Floor Statements

Mr. President, today, I am cosponsoring the American Homeownership Act. When Wall Street buys up homes in communities across the country, we have all too often seen families get squeezed by higher costs and abusive landlords. This bill is an important step toward making a home more affordable and accessible. It would limit tax breaks for private equity firms and big corporations that acquire housing, expand investments in affordable housing programs, and crack down on companies that take control of the housing supply in a community.

As we work to tackle Wall Street's role in our housing market, it is critical that we support efforts to rehabilitate existing housing stock and revitalize neighborhoods with new investment. I appreciate Senator Warren's thoughtful consideration of these issues, and I will work with my colleagues to ensure they are effectively addressed in this legislation.

Mr. President, today, I am cosponsoring the American Homeownership Act. When Wall Street buys up homes in communities across the country, we have all too often seen families get squeezed by higher costs and abusive landlords. This bill is an important step toward making a home more affordable and accessible. It would limit tax breaks for private equity firms and big corporations that acquire housing, expand investments in affordable housing programs, and crack down on companies that take control of the housing supply in a community.

As we work to tackle Wall Street's role in our housing market, it is critical that we support efforts to rehabilitate existing housing stock and revitalize neighborhoods with new investment. I appreciate Senator Warren's thoughtful consideration of these issues, and I will work with my colleagues to ensure they are effectively addressed in this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak 10 minutes beyond my original time.

Mr. President, so this is a really embarrassing moment for the U.S. Senate. It is a gross, gratuitous assault on the people of the District of Columbia, the people who live in our Nation's Capital.

And also, as I listen to the rhetoric around this, it is actually one of the most dishonest arguments I have heard in the U.S. Senate for a long time. That is saying a lot.

I also want to make clear from the outset that at a time when Americans in every State in the Union are feeling squeezed by costs and rising prices, this doesn't do a thing for any of the constituents of any Senator in this U.S. Senate--not a thing.

And it doesn't do a damn thing for the Federal budget. What it does is pretend to say that you are protecting the people of the District of Columbia because you are assuring that they will get the benefit of the President Trump so-called Big Beautiful Bill.

So with everything happening in this country, what we are doing here or what is being attempted here is to micromanage the government of the District of Columbia. This has nothing to do with Federal taxes-- nothing.

The people of the District of Columbia are going to get the same Federal income tax form as people in every part of the country. I have the form right here that the people of the District of Columbia will fill out. It is a 1040. It has also got the additional deductions.

It has all the deductions that are in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill. They have got no tax on tips, no tax on overtime. The list goes on--qualified passenger vehicle loan interest deduction. So people who live in the District of Columbia will get this Federal tax form for their Federal taxes.

We can't change the Federal Tax Code for the people of the District of Columbia. They are going to do exactly what everybody else in the United States is doing.

And yet there are some who are pretending that somehow this is an effort to ensure that the people of the District of Columbia get the benefits of the changes to the Federal Tax Code. They are going to get whatever benefits people think are available under the Federal Tax Code.

The author of this resolution, who is on the Senate floor, has said:

. . . the D.C. Council's recent move that prevents federal

tax laws under President Trump's Working Families Tax Cuts

from going into effect for district residents.

That is not true. District residents are going to get the same Federal tax form as the constituents of every Senator in this body. Congressman Gill, one of the supporters of this resolution in the House says:

The DC Council's actions would block DC residents . . .

from receiving these Federal tax credits . . . and from

keeping their hard-earned money in their wallets.

Not true. Not true. They pay the same Federal income taxes and have the same Federal tax deductions as every other person in the country.

House Speaker Johnson said:

If this act were to become local law, D.C. residents would

be prevented from claiming no tax on tips, no tax on

overtime, the increased standard deduction, and so much more.

Not true. They are going to fill out the same Federal tax form as everybody else in the United States of America. So this is an example of complete false and deceptive advertising. What it is attempting to do, in reality, is not deny the District of Columbia benefits under the Federal Tax Code as they fill out their Federal tax forms, it is to prevent the people from the District of Columbia, when it comes to their local tax code, from having the autonomy that all of our jurisdictions have.

That is what it does. And the people of the District of Columbia, through their elected representatives, chose, with respect to their local tax law, to make some different decisions than under the Federal Tax Code. So, for example, they restored the District of Columbia's local child tax credit, and they increased the District of Columbia's existing earned income tax credit. In fact, they adopted 84 of the provisions that were passed through from the Federal cut. Just 13 of the 84 provisions were changed as a matter of local DC law.

So, for example, they decided that they could not afford to immediately

implement the ability of companies to fully expense their R&D costs. They concluded, they did an analysis that if you adopted that Federal provision and you put that also in your DC tax code, that the people of the District of Columbia--the District of Columbia would lose $170 million.

As I said, they did choose to enhance their child tax credit, and so if you actually vote for this resolution on the floor of the Senate, you are going to increase taxes on 78,000 children. Families that represent 78,000 children in the District of Columbia are going to see their taxes go up if you pass this Republican resolution.

And, in fact, by increasing the child tax credit and taking measures on the earned income tax credit as a matter of local DC tax law, they are reducing poverty in the United States by 20 percent. So if you actually vote to overturn that, you are going to increase poverty in our Nation's Capital by 20 percent. It is insane what they are proposing.

So like many States, and I am going to point out some of the other States that decouple from the Federal Tax Code when it comes to their State or local taxes--like many States what the District of Columbia wanted to do was to at least temporarily decouple so that they could examine what impact the Federal tax law changes would have if they incorporated them directly into their local tax system. And they are not alone in doing that.

In fact, at least 13 States, represented by U.S. Senators in this body, have decoupled from some of the Republicans' reconciliation bill, tax bill. Those include the States of Alabama, Michigan, Illinois, and Virginia. And additionally, there are about 20 States, including Kentucky, Ohio, and Wisconsin, that do not automatically adopt changes to the Federal Tax Code as part of their State tax code. My State of Maryland doesn't automatically do it. Indiana doesn't do it.

In fact, if you look through the various States, you will find that many do not do it. Let's look at Alabama. It is under Republican control right now. They voted to actively decouple their State tax provisions from the Federal tax provisions. I don't see any Senator here on the floor trying to undo the State of Alabama's tax code.

Let's look at Kentucky law, and I am reading directly out of their statute.

FEDERAL TAX LAW CHANGES--Recent federal income tax changes

were enacted after Kentucky's conformity date set forth in

Mr. President, we are considering an appropriations package on the floor this week, and there has rightfully been a lot of focus on the section of the bill that funds the Department of Homeland Security, a section that I and my Democratic colleagues continue to insist should be considered separately, as it was in the House, to secure essential reforms to end the Department's abuses, stop the killings, protect people's rights, and ensure real accountability. Any additional funding for this unconstrained, lawless operation at DHS is unacceptable as we witness executions of civilians in our streets, unaccountable and warrantless raids, and in my home State of Maryland, inhumane conditions at the Baltimore Holding Center even as ICE moves to set up a warehouse with the capacity to process and detain 1,500 persons. I said I would not support one more dime for Trump's lawless ICE operation, and I meant it--not even for 1 more day.

But I also want to take a moment to speak to the rest of that funding package, which includes the work of five other Appropriations subcommittees: Defense, State and Foreign Operations, Transportation and Housing, Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Financial Services and General Government.

I appreciate the work of the Democratic ranking members of these subcommittees and Vice Chair Murray, who secured some important provisions in the bill to reassert the congressional power of the purse with specific spending directives in legislative text. For example, the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education bill rejects the administration's effort to eliminate the Department of Education and cut Pell grants.

It also rejects the Trump proposal to cut NIH nearly in half and instead increases funding; and it successfully overrides the OMB directive that NIH fund more lump sum multi-year grants, which would otherwise result in fewer overall grants and less research activity. NIH, which is located in my home State of Maryland, is one of our greatest American success stories, where some of our brightest minds pursue treatments and cures to diseases that impact virtually every American family. This administration has spent the last year attacking the critical work of NIH, canceling grants and clinical trials and short-circuiting lifesaving research. I am glad this bill roundly rejects that and requires the administration to change course. At the same time, I am very disappointed that the bill does not reverse the rescission cut to public broadcasting, which provides critical services to Americans across the country, particularly in rural communities.

Indeed, while these bills make important investments and include some critical safeguards, I have serious concerns that they do not go far enough to protect the power of the purse and the Federal employees who carry out the programs we fund, particularly as the administration continues its efforts to strip away the protections that safeguard our nonpartisan civil service and hollow out Agencies. Without enhanced guardrails in this package, the administration will continue to wreak havoc on the ability of our dedicated, merit-based civil servants to provide critical services to the American people.

I also have deep concerns about the State foreign operations bill, now called the national security package. I know and appreciate the work of Vice Chair Murray and Ranking Member Schatz to preserve the legacy of U.S. foreign assistance in this bill after Elon Musk, Russell Vought, and their DOGE cronies took a chainsaw to USAID and the State Department.

The bill includes some new guardrails to prevent deeper cuts going forward, but it still reflects a $9 billion cut from FY25 levels. The largest share of those cuts comes from humanitarian assistance and development assistance.

Foreign aid is not a giveaway; it is an investment in the world we all live in. When your neighbor's house is on fire, it is foolish to wait until the flames reach your own home. Conflicts, pandemics, and humanitarian collapse do not respect borders. Preventing wars from starting and stopping new diseases before they reach American shores costs far less than fighting those threats once they arrive here.

For less than 1 percent of the Federal budget, we can help save the lives of the world's most vulnerable children.

Cutting that support is not fiscally responsible; it is morally indefensible. A Lancet study estimated that Trump's foreign aid cuts will cost 14 million lives by 2030, including over 4.5 million kids. Thousands of children are already dying.

The bill also codifies an $850 million ``America First Opportunity Fund'' for an administration that has proven itself to be a reckless and unlawful custodian of Federal funding. This risks becoming a political slush fund, untethered from evidence-based programs and longstanding safeguards that ensure taxpayer dollars are used to advance genuine U.S. interests, not pet projects and foreign ventures that serve the interests of the Trump family, Trump campaign contributors, and his billionaire buddies at the expense of America's national security interests.

The bill imposes a new cap on how much foreign assistance can be transferred to the Department of Homeland Security--an important check--but it still allows hundreds of millions of dollars to be transferred to an already bloated DHS for immigration enforcement. That is unacceptable.

I also object to the bill's $3.3 billion in foreign military financing to the Government of Israel with no conditions or guardrails. The Netanyahu government has spent years openly flouting international law and disregarding U.S. interests, advice, and warnings, including concerns ranging from blocking humanitarian assistance and ethnic cleansing in Gaza to continued settler violence and mushrooming illegal settlements in the West Bank.

I made clear on October 7, 2023, the day the heinous Hamas attack brutally killed over 1,200 people and seized over 200 hostages, that Israel had a right--indeed a duty--to go after Hamas. But the Netanyahu government's response went way beyond targeting Hamas to imposing collective punishment on all the people of Gaza.

In Gaza, entire neighborhoods have been systematically destroyed. Throughout the war, more than 1.9 million Palestinians have been forcibly displaced, many of them multiple times, through military orders, bombardment, and the deliberate rendering of civilian areas unlivable. All of this has occurred with U.S.-funded weapons and equipment.

In the West Bank, 240 Palestinians, including 55 children, were killed by Israeli forces or settlers in 2025, according to OCHA. Even the IDF found that Israeli settler violence in the West Bank rose by about 25 percent in 2025. This violence happened with virtual impunity and in many cases with the complicity of Israeli forces in the area. Along with settler violence, Israeli settlement expansion continues to rise, with a record number of 9,629 settlement housing units being approved by the Israeli Government in 2025, more than the previous 6 years combined. This includes approval for construction in the area known as E1, east of Jerusalem. Construction in E1 would effectively bisect the West Bank, preventing the development of a contiguous Palestinian state and sounding the death knell of the already diminishing prospects for a two-state solution. The Netanyahu government also retroactively legalized eight illegal outposts, half of which are located deep within the West Bank.

We should be using every tool at our disposal to ensure that the Netanyahu government complies with President Trump's stated objective of a ``credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood'' and end its slow-motion annexation of the West Bank, destruction of neighborhoods in Gaza, and displacement of the Palestinian people.

Conditions on foreign military financing and other types of assistance are not unusual; in fact, they are the norm. Other U.S. partners--including longstanding recipients like Egypt, Lebanon, Pakistan, El Salvador, Colombia, and Mexico--have had their assistance routinely tied to human rights, accountability, or other statutory benchmarks. Yet this bill provides the Netanyahu government with a blank check and no meaningful guardrails. That double standard weakens U.S. credibility and undermines our commitment to our core values.

I appreciate that the Defense title in this bill funds a pay raise for our servicemembers and makes investments to support military families and critical work at Maryland's military bases. But I am deeply disturbed by the way Trump has misused and wrongfully deployed our military, from our Active-Duty forces to our National Guard.

The Trump administration's abduction of dictator Nicolas Maduro wasn't a ``law enforcement operation'' or an effort to stop drug trafficking. It was about oil, seizing and controlling Venezuela's oil for the benefit of Trump's billionaire buddies. It is simply wrong to risk the lives of brave American soldiers to profit the Trump campaign's political contributors.

And Trump has deployed the National Guard to DC, Los Angeles, Memphis, and Chicago, manufacturing claims of emergency and chaos to use the Guard in domestic law enforcement and his mass deportation agenda rather than using Justice Department resources to work with local partners and keep communities safe. And as State and local leaders and courts have stood in the way of these deployments, Trump has threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to bypass them and the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act.

Taken together, these abuses of power show an authoritarian administration using the military for its own ends, not for U.S. national security. These concerns only reinforce my existing reservations about the continued uncontrolled growth in defense spending, especially when the Pentagon continues to fail independent audits for 8 consecutive years.

Finally, I want to underscore a point regarding the financial services and general government portion of this bill, which funds the General Services Administration. GSA, together with the FBI, is responsible for the FBI headquarters project. This bill provides no additional funding for that project, but GSA has funding available from prior year appropriations. There are still significant outstanding questions about this project and a security assessment and construction plan is underway and must be delivered to Congress as directed in the CJS Appropriations bill. From the start of this project, Congress has expected that the building would meet Level 5 ISC security requirements to safeguard the FBI mission, and GSA has shared its expectation that this project will meet that standard, though the security assessment is not yet complete. In order to ensure adequate congressional oversight and use taxpayer resources responsibly, GSA should also pause activities until the plan is finished and Congress has reviewed it.

As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I recognize the challenges in negotiating these bills given the radical demands of the administration and the complicity of too many of my Republican colleagues in the House and Senate. I appreciate the hard-won investments and safeguards in these bills and the rejection of dozens of partisan House policy riders. That said, for the reasons I have outlined and because I believe more can be done to rein in this administration's authoritarian impulses, I oppose this package.

Mr. President, on Saturday, the Nation learned the name of Alex Pretti. Alex was an ICU nurse at the Veterans' Administration, fulfilling our Nation's sacred promise to care for our wounded warriors. Many have probably seen the video of him paying final respects and honors to one of our fallen veterans.

Alex was also a neighbor who cared deeply about his community, and because of those values, Alex was an observer, recording and bearing witness to the actions of ICE and Customs and Border Patrol as they descended upon his hometown, stopping and detaining individuals without judicial warrants.

We all saw video of Alex's final moments, when he stopped to help a fellow observer, a woman who had been pushed by Federal agents, before those agents sprayed him with chemicals, disarmed him of the gun he legally carried, and shot him in the back, firing 10 shots in less than 5 seconds. We all saw this on video--in fact, multiple videos from multiple angles from other civilians on the street that day bearing witness.

But this administration--the Trump administration--immediately lied to us. And when I say ``us,'' I mean the American people. They called Alex a ``domestic terrorist.'' They called him a ``would-be assassin.''

This administration must think the American people are really stupid, telling them not to believe their own eyes. This was the killing of an American citizen exercising his constitutional rights, and you would think that that by itself would spur a reckoning with the actions of the Department of Homeland Security.

But this isn't one isolated event. This isn't even the only killing committed by DHS agents in Minnesota this year. On January 7, a Minneapolis mom, Renee Good, was shot and killed as she attempted to drive away from immigration agents who aggressively approached her, contrary to DHS's use-of-force policy, and, ultimately, killed her, and then prevented her from receiving immediate medical assistance.

They lied about her case, as well, accusing her also of ``domestic terrorism,'' despite the evidence that people across this land could see with their own eyes.

This is not a case of just a few untrained bad apples. It is the result of an out-of-control Federal Agency that has directed its agents to act with impunity, to detain and deport scores of people who pose no risk to our communities in so many cases and have no criminal records, including small business owners, pastors, parents taking their kids to school, neighbors walking their dogs, children.

This is an intentional policy coming out of the White House--from Donald Trump to Stephen Miller, to the Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem. JD Vance, the Vice President, said the agent who shot Renee Good was ``protected by absolute immunity.'' That is what the Vice President of the United States said. He should know better.

And they have deliberately cut funding for offices at DHS that monitor the conduct of immigration officers to protect civil rights and civil liberties. They are giving agents a license to kill with impunity.

Secretary Noem should be fired immediately--if not fired, impeached.

Stephen Miller has now tried to point the finger at others, when he has been the ringleader in the White House.

He should be fired.

DHS operates at the direction of the White House and the President with orders to meet arbitrary quotas, to detain and deport not just the worst of the worst but anybody. They conduct masked raids in unmarked vehicles and refuse to show identification. They arrest people without warrants, use force to enter homes, and lock people up without due process. They sweep up citizens, legal immigrants, and immigrants without deportation orders.

And when they are confronted with their abuses, they lie. They tell us not to believe what we see with our own eyes.

I want to salute the people in Minneapolis and across the country, including in Maryland, who are taking videos and working to hold these Federal forces accountable. Think about what would have happened if there was no video in these cases. These videos have complicated the Trump administration's effort at a coverup, even as the Trump administration refuses to work with State and local law enforcement to investigate these killings.

In my State of Maryland, DHS lied about the circumstances surrounding a nonfatal shooting, and they were exposed in their lies because of a local county investigation that showed that DHS was plain wrong.

DHS has restricted access to detention centers, preventing congressional oversight into inhuman conditions, where we know at least 30 people have died in custody, including one death in Texas that has been ruled a homicide.

And as they view the actions of peaceful protestors and observers as a personal offense, they have reacted with violence and labeled them domestic terrorists for practicing their constitutional freedoms and rights.

In Minnesota, these Federal agents hurled chemical irritants at peaceful crowds who are simply exercising their First Amendment rights to freedom of assembly and peaceful protest. They view whistles as weapons. In Portland, they claimed to be threatened by people wearing frog costumes.

My colleagues, Republicans in Congress, have fueled this surge in illegal activity by exploding the DHS budget with $165 billion as part of what Donald Trump called the Big Beautiful Bill. Remember, that is the bill where the richest people in the country were given permanent tax cuts. That is the bill that made deep cuts in healthcare for tens of millions of Americans. And in that bill was also this huge slush fund for DHS.

ICE, by itself, is now the Nation's highest funded law enforcement Agency and has more funding than the militaries of most countries in the world--including Italy, Israel, and Brazil. ICE, by itself, has more funds than the armies of those countries, and now they are spending those funds to hire more agents and are putting more of them out on the streets with limited training.

They are preparing to turn warehouses into so-called processing sites and detention centers, including one in my home State of Maryland, doing it against the will of the community. We see DHS spitting in the face of local communities across the country.

In Maryland, we had a rally with hundreds of people on a very cold day, sending a message to ICE and to the Trump administration that the people in that community did not want a warehouse for detainees right there. Within days of that demonstration, the Trump administration-- ICE--signed a deal for $100 million of our taxpayer money to purchase a warehouse where they say they can keep up to 1,500 detainees.

I can tell you Maryland taxpayers don't want their money going to that purpose, and I will bet you the great majority of taxpayers around this country don't want to see their tax dollars used in that way as well.

And now, despite the fact that they are already clearly misusing these taxpayer dollars, as American citizens are killed on the streets, our fellow Republicans, our Republicans in the Senate, want to give them even more in the bill that would be up on this floor this week--in fact, another $10 billion more for ICE and over $18 billion more for Customs and Border Patrol, while refusing to rein in these abuses-- another blank check for lawless activity, another blank check that results in the killing of Americans, another blank check with no accountability.

That would be madness. We cannot green-light the actions of an Agency that is already terrorizing our communities and executing our neighbors with billions of dollars in new funds without any regard to their constitutional rights.

Again, President Trump said he was going to go after ``the worst of the worst.'' That has not been their focus, and we can see it with our own eyes.

And we cannot accept the administration's claim that these agents have some kind of absolute immunity and are free from the consequences of their actions. That is why an independent investigation into the killings of Renee

Good and Alex Pretti have to happen, and I appreciate my colleagues from the other side of the aisle who have called for one. But that should be a standard situation. That should be the standard operating procedure in a situation like this. State and local law enforcement should, of course, be partners in that effort. The Feds should not be trying to hide evidence from those local and State law enforcement officers.

We must do that, but it is not enough to take the word of the Trump administration that they will do that. We can't simply trust an administration that has repeatedly lied to the American people, as if, this time, they will try to do better.

And, again, we wouldn't be here, probably, but for that video. The administration would have thought that it got away with its lies.

So let's not be naive. We are not going to give away our responsibility as legislators to put real reforms right into the DHS bill to prevent this lawlessness, to prevent these killings, to protect our freedoms, and to assure real accountability.

Our most important job is protecting the life and liberty of the American people. It is sadly too late to protect Alex Pretti and too late to protect Renee Good, as they should have been protected, but it is not too late to act on behalf of the rest of the American people.

So, this week, we have before us a package of appropriation bills that includes the work of six appropriations subcommittees--including Defense; Transportations and Housing; Labor, Health and Human Services; Foreign Operations; and Financial Services. These are not perfect bills, and I have serious concerns with some of them that I would like to see addressed. But it is also clear that there is enough support in this body to pass them. We could pass them today if they were separated out.

In fact, when those bills went through the House of Representatives, they considered the Department of Homeland Security bill on its own merits. They didn't bundle it in with everything else and say: You know, you have got to vote for this whole package at one time.

So the House, after they passed it individually, they pulled all those bills together and sent them in a bundle over here to the U.S. Senate. But, my goodness, that doesn't mean the U.S. Senate has to take it that way from the House. This is supposed to be an independent branch of the Congress. I don't know why we would surrender our responsibilities to the House of Representatives. And they should get right back into Washington if we change this bill and pass it to prevent a shutdown of those Agencies. That is their responsibility.

The House needs to perform its duties, and we need to perform ours. And ours involve making sure that we separate out those five appropriation bills that I mentioned from the Homeland Security appropriations bill. In fact, I would argue that we should also take-- as part of the package of five bills, we should take FEMA and TSA and the Coast Guard, which are part of the DHS bill, and we could send all of those back to the House for immediate passage to go on to the President.

But, instead, Republican colleagues here are wasting time. We could take up that package today, if there was the will to do it among my Republican colleagues. But, right now, instead, we are holding all of those other Agencies--the Defense Department, Health and Human Services--hostage to holding onto the Department of Homeland Security bill that needs to be changed dramatically.

I don't think that a single person in this body would argue against deporting those who have committed serious crimes--``the worst of the worst''--but that is not what this administration has been focused on. Nothing about this has been targeted. And Trump's ICE has not focused, as they promised, on ``the worst of the worst.'' They are stopping and arresting people who are citizens, who are legal residents, who have legal pending asylum claims, just because of how they look or their accent. And they are wreaking havoc on communities across the country, including on peaceful protestors, two of whom have now given their lives to protect our freedoms.

And do you know what? They are not just using their own agents as part of this indiscriminate dragnet. They are bringing in other Agencies as well, distracting them and redirecting them from critical missions. Senator Warner released data that showed nearly half of the FBI agents in its largest field offices have been redirected to immigration, away from fighting drug trafficking, terrorism, and violent crime.

It is time for us in the Senate to do our job. This isn't going to go away with the couple hours of extra training, personnel reassignments, or administration statements. Let's make this a moment for real change and not give DHS another huge blank check.

I, for one, will not vote for one more dime for this lawless DHS operation that we are witnessing at this time.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Vice Admiral Nancy Hann on the occasion of her retirement. VADM Hann is retiring after more than 30 years of extraordinary service with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA.

After graduating from the University of California San Diego in 1996 with a bachelor's degree in marine science and biology, VADM Hann started her career with NOAA as a fisheries observer. Over time, she expanded her expertise and was later commissioned as an officer in the NOAA Officer Corps, where she served in a variety of capacities. VADM Hann's versatility and dedication to her profession have made her an incomparable asset to NOAA and to the Nation. She later went on to earn a master's in space studies and remote sensing at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and a master of public administration at the Harvard Kennedy School.

Most notably, VADM Hann has served in many operational and top management assignments including her positions as NOAA's Acting Administrator, deputy director of the NOAA Corps and the Office of Marine and Aviation Operations, OMAO, commanding officer of the NOAA Aircraft Operations Center, and NOAA liaison to the U.S. Pacific Command. Most recently, VADM Hann completed a tour as the director of the NOAA Commissioned Officer Corps and is currently the highest- ranking officer in the NOAA Corps.

VADM Hann is a trailblazer in her field. She was she one of the first female officers to qualify as an aircraft commander and the first woman to achieve the rank of vice admiral in the NOAA Corps, as well as one of NOAA's first uncrewed systems operators. She has consistently led by example through her experience, her achievements, and her demonstrated commitment to equitable workspaces. VADM Hann's leadership has left an enduring legacy of professionalism, mentorship, and innovation that will inspire generations to come.

Upon retiring, VADM Hann is closing out an illustrious, awe-inspiring career, one spent in service to research, coastal and marine stewardship, and our Nation. She has dedicated the entirety of her career to principled leadership and environmental conservation, and I thank her for her commitment. I invite my colleagues to join me in thanking VADM Hann for her lifetime of service and to congratulate her on her well-deserved retirement.

Mr. President, today we consider S. 3627.

This legislation would limit the information students receive about their healthcare and family planning options. No one disagrees that pregnant and parenting students should have access to care and necessary accommodations.

But this legislation explicitly and intentionally excludes information on the entire range of healthcare available to students, including contraception and abortion care. Students should have access to information regarding all comprehensive healthcare choices, including pregnancy and postpartum care, contraception, and abortion care, so they can make their own decisions.

This bill does not create any new rights or supports that students do not already have; it simply limits what information would be available to them. Instead of focusing on limiting healthcare options for the American people, Republicans should focus on providing real supports for families, like comprehensive maternity and postpartum care and access to affordable childcare.

Mr. President, I rise as the ranking member of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee--known around here as CJS--to discuss the funding for critical national programs provided to those Agencies for fiscal year 2026.

This is one of the appropriations bills that is before the Senate right now.

I want to thank Senator Moran, the chairman and my partner on the CJS Subcommittee, and his staff Brian Daner, Kevin Wheeler, and Rachel Taylor, for working closely with me and my team to produce this important final bill for consideration of the Senate. I want to thank House CJS chairman Hal Rogers and ranking member Grace Meng and their staffs as well.

This bill is the result of many long days and nights of tough negotiations over the holidays, including a very productive call among the four of us on New Year's Eve to broker a final deal on the bill's remaining and outstanding items.

This bill has already overwhelmingly passed the House of Representatives. The CJS appropriations agreement meets the allocation that was given to our subcommittee of $78 billion in discretionary spending. It rejects the very deep and reckless cuts proposed in the President's budget. At the same time, it is not much higher than the 2025 continuing resolution--so basically flat funding even as needs have grown in these important programs.

We had to make tough decisions when it came to what programs to cut and what to protect. Senator Moran and I were able to work together with our House colleagues in a bipartisan way to do our best to make those decisions.

I must say this is not the bill I would have written if I were doing it on my own, but it is the result of negotiations. Republicans currently control every branch of government--majorities in the House and Senate and, of course, control of the White House. But this bill, while not what I would have written alone, will ensure that Congress-- and not Donald Trump or Russ Vought--decides how taxpayer dollars get spent for the Agencies covered in this bill.

So I am happy to report to my colleagues that the CJS conference bill before us is a strong bipartisan one that rejects the very devastating, misguided funding cuts and program eliminations that had been advanced and suggested by President Trump, and it rejects dozens and dozens of extreme poison pill riders that had been proposed by our House Republican colleagues.

It makes smart and targeted investments in a wide range of critical initiatives that affect the lives of all of our fellow Americans. It prioritizes keeping our communities safe. It advances American leadership in science and innovation. It boosts economic opportunities around the country, including through the Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program. It funds vital initiatives at Federal Agencies in my home State of Maryland, from scientific research at NASA Goddard, to operations at NOAA and NIST, to preparations for the next census.

Through the Department of Commerce, we maintain the current generation of NOAA weather and climate satellites, and we invest in next-generation satellites that will track severe weather. We also promote American businesses and exports through Department of Commerce efforts. We also help Agencies like NIST that are creating cybersecurity and AI standards for the future. Through NOAA, we are also enabling sustainable management of ocean resources that are so vital to our fisheries and to commerce throughout our country.

To promote American innovation and scientific discovery, the bill provides $8.75 billion for the National Science Foundation, sparing it from the 57-percent cut sought by President Trump.

Colleagues, we cannot expect to maintain our cutting edge in science and discovery and stay ahead of our competitors if we are not making the vital investments in research through the National Science Foundation.

The bill funds NASA at $24.4 billion to explore the solar system, to advance our understanding of climate change, to promote innovation and sustainability in aeronautics, and to protect our planet. This is another area where we rejected very deep cuts proposed by the Trump administration, including the 47-percent cut they had proposed to NASA's Science budget.

Colleagues, we won't have a space program if we don't understand what is happening in space and get to the fundamentals of science in space. You cannot have one without the other. So we reject those cuts.

The President's budget would have wrecked the exciting work being done right now at Maryland's Goddard Space Flight Center, where they are completing what is known as the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope. It is on time--in fact, ahead of schedule--and, right now, under budget, and is expected to launch later this year to investigate dark energy and the formation of galaxies and stars--all things that will add to the body of human knowledge and help the United States remain a leader when it comes to space discovery exploration.

The next step will be the development of the Habitable Worlds Observatory that can answer the fundamental question of whether we are alone in the universe.

That is another exciting project where America will take the lead, but only if we provide the resources to get it done, and that is another important program led by NASA Goddard.

I also included language directing NASA to preserve all the technical and scientific world-class capabilities at Goddard during any consolidation of the campus and calling for a National Academy of Sciences study to make sure that NASA Goddard is set up for long-term success. It is a national treasure, and we need to preserve it.

Reform, yes, but let's make sure we reform it in a way that can allow it to continue to be a leader when it comes to space science, Earth science, and the American enterprise.

Funding in this bill will also help better protect American communities. It invests in lifesaving grant programs from State, local, and Tribal law enforcement, to advancing criminal justice initiatives, to providing the highest level of funding ever for the Office on Violence Against Women.

In addition to these funding priorities, the bill also includes language I worked on to address the Trump administration's ongoing efforts to set aside and ignore the decades-long site selection process for a new FBI headquarters. The language in this bill requires that prior to spending any reprogrammed construction funds on a new headquarters, the FBI must submit the contracted and completed architectural and engineering plan for any new building, including the security plan, for review by the Appropriations Committee.

I think we would all agree that it is essential that the men and women who work at the FBI have a headquarters that meets the security requirements that have been set out for it over the last 15 years to two decades, which is Level 5 Security. It is the highest level of security and needed given the very sensitive work that the FBI does on behalf of our country.

This language is important to reasserting Congress' oversight role in a large and expensive project and ensuring that the new headquarters meets the mission and security needs of the men and women of the FBI. And I want to thank Senator Moran for working with me on this provision.

As I said earlier, this bill is not perfect. It does, however, include guardrails to safeguard the Congress' powers when it comes to spending the taxpayer dollars, at least within the domain of the Agencies in this particular appropriations bill. And that is one of the very important features of this legislation compared to what we would otherwise see in a straight continuing resolution. In this bill, we make sure that congressional prerogatives are protected, not just in report language, but in the statute itself.

As I said, the bill is not perfect. There are many things that I would have chosen to do differently if I was doing this on my own. I will say one problem with the bill before us is that a provision that had been unanimously adopted in the Senate Appropriations Committee regarding the Epstein files was taken out of this bill. That provision would have required the Department of Justice to retain those records.

It also required them to submit not just the files, but a report that provided information and analysis on various aspects of the Epstein files, from financial questions to links regarding foreign intelligence, anything that the documents reflected. And I will say, at a time when we have seen just a small percentage of those files actually released to the public and to the Congress, we need to do much better, which is why I have filed an amendment to this conference bill to restore the identical language that the Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously adopted.

Despite those shortcomings, I do think if you look at its full scope, that this bill is something that is worthy of bipartisan support. I think it will advance very important national interests, both when it comes to science and discovery, when it comes to law enforcement, and when it comes to other major national priorities.

The funding in this bill and the resources it has provided will, in my view, strengthen our country, especially at a time when we are facing so many challenges around the world from competitors and adversaries, including China and others. We need to make sure that the United States invests in the future of our people and the future of our country. This bill is a positive step in that direction, and I urge my colleagues to adopt it.

If I could, I did want to thank some of the folks on my team. And I want to thank them for all of the work that they did, including Jessica Berry, who is the lead Democratic clerk on the committee, as well as other members of our committee, Lindsay Erickson, TJ Lowdermilk, and Blaise Sheridan. I thanked the Republican staff members, Senator Moran's staff, who worked with us, and I want to thank my own team as well.

And in closing, I also do want to thank the chair and vice chair of the Appropriations Committee--Senator Susan Collins and Senator Patty Murray--for their work in getting us to this point, and, again, I urge adoption of this legislation.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I think the real danger is that over time, this Congress has conceded and delivered its constitutional responsibilities to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue and President Trump and other executives. It is time for Congress to take seriously its responsibilities, including the constitutional responsibility to decide when to declare war.

Here at home, our fellow Americans are facing higher costs for virtually everything: for groceries, for electricity, childcare, healthcare. The list goes on and on. Folks all over the country are working nonstop just to make ends meet.

So you would think that President Trump would be focused on keeping his campaign promise to bring down prices. He said he was going to do that on day one of his administration, but that is not what he is doing. He is doing the opposite.

He and Republicans right here in the Senate and in Congress are actually driving up costs, including healthcare costs across the country. Members of Congress on the Republican side voted against extending tax credits to help middle-class Americans afford their healthcare. In fact, those tax credits expired at midnight on December 31, and 20 million Americans are seeing their healthcare costs spike.

President Trump is also breaking another promise. He is breaking his promise to keep America from being dragged into costly foreign conflicts. He is not focused on nation building here at home. He is focused on nation building overseas--exactly what he said he did not want to do.

First of all, he bailed out Argentina, and now, he says he is running Venezuela. He says he is in charge of Venezuela. In fact, just this morning, President Trump's Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said the United States would be overseeing the sale of Venezuela's oil production ``indefinitely.''

Here is a Washington Post story: ``U.S. vows to control Venezuela oil sales `indefinitely'''--Energy Secretary says.

That is what this has been about from the beginning, grabbing and controlling Venezuela's oil for the benefit of Trump's billionaire buddies. That is why Wall Street appears to be drooling at the prospect of making more money in Venezuela.

So I think we should start by pointing out the fact that the Trump administration has been engaged in a long campaign of deception and lies to the American people about the reasons for this adventure in Venezuela.

They lied to the American people when they said this was all about stopping the flow of drugs into the United States. We all support that goal. But that is not what this has been about. If this was about stopping the flow of drugs into our country, the Trump administration would not have proposed big budget cuts to the Drug Enforcement Administration. They would not have shuttered the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force. They shut it down.

President Trump talks about deaths caused by fentanyl in the United States. He is absolutely right about that. What he does not tell the American people is that the fentanyl killing Americans is not originating or even transiting through Venezuela.

And, of course, if President Trump was serious about fighting drugs, he would not, just as he did weeks ago, have pardoned the former Honduran President and notorious drug kingpin Juan Orlando Hernandez.

I should say, even closer to home in December, we learned President Trump also pardoned a Baltimore City drug kingpin whom the DEA called ``one of the largest cocaine and heroin dealers to be arrested by the DEA in recent history.''

That sends a signal to everybody that Donald Trump is willing to pardon people who have been engaged in poisoning our people.

So this has not been about stopping drugs for Donald Trump. And it certainly wasn't about removing an illegitimate leader--and Maduro is an illegitimate leader--but Donald Trump cozies up to dictators all over the world.

Of course, yesterday was the fifth anniversary of Donald Trump's efforts to overturn a free and fair election right here in the United States.

The President himself has made clear that this is all about the oil. When he announced the fact that the United States had seized Maduro, he said: ``We're going to get back our oil'' and ``We need total access . . . access to the oil and to other things in their country,'' meaning other natural resources in Venezuela. He uttered the word ``oil'' 19 times when he announced the seizure of Maduro.

Indeed, while President Trump did not consult or notify Congress about his plans, as is required, he revealed that ``the oil companies were absolutely aware that we were thinking about doing something.''

So colleagues, Donald Trump wants to grab the oil, and he wants to do it to help his billionaire buddies. Case in point is Paul Singer. He is the billionaire head of Elliott Investment Management and a Trump megadonor. He recently acquired Citgo, the U.S.-based subsidiary of Venezuela's state-run oil company in November 2025, just a few months ago. He acquired it for approximately half the company's estimated value.

Now, according to the Wall Street Journal in an article on January 5:

Now Elliott appears poised to reap the rewards of owning

Venezuela's most valuable foreign oil asset. The regime

change could lead to an increase in Venezuelan oil

production, which would likely provide cheap feedstock to

Citgo's Gulf Coast refineries and increase the company's

value, analysts and refining experts said.

So a huge win for one of President Trump's biggest donors.

Now, I think we all need to acknowledge and salute our troops who took part in this operation. They performed magnificently, flawlessly, bravely. I want to thank them on behalf of my fellow Marylanders.

But it is also outrageous that President Trump would put the lives of American service men and women at risk to grab Venezuela's oil to enrich his friends on Wall Street. At least six of our American service men and women were wounded, approximately 80 Venezuelans were killed in this operation, including civilians, not to mention the over 100 people who were on those boats over the last couple of months who had been killed.

And while the Trump administration and congressional Republicans attempt to bask in the euphoria of Maduro's removal, the hangover of running Venezuela is still to come. In fact, it has started.

In recent remarks on Venezuela's future after Maduro's capture, President Trump said:

You know, rebuilding there and regime change, anything you

want to call it, is better than what you have right now.

Can't get any worse.

Well, actually, colleagues, it can, and we have seen it before; two decades in

Afghanistan, years in Iraq stand as a warning: The United States spilled blood and treasure on state-building fantasies that failed, undermined American interests, and left a more fractured and unstable region in their wake.

The United States has no mandate to decide Venezuela's future. That is up to the Venezuelan people, not to be imposed through U.S. military regime change efforts that are really motivated by oil company interests and not to be dictated by threats of occupation.

This time, President Trump has co-opted the U.S. military in service of those goals, benefiting oil companies and his billionaire buddies. And in doing so, he has charted a dangerous playbook that they say they may employ elsewhere.

As we all know, since seizing Maduro, President Trump has threatened further action against Cuba, Colombia, and Greenland. After being asked about an operation in Greenland, which he has threatened several times with invasion since beginning his term, he said--President Trump said:

We need Greenland.

Just yesterday, the White House confirmed in a statement that they are discussing ``a range of options'' to acquire Greenland, not excluding military force.

When asked about a U.S. operation against Colombia, President Trump said:

It sounds good to me.

Look, what we have seen is President Trump resurrecting a policy from a bygone era, one which would be better left in the dustbin of history, the Monroe Doctrine.

That was encapsulated in his recent press conference as well when he said that ``American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never be questioned again.''

What he means by that is that he will deploy U.S. forces wherever he wants for whatever purpose he wants--and, again, trying to leave Congress out of the equation. You know, you listen to our Republican colleagues here who apparently just want to give the Executive a blank check.

If you look at the National Security Strategy that the Trump administration unveiled a few weeks back, you will see how serious a change their proposal is because it essentially throws overboard the idea that the United States will employ a foreign policy based on values and principles, that we will support a rules-based order, human rights, freedom, and democracy.

However imperfectly we have done that--and we have been far from perfect--that has been one of the guiding lights for U.S. foreign policy. And when you throw that overboard in favor of this new policy, which says we will essentially reassert a dominance in the Western Hemisphere, it is clearly a signal to others around the world--or at least this is the way they will hear it--that they get free rein in their neighborhoods, which explains why President Trump has been so weak when it comes to negotiating with Vladimir Putin over Ukraine.

We can explain it when we understand that when Donald Trump says ``Ukraine is your neighborhood,'' you, Vladimir Putin, get to do what you want in Ukraine. So he invites Vladimir Putin to a summit in Alaska, thinks he is going to sweet talk Putin. As soon as the summit is over, Russia and Putin escalate their attacks against Ukraine.

Maybe in Donald Trump's mind it is like: Well, you know, Ukraine is in your neighborhood, none of my business. That is a very dangerous signal to send.

Of course, President Xi--I mean he is looking at Taiwan 90 miles away and saying: Well, that is in my neighborhood.

So Donald Trump has unleashed this idea that we are going to focus only on the Western Hemisphere--or mostly on the Western Hemisphere-- and that we are essentially going to live by the rule that might is right. When you unleash that idea around the world, other significant powers will listen and it will make the world a lot more dangerous and it will undermine American interests.

So I do want to close where I started, which is instead of engaging in these costly foreign adventures that cost billions of dollars and put American lives at risk, we should be doing what Candidate Trump said he was going to do, which is focus on making sure we improve the lives of American people right here at home.

That is not what the President is doing. That is what we should be doing, and we should start by saying no to this foreign, illegal adventure by supporting Senator Kaine's resolution.

And then we should get about making sure that we work to bring costs down here in the United States, including, after the House passes later this week, legislation to restore those tax credits that help people afford their healthcare. We should take that up in the Senate and get it passed.

Let's focus on helping the American people here at home rather than putting Americans and their lives at risk in costly foreign adventures to get our hands on Venezuela's oil for the benefit of Donald Trump's donors and billionaire buddies.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, every year, Congress considers the National Defense Authorization Act which has critical investments in our national defense, including in Maryland. In my State, tens of thousands of military personnel and civilians work at military installations and in the defense sector, driving innovation and research to advance our defense. The NDAA governs this work and provides essential support to our servicemembers and veterans.

But at this moment, we are at an inflection point in the United States. We are witnessing increasingly authoritarian actions by President Trump and his administration. The President is using tools of government to pressure and silence dissenting voices, terrorize communities, lead our Nation into conflict without congressional authority, and undermine institutions critical to our democracy.

As I noted during Senate consideration of the NDAA a few months ago, the President has played politics with our Nation's military and tried to use them to advance his authoritarian agenda, be it here at home or abroad. He has deployed the National Guard to the District of Columbia, Los Angeles, Memphis, and Chicago and has attempted to deploy the National Guard to Portland. These deployments are a flagrant violation of U.S. law, including the Posse Comitatus Act, as noted in recent court decisions. Not only have these deployments created chaos in American cities and communities, they have also pulled the military away from its mission and expended funds meant to defend our Nation. Senator Warren and I, along with several other colleagues, put out a report that outlines how the Pentagon has diverted at least $2 billion from its core missions to support the President's mass deportation agenda.

The President's decision in DC and others cities to activate the National Guard without the recipient State Governor's or mayor's consent is why I offered an amendment to the Senate version of the NDAA to block the President from deploying the National Guard to a State, or the District of Columbia, if that State's Governor, or the DC Mayor, objects. Unfortunately, the effort failed, and this bill does not prevent the President's efforts to militarize American streets.

And abroad, Trump has resurrected a policy of a bygone era: the Trump version of the Monroe Doctrine, carrying out an illegal airstrike campaign against boats in international waters, which have been flagrant violations of both U.S. and international law, and can only be seen as extrajudicial killings amounting to state-sanctioned murder. Trump has pursued these actions not to stop ``narco-terrorists,'' as the administration claims, but as a pretext to start a regime change war in Venezuela. There is simply no evidence that these vessels posed an imminent threat, nor is there an active armed conflict between the United States and Venezuela. The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, making the President's acts flat out illegal. Trump's warmongering with Venezuela, including the recent declaration of a blockade on oil tankers from Venezuela is not about stopping drug traffickers. The real goal is regime change and to grab Venezuelan oil and gas reserves for the President's billionaire friends.

These escalating abuses demonstrate an administration increasingly willing to sidestep the law using military force. They also underscore my broader concern about unchecked increases in defense spending, despite the Pentagon's repeated audit failures, including in November 2024. From FY 2021 to FY 2025, defense authorizations rose from $740 billion to $895 billion, a 21 percent increase, and this bill would raise that to $900.6 billion, approximately $8 billion more than the President's budget request. That excludes the July 2025 reconciliation bill, which added over $150 billion in mandatory spending. We need to more carefully examine how our defense spending increases year after year, seemingly without fail, and demand the same accountability from the Department of Defense as from every other Agency.

In addition to these concerns, embedded within this legislation is a provision that walks back a key National Transportation Safety Board recommendation implemented in the wake of the deadly air collision between a commercial airplane and a U.S. Army helicopter near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, DCA, specifically that military aircraft in the area broadcast their location to other aircraft using the most effective collision avoidance technology available. It also allows the military to waive their own requirements for usage of any collision avoidance technology in the DCA area. The inclusion of these provisions is unconscionable when families are still grieving, and the airspace congestion has not improved.

I also remain concerned by the Trump administration's actions to weaken the merit-based civil service across the Federal Government, including at the Department of Defense. One such action was a recently issued executive order that misuses national security exemptions, expanding them to cover two-thirds of the Federal workforce, including many civilian employees at DOD who have long been protected by collective bargaining. For decades, collective bargaining agreements at DOD have enhanced transparency and allowed employees to perform their work free from political interference. The Trump administration's move to limit these protections undermines employee trust and could harm the DOD's ability to maintain a skilled workforce. The bill before us strips out a House-passed bipartisan amendment to restore collective bargaining rights of DOD employees.

I appreciate that the NDAA process each year gives us the opportunity to conduct oversight, update our defense policy, and assert congressional prerogatives. This bill does include important provisions, including an increase in pay for servicemembers, investments in research, and reauthorization of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. It includes a provision I worked on to ensure continued public access to Greenbury Point near the Naval Academy and my efforts with Senator Kennedy to protect investors from foreign insider trading. And there are provisions that will assist in future oversight by requiring the Department of Defense to share more information with Congress.

But these are not ordinary times. We must go farther to stand up to an administration that is currently diverting the military to conduct local law enforcement operations. That is conducting unlawful military operations in service of regime change and threatening further actions, including troops on the ground.

Our military is meant to protect and defend our homeland and our citizens, not carry out actions against them. It must be governed by the rule of law, not undermine it. I am opposing the NDAA because we must do more to rein in these abuses.

Mr. President, today we consider the nomination of Mr. Jared Isaacman to serve as NASA Administrator, a critical position whose leadership will help determine the success of America's ambitious scientific and exploratory goals in space science.

The next NASA Administrator will be tasked with leading the United States and all of humanity to places humans have never ventured, but they will face equally great challenges here on Earth, leading a workforce that has faced a year of upheaval and navigating an administration that has grounded progress rather than fostered it.

Last Spring, President Trump requested a $6 billion cut to NASA, the largest cut in the Agency's history, with cancellation of more than 40 missions and cuts to others, including some already in the final pre- launch stages, such as the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope. Then, only a few months later, the administration worked to push out as many scientists and engineers as possible through their resignation program, resulting in thousands of experienced and dedicated workers leaving the government, often as a result of fear and uncertainty around the future of their jobs. Some of these top scientists were recruited to research labs and universities in other nations, further eroding America's competitive edge. Now, 11 months since the inauguration, the workers remaining at NASA are simply looking for the stability and opportunity to do their world-leading work. The next administrator must bring a greater respect for and commitment to the NASA workforce.

In addition to their attacks on the workforce, vital earth science missions have faced cancellation because the Trump administration dislikes that they provide us with information about our changing climate. There has been bipartisan pushback to this direction for the Agency coupled with bipartisan support for providing NASA the resources they need to conduct their operations. Despite this resistance, the tension between the branches of government remains, and the next administrator will have a vital role to play in standing up for the Agency.

Maryland is the cornerstone of innovation in space science, centered around the crown jewel of American space science, the Goddard Space Flight Center, the Space Science Telescope Institute, AURA, and the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, alongside contractors and small businesses who support their essential work. Wallops Space Flight Center is just over the border in Virgina, but many of its employees and contractors call Maryland home. Space research and technology are a critical and productive part of Maryland's economy, and in turn, these entities are critical to the United States' broader space goals.

When President Trump attempted to cut NASA's fiscal year 2026 budget by an unprecedented amount, he did not target all parts of NASA equally. NASA Science was singled out for a 46-percent reduction in overall budget, which would disproportionately impact Goddard. The next Administrator will need to be ready to fight not just for individual parts of the Agency or flashy programs, but for the entire mission. If NASA seeks to take us back to the Moon and eventually to Mars, it will be cutting-edge science that takes us there and that path runs through Maryland.

I have had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Isaacman twice and watch both of his confirmation hearings, and I appreciate his willingness to engage on Maryland and national priorities for NASA's mission. During both my meetings with Mr. Isaacman, he relayed his belief in the importance of the NASA Science mission and the work done at the Goddard Space Flight Center. At the same time, however, I was alarmed to read Mr. Isaacman's Project Athena, his proposed plan for the Agency that suggested that NASA science should be a service to the commercial industry, rather than continuing to serve the public. I was further discouraged by his proposed plan to move certain mission control operations away from Goddard and to mark other Goddard facilities for possible ``deletion.'' The next NASA Administrator will need to approach the highly technical work and the people who perform it with respect and understanding for how their contribution fits into our larger goals.

I expect Mr. Isaacman's nomination to be confirmed, and it is my sincere hope that he means it when he says that he intends to prioritize and foster the cutting-edge research and science done by NASA, rather than cut it. I intend to work with him and the entire Agency through my role as Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce, Justice, Science--CJS--Appropriations Subcommittee to support and provide critical oversight over the important work of NASA in Maryland, across the country, and around the world.

Mr. Isaacman's actions on the job, not his words during the confirmation

process, will be the true test of his commitment to the workforce and the future of the Agency. I look forward to working with him to achieve those goals.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the Honorable Adrienne A. Jones, who concluded her historic tenure as speaker of the Maryland House of Delegates on December 4, 2025.

A native of Baltimore County, Speaker Jones has dedicated her life to

serving both the county and our entire State. Her passion for public service was evident early on. After graduating from the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, she performed a variety of public roles and quickly became a well-known, dynamic advocate. Notably, she served as director of the Baltimore County Office of Minority Affairs, opened the Baltimore County Office of Fair Practices and Community Affairs as its inaugural executive director, and founded the Baltimore County African American Cultural Festival.

In 1997, Speaker Jones was appointed to fill a vacancy in the House of Delegates, and she won election to her first full term the following year. She has served on numerous committees, including appropriations, rules, and executive nominations, spending affordability, and ways and means. Never one for ideological grandstanding, Speaker Jones maintained a rapt focus on the issues affecting the day-to-day lives of her constituents. She worked tirelessly to direct State dollars to county and community projects, including much-needed school modernizations.

In 2003, after just 5 years as a delegate, Speaker Jones' colleagues recognized her integrity, leadership ability, and inexhaustible work ethic by electing her speaker pro tempore. She served faithfully in this role for 16 years before becoming acting speaker following the death of her predecessor. On May 1, 2019, after a brief and lively campaign, she shattered barriers and made history by being unanimously elected as the first woman and first African-American speaker of the Maryland House of Delegates.

Speaker Jones' tenure was defined by her courage, vision, and steadfast commitment to those she was elected to serve. During the chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic early in her speakership, she met the moment and ensured Marylanders received the State support they needed to stay safe and informed. Speaker Jones presided over the passage of consequential legislation, including the Blueprint for Maryland's Future, the largest education investment in Maryland's history, steered resources to historically underfunded Black colleges and universities, staunchly pursued commonsense police and education reform, and spearheaded the successful campaign to enshrine a woman's right to choose in the Maryland Constitution.

In recognition of her many achievements, Speaker Jones was named Outstanding Alumna of the Year by her alma mater in 2003, was given the Casper R. Taylor, Jr. Founder's Award--the highest honor the speaker may grant to a sitting member of the House of Delegates--by her predecessor in 2019, and was inducted into the Maryland Women's Hall of Fame in 2024. She has also received honorary doctoral degrees from Goucher College and Morgan State University.

Throughout her time in public service, even in moments of intense personal tragedy, Speaker Jones has remained unshakably dedicated to improving the lives of all Marylanders. I am very glad that she will continue to serve as a delegate and that our State will retain the benefit of her great wisdom and experience. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Speaker Jones for her many years of transformative service to the State of Maryland, the impact of which will be felt for generations to come.

Mr. President, I want to start by thanking my colleague Senator Merkley for bringing this resolution before the Senate and Senator Kaine and colleagues for focusing on this question of war and peace.

This is a very simple resolution. It says that no U.S. taxpayer dollars should be spent to go to war against Venezuela absent congressional authorization.

I just heard the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee say to the Senate: If you are opposed to this, go to court. Last time I checked the Constitution of the United States, it gives Congress, this body, the power to decide questions of war or peace, which is exactly why this resolution is before us saying that we shall not spend taxpayer dollars going to war against Venezuela unless the Congress invokes that awesome power.

Now, I know the President of the United States, when he was asked a couple months ago whether he had to comply with the Constitution, he said: ``I don't know.''

Well, I would hope our colleagues on both sides of the aisle here in the U.S. Senate would recognize that the President has to comply with the Constitution, and we should fulfill our constitutional responsibilities as well and not run away from them.

President Trump is bringing us to the brink of war, a regime change war in our hemisphere, and we are running out of time to stop it. We know the President has already authorized the CIA to conduct operations in Venezuela. We know that we are witnessing the largest naval buildup in the Caribbean in decades. We know, as Senator Kaine just mentioned, that today the United States intercepted a Venezuelan oil tanker bound for Cuba, and we know that for weeks and weeks now the Trump administration has been striking boats in international waters, killing more than 80 people.

Now, the President claims to be going after so-called narcoterrorists, but this operation they are conducting is not about drugs. All of us in the Senate want to make sure we address the scourge of drugs in the United States of America, but that is just a cover story presented by the President of the United States because if the President really cared about addressing illegal drugs, he wouldn't have proposed deep cuts to the DEA, the Drug Enforcement Agency, nor would he have proposed to shutter entirely the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force.

I serve on the Appropriations Committee. I am the ranking Member of the subcommittee that oversees the Justice Department and some of these operations. The President's budget cuts our investment in those antidrug operations. If they cared about actually reducing the flow of drugs to the United States, the President would not have just pardoned the former Honduran President, who was convicted of drug trafficking and sentenced to 45 years in Federal prison.

If you want to send a message that we don't want illegal drugs coming into the country, why would you pardon the person who was convicted of doing exactly that? That simply sends a green light to others to go ahead. And, in fact, just this week we learned that President Trump had pardoned a Baltimore drug kingpin. This is somebody whom the DEA called ``one of the largest cocaine and heroin dealers to be arrested by the DEA in recent history.'' President Trump just pardoned him.

So don't tell me, President Trump, that this is about drugs. In fact, we also know that fentanyl, which is primarily fueling the drug overdose deaths in America, is not originating or transiting through Venezuela, that fentanyl is typically manufactured in Mexico, with precursors from China.

It is true that Venezuela has become a source of cocaine, but even that is mainly bound for destinations in Europe and West Africa.

So that is not what this is about. This is about their efforts to engage in regime change.

Look, the Trump administration has concocted this fanciful legal theory that it is engaged in an armed military conflict with these drug boats and drug runners. In fact, we have seen, as my colleagues say, the President of the United States releasing these videos where they are blowing up these drug boats and killing people as if they are engaged in a military conflict with the U.S. Navy. That simply is not true. They are engaged in criminal activity, but their purpose is not to engage the United States militarily--far from it.

I would just ask my colleagues how we would react if another country began bombing boats with U.S. citizens on them and then claiming that those boats were being used by U.S. citizens to transport drugs. Even if that were the truth, what would we say if the other country claimed that they would be at war with those American citizens? I think we would see it as a hostile act. I know that we would.

Now, even if you take the Trump administration's framing here--which is that we are engaged in a military conflict--then it is a fact that the video, which has been well reported, indicates that some of the survivors of the first attack on September 2 were seeking help.

Here is what Congressman Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, had to say about those survivors: that they were ``basically two shirtless people clinging to the bow of a capsized and inoperable boat drifting in the water until the missiles come and kill them.''

So, as my colleague said, if Donald Trump has nothing to hide here, he should provide the full videos to the Congress and to the American people.

That would be a war crime only if you take the framework presented by the Trump administration, which is that we are at war with these boats. But we are not. And what that means is that these are simply extrajudicial killings, just killing people on the high seas. What that means is that this is simply state-sanctioned murder of these individuals. And that is why it is very important for the Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities.

But I want to close by making a more simple point about the resolution that Senator Merkley has introduced here. Even if you for some reason agree with President Trump with respect to the drug boats despite their fanciful legal theories, what this resolution says is: Don't spend taxpayer dollars to take military action against Venezuela.

There is no argument that a U.S. attack on Venezuela doesn't constitute an act of war--an act of war that does come under the jurisdiction of this Senate under the Constitution of the United States.

Now, all of us would like to see a different leader in Venezuela. Maduro is an authoritarian. He is a dictator. He is not a legitimate President. But that doesn't mean that we go after every leader who is not legitimately elected by the people of their country. In fact,

this President is cozying up to dictators and authoritarians all over the world. In fact, if you just read their National security strategy that came out last Friday, you will see it completely abandons the idea that the United States will stand up to dictators and authoritarians, abandons the idea that we stand up for democracy and freedom and human rights and the rule of law. It is a document that actually green lights cozying up to people like Maduro.

So what they are doing is using the American military in an attempt of outright regime change. And I just read the words of James Madison, who really put it best back in 1793 when he wrote:

In no part of the Constitution is more wisdom to be found

than in the clause which confides the question of war or

peace to the legislature, and not to the executive. . . . The

trust and . . . temptation would be too great for any one

man.

As I said earlier, Donald Trump has been asked directly whether he has to comply with the Constitution of the United States, and he said he doesn't know.

It is our obligation to uphold our duties under the Constitution of the United States. That is what Senator Merkley's resolution does. It says we shouldn't be spending any of our country's precious resources on going to war against Venezuela unless this Congress undertakes its responsibility and were to decide to declare war.

In my view, going to war against Venezuela is a very bad idea. Let us not simply slide into it through negligence. That is what we are trying to avoid through this resolution.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, on October 23, a genocidal militia called the Rapid Support Forces, also known as the RSF, entered the city of El Fasher in the Darfur region of Sudan.

Countless reports describe how they murdered men and boys and raped women and girls. Credible reports indicated that RSF fighters entered a maternity hospital and slaughtered 460 people--doctors, nurses, patients, and their loved ones.

They turned the city into a killing field, going house to house, rounding up people to torture and murder because of their ethnicity. RSF forces entered a shelter for displaced people near El Fasher University and raped at least 25 women at gunpoint.

Over 100,000 survivors have fled the city, making it out, trying to take the roads. But the RSF has targeted those who try to escape.

The massacre has been so brutal and so bloody we can see it from space. The Yale Humanitarian Research Lab has flagged satellite photos that appear to show incidents of mass killings, with dozens of unarmed people lying dead and sand stained with blood.

In late October, the same Yale lab was told that more than 10,000 people were killed in 3 days.

Human rights groups also report that hundreds of unaccompanied children, some carrying babies, have fled El Fasher to other Sudanese towns, seeking to escape the violence.

Sadly, we have seen this story before because the RSF have a horrible history and lineage. They are part of what is known as the Janjaweed militias, who committed genocide in Darfur 20 years ago, and they want to continue the Janjaweed's genocidal mission of eliminating other ethnic groups.

I do want to salute the journalists and human rights analysts who are working to expose these terrible truths, but it is up to us as to what we do with that truth. And the truth is this could have been prevented. We had warning, and we could have done more to stop it. And we can still do more now to stop the ongoing genocide.

El Fasher was under siege for 18 months. The civil war in Sudan has been raging for more than 2\1/2\ years. More than 150,000 people have died, and approximately 14 million have been displaced in Sudan, marking the largest and fastest displacement crisis in the world.

Earlier this year, at the beginning of his administration, Donald Trump gutted USAID and suddenly cut off our humanitarian aid to Sudan. More than a thousand soup kitchens closed overnight. While others have stepped up, the vacuum left by AID's departure means that even more innocent people are dying.

And even as we cut humanitarian aid for the victims of genocide, we have not effectively used our leverage and influence to end the war, because throughout this conflict, we, the United States, have continued to send weapons to the United Arab Emirates, the UAE, whom we know are arming the murderous RSF.

Report after report from the United Nations, human rights organizations, and journalists have provided evidence that the UAE is doing this. In fact, in January of this year, the Biden administration confirmed to me directly that the UAE was providing material support to the RSF, even though the UAE had assured the United States that it wasn't and that it wouldn't.

So this is not a question for debate, and, in fact, if the UAE is not supplying the RSF with weapons, then they should have no concerns about this legislation.

And around the same time that I heard from the Biden administration about the UAE supplying the RSF, the U.S. Government concluded what is clear from plain sight, that the RSF and their allied militias are committing genocide in Darfur.

According to the State Department's assessment, ``the RSF and allied militias have systematically murdered men and boys--even infants--on an ethnic basis, and deliberately targeted women and girls from certain ethnic groups for rape and other forms of brutal sexual violence. Those same militias have targeted fleeing civilians, murdering innocent people escaping conflict, and prevented remaining civilians from accessing lifesaving supplies.'' End of quote from the State Department of the United States.

So we know this has been going on. We have known it for years. And the Trump administration has reiterated the finding by the Biden administration State Department that the RSF is engaged in genocide in Darfur.

We are not helpless. We are not innocent bystanders in the face of these unspeakable crimes. We have leverage. We just need the political will to use it.

And I should say, I recognize--we recognize--that the RSF is not the only party to this conflict in Sudan. The State Department has determined that the Sudanese Armed Forces, known as the SAF, have also committed atrocities throughout this war. And there are also other external actors fueling the war in Sudan, including countries like Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Russia, and others.

I commend the U.S. mediators who have been trying to bring peace to the region, both in the previous administration and now. But at the same time, we have got to recognize, after 2\1/2\ years and after all the bloodshed and the ongoing genocide, that talk is not enough; that we have to use at least the leverage we have and use our influence more effectively when it comes to the UAE and its army of the RSF.

I would gladly work with my colleagues across the aisle to say that the United States should not be supplying U.S. military assistance to any country that is fueling the ongoing war and genocide, but surely-- surely--we can agree that we should begin by not providing weapons to a country that is, in turn, fueling a genocide--what we have determined is a genocide in Darfur.

And I should say that Secretary Rubio, during his confirmation hearing for Secretary of State, was asked about this very issue, and here is what he said: We need to ``raise the fact that they''-- referring to the UAE--``are openly supporting an entity that is carrying out a genocide.'' That was Secretary Rubio, nominee.

But I asked the Secretary and I asked the President and I asked my colleagues: If we agree that there is a genocide going on and we agree that it is being committed by the RSF, shouldn't we agree that we should at least pause the transfer of weapons to the UAE, which is fueling the genocide in Darfur? And why haven't we done that?

Well, Donald Trump visited the UAE over the summer. Instead of demanding accountability for their role in the genocide in Darfur, he gave away the crown jewels of American AI, and many of our most sophisticated chips were promised to the UAE. In return, a UAE-backed firm gave the Trump family's newly launched stablecoin business a $2 billion boost.

And it was just days before President Trump visited the UAE that the administration green-lit the sale of $1.4 billion of arms to the UAE.

What about the genocide they were fueling in Darfur? Did he say anything about that? It doesn't seem that he raised those issues during his visit to the UAE. In fact, President Trump said just yesterday in a speech that Sudan was ``not on my charts'' until the Saudi Crown Prince brought it to his attention.

Really? Really, President Trump? This has been going on for 2\1/2\ years. You have been sending military assistance to the UAE that, in turn, is fueling the RSF's murderous rage in Darfur, and it just wasn't on the President's charts until yesterday. What was on his charts was all the corrupt deals that were going down in the UAE.

So here are the facts. The UAE is aiding and abetting a genocide in Darfur. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has been providing highly sophisticated U.S. technology to the UAE, removed many of the safeguards that have been in place to prevent that technology from falling into China's hands, and shipping them advanced technology and deadly weapons, while a UAE state-owned company invested $2 billion in the Trump family's crypto scheme.

Now, earlier this year, in the summer, Senator Murphy and I, along with colleagues, filed a joint resolution of disapproval to try to stop those weapon sales to the UAE, sending a message--or trying to send a message--that the U.S. foreign policy could not be manipulated by corrupt bargains. Unfortunately, that effort failed.

If we want to stop the ongoing horrors in Sudan, we need to begin by applying our leverage and stop the UAE from funneling weapons to the RSF. That is why I have been working for years during this conflict with Congresswoman Sara Jacobs. We introduced the bill. It is called the Stand Up for Sudan Act. It would prohibit the United States from selling weapons to the UAE until the President certifies that the UAE is not arming the RSF. So if the UAE is really not doing this, they shouldn't have to worry about it because President Trump won't make that certification.

And I acknowledge that the UAE is an important partner to the United States. But that doesn't mean that even with partners, we shouldn't use our leverage to stop them from fueling a genocide.

I remember many days when Senator Rubio took to the floor of this Senate, and he talked about having an American foreign policy based on values and principles, on human rights, on self-determination. That has all gone out the window in this administration. It seems like a quaint thing, but it doesn't have to be a quaint thing in this body, in this Senate, where Senators can stand up for our values and

can make sure we exercise our leverage to prevent the ongoing genocide in Darfur.

I am going to close with a story about an orphan boy in Sudan. He told the Norwegian Refugee Council and the New York Times that ``his parents and siblings were killed . . . in a strike as they tried to flee El Fasher: On a broken foot, he wandered alone to the northern gates of the city until others who were fleeing put him on a truck''--a truck to another city.

Then he told reporters:

Now I'm here alone. At night I find places where people

gather and sleep on the ground near them.

I hope someone helps me.

That boy needs our help. Thousands of innocent people need our help, and for goodness' sake, we could take one small step to exercise just some of our influence to end the ongoing genocide in Darfur, and that is by adopting a resolution that Congresswoman Jacobs and I have put forward.

So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from further consideration of S. 935 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I was listening carefully to my colleague and, of course, she raises the question: If the UAE is telling us the truth when they say that they are not sending any of their weapons to the RSF to help fuel the genocide in Sudan, why do my colleagues protest so loudly against this measure?

It must mean that they don't believe the UAE when it is doing it because the pausing in the transfer and sale of U.S. weapons to the UAE in this legislation is predicated on a finding from the President that the UAE is, in fact, arming the RSF. So if their denials are true, then my colleagues should have nothing to worry about in terms of the impact of this legislation.

And, in fact, if they are lying to the United States, that should cause concern.

Now, I agree that the UAE is an important partner, and they have been an important partner in a variety of interests in the Middle East region, including countering Iran's malign influence there. But, colleagues, does that really mean that we should look the other way while they are supplying an entity that our own government has concluded is committing a genocide in Darfur?

Surely, the UAE needs the United States for all sorts of things. They clearly want our AI technology, our semiconductor technology. In fact, as I described, they went to great lengths to essentially provide $2 billion for the President's family crypto schemes in order to get that American technology.

So this is not a situation where its either-or. We can continue a partnership with the UAE, which, again, says that they are not supplying the murderous RSF with weapons or we can choose just to look the other way.

And I will just close again with this. I remember Secretary Rubio-- and I hear so many of my colleagues take to the Senate floor--calling out human right abuses around the world.

It is always convenient to call out human rights abuses by our adversaries. We all talk about the awful things China does when it comes to the Uighurs. We talk about what Russia is doing in Ukraine and other places. But for some reason, we cannot find it in ourselves to say to a partner that we value our relationship with the UAE, but we are not going to stand by and supply you with weapons while you continue to provide weapons that are fueling a genocide in Darfur.

What happened to any semblance of a values-based American foreign policy? We can pursue our interests, and we can pursue our values. We don't always do it perfectly. But for goodness' sake, Senator Rubio talked about the importance of human rights; Secretary Rubio, apparently, has thrown that out the window along with the President of the United States.

I am very disappointed that our colleagues cannot join together in a bipartisan manner to just use a little American influence to try to stop a genocide in Darfur.

I yield the floor.

Recognition of the Minority Leader

Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of former Howard County Executive Edward Leo Cochran, Jr., a distinguished public servant and scientific researcher, who passed away earlier this month at the age of 96.

Born in Maryland on March 18, 1929, Dr. Cochran was committed to public service, education, science, and family.

Dr. Cochran attended what was then Loyola College before pursuing a master's degree in chemistry at Duquesne University and a Ph.D. at the University of Notre Dame. It was during his time at the University of Notre Dame that he met his wife Catherine Joan Flanagan. The couple were married for 62 wonderful years and had six children.

Dr. Cochran was a tremendous Marylander, making a positive impact and leaving a lasting legacy in our State and for the good of our entire country. As a scientist, Dr. Cochran made significant contributions to the understanding of free-radical chemistry, which he worked on at Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory.

Beyond scientific discovery, Dr. Cochran's impact was felt through his dedication to public service. He served on the Howard County Board of Education and the Howard County Council prior to being elected as county executive in 1974. In each of these elected offices, he served his constituents with distinction and fulfilled his commitment to creating a more just community shaped by equal rights for all. During his service, he helped move that goal forward by working to end segregation in county schools. He also formed many government agencies, including the Citizens Services Department, the Office of Human Rights, the Office of Aging, the Office of Law, and the Office of Consumer Affairs, with a focus on bettering the community he served and the lives of Howard County residents. He made more affordable housing options available to local seniors and enhanced consumer protections. A true believer in the value of education, Dr. Cochran was critical to the founding of Howard Community College and served as the first chair of its board of trustees.

There is no doubt that Dr. Cochran's legacy lives on in Maryland and especially in Howard County. Just as enduring is the example he set at home, where he was an engaged and loving father who modeled for his children responsibility for the environment in a hands-on way while working on the family farm.

Dr. Cochran is survived by his brother Donald; six children; Maryland Delegate Courtney Watson, Ted Cochran, William Cochran, Mark Cochran, Mary Catherine Cochran, and Christopher Cochran; 23 grandchildren; and 13 great-grandchildren.

The people of Maryland have lost an incomparable leader, but Dr. Cochran's many legacies will continue to shape the future of Howard County and beyond. I ask my colleagues to join me in extending our condolences to his family.