Floor Statements

Mr. President, July 4 is supposed to be a day of celebration and patriotism, but earlier this month, leftwing domestic extremists tried to turn that day into a day of tragedy and a day of terrorism.

On the evening of Independence Day, a group of antifa terrorists carried out an ambush attack on an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Alvarado, TX.

They drew immigration agents outside by shooting fireworks at the building and vandalizing cars in the parking lot. Unarmed ICE officials came outside. They came outside thinking they were just dealing with hooligans and not realizing that there were snipers hiding in the trees.

The gunmen opened fire, but, thankfully, these leftwing terrorists weren't your typical Texas straight shooters. Though they fired 20 to 30 rounds, they failed to kill or critically injure any law enforcement officers.

When a shooter's gun jammed, he didn't know how to clear it so he dropped his weapon and fled the scene. The terrorists tried to hide in a nearby trailer park, endangering residents who were celebrating our Nation's founding.

Thankfully, the local police were able to detain these violent radicals without harm to any bystanders.

This assault on the ICE facility is a direct result of inflammatory rhetoric aimed at our immigration enforcement officers. As you see every day on TV, leftwing street mobs constantly chant that ICE employees and ICE, generally, is a modern-day KKK.

A Democrat Congressman recently compared ICE agents to Nazis. I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to condemn these outrageous attacks and to condemn the left's hateful rhetoric toward the men and women who enforce our immigration laws.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, 32 years ago today, I joined President Clinton, Governor of Iowa Terry Branstad, and members of the Iowa congressional delegation to tour catastrophic flood damage in my home State. The great flood of 1993 ravaged nine States in America's heartland.

This reminds me of a poster we in the Midwest showed at that particular time, and I was hoping I could round it up and show it again to the Senate. But it had a picture of the Great Lakes in the satellite, and then it had a picture of the flooded areas of the Midwest. And the blue that shows up where the water is was almost as blue in the Midwest that was flooded along with the same color of the Great Lakes.

Flooded tributaries at this time of the 1993 flood overtopped levees, devastating communities, businesses, and the livelihoods connected to those businesses. More than 15 million acres of farmland were underwater. Barge traffic on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers stopped for 2 long months. A quarter of a million residents in Des Moines went without running water for 11 days. At least 54,000 people were evacuated.

The 1993 flood amassed the largest financial loss from flooding in modern history. The second costliest flood swept the Midwest 15 years later in 2008.

Of course, the loss of life is the most significant tragedy of any natural disaster. Fifty precious lives were lost in the 1993 floods. Iowans know firsthand the anguish and despair caused by natural disasters. So, on behalf of my home State, we mourn the loss of life in Texas Hill Country from flash flooding along the Guadalupe River on July 4 of this year.

As the road to recovery gets underway, Iowans stand with Texans. The grit and resilience we have in the Midwest runs just as deep in the State of Texas.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, on July 13, 2024, an assassin nearly killed President Trump. The gunman injured him and two rally participants and killed Corey Comperatore. We keep him and his family in our prayers as well as everyone affected that day. Today, 1 year and 1 day later, I come to the floor to provide an update on my ongoing oversight of that attempted assassination.

The day of the shooting, I launched an investigation focused on gathering and releasing information to the public. I didn't want the public to be kept in the dark. Public transparency stops conspiracy theories. Sixty years after JFK's assassination, we still have questions being asked. Unfortunately, there are still aspects to that shooting where the government hasn't been transparent.

The Biden administration stonewalled my oversight requests. I strongly urge the new administration to let all the facts breathe, unlike the last administration.

The day of the shooting, my oversight unit quickly got to work. They talked to patriotic whistleblowers. They performed dozens of witness interviews, including local law enforcement officials, rally goers, and local businesses. My staff obtained and reviewed weeks' worth of security footage, text messages, pictures, law enforcement briefing materials, after-action reports, and other records. They also obtained police body camera footage that provided the first video of what happened in the aftermath of that shooting. I made it all public.

At the time, my investigative work unveiled the most detailed picture of the Trump assassination attempt. As part of my oversight, I asked the Department of Homeland Security inspector general to review the matter. I also requested that the Government Accountability Office do the same as I asked the inspector general to do. The American people wanted answers. They wanted accountability in the aftermath of this tragedy. I worked hard to do just that, and I know there is more work to be done.

This past weekend, the Government Accountability Office produced to me its report on the July 13 assassination attempt. The Government Accountability Office report starts by stating:

The U.S. Secret Service failed to implement security

measures that could have prevented the assassination attempt

on then-former President Donald J. Trump during a July 13,

2024, campaign rally.

According to the report, prior to the July 13 rally, Secret Service received information from the intelligence community about a threat against President Trump's life. Yet this threat information wasn't shared with Secret Service personnel or local law enforcement officials--all responsible for securing that event. Clearly, had all Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials known of this threat, it would have changed how they secured the AGR building where the sniper opened fire from.

As I previously made public, Secret Service and its local partners had cell phone issues on July 13. The Government Accountability Office report found that the Secret Service didn't have a policy to assess cellular service at the site even though communication is key during any major event like this. This resulted in the Secret Service not receiving real-time threat information and updates during the search for the gunman. Every delayed second in finding the gunman meant that he was one step closer to carrying out his evil objective.

I previously made public documents showing that the Secret Service had issues with a counterdrone system at the rally. The Government Accountability Office confirmed my previous oversight. GAO found that the Secret Service's counterdrone operator lacked the training, knowledge, and support to fix and operate the counterdrone system. According to the Government Accountability Office report, these problems occurred because the Secret Service didn't follow its own requirements that personnel must complete training before operating a counterdrone system.

The GAO report says the Secret Service said that using a counterdrone is like ``turning on a flashlight.'' Yet the counterdrone did not work, and the Secret Service could not fix it. Had a counterdrone been operating as planned, it could have identified the shooter's drone and even the shooter.

The Government Accountability Office's report also found that the Secret Service planned to use farm equipment to address a line-of-sight issue when securing the AGR building. Before the rally, a campaign staffer asked Secret Service to modify the plan, and the advance team did as the staffer requested.

But they didn't notify senior officials overseeing the rally of these changes. If they had, the senior officials might have overruled them.

While the report says the Secret Service has made changes to correct some of these problems, they still have more work to do. The Secret Service operates in a zero-fail mission, and they don't have room for any error.

Every failure exposed by the Government Accountability Office report must be turned into positive changes in the Secret Service. I want my colleagues to know that I will be riding hard on them until I am satisfied the job is done.

I want to close out by thanking the law enforcement officers serving on the frontlines, including the Secret Service, Capitol Police, their law enforcement partners, and, of course, their families--all working hard and sacrificing to keep the public and the government safe.

I am grateful to you all and do not, in the future then, take the days that seem uneventful for granted.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, July 11 is recognized by the United Nations General Assembly as the International Day of Reflection and Commemoration of the 1995 Genocide in Srebrenica.

This town in Bosnia and Herzegovina was the scene of the worst genocide on European soil since the Holocaust. Bosnian Serb separatists murdered 8,000 of their fellow Bosnians at that time--these fellow Bosnians had been their coworkers, their neighbors, even friends-- because of their Muslim heritage, practicing that faith or not practicing.

Many Bosnian families who survived the genocide but who lost their family members became refugees and found a home in my State of Iowa. Bosnian Iowans have enriched Iowan communities with their strong work ethic, family values, and unique culture.

Today, there are renewed calls for ethnic separatism in Bosnia. That dredges up painful memories for those who lived through the genocide of the 1990s.

As we commemorate the loss, which so many Bosnian families experienced, we ought to be alert to the renewed efforts to finalize the ethnic cleansing project that began in the 1990s.

The Dayton Accords are rightly celebrated for ending that killing of 8,000, but they essentially froze the frontlines and enshrined ethnic divisions by creating two entities within Bosnia and Herzegovina. These two entities are named Republika Srpska and the Federation.

Prior to the war and the ethnic cleansing, Bosnians of Orthodox, Muslim, and Catholic heritage were very intermixed; although, many Bosnians were not particularly practicing their respective religions.

The territory that is now the Republika Srpska used to have a large percentage of Bosnians of Muslim heritage, but most are now gone. However, I have talked to Bosnians in Iowa of Muslim heritage who still have family living in the old country.

Separatists in Bosnia and their advocates here falsely imply this area was always populated overwhelmingly by Orthodox Bosnian Serbs so they ought to have their own state. They also spin narratives that this is some great clash of faiths or civilizations.

Bosnians share a common European culture. However, it seems like ethnic identity--not whether or how a Bosnian practices a faith--has been the focus of conflict.

There are no easy answers for Bosnia's future, but I am convinced that state-building based on ethnic cleansing is not the right way to go, and we should have learned that from the genocide of 1995.

Mr. President, this year, I have been working hard to help the renewable fuels industry, which provides about 40,000 to 50,000 jobs in the State of Iowa and is a very big help for the family farmers of Iowa. These family farmers rely on the renewable fuels market as a source for the use of the bountiful crops that we raise each year.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed last week, signed by the President on July 4, supports family farmers and advances energy production--renewable energy production and, also, fossil fuel production.

During the consideration of this legislation, I pushed hard for a provision to provide transition relief to small biodiesel producers by temporarily extending the small agri-biodiesel tax credit. The previous administration, the last 4 years, failed to release functional guidance implementing the clean fuel production tax credit. Their refusal to do that contributed to many small producers shutting down their operations and leaving hundreds of people unemployed. The extension of this credit will provide relief to these plants while they await further implementation guidance from the Department of the Treasury under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

I am proud to deliver this certainty to Iowa's small biodiesel producers, to the consumers, and to the benefit of the 86,000 family farmers of Iowa.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, nonpartisan civic education and civic participation are critical for our constitutional and representative form of government.

Increasingly, however, civic knowledge is on the decline.

A recent survey by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that 70 percent fail a basic civic literacy test.

Another survey found that nearly 17 percent of Americans could not name any branch of government.

This should be concerning for all of us.

I would like to commend efforts in my home State of Iowa to promote civic education and participation in our colleges and universities. These include Cyclone Civics at Iowa State University, Hawk the Vote at the University of Iowa, and the Center for Civic Education at the University of Northern Iowa.

These programs are crucial in ensuring that the next generation of leaders understands our constitutional system of government and are ready to lead our Republic forward.

Mr. President, since 2021, I sounded the alarm about the former Biden administration's failure to vet Afghan evacuees. Instead of coming clean, the previous administration dismissed and failed to answer my oversight request.

For years, the Biden administration hid from the American people known vulnerabilities in the vetting process that goes under the names of Operation Allies Welcome and Operation Allies Refuge. The Department of Homeland Security inspector general eventually exposed those vetting failures, and, just last month, so too did the Department of Justice inspector general. Both inspectors general substantiated vetting failures that I have raised for years.

Recently, I was informed by the Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard of new information. My office has been told that of the more than 100,000 Afghan evacuees, as of August 2022, 1.6 percent had links to terrorism or other derogatory information. It happens that that is over 1,600 people who, at that time, posed a potential threat to our homeland and our people.

At that time, all 1,600 were located in the United States. Now, naturally, since then, some may have left, some may have been deported, and it is unclear who remains.

Based on past briefings provided by the FBI, it is clear they began to investigate these evacuees years ago. I strongly urge the current FBI and intelligence community leadership to aggressively investigate those evacuees who require it and bring these matters to a close.

I am also calling on the Trump administration to ensure that its findings are declassified to the fullest extent possible. Why? Because the public has a right to be made aware--in fact, fully aware--of the Biden administration's failure to vet Afghan evacuees.

Transparency brings accountability, and in this case, that transparency is important because it is a matter of public safety.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, today I would like to address a whistleblower complaint that I received the morning before Emil Bove's nomination hearing. That is the complaint that was given to the New York Times for them to report on it the very same morning.

One group has publicly accused this chairman of the Judiciary Committee of undermining that whistleblower. That group also said:

I used to be a champion of whistleblowers.

Then the whistleblower and his lawyers took part in a political hit piece on my handling of this situation, and so now my Democratic colleagues have all of a sudden found whistleblowers to be of benefit to them.

Let me be absolutely clear. I appreciate the whistleblower's disclosure being sent to my office. My door is open to anyone, but that doesn't mean that I am going to jump at every allegation in a way that some may want this Senator to do. So let me respond with a very short history lesson.

Last Congress, during the Biden administration, I worked to protect many whistleblowers, as I have throughout my Senate career. I recall with pride the work that I did during the Reagan administration with Department of Defense whistleblowers.

In some cases, my whistleblower work never sees the light of day because the situation demands nonpublic attention. In other cases, publicity is required.

In my efforts to protect the IRS whistleblowers who came forward during the previous administration, my Democratic colleagues didn't join me. In my efforts to protect the Department of Homeland Security whistleblowers, my Democratic colleagues refused to join me.

And those whistleblowers even disclosed problematic conduct during the Trump administration, conduct which that administration actually tried to fix.

In my efforts to protect Health and Human Services' whistleblowers, my Democratic colleagues didn't join me in that effort either.

Last year, I hosted two oversight roundtables, one on the Biden administration's failure to protect unaccompanied children from trafficking, another on the Biden administration's failure to collect DNA at the border, resulting in Americans being subjected to senseless crimes from illegals.

At that roundtable, the witnesses said that Rachel Morin's murder by an illegal could have been prevented had his DNA been taken by the border people, as required under law.

At both of these roundtables, my whistleblowers testified. On both roundtables, not a single Democrat attended, even though I invited them to come.

During Trump's first term, I made a public statement that it appeared the Ukraine complaint followed whistleblower laws. I said that even though I had serious concerns about the complaint's substantive legitimacy--concerns which have been proven right over time. Now, at that particular time, Democratic groups praised me.

During Trump's first term, I investigated Russian collusion, then- Ranking Member Feinstein joined me in that effort. We and our staffs interviewed Donald Trump, Jr., and other Republicans. As we found out, there was nothing there.

And what ended up happening is the exposure of the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee paying for the fake Steele dossier.

Yet, with overwhelming evidence of Biden family corruption, my Democratic colleagues didn't do any investigation of that matter. And when I say ``overwhelming,'' I made bank records public proving the case, and it was still crickets from the other side.

During the Kavanaugh nomination, many alleged whistleblowers came forward. I directed my oversight and investigative staffs to dig in: 45 witnesses were interviewed, 25 written statements, and an over 400-page report.

Some of those witnesses were sent to us by my Democrat colleagues. The conclusion of that, no evidence to support the allegations that were brought forward against Kavanaugh. Indeed, what ended up happening were several criminal referrals for felonious lies from these same witnesses. This committee made four criminal referrals for materially false statements and obstruction, two of these four referrals also included criminal conspiracy.

One witness was referred to my staff by a fellow Senator who also referred that witness to a reporter. That witness's information was used to question Kavanaugh under oath. That witness later publicly admitted that they lied.

When individuals provide fabricated allegations, it diverts committee resources when other time-sensitive investigations are ongoing. Resources were diverted away from whistleblowers to handle the Kavanaugh matter. Such conduct impedes the Senate's work. During Kavanaugh, my investigative staff spent hours, days, and many weeks investigating one claim after another.

So getting back to the matter I opened with, Emil Bove, my first question to him at a public hearing was directly about the whistleblower complaint that my staff received the very single day before the hearing.

So the nominee, Mr. Bove, denied the allegations under oath. The Deputy Attorney General has denied the allegations publicly. Two high- level principals have made outright denials publicly. The whistleblower also signed papers acknowledging the Justice Department had complied with court orders. So right now that is the state of the play.

Every day my office receives many whistleblower cases. My investigative staff study them and run down the facts.

There are many government employees who need help. And just this year, I have had a lot of success with whistleblowers that were discriminated against, investigated against, maybe fired, maybe put on administrative leave. But in most cases, it was all an attempt to hurt them professionally, besides being out of a job.

So in regard to the IRS whistleblowers, they were finally helped--one of whom is a Democrat. My Department of Homeland Security whistleblowers got their guns, badges, and retirement back. On another example, I spent significant time helping FBI whistleblowers, and it appears their cases are trending in the right direction.

And guess what. One of those whistleblowers is also a Democrat.

I would always welcome more bipartisan oversight. It is just that the Democrats apparently don't want to join my efforts.

So when I read unfounded public broadsides about my operation in that political piece I have already referred to, let what I said today be a reminder of my dedication to helping the whistleblower community. And let me also remind everyone that sometimes what I do to protect whistleblowers is nonpublic, as it should be. And I don't care about that. All I care about are the results of helping whistleblowers and bringing attention to the wrong that the whistleblowers say are wrong within our government.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, contrary to misinformation campaigns seeking to stop commonsense Medicaid reforms from getting to the President's desk, the One Big Beautiful Bill does not take away Medicaid from those who need it. In fact, the bill will strengthen the Medicaid program, so that it can continue to serve the vulnerable populations it was designed to serve.

Before I discuss the program integrity measures in this bill, I want to give some context on Medicaid spending. Under this bill, Medicaid will spend over $7.4 trillion over 10 years. We are only slowing the growth of Medicaid spending as Medicaid spending will still go up at about 2 to 3 percent annually, compared to 4.5 to 5 percent annually, if we don't pass this bill.

A sizable majority of Americans support efforts to stop wasteful spending that drains resources for people who truly need this safety net and puts an unfair burden on taxpayers. Between 2015 and 2024, the total amount of improper Federal Medicaid payments was over $560 billion. Some independent estimates put it closer to $1.1 trillion. We must do something about it. I am also the author of major updates to the False Claims Act, a major tool to save taxpayers money.

Since my reforms were enacted, the Federal Government has recovered more than $78 billion lost to fraud--much of it in government healthcare programs--and saved billions more by deterring would-be fraudsters. We are doing more in this bill, because taxpayers and those who rely on Medicaid deserve better. That is why we are putting an end to the billions of dollars of waste, fraud, and abuse in healthcare programs.

Let me list off a few provisions that establish some program integrity:

Reducing duplicate enrollment under the Medicaid program.

Ensuring deceased individuals and health care providers

don't remain enrolled.

Payment reduction for erroneous excess provider payments

under Medicaid.

We're also going to require states to check if an

individual is eligible to be on Medicaid twice a year,

instead of once a year.

These provisions alone save over $94 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, CBO. We establish robust verification for individuals receiving premium tax credits through the Federal marketplace.

We also ensure that if someone gets more subsidization than they are allowed based on their income, the excessive subsidy amount is returned.

Last year, I pointed out to the Treasury Inspector General that excessive payments were not being recouped. Through my oversight, I discovered over 40 percent of excessive Federal marketplace subsidy payments totaled over $10 billion dating back to 2016. These excess payments were not recouped because of current safe harbor rules. This excessive waste will end in this bill and save over $60 billion, according to CBO.

We also delay costly regulations that establish one-size-fits-all rules, including for nursing homes and State Medicaid programs. I am a strong proponent of nursing home oversight and ensuring our most vulnerable senior citizens and those with disabilities have access to high-quality care. We

should be addressing the workforce challenges nursing homes face by partnering with nursing homes, not mandating from Washington, DC. Delaying the nursing home staffing mandate rule and so-called ``streamlining eligibility rule'' saves over $187 billion according to

Mr. President, I come to the Senate to bring up the issue of how the Congress--on a piece of legislation that I am part of--and how President Trump can help the economy through helping small business.

President Biden issued an Executive order in February of 2022. That Executive order required what is called the project labor agreements, or PLAs, on Federal projects over $35 million. Just to be clear, I meant that Executive order requires project labor agreements.

I opposed this Executive order at that time, and I joined a letter with my colleagues, telling President Biden what a bad idea that was. I believe the Trump administration should deregulate this Biden Executive order.

Project labor agreements are a sort of backdoor way to give unionized contractors a leg up on Federal contracts in competition with nonunion contractors. Plus, there is too much redtape for a business to comply.

Public project labor agreements effectively make it impossible for a contractor to compete for Federal contracts if its workforce isn't unionized. So it is kind of like a union shop outlawed by the Taft- Hartley Act in right-to-work States. About 27 States have right-to-work laws.

Well, most of the workforce in Iowa isn't unionized. This Executive order seems to assume that every workforce should be unionized, and Iowa happens to be a right-to-work State.

It happens that I support the right of workers to organize. I joined a union from 1962 to 1971. I was a member of the International Association of Machinists. I am proud of my membership in that union and the years I spent on the assembly line at Waterloo Register in Cedar Falls, IA. It happens that my job was putting screw holes in furnace registers. However, I also support the right of workers not to join a union.

Iowa has many companies, small and large, including many family-run enterprises, where they care deeply about their employees. So it is natural that these companies' employees don't feel a need to unionize.

The Federal Government should not tip the scales against these great but small companies and their workers. Federal contracts should be awarded through a fair and competitive bidding process that allows all qualified contractors to compete on a level playing field based on merit, based on experience, quality, and the safety of their workforce.

Project labor agreement mandates prevent many small businesses from competing for Federal projects and may even lead to increased costs for taxpayers.

I told you I was going to talk about legislation that would do the same thing I asked President Biden to do. I am the cosponsor of a bill called the Fair and Open Competition Act prohibiting Federal Agencies from mandating project labor agreements or using PLA preferences on Federal construction contracts.

I am also joining Senator Britt and a number of my colleagues in urging President Trump to revoke the ill-conceived Biden Executive order mandating project labor agreements on Federal projects. The Biden Executive order should be at the top of the list of a ``deregulation'' administration, which this Trump administration is and it proudly speaks so.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I come to the floor this very day to correct the public record. That public record has become so distorted by fanatical allegations of Republican tyranny that it no longer records actual history.

My Democratic colleagues have obscured the transcript with tales of a constitutional crisis, corrupt law enforcement, and Democratic knighthood defending the very rule of law that they abandoned for open borders not 1 year ago. Dare they pause in their breathless accusations, the historical record might reflect the consequences of Democratic leadership.

It was Democrats who threw open our southern border with foolish policies that paroled over 6,000 criminals and terrorists into the United States and lost track of over 2 million known ``got-aways.'' Those same Democrats are now criticizing efforts to remove those threats.

They have hurled one-sided accusations of ``masked agents acting with unnecessary force.'' This inflammatory rhetoric is a breeding ground for physical threats. As we have seen on TV, law enforcement have been pelted with rocks, assaulted with homemade explosives, and defamed and doxed by the far left.

At a hearing I just held, agents told the Senate Judiciary Committee of an officer whose photograph was taken during an operation and posted on Instagram with a message that the community needed to remind him where he came from and where he was. The officer felt so threatened, he changed his appearance to protect his family. In another example, an FBI agent was threatened to back down from an investigation with photos of his children.

These men and women held the line against every national security threat while Democrat Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas and Director Wray of the FBI refused to appear for their annual congressional report on threats to the homeland because they didn't want to face the tough questions they would get on why they weren't enforcing the law.

Congress didn't make this Nation's laws subject to the whims of purported righteous indignation. Passionate protests don't justify laying hands on law enforcement, and bleeding hearts don't erase immigration laws critical to our national security.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I want to bring attention to all of the selfless veterans that have served our country, especially those from my home State of Iowa.

Each and every veteran has put a piece of themselves towards the mission of protecting our Nation that we are blessed to live in, so it is tremendously important to commemorate and thank these veterans.

I want to give you one example of how that is done: the Honor Flights that take place at the World War II Memorial. The veterans that travel from across the country to here in Washington, DC, represent big cities, small towns, and rural areas. But what they all embody is deep courage, sacrifice, and humility. Honor Flights are just one small reflection of the gratitude that we have for these brave souls.

I hope that for visitors to our Nation's Capital who have the privilege to witness an Honor Flight, it may inspire deeper gratitude to all the veterans. This is what I found when, occasionally, I get an opportunity to go to the World War II Memorial to meet the veterans that have flown in from Iowa.

And many times, I had the occasion to see--when he was still alive-- former Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, even in his weak condition being in a wheelchair, there to meet those same veterans from all over the country, not just from Iowa.

It is a priority for me to share their legacy with every new generation of Americans to foster a deeper appreciation for our Republic.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, having a job gives individuals purpose and dignity. We should promote policies lifting people out of poverty.

In the 1990s, we passed welfare reform with a Republican Congress and a Democrat President. The results? Welfare rolls went down, poverty rates decreased, and employment and earnings increased.

Establishing work requirements in Medicaid for able-bodied adults with reasonable exemptions, then from the previous precedent of welfare reform--that all makes common sense yet today.

States like Iowa are already leading the way in establishing work requirements for able-bodied adults in Medicaid. Iowa's Governor Reynolds has said:

If you are an able-bodied adult who can work, you should

work.

We are doing the same thing at the national level.

Work requirements under the One Big Beautiful Bill only apply to able-bodied adults between the ages of 19 and 64. Individuals will have to complete a minimum of 80 hours of work a month, or about 20 hours a week, of qualifying community engagement activities like working, job training, going to school, volunteering, or a combination of all these.

We have reasonable exemptions for veterans with a disability rated as total, individuals who are medically frail or otherwise have special medical needs, individuals who are blind, have a substance use disorder, a disabling mental disorder, a physical or intellect disability that significantly impairs their ability to perform one or more activities of daily living, or serious or complex medical conditions.

We also have exemptions for parents, guardians, and caretaker relatives of children aged 14 or under or disabled individuals and foster care youth through the age of 26.

We give ``good cause'' exemptions for short-term hardships like hospitalizations or for an individual receiving psychiatric care. Individuals impacted by a natural disaster, living in a high- unemployment area, or having to travel outside their community for an extended period of time to receive medical service would also be exempted.

States will obviously be required to establish streamlined processes and use reliable data, like payroll data, to avoid individuals submitting their own documentation. There will also be significant outreach and education to those who will be required to work.

Labor force participation data for prime-age men--25 to 54--indicates that between 1950 to 1970, less than 1 in 30 was out of the labor force. Now--maybe it shouldn't be surprising--since then, participation declined steadily, so that 1 in 30 figure is now 1 in 10. This represents nearly 7 million prime-age men absent from the workforce.

On top of this, recent research found that nonworking Medicaid recipients spend 6 hours a day on socializing, relaxing, TV, and video games. They spend 125 hours during a 30-day month watching TV and video games alone. That is more than 50 percent higher than the 80 hours they would be required to work in a month.

Commonsense Medicaid work requirements for able-bodied adults take the same approach as welfare reform did in the 1990s--move people from welfare to work and self-sufficiency. The

contrary--being on government programs--is a life of poverty. If you want to get out of poverty, you have to be in the world of work, and that is what we are trying to accomplish through this legislation, just like we do work requirements for every other government program.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, recently, we witnessed China peddling false claims as it continues to try and convince the United States that China is a good partner. China has recently claimed that ``the Chinese always honor and deliver what has been promised.'' What China asserted is nonsense. Nobody ought to believe that the promises made are honored.

So I want to give you one example: intercountry adoptions.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, China ``temporarily'' restricted travel into the country, which stalled hundreds of families from completing their adoptions. Today, the families I mentioned continue to be separated from their adoptive child in China or are learning that the child they have been matched with for many years has been rematched with a different family in China. The latter is the case for the Robinson family of Iowa.

Does that sound like China always honors and delivers what it promises? I think not.

In September of last year, I wrote to the Chinese Ambassador to the United States, outlining my concerns about China's termination of its intercountry adoption program and urged China to not go back on its promises, but, instead, allow for matched adoptions to finally be completed. That has not happened.

It is a positive development that Chinese families have a stronger will and capacity to adopt orphans within their own country. Children having a safe and loving home is always a good thing. But my point of contention is that China left American families in the dark and didn't engage in good faith. American families were not given the same opportunity as families from other countries to be united with their children. Real commitments were made, and they were dismissed. This brought disruption to families and needlessly left children orphaned.

Again, I suggest China doesn't honor its commitments, and I pray that the hearts of Chinese leaders experience a transformation.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.