Floor Statements

Mr. President, we are now in the longest government shutdown in American history--39 days--and all across our country, Americans are paying the price.

More than 600,000 Federal workers have been furloughed. Air traffic controllers, Federal law enforcement officers, Border Patrol and TSA agents, U.S. attorneys, Capitol Police, and the staff here in this Chamber show up every day to work, and they are not getting paid. Federal courts are running limited options. SNAP benefits are only partially being issued. Head Start grants are on hold. Small business loans are frozen. Aircraft inspections are delayed. Veterans' transition assistance is disrupted. National Guard training is postponed.

Every one of these examples represents real people, hard-working Americans who are being harmed by this shutdown.

Thirty-seven percent of Americans cannot cover a $400 emergency using cash, savings, or a credit card that they can pay off quickly. They need to borrow from their friends or their family. They need to take out a loan, or they need to sell something. And 12 percent--12 percent--of those folks couldn't even pay at all without borrowing or selling. That wouldn't even help them.

I want to share a few voices from my constituents in Nebraska.

In Ogallala, a young farmer who is trying to make ends meet wrote to my office. Even though the FSA offices are kind of open, he is still unable to make advances on his annual operating loans. This is a critical time when land rent payments are due, along with bills for fuel, seed, fertilizer, and equipment.

These funds were approved months ago. We need to reopen government so our farmers can access that vital assistance.

A fire inspector at Offutt Air Force Base who puts his life on the line to keep our troops and Nation safe wrote to my office after he missed a paycheck. This is a matter of fairness, respect, and responsibility.

Government employees are not bargaining chips. The Democrats want to use people like him as leverage. This is not OK. These are not abstract numbers; these are people's lives.

A military spouse in Bellevue picked up a prescription at Offutt Air Force Base and was told that she could only receive a 30-day supply because of the government shutdown. She was told to call back in a month and hope they can fill it.

A small business owner in Lincoln wrote in that their sales had dropped 47 percent. Their government customers cannot buy the equipment they need to destroy classified data. That creates a risk to our national security. So this business--they have been forced to reduce staff, and they said they cannot sustain any further delays.

Our Main Street businesses aren't asking for special treatment; they are asking for stability.

Another spouse of a Federal worker who has been called in to continue essential work during this shutdown wrote in after day 24 of her husband not receiving pay for time worked. Their mortgage company and their utility provider don't care that the government is shut down; they expect payment.

These voices are the heartbeat of America--farmers, firefighters, small business owners, veterans, public servants. They are not pawns in a political standoff; they are people who serve their communities, and they deserve better than this. Every day does not get better for them.

The shutdown must end. We need five more Democrats to say: We care more about people than we do about political leverage. We need five more Democrats to join the three who have already stood with us. That is all it takes to reopen the government.

Meanwhile, Democrats continue to push this absurd proposal--a $35 billion handout to insurance companies that benefits the wealthy, includes no fraud protections, and it does nothing to lower real healthcare costs. These are so-called COVID bonuses. I thought COVID was over. I thought it was done. It is done. They were never meant to be permanent.

The Democrats--they did this. They set it up with no Republican votes, and even they put this date on so they would expire. But now they want to extend them, doubling down on a failed system that shifts costs to taxpayers and even subsidizes wealthy families because there is no limit set on these COVID bonuses. There is no limit set on what a family can earn. There is no limit set on the take-home pay of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and you can get a bonus.

Look at this chart. A lot of my colleagues are using it. It shows the huge increase in stock values for insurance companies under ObamaCare. Insurance companies are the winners in this scheme that was set up by Democrats.

Well, unlike my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I don't work for the insurance companies. I work for the people of this country and the people of Nebraska.

Senate Republicans are ready and willing to discuss real solutions to make healthcare more affordable, but Democrats must first open the government.

Mr. President, the American people deserve a government that works. They deserve leaders who put service above politics, people above partisanship, and common sense above the chaos.

It is time to reopen the U.S. Government.

I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, it has been 15 days since congressional Democrats shut down the Federal Government. Let's call it what it is: It is the Schumer shutdown.

In that period, we have voted eight times on a clean continuing resolution. It is straightforward. It is a short-term bill that funds government at current levels without adding any kind of partisan policies to it. This would give us, here in Congress, time to finish the full-year funding bills responsibly.

Instead, Democrats pushed for over a trillion dollars in new spending to recklessly eliminate the $50 billion rural hospital stabilization fund. Why in the world would Democrats want to do that? Why would they want to eliminate this crucial fund for our Nation's rural hospitals? It is unthinkable.

The fact is, the Democrats' so-called proposal to reopen the government is packed with unrelated items. This includes the COVID-era bonus payments, overseas climate resilience projects, and taxpayer- funded healthcare for noncitizens. That is not responsible governing, and it is not fair to American families.

House Republicans passed and they sent to the Senate a clean CR. That means that it has no poison pills, no policy riders on it. Democrats rejected it eight times. It is now time, folks, for Senator Schumer and his caucus to drop this partisan wish list and do their jobs.

Meanwhile, it was reported in Punchbowl News on October 9 that Chuck Schumer said:

Every day gets better for us.

And by ``us,'' he means the Democrat party.

If the Democrats think it is better that our troops aren't paid and that it is better when people are worried about being furloughed, then that just shows their arrogance. That just shows that they are tone- deaf to the uncertainty and the stress people are feeling. That just shows Chuck Schumer is in his Schumer shutdown only for political theater.

This shutdown is hurting people. Farmers are losing access to Federal support at a time when the ag economy is already strained. Construction projects that rely on Federal funding are stalling. Air traffic controllers and Federal employees face uncertainty about their paychecks. None of this--none of this--is necessary.

Let's be clear. A short-term funding bill is not the place for sweeping policy changes. If this continues, deeper cuts to essential services may follow, and that is entirely preventable.

Remember, the House sent us a clean CR, with no new policies included. It simply continues current funding until November 21. Then we will take up appropriations bills that have strong bipartisan support. And they have that because it was already negotiated within that Appropriations Committee and, as a member of that committee, we passed it out of the committee.

I am deeply committed to that transparent process--one where Senators debate, amend, and vote on each bill individually before the end of the fiscal year.

All we are asking is to reopen the government so that we can continue that funding process. Leader Thune promised that we would take appropriations bills up, here on the floor, and we have already passed three of them. Let's show the American people bipartisanship and transparency and continue this important work.

So why are we here today and still shut down? Because the Democrats are more focused on appeasing the far left than funding the government. I believe they are caving to political pressure when they should be fulfilling their most basic duty: keeping the government open and operating for their constituents.

Republicans' goal is simple: Reopen the government now, protect our military and families, and return to regular order.

At the end of the day, Americans deserve a functioning government, not political theater. If just a handful of Senate Democrats join Republicans, we can end this shutdown. And I hope when we next vote to reopen the government, my Democrat colleagues will join us in doing the right thing.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise in opposition to this amendment because it would have a significant negative effect on our U.S. nuclear deterrence.

In addition to the obvious stab at President Trump, the way the amendment is drafted would affect one of our military's most important programs: the Survivable Airborne Operations Center--otherwise known as the Doomsday Plane.

This aircraft program is crucial to ensuring command and control for the President if we are attacked with nuclear weapons. It is an important part of our nuclear deterrent.

The program purchased a Boeing 747 aircraft from Korean Air, and thus this program would be unable to spend appropriated money this year if this amendment passes.

For those reasons, I urge a ``no'' vote.

Vote on Amendment No. 3109

Madam President, for all ag producers, the word ``tariff'' makes us nervous, but earlier this year, I took a step back to look at the bigger economic picture, and I became one of the first Members of Congress to support the administration's effort to level the playing field on trade.

I have said many times that the administration deserves time to secure strong trade deals that benefit Americans; however, the reality is this: Farmers are targeted by other countries, like China. I have seen it firsthand back home in Nebraska.

Producers of corn, soybeans, and other top commodities are under crushing pressure. Rising input costs and uncertainty have driven farm finances to levels reminiscent of the 1980s crisis, which bankrupted thousands and hollowed out our rural communities.

Since 2020, seed costs have jumped 18 percent, fuel and oil are up 32 percent, fertilizer has spiked 37 percent, and interest expenses have surged an alarming 73 percent.

Our soybean producers are projected to lose about $100 an acre this year. On top of that, storage costs for soybeans and corn have risen steeply. For everybody, this is crippling, and it is happening during one of the largest harvests in memory.

Time is running out, and we need to turn this around. We need a strong and positive set of actions. Ensuring our farmers can weather tough economic times must be a national priority.

It is clear that farm aid is needed at this time. Congress has taken some steps toward this goal. We passed $10 billion in farm aid last December, and we included a major boost for producers in July's reconciliation law. However, that money is not going to reach any farmers until next fall, and producers need to have relief right now.

But here is the challenge: We also need lasting, long-term solutions that help provide stability and real opportunity for ag producers. That is why one of the fastest ways we can deliver results is by unlocking year-round access to E15--a clean, American-made biofuel. Permanent nationwide access would increase corn demand by 2.5 billion bushels a year. It would lower gas prices for families, and it would drive new revenue into rural communities.

President Trump's day one order to promote E15 through his national energy emergency declaration--that was a strong start, but temporary fixes don't cut it. That is why I reintroduced my Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act earlier this year.

When I first introduced this bill nearly a decade ago, it felt like an uphill climb. Well, today, momentum is finally on our side. We have strong bipartisan support. We have new industry partners, including members of the oil and refining sector, who are at the table.

This is a key piece of Republicans' plan to lower energy costs, to strengthen American production, and to give consumers more choices at the pump.

Trade--well, that is the other half of the equation. Former President Biden's lack of a clear trade agenda left America with a $49 billion trade deficit, undercutting farmers in Nebraska and all across this country.

President Trump, you can help reverse that deficit by holding China accountable and ensuring American-grown soybeans have access to global markets--a lifeline for farmers facing losses this harvest season.

President Trump has already made progress on this trade front. Take beef. Australia has sold nearly $29 billion worth of beef to U.S. consumers, while American ranchers have been locked out of their market. Do you know how much beef--American beef--Australia bought? Zero.

Now we need the same kind of breakthrough by opening up the market for soybeans and corn and every other American crop.

At the end of the day, farmers and ranchers want programs that work, and we want markets to sell our products. Simply put: We just want a fair shot.

By securing strong trade deals and building new markets through year- round E15, we can revitalize the farm economy, we can bolster U.S. energy security, and we can ensure that America's producers can keep feeding and fueling this Nation for generations to come.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order for the two leaders to enter motions to reconsider without being on the prevailing side with respect to the cloture votes on the motion to proceed to S. 2882 and H.R. 5371; further, that mandatory quorum calls with respect to S. 2882, H.R. 5371, and the en bloc nominations provided for under the provisions of S. Res. 412 be waived.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum call with respect to the Miran nomination and, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, we are living in a time of growing global unrest. China is accelerating its military buildup in the Indo- Pacific. While I remain hopeful that President Trump can help broker peace between Presidents Putin and Zelenskyy, Russia's brutal war against Ukraine grinds on. That is why it is more important than ever that we invest in our servicemembers, protect defense spectrum, drive innovation, and strengthen our missile defense systems.

As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I am proud to report that this year's National Defense

Authorization Act meets this moment. It includes key provisions I secured to modernize our nuclear deterrent and strengthen our national defense.

As chair of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, I fought to upgrade the National Nuclear Security Administration's infrastructure. The bill establishes an annual independent assessment of NNSA's progress toward modernization goals, ensuring our nuclear deterrent remains both effective and up to date.

It requires the deployment of at least 400 intercontinental ballistic missiles across no fewer than 450 launch facilities, maintaining a force structure capable of deterring any nuclear-capable adversary.

It authorizes more than $4 billion for the Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Program, and it requires that it be fielded no later than September 30, 2033.

It accelerates the sea-launched nuclear cruise missile program. And it expands experimentation and prototyping authority to all combatant commands, including U.S. Strategic Command at Offutt Air Force Base in my home State of Nebraska.

This is exactly the kind of strategic deterrence that makes our adversaries think twice and say: Not today.

This year's NDAA also safeguards critical defense spectrum. Some in Washington have suggested that the Pentagon is sitting on spectrum bands that could be better used for commercial wireless. That portrayal is both inaccurate, and it is dangerous. The reality is these frequencies are not idle. They are the backbone of America's missile defense and intelligence systems. And we should not be allowing Federal Agencies to sell critical communication channels needed to carry out the Trump administration's priorities, including the Golden Dome missile defense shield. That is why this year's defense bill prohibits any modifications to defense systems in these spectrums bands unless top Pentagon leaders themselves deem it absolutely necessary.

Earlier this summer, I led the effort to secure--for the first time in law--a carve-out that prevents the Federal Communications Commission from auctioning or reallocating these bands for the next decade. The NDAA provision is consistent with these protections, ensuring that we strike the right balance: unleashing America's wireless innovation, while never compromising our national security.

We are also preparing for the threats that we cannot yet see. I secured provisions to assess the readiness of the National Disaster Medical System, to modernize our roadmaps for cloud migration and artificial intelligence, and to ensure that our intelligence community has the meteorological and environmental services that it needs.

But all of these priorities mean little without investing in the brave men and women who carry them out. That is why I fought to authorize $19 million above the President's budget request to help recover and identify the remains of our fallen servicemembers from past wars and conflicts. The U.S. military leaves no one behind.

And through this bill, we are directing the Pentagon to explore whether local communities can play a more active role in helping develop the Department's healthcare facilities, similar to my CHIP IN for Veterans Act. This is the very least we can do for the troops and the families who have sacrificed so much for the freedoms that we hold dear.

Beyond the details, we must keep sight of the bigger picture. Our adversaries--nations that hate America--well, they are sharing weapons and resources and a common goal. They want to weaken American power and dismantle our influence across the globe.

The character of war has evolved rapidly. Breakthroughs in artificial intelligence, unmanned systems, hypersonic weapons, next-generation aircraft, and space-based capabilities, they are all reshaping the battlefield. At the same time, we live in a political environment that is too often partisan and divided.

Yet on this issue, I believe most of my colleagues agree that we must confront these threats head-on, and that means rebuilding the arsenal of democracy.

To do so, we need serious reform at the Pentagon. This year's NDAA delivers: modernizing the budget process, cutting redtape, improving efficiency, and unleashing innovation. This is not partisan. This is not political. This is necessity.

Our servicemembers must have the resources they need to carry out their missions and return home to their loved ones. This bill strengthens our military, and it sends a very clear message: America is prepared to meet the moment.

I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support it without delay.

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

Mr. President, I recently returned from an official trip to the Indo-Pacific, where I visited U.S. military installations in Hawaii and Guam and met with leaders in Palau, the Philippines, and Taiwan. That trip underscored a simple reality: We are living in a time of global unrest, and maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific is vital to the security of both the United States and our partners.

On the final leg of the trip, I met with Taiwanese officials and saw firsthand how we can strengthen U.S. posture and deepen collaboration in the region. I was also struck by the warmth, hospitality, and the resilience of the Taiwanese people.

For decades, our partnership with Taiwan has been anchored in democracy, in freedom, and in economic opportunity. Today, it is equally defined by innovation and resilience. A stronger Taiwan means a stronger United States and vice versa. That is why both our Nations must continue working deliberately and decisively to deepen cooperation. The payoff is clear: greater prosperity for our people and greater stability for the world.

Taiwan has made remarkable progress in bolstering its self-defense in recent years. We should seize every opportunity to build on that momentum. At the same time, we must recognize the challenge before us.

The Chinese Communist Party continues to threaten, pressure, and attempt to isolate Taiwan. These actions are unacceptable. The people of Taiwan have earned their place as a respected and indispensable part of the global economy.

Here in the Senate, we understand the gravity of the challenge. The world is more dangerous today than at any point since World War II, and this moment--this moment--demands seriousness and resolve. Taiwan is the test case for U.S. credibility in upholding a free and open rules- based order. If Taiwan were to fall under coercion, the consequences would reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, shaking the

confidence of our allies and emboldening adversaries worldwide.

That is why integrated deterrence is essential. The world is safer when America leads. And it is not just Taiwan that feels pressure from China; the Philippines, one of America's treaty allies, is locked in a contentious territorial dispute with China. Beijing wrongly claims islands and shoals that have been internationally recognized as belonging to the Philippines. Yet Manila is standing its ground with remarkable courage despite relentless Chinese pressure, and that deserves our deepest commendation.

Our alliance with the Philippines is rooted in shared sacrifice. During World War II, U.S. and Filipino prisoners of war endured the horrors of the Bataan Death March, and, together, we fought to liberate the islands from Japanese occupation.

General MacArthur's famous return symbolized the unbreakable bond between our peoples. That history of fighting shoulder to shoulder lives on today in our mutual defense treaty, in Exercise Balikatan, the largest annual exercise that we conduct together. ``Balikatan'' means shoulder to shoulder, and that is exactly how we continue to stand.

Just as the Philippines is a vital ally, so, too, is Palau, a uniquely valued partner. As a Compact of Free Association state, our relationship with Palau goes beyond a traditional alliance. It is both economic and military. Palauan citizens can live, work, and study in the United States, while U.S. forces have access to Palauan territory under the ironclad guarantee of American defense. That partnership, it is strengthened by the fact that Palau has continued to maintain diplomatic ties with Taiwan, even under enormous pressure from Beijing.

Palau is a small nation by land mass and by population, but its exclusive economic zone is vast, and its courage to stand up to one of the world's largest bullies should not be underestimated.

And Palau is breathtakingly beautiful, truly one of the most stunning places on Earth. When President Whipps visited Washington, he gave me a book filled with page after page of Palau's incredible landscapes. But beneath that beauty, lies real strategic importance. Palau reminds us that size is not what determines strength; conviction is.

Guam, home to over 150,000 U.S. citizens, is central to our Indo- Pacific posture. Together, with partners like the Philippines, Palau, and Taiwan, we are building a network of deterrence--deterrence that keeps the peace and safeguards freedoms.

It is clear that Taiwan's defense is not Taiwan's problem alone. Any conflict in the region would have devastating, worldwide consequences. It would likely halt Taiwan's advanced semiconductor production, which our electronics, automotive, and healthcare industries rely on. Economically, a conflict would disrupt global trade routes, potentially triggering a global financial crisis. And it would escalate regional military tensions, risk broader conflict, and cyber attacks.

A strong American presence in the region lowers the odds of conflict and reassures our allies that they will never face these threats in isolation.

All of this is why we need wise investment from both Washington and Taipei. It requires strengthening our deterrence networks and ensuring that our forces are ready for the threats of tomorrow.

I am proud that the Senate Armed Services Committee has made this a top priority and that the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 reflects that commitment.

I look forward to voting for this must-pass legislation on the Senate floor and to vote on it very soon.

That partnership between the United States and Taiwan is built on shared values and common purpose. It advances the security, prosperity, and freedom of our peoples. If we continue to invest in deterrence, I am confident that partnership will endure for generations.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today, the U.S. Senate will vote on my resolution to overturn the EPA's waiver for California's Advanced Clean Trucks.

First of all, I would like to thank my friend and colleague Chairman Capito for her strong leadership and work on this very important issue. This heavyhanded regulation imposes unrealistic emissions requirements for heavy-duty trucks and heavy-duty diesel engines. This government mandate handed down to vehicle manufacturers demands that they sell zero-emission trucks at an increased rate from 2024 to 2035. We aren't under any illusions as to what this means. We know that the goal is to effectively end the sale of internal combustion engines.

Now, I am not here today to disparage electric vehicles, and I am certainly not here to discourage the manufacturing and the purchasing of EVs either. What I am concerned about is the Federal Government dictating which cars and which trucks are acceptable and which are not. If Americans want to drive an electric or a hybrid car, that is fine. However, the government--the government--should not pick winners and losers in the vehicle marketplace. I believe in the power of America's free markets, and I believe we should allow the markets to determine the viability of clean trucks.

Here is the truth: This California waiver and subsequent regulation is simply not based in reality, and it will have real-world consequences on us. By requiring truckers to meet California's standards, even while working outside of the State, operator costs increase, fleet upgrades would be impacted, and interstate commerce would be disrupted. And American consumers would bear the brunt of increased costs. Hard-working families are already dealing with the high cost of everyday goods and services, and they cannot afford this regulation.

Let me be clear. This action is necessary to stop one State from dictating emission policies for the entire country. Prior to this waiver being granted, California's own Air Resources Board readily admitted this action would extend beyond its own State borders, and several States have already followed suit.

I would also like to address the eligibility of Congress disapproving rules. A few weeks ago, I questioned the Government Accountability Office Comptroller during an Appropriations subcommittee hearing. The Comptroller explicitly stated that GAO's role is just an advisory one and that it is up to us--it is up to Congress--to determine what constitutes a rule. Again, let me be clear. We are reclaiming our congressional authority under the Congressional Review Act.

I will be proud for this body to vote on and pass my resolution, which is a commonsense step to keep government overreach at bay, protect consumers, and support America's free markets. With the passage of the House version of this resolution and with the passage of the Senate's version today, it will head to the President's desk to be signed into law.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, last week, my bill, the Foreign Adversary Communications Transparency Act, or the FACT Act, cleared the Commerce Committee unanimously. Now it will come before us here on the Senate floor for a vote.

I stand before you today because the threat our foreign adversaries pose is not a distant concern. It is real; it is relentless; and it is constantly evolving. We cannot afford to wait and deal with the consequences. The cost of inaction is too great.

Congress must anticipate the threats, and we must work together to curb the malign influence of foreign adversaries like communist China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. For too long now, we have allowed foreign adversarial governments to secure a silent foothold in our telecommunications infrastructure.

Take, for example, Huawei. Huawei, a Chinese-owned telecommunications giant, is one of the leading producers of cell phone network equipment. This equipment spans across our country and finds its home in most of our cellular devices. Over a decade ago, our intelligence Agencies began noticing a peculiar pattern of Huawei equipment on cell towers across my home State of Nebraska as well as nearby Colorado and Montana. That Chinese gear was clustered near sensitive military assets, including Nebraska's Offutt Air Force Base and our nuclear missile silos.

Then, just 4 years ago, U.S. intelligence officials sounded the alarm. Their investigations found that Huawei could secretly access mobile phone networks around the world through backdoors, unbeknownst to carriers. And perhaps even more concerning, Huawei has had this capability for more than a decade.

And Huawei's ownership is bankrolled by billions of dollars from the Chinese Government. What government freely hands over that kind of money without expecting something in return? Despite being based in China and having deep connections to the Chinese Communist Party, as confirmed by U.S. intelligence communities, the company continues to refuse to acknowledge the Chinese Government's influence.

However, in 2020, under President Trump's administration, the Federal Communications Commission designated Huawei as a national security threat, and it banned the sale of its telecommunications equipment here in our country. This past December, Congress also secured the remaining funding to enable smaller rural communications companies to rip that risky Chinese-made equipment out of their networks.

In 2022, the Justice Department charged two Chinese intelligence officers with an unsettling crime: attempting to obstruct a Federal investigation into Huawei by stealing sensitive case material from a U.S. District Attorney's Office.

Colleagues, I pose to you this question: Why would the Chinese Government go to such lengths to interfere in a case involving a so- called private company in which they have no stake?

Well, they wouldn't.

While recent actions to curtail Huawei equipment and those from other high-risk Chinese firms are steps in the right direction, they don't go far enough. We must have far greater transparency about which companies holding Federal communication licenses and authorizations also have influential ties to foreign adversarial governments, and we must look deeper at who has this access and how many more companies like Huawei are out there.

Companies like Huawei must be stopped. We can no longer permit authoritarian regimes like China to infiltrate our networks and lurk in the shadows, waiting for the opportune moment to strike. It is not enough to brace ourselves for the aftermath of disaster. We must root out the threat before it has time to fester.

The reality is this: Our foreign adversaries have stakes in numerous companies operating freely and legally within the United States. Yet, in many cases, the public remains unaware which companies are owned, wholly or partially, by these adversaries.

That is why, today, I call upon the Senate to pass my FACT Act, which takes a much needed step to strengthen our visibility into our telecommunications market to weed out that access that we have seen from these malicious adversaries because the first step--the first step--in defending our national security is understanding the threat.

My bill directs the Federal Communications Commission to publicly identify these companies, the ones that have that FCC license or authorization, that are owned by foreign adversarial governments. Under the FACT Act, companies with foreign ties will no longer be able to operate in secrecy, and they will no longer be able to conceal their financial backers or obscure their true loyalties.

Huawei should serve as a warning. China is on the offensive to undermine the security of America's communications. An attack on our networks is a direct attack on the United States, and it is not one that we should tolerate.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I understand the Senate has received H.J. Res. 61 from the House.

Madam President, I move to proceed to H.J. Res. 61.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, across America, 1.3 million people live in nursing homes. Many of us have parents, grandparents, or other loved ones who rely on these homes for care and community in their golden years. We understand just how vital nursing homes are--whether it is in urban, suburban, or rural areas--to help seniors in our country thrive.

But, unfortunately, a Federal rule that is still in place from the Biden era is putting many of America's nursing homes in jeopardy, especially those in our rural communities. Last year, under President Biden, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services finalized a rule that placed strict, unrealistic regulations on nursing homes. The rule requires a registered nurse to be present 24/7 in these homes and requires 3\1/2\ daily hours of dedicated nursing care for each resident. If this rule is not stopped, the regulations will be imposed on every nursing home in America over the next few years.

It does sound nice to be able to have a nurse on hand in nursing homes every moment of the day or night, but that is not the reality. The reality is that

these homes are already facing historic staffing shortages. Across the country, nursing homes lost more than 200,000 workers from February 2020 to December 2022. These shortages have already caused many nursing homes to close down.

Since 2015, 44 nursing homes and 35 assisted living facilities have shut their doors in my State--in Nebraska--alone. These closures deprived Nebraskans of over 3,000 beds. They hurt seniors who wanted to stay in their home community to be close to their family, to be close to their friends.

This CMS rule will worsen this crisis. According to the Agency itself, 75 percent of America's nursing homes will have to increase staffing to comply with this regulation. Under the Biden administration's rule, nursing homes now have to scramble so that they can find staff in the midst of these really overwhelming shortages. If they fail, they have to shut their doors; they have to deprive seniors of care and housing.

That is why, today, I reintroduced legislation to stop this Biden-era rule in its tracks. My Protecting Rural Seniors' Access to Care Act will prevent the rule's misguided requirements from going into full effect. It will also establish an advisory panel on the nursing home workforce, representing various stakeholders, including members from rural and underserved areas. This will ensure that the government hears voices outside the big cities--those big cities on the coasts--when it comes to our nursing homes.

Nursing homes are few and far between in rural areas of our country. If one facility closes, the next closest one could be many miles or even many hours away. Just one closure could be detrimental to seniors in some of our communities.

But if our nursing homes stay open, seniors won't have to face that upheaval of finding a new place to live, of moving, of leaving their home communities, leaving their loved ones, leaving their friends, and having that upheaval in their final years. They won't have to leave their family. They won't have to leave loved ones. They won't have to experience the loneliness, the uncertainty, the depression that can come along with moving to an unfamiliar place.

My bill advocates for these seniors, for their care, and for their families. It fights for our rural communities and for our nursing homes in my State of Nebraska and across this country. I will keep pushing for this legislation until the President signs it into law so that we can protect our seniors from a rule that would only harm them, harm their families, and harm their caretakers.