Floor Statements

Mr. President, we are in the middle of a full-blown healthcare crisis. Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are ripping away healthcare from 15 million Americans. And now, thanks to Donald Trump, one in four nursing homes could close, community health clinics are on the brink of shutting their doors, hospitals, already filled to the brim with patients, are bracing for the biggest cuts in decades. Kids with cancer are watching as promising research, their only chance at treatment, is shut down and health insurance premiums are skyrocketing.

Talk to anyone in the country, and they will tell you that the cost of going to the doctor is already way too high because the reality is that healthcare in America was already failing families even before Trump and Republicans took a chain saw to it.

Massachusetts lost two hospitals last year in the biggest healthcare bankruptcy in decades. Our community health centers were already down to counting their nickels to keep the door open. And now, the Republicans have come in and said they want to take away money that helps cover mamas giving birth and neighbors who need wheelchairs and home health aides so that they can hand that money over to billionaire CEOs. Trump's one-two punch of chaotic tariffs and his Big Beautiful Bill is going to push middle-class families in America over a financial cliff.

Before working moms go broke from a cancer diagnosis, Congress must act. Before community hospitals are forced to shut down, Congress must act. Before your neighbor with the home health aide loses his care, Congress must act.

That is why Democrats are saying, if Republicans want our votes, they need to restore healthcare for Americans. We made it about as clear as we humanly can. The American people need affordable healthcare. No one should go bankrupt because they got sick and needed to see a doctor.

And if the Republicans want to shut down government so that they can keep increasing costs and cutting healthcare, then they need to explain that and not just to us; they need to

explain it to the American people. Every Senator here is here to work for the American people, and part of that job is coming to the negotiating table and making a plan to fund government. But Donald Trump flat-out said he doesn't want to negotiate with Democrats. He said:

Don't even bother dealing with them.

OK, then, Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House. You own the healthcare crisis. Democrats believe that not a single newborn baby in America should lose healthcare, not a single senior should be tossed out of their nursing home and onto the curb, and not a single person should have to drive hours and hours to get to the nearest hospital.

If we are going to pass a budget for the U.S. Government, then we need to save healthcare for millions of Americans, period.

And make no mistake, every penny of funding needs to be protected from a Trump power grab. Since the week he took office, Donald Trump has been trying to illegally rip away money from programs that Congress has already agreed to fund. His latest ploy: an attempt to zero out funding without even asking for Congress's approval. It is a dirty trick, and it is illegal. We can't have Democrats and Republicans in Congress agree to a budget that helps people get to the doctor and pay for lifesaving cancer research and then turn around and have Donald Trump just halt that money. We need proper safeguards.

So this is our moment. This is our chance to restore healthcare for millions of people in this country. Right now is our small window of opportunity. The Democrats are ready to go. We want to seize this opportunity. It is only the Republicans who stand in the way.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I rise today to oppose the nomination of Dr. Stephen Miran to serve on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

President Trump has run a monthslong campaign to turn the Fed into his personal piggy bank in an attempt to escape accountability for his own economic failures. He has tried to intimidate and threaten to fire Federal Chair Jerome Powell. And when that didn't work, he illegally attempted to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook so that he could seize control of the Board. Both of those failed. So now he is attempting to install his own puppet on the Board with Dr. Miran, someone who intends to keep his White House job as the President's chief economic adviser open while serving at the Fed, setting up an unprecedented and unacceptable conflict of interest that will only ultimately cause more pain for American families.

Don't just take it from me. Take it from one of the President's closest advisers, Larry Kudlow, who said:

The bottom line is, President Trump's going to take the Fed

over, as he should.

And Senate Republicans are facilitating it, including by jamming through this nomination at warp speed so that Dr. Miran can be sworn in literally hours before the Fed's meeting tomorrow morning to determine interest rates.

The facts are clear: Donald Trump promised that he would lower costs, in his words, ``on day one.'' Those were his words. He said them over and over as he ran for President: He would lower costs on day one. He didn't. Now the cost of groceries: up. The cost of utility bills: up. The cost of housing: up. The cost of healthcare: up. The cost of back- to-school shoes and backpacks and baby strollers: up and up and up.

He also promised a golden age for American workers. Again, he has failed. Job growth is down. The economy lost jobs in June. Unemployment is up. People are staying unemployed longer, and worker confidence in the labor market is at its lowest since the end of the great financial crisis.

Donald Trump can reverse course on his failing economic agenda. He could start helping families instead of turning everything over to his billionaire buddies. Instead, Trump wants to point the finger at everyone else and make the Federal Reserve his scapegoat.

If Republicans let Trump interfere with the Federal Reserve, American families and businesses will pay the price in terms of higher costs going forward. Here is why: Congress created an independent Fed to keep politicians from making shortsighted economic decisions that would benefit the politicians politically. Sometimes the Fed is called on to make really hard decisions about when to raise interest rates when fighting inflation, and the whole world needs to know that the Fed is making these decisions based on data rather than being influenced by politicians. If the Fed loses its credibility, businesses and consumers will stop trusting the Fed to control inflation, and they will start acting like inflation is here to stay, and that will make prices soar.

This is not a hypothetical. When autocrats take over their central banks, inflation follows. Turkiye hit nearly 80-percent inflation. Argentina reached nearly 200-percent inflation. Even here in America, back when Richard Nixon pressured the Fed to serve his political needs instead of American families', prices went up. If Trump can control the Fed, the cost of Americans' credit cards and car loans and home mortgages and student loans and more will all be higher.

So today's vote is not just about Dr. Miran; it is a question of whether the Senate allows President Trump to succeed in this next phase of his very public, very obvious, monthslong campaign to stack the Fed with loyalists who will prioritize Trump's personal whims over America's long-term economic health.

And throughout this confirmation process, Dr. Miran has spectacularly

failed to demonstrate independence from dear Leader Trump. During his confirmation hearing, Dr. Miran could not say the words ``Donald Trump lost the 2020 election,'' making Dr. Miran the first admitted election denier to sit on the Federal Reserve Board.

Dr. Miran refuses to resign from his current job at the White House as the President's chief economic adviser at the Council of Economic Advisers. Dr. Miran's so-called leave of absence from the Council of Economic Advisers is also just a joke. He will be sitting literally down the street from the White House, and he has refused to disclose any communications he has with the White House while he is at the Fed.

And, look, let's be 100-percent clear here. The vote we are taking today is not to confirm Dr. Miran for a 4-month term at the Fed, the official vote. When the lights were off and the cameras stopped rolling, Dr. Miran confirmed in writing that he will not rule out staying in his seat after his term expires this January. That means he could serve as a Fed Governor and as the President's chief economist simultaneously for an indefinite period.

Even if none of this were happening, Dr. Miran is a terrible choice for this job. He continues to callously dismiss the fact that Trump's policies are raising prices for families. He compares tariff-driven inflation to a meteor strike while dodging questions about his own financial disclosures.

Now, look, you won't hear me say this often, but I agree with the Wall Street Journal editorial board when it said that Dr. Miran ``won't be independent in any fair definition of the word.'' Dr. Miran knows that if he is confirmed, every decision he makes and every vote he takes at the Fed determines whether or not he will be able to go back to his White House job later on. That is not independence--that is servitude--and he will have zero credibility with markets, zero credibility with businesses, and zero credibility with the public if he is ultimately confirmed.

Many Republican Senators have paid lip service to the importance of Fed independence. Well, if you actually mean it, then you should vote no. Otherwise, we are sentencing American families to years of higher prices and higher unemployment.

I urge my colleagues to vote no on Dr. Miran's nomination.

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, I come to the Senate floor to discuss how our government is funded.

The Constitution puts Congress in charge of setting up programs and funding them. There are some programs--for example, Medicare and Social Security--that are funded at a certain level every year unless Congress passes a law to change it, but for pretty much everything else, Congress has to pass a new funding law every single year. The list is long. It is medical research, fighter planes, weather satellites, salaries for park rangers, and food inspection programs so that the lettuce you eat doesn't make you sick.

The money we spend is detailed every year in a set of 12 bills that Congress votes on, and they are called appropriations bills. The Senate voted on the first one of these 12 bills last week, the one that deals with funding veterans programs and military bases.

I care deeply about improving the lives of our servicemembers and our veterans. All three of my brothers were proud veterans, and they served their country with honor.

I am the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee. I voted no on that funding bill because even if this bill becomes law, I don't believe Donald Trump has any intention of following that law, and I am not willing to be a helpmate on another one of Donald Trump's scams.

Why do I think that Trump won't follow the law? Well, consider his administration's track record of the past 6 months on congressional spending laws.

First, Trump tried to freeze billions of dollars that American families and businesses count on, money that Congress set aside to support everything from food assistance programs to scientific research. Multiple Federal judges blocked the illegal power grab, saying it blatantly violated the Constitution of the United States. Now even Republicans are begging the administration to hand out the money for investments that Congress already passed and, by law, that their communities were promised.

Second, Republicans in Congress are bowing down to Donald Trump and ratifying some of his worst efforts. They are using an obscure piece of Federal law to zero out Federal funding after it was approved by both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. This process is called rescission, and it only requires 50 Republican votes to do Donald Trump's bidding.

If that wasn't bad enough, Trump is already promising to use a shady loophole to defund even more programs, demanding cuts so late in the year that Congress doesn't have time to do anything about it. The Director of Donald Trump's Office of Management and Budget Russ Vought has already said that the loophole is ``on the table.''

Let's be clear about what is happening here.

Step 1, Congress negotiates a compromise that both Republicans and Democrats support, and it is signed into law.

Step 2, Trump tells Republicans what parts of that deal he wants to cancel.

Step 3, Republicans in the Senate bend the knee and follow Trump's orders to cancel the money.

But wait--there is more. Apparently, step 4 is Republicans turn around and, with a straight face, ask Democrats to negotiate more deals for the next year's funding, starting the whole rinse-and-repeat process again, beginning with this bill to fund veterans services.

Are you kidding me? Do we really look that gullible? Why should Democrats come to the table and negotiate in good faith and throw our support behind a ``bipartisan bill'' only for Republicans to turn around after the deal is done and, somewhere down the line, delete any parts of the deal that Trump doesn't like? That is like Republicans saying ``Let's cut a deal'' and that you are going to sell us a car today, and then a month from now, the Republicans come back and steal the wheels.

Of course, Trump may not ask his Republican buddies to rescind spending. Maybe instead, on his own, he will just illegally refuse to spend it--the way he has done with $425 billion already this year.

Look, our Founders didn't give the President the power to decide spending. A King can decide anything he wants but not a President. Donald Trump wants to be able to wake up and decide to cancel funding for public education, for transportation projects, for medical research, for food inspectors, for anything, just because Donald Trump feels like it, and he wants the Republicans in Congress to roll over and let it happen--no checks, no balances; just Trump playing King and ending the programs that would help the American people.

Trump is getting a lot of help from his Republican team. Russ Vought, the head of the Office of Management and Budget, has said the problem in Congress is too much bipartisanship--too much bipartisanship. In other words, the Trump administration is saying loud and clear that Donald Trump makes all the decisions. They don't need and they don't want Democrats.

At the very same time, the Republicans need Democratic votes for these funding bills because the Senate rules clearly require 60 votes for them to pass and there are only 53 Republicans in the Senate. If Democrats won't provide those votes, the Republicans want to blame Democrats for shutting down the government when this year's funding runs out at the end of September.

On the other hand, if Republicans really want Democratic votes for these funding bills, then they should ask us what is it going to take to win Democratic support, not just what programs we want to fund or what the level of funding should be--not that, when the promises themselves won't be worth the paper they are printed on. No. Democrats should tell Republicans that if they want our votes, then they are going to have to guarantee that the deal we strike actually means something.

I get it. Democrats and Republicans have different priorities. Here in the Senate, Republicans just voted to end healthcare for 17 million Americans and to drive up health insurance costs for millions more. Republicans have just voted to give billionaires huge tax cuts.

Democrats are willing to make a deal, but our deal is about bringing down costs for families, including the cost of healthcare, groceries, and housing.

If Republicans want to make a deal, then let's make a deal but only if Republicans include an agreement that they won't take back that deal a few weeks later.

Congress is a coequal branch of government. We swore an oath to the Constitution, not to a King. I am asking my Republican colleagues to grow a spine and stand up for Americans instead of bowing down to their pretend King, and I am asking my Democratic

colleagues to join me in using the power we have to fight back.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following motions to recommit for the bill H.R. 4 be placed in the Congressional Record:

1. A motion to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the Committee on

Appropriations of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any rescission of funding that supports

public broadcasting in Massachusetts.

2. A motion to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the Committee on

Appropriations of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any rescissions to programs that support

Palestinian refugees within the Migration and Refugee

Assistance account.

3. A motion to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the Committee on

Appropriations of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any rescissions to programs that support

refugees within the Migration and Refugee Assistance account.

4. A motion to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the Committee on

Appropriations of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any rescissions to programs within the

Global Health Programs account that support child and

maternal health, including through increased access to

reproductive health care and family planning.

5. A motion to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the Committee on

Appropriations of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any rescissions to programs within the

Economic Support Fund account that support human rights.

6. A motion to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the Committee on

Appropriations of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any rescissions to programs within the

Economic Support Fund account that support mitigating and

addressing the risks of climate change.

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the

following motion to recommit for the bill H.R. 4 be placed in

the Congressional Record:

A motion to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the Committee on

Appropriations of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would preserve investments in a just energy transition

and in clean, reliable, and affordable energy buildout

through development finance investments in Africa that

maximize market opportunities for United States companies and

save lives.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 2414 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is the financial watchdog to keep people from getting cheated on credit cards and mortgages and Venmo and payday loans and a zillion other transactions. When this financial cop can't do its job, there is no one else in the Federal Government to pick up the slack.

The CFPB has returned over $21 billion to more than 205 million Americans who were cheated by big banks

and giant corporations. That is why this Agency is popular across the country.

But, from the beginning, Republicans in Congress have been trying to kill it, and now they want to slash the CFPB's modest funding cap almost in half--not to save working people money but to make it easier for corporations to trick and trap millions of people. Scammers love this Republican move.

I urge my colleagues to vote yes to support the CFPB, the little Agency that fights for all Americans, and I reserve the remainder of my time.

Mr. President.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive section 302(f) of that act for the purposes of the pending amendment.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Vote on Motion

Mr. President, Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois and Senator Edward Markey of Massachusetts support the motion to commit bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and eliminate provisions that would strike any provision that restricts borrower defense to repayment or closed school discharge. Senators Durbin and Markey know the existing challenges defrauded students and students whose schools precipitously closed face and understand the profound harm student borrowers will face without protections to receive student loan discharges for the loans they took out to attend for-profit colleges that offered no degree or a worthless degree.

Mr. President, I thank our leader for setting the record straight.

It is really awful when you hear Republicans come down here and they just don't tell the truth about the bill that they are trying to pass. Maybe that is why they try to pass it in the middle of the night. They think no one will really notice.

I yield.

Yup. Yup.

Mr. President, on Friday I met Vivian. Vivian is an 11-year-old kid from Winston-Salem, NC. Vivian likes school. She likes her friends. She likes reading Harry Potter. She is a lot like any other 11-year-old; but for Vivian, going to school and being with her friends depends on Medicaid because Medicaid covers the cost of her wheelchair, for her therapists, and for her health aide.

Right now, Republicans are trying to rip away healthcare from kids like Vivian. The cruelty is truly breathtaking.

I asked for one Republican Senator--just one Republican Senator--who plans to vote for this bill to look into Vivi's eyes and tell her that her healthcare is just not a priority for this country.

You know, Mitch McConnell said to Republican Senators that he knew they were getting calls about Medicaid but not to worry about people losing their care because, according to Mitch McConnell, ``they will get over it.''

So I ask the Republican Senators to look at Vivi and Vivi's sisters and Vivi's mom and Vivi's dad and say--if Vivi loses her Medicaid and her wheelchair and her therapists and her health aide, tell all of them that they will get over it, because here is the deal: Vivi won't get over it. Her family won't get over it. The people of North Carolina won't get over it. None of us--Massachusetts, Idaho, Louisiana--none of us will get over it.

The cruelty here is off the charts, but the part that really burns is the Republicans are trying to slash the healthcare that keeps kids like Vivi alive so they can hand out more tax cuts for billionaires. It is beyond cruel. It is obscene.

I am angry, and we should all be angry, because instead of playing at the pool or at the park like a regular kid on summer break, Vivian had to come here to Washington to beg Senators not to cut her healthcare. In a country as rich as ours, that shouldn't even be a question.

Now, I actually don't think that my Republican colleagues have lost their hearts. They have lost their spines. It seems that all they can do now is bow down to Donald Trump and his billionaire donors. They will bow down even if it means hurting families, community hospitals, and nursing homes in their own States.

Trump wants the Republicans in Congress to hand out giant checks to the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations, and the Republican Senators are willing to do that even if it means kicking Vivi to the curb.

Republicans know what they are doing. They know that this bill will hurt people. They know that this bill will kill people. And though it is hard to believe, they just look the other way. But on behalf of Vivi and millions of other kids and mommas and seniors and families that rely on the lifesaving care that Medicaid makes possible, my Republican colleagues should grow a spine and stop this awful bill in its tracks.

If it wasn't bad enough that this bill is set to rip away healthcare from 17 million Americans to pay for tax giveaways for billionaires, it actually has a bunch of other filthy giveaways buried in it too.

Who wins if Republicans pass this ``Big Ugly Bill''? Billionaires; Wall Street; Big Tech; Big Oil; the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations.

Big Oil will get a special ``get out of paying your taxes'' card while millions of people lose their healthcare coverage. Billions of dollars for Big Oil, nothing for Vivi.

Meta--oh, man, Meta. There is a company that is really struggling. Meta will win $15 billion to incentivize them to do research in 2022, 2023, and 2024.

Think about that. Unless a time machine comes with this, what Meta does in those 3 years is already done, but under this bill, Meta gets a $15 billion check on the day this bill passes simply for existing, while families lose access to their healthcare.

Wall Street wins big with a provision Republicans squeezed in that would slash funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Giant corporations want the opportunity to cheat American families again, so Republicans are desperately trying to take the cop off the beat.

And who loses thanks to this big, ugly bill? Americans who can't afford healthcare. Families who need a little extra help putting food on the table. Grandmas and grandpas in nursing homes. Little babies and their mommas.

If Republicans pass this bill, 17 million Americans will have their healthcare ripped away. That number has kept growing as the Republicans keep making more and more changes to the bill. For them, it is just a question of how many more Americans they can rip healthcare away from. This bill would also make the biggest cut to food assistance for families, kids, and veterans in American history.

Here is one to underscore: One out of every four nursing homes in America would have to shut down under this bill.

You know, my Republican colleagues should just call a few seniors who are in nursing homes in their home States and just go over the plans for where those folks are supposed to go next. What exactly do the Republicans have in mind for them? Maybe call the daughter of someone who is in one of those nursing homes and explain how she has to become a full-time caregiver once this bill passes. Maybe call just a few of the people whose lives you plan to tear apart.

Budgets are about our values, and Republicans have made their values clear: They are willing to throw millions of Americans under the bus so that they can help out a handful of their billionaire buddies and giant corporations. They should be ashamed.

Here is what Democrats believe. Democrats believe that no baby should go hungry so that Mark Zuckerberg can buy another Hawaiian island. Democrats believe that no person with a disability who needs a wheelchair or a home health aide to live independently should have to give that up so that Jeff Bezos can buy a third yacht. Democrats believe that no grandma should be pushed out of her nursing home so that Elon Musk can take a subsidized rocket ship ride to Mars.

It doesn't have to be this way. What if, instead of tax breaks for billionaires, we make the rich pay their fair share? What if, instead of slashing healthcare for our kids, we make it possible for every American to see a doctor when they are sick without breaking the bank? And what if, instead of giving Big Oil more giant handouts, we make universal childcare a reality for families all across this country?

We can tax the rich. Dammit, if Jeff Bezos can afford to rent Venice for $50 million for his wedding, he can afford to pitch in his fair share on taxes so the next kid has a chance to make it big and the kid after that and the kid after that.

We can make life better for working people. We can make it easier, not harder. We can lower costs for families, not jack them up even more like this bill does. We can put families first, not billionaires and billionaire corporations.

Democrats believe this. Democrats are willing to fight for this. We will vote no on this awful bill. And for kids like Vivian, for seniors in nursing homes, for families who rely on home health aides, and for the millions more Americans that this bill will hurt, I urge my Republican colleagues to grow a spine and vote no.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following motions to commit for the bill H.R. 1 be placed in the Congressional Record:

1. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any provision which reduces the average

tax liability of corporations with income in excess of

$1,000,000,000.

2. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) ensure sufficient funding and staffing for the

Institute of Museum and Library Services.

3. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) strike any provision that increases the costs to

students of attending an institution of higher education.

4. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee;

(2) would strike any provision that cuts funding to Federal

health programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, and the

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; and

(3) would protect patients and providers, including

hospitals and community health centers.

5. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike cuts to Federal nutrition programs.

6. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike all provisions that would decrease access

to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care.

7. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike all provisions that would decrease access

to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care.

8. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would ensure sufficient funding to reinstate veterans

in Massachusetts who had been Federal employees and were

removed while serving in a probationary period.

9. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would provide funding to protect the privacy of

veterans in Massachusetts, including those working for the

Federal Government.

10. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

the Judiciary of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 1 day, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would restore to, or increase above, the fiscal year

2024 level any funding administered by the Office of Justice

Programs of the Department of Justice for community violence

intervention and prevention initiative programs.

11. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

the Judiciary of the Senate with instructions to report the

same back to the Senate in 1 day, not counting any day on

which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would restore to, or increase above, the fiscal year

2024 level any funding administered by the Office of Justice

Programs of the Department of Justice for reentry programming

and services, including to support employment, education,

housing, and health care needs.

12. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would ensure sufficient funding for the Local Food

Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program.

13. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would strike any provision that restricts borrower

defense to repayment or closed school discharge.

14. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) prohibit the privatization of the program 4 carried out

under the National Flood Insurance Act 5 of 1968 (42 U.S.C.

4001 et seq.).

15. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee;

(2) would strike any provision that will take nurses out of

nursing homes; and

(3) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay

a fair share in taxes.

16. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with

instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days,

not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session,

with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) strike section 30002 (relating to rescission of funds

for the Green and Resilient Retrofit Program for multifamily

housing).

Mr. President, bombing another country is an act of war; and last week, Donald Trump launched an attack that could spin the United States into another endless war in the Middle East. What followed from that decision can only be described as pure madness.

Trump declared total victory. Iran threatened retaliation. Americans in the region were forced to shelter in place.

Trump's own team then admitted no one knows where the nuclear materials are and what nuclear capacity Iran might still have. Trump called for regime change, and then last night, just for a moment, we hoped and believed there was a cease-fire, only for us to wake up to frantic posts on social media by the President begging both sides to stop shooting missiles and rockets at each other.

Today, the Deputy Commander of Central Command could not describe what kind of contingency plans the Defense Department was making or even whether they did or didn't have plans for the United States to put boots on the ground in this Middle East conflict.

And a classified briefing scheduled for right now that we should be having so that all the Senators can ask questions about what has happened and what is currently happening in Iran has just been scrapped by the Republicans for another 48 hours.

There is no grand plan. There is no careful effort to develop a responsible U.S. foreign policy designed to keep us all safe. Once again, Donald Trump serves up chaos--dangerous chaos--that threatens the long-term security of the American people.

New reporting by CNN and the New York Times suggest Donald Trump's bombing of Iran failed to destroy its nuclear program.

The media reports highlight that the strikes only set back Iran's nuclear program by a few months--a few months, while risking another war in the Middle East.

Now, we all agree that Iran should not and cannot have a nuclear weapon. We are committed to that. But the only successful strategy for preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon is diplomacy, something that Donald Trump has been pursuing right up until Prime Minister Netanyahu began bombing Iran. That is what we need right now, for all sides to come to the table to build an agreement that is sturdy and that cements lasting peace in place.

But Trump's reckless action, backed by many Republicans in Congress, makes it more likely that this crisis escalates into a deadly cycle of violence. Trump's reckless action puts American lives at risk. Trump's reckless action risks initiating another endless war that could last months, or even decades, as it did in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We have the power to put a stop to this madness right now. Senator Kaine

has introduced a war powers resolution to stop Donald Trump from turning these Iran bombings into another endless war in the Middle East.

Americans don't need another war. Americans don't want another war. They need and want good jobs and lower prices, and that is exactly what we should be focused on.

Mr. President, now, when Donald Trump ran for President, he promised over and over that he would lower costs on day one. His words: On day one.

And after he was elected, he was told that his policies would drive up costs. Trump said he ``couldn't care less.'' Now we are on day 154, and costs are up. Families are paying more for gas, more for housing, more for electricity. Prices are even going up on baby strollers--or as Donald Trump calls them ``the thing you carry the babies around in.'' Yeah, Donald Trump, man of the people.

So, logically, right now, Republicans in Congress are ramming through Trump's Big Beautiful Bill, a bill that is not designed to bring down costs, but that will rip away healthcare from over 16 million people and hand that money over to every billionaire CEO who paid to be in the front row at Donald Trump's inauguration.

For anyone who is watching, I am here today to read into the Record 10 ways that Trump and Republicans' Big Beautiful Bill will make your life more expensive:

One, your utility bills may go up. The Republicans' bill will get rid of investments that we have made in clean energy. Now, we need that energy, and the Republicans take our country backwards. It also means that the price of electricity will go up for American families like yours.

Two, your rent could go up. How? Republicans are trying to block State and local governments from fighting schemes that predatory housing companies use to artificially jack up the price of rent.

Three, if you are a kid from a working-class family and you don't have the money to write one check to pay for college, Republicans will make that even more expensive for you. That is right, Republicans want to make it more expensive for you to go to college. They are cutting Pell grants.

Four, Republicans are making your student loan payments go up. Independent experts explain that by changing how student repayment plans work, Republicans could raise your student loan payments by an average of $400 a month.

Five, Republicans are making it more expensive to go to medical school. I can't believe I have to say this, but rich kids should not be the only ones who can become doctors. But this bill would limit how much you could take out to go to medical school, how much you can get in loans.

Six, Republicans are making the cost of groceries go up with this bill. They are cutting food assistance, or SNAP, by nearly $200 per person per year. More than 7 million people will have less help, including more than 4 million people who will lose their food assistance altogether.

Seven, Republicans are increasing the cost of prescription drugs for millions of Americans by demanding that States require higher copays for prescription drugs from $4 to $35, the cost of a prescription will go up nearly 900 percent for people on Medicaid.

Eight, Republicans will send your Affordable Care Act premiums skyrocketing, pushing them up by thousands of dollars, and in some cases, tens of thousands of dollars every year.

Nine, Republicans will drive up the cost of private health insurance. More than half of all Americans get their insurance through their employer. When a portion of the uncompensated care that happens under the Republican bill is shifted to private insurers, experts estimate that the cost to your family will be increased by hundreds of dollars a year.

And 10, Republicans are ripping health insurance away entirely from 16 million people. For those people who will be uninsured, the cost of essential services like x-rays and blood tests will go up, a trip to the emergency room if, God forbid, there is an accident could mean that they go bankrupt. And that is just 10 ways that this bill could raise your costs. That is bad.

But what makes the bill worse is the money you lose does not pay down the national debt or help us rebuild our roads and bridges. Nope. The money you lose will be handed directly to a handful of giant corporations and billionaires in the form of new tax giveaways. Yes, Republicans are stealing your healthcare to pay for Jeff Bezos's third yacht. And at the same time that working families are worried about war and are scraping together enough money to put food on the table, Jeff Bezos is already celebrating by renting out Venice--all of Venice--for his $10 million wedding. Wow.

With control of the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives, this is what Republicans decided to do with their power. They decided to drive up your costs and rip healthcare coverage from millions of people. Really? Just imagine that. The Republicans have virtually unlimited power, and they want to use it to kick newborn babies out of the hospital and take wheelchairs away from people with disabilities, all so they can give that money to their billionaire friends and their big corporate donors. It is sickening, and I am angry.

I am angry because I believe it shouldn't just be rich kids who are able to afford a trip to the hospital when they fall down and break an arm.

I am angry because I believe it isn't just babies from wealthy families who should be able to afford a trip to the pediatrician when they get an ear infection. I am angry because I believe it isn't just parents who are Wall Street bankers who should be able to pay for cancer treatments for their kids. Our Nation is better than that.

My Republican colleagues should feel ashamed. Experts have run the numbers: 51,000 more people every year will die unnecessarily if this Republican bill becomes law. And the Republican reaction? Senator Joni Ernst proclaimed:

Well, we're all going to die.

As recently as today, Mitch McConnell is telling Republicans behind closed doors that their party can take a sledgehammer to Medicaid and ignore people's concerns because ``they'll get over it.'' Really? Seniors in nursing homes who get kicked to the curb won't get over it. Little kids who find their mom or dad on the kitchen floor after they couldn't afford insulin won't get over it. Parents who rely on Medicaid to take care of their kids with a disability won't get over it. Because, make no mistake, people won't stop getting sick; they will just stop getting care. And it doesn't matter if you are in a red State or a blue State either.

No, if Senate Republicans cut Medicaid, we will not get over it. We will hold you accountable at the ballot box.

But right now, this bill is not law. We still have time to stop it, and that is exactly what we should do. Democrats will vote no. We will all vote no. We just need a few courageous Republicans, people who care more about working people instead of billionaires, just a few courageous Republicans to join us and to stop the ``Big Beautiful Betrayal'' from becoming law.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, this is a horrifying moment in our Nation's history. Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla was violently removed from a public briefing for asking questions on behalf of the people he represents, people in California who deserve answers about the brutal crackdown on protesters.

I have watched the video, as many of you have as well. Let me just describe what it shows. Officers pushed Senator Padilla backward, out of the room, as he said the words: I am Senator Padilla. I have questions for the Secretary.

He was then shoved to the ground. When the Senator complied with the officers and went on his knees, he was forcibly pinned onto his stomach. He was ordered to put his hands behind his back. He can be heard on the video saying he is trying to comply with their orders. Officers then put handcuffs on the Senator while he was lying on the ground. His staff was then told to stop recording the handcuffing.

He was put in handcuffs for asking a simple question. He was put in handcuffs for doing his job as a U.S. Senator. He was put in handcuffs for standing up for the Constitution of the United States. He was put in handcuffs for representing the people of California.

Now, if you are not yet convinced that President Trump and his administration are trying to suppress free speech, then just watch the video. Watch the video. If you are not yet convinced that President Trump and his administration are trying to undermine the foundations of our democracy, watch the video. If you are not yet convinced that President Trump and his administration are hellbent on punishing people with differing opinions than those of the President, then watch the video.

And here is the really chilling part. Make no mistake, what happened to Senator Padilla today is happening every day all across this country. Every day, DHS agents are throwing people to the ground and violently handcuffing them while they are not resisting, detaining them for exercising their First Amendment rights of free speech. Every day, Donald Trump is making this Nation look more and more like a fascist state.

If this is how Federal agents treat a U.S. Senator who peacefully asked questions of this administration, then we all have to ask: How far will they go? How violent will they get?

I know my Republican colleagues can see what happened today was wrong, but will any Republican Senator speak up for our democracy?

They know Senator Padilla's character. They know that Senator Padilla is a kind man, a man who is concerned for his children, a man who is concerned for his home, a man who has dedicated his life to public service, a man who is a patriot.

Where are our Republican colleagues? Where is the Republican Senate? Where are you? Stand up and speak out.

This is a continuation of what we have been seeing: Intimidate every other check on Presidential power in this country. Fire the civil service. Get rid of those people. Threaten to imprison judges. Criminally charge House Members who try to visit an ICE facility. Arrest Senators who ask questions.

This is not a drill. This is an assault on our democracy. I am calling on my Republican colleagues to join us in demanding a bipartisan investigation into this incident.

What happened at this press conference was disgraceful. It was un- American. And every Member of the U.S. Senate should condemn it and condemn it now.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the GENIUS Act and the threat it poses to our financial system, our national security, and our democracy.

Now, at this moment, I expected to be on the floor urging the Senate to adopt a series of amendments filed by both Democrats and Republicans, amendments that would fix the core problems with this bill.

For weeks, Leader Thune promised that Senators would have a chance to vote on amendments on the stablecoin bill. Today, he broke that promise. This bill goes forward without a single chance for a single Senator to offer a single amendment.

Even changes that have widespread, bipartisan support are left aside as Leader Thune decides just to strong-arm the bill on through the Senate.

Now, before I outline the specific dangers posed by this bill, it is worth taking a step back to ask a simple question: Why is the crypto industry so vigorously lobbying for a bill that proponents claim will bring much needed regulation to the market?

Simon Johnson, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, and Brooksley Born,

the former Chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, answered this question in a recent op-ed by reminding us that we have seen this movie before.

Back in the late 1990s, derivatives were a relatively niche market, but a new type of product called an over-the-counter derivative had just been developed.

Most investors didn't really understand what they were or what they did, but the derivatives industry came knocking, begging for so-called regulation. Congress was ready to oblige. In 2000, Congress passed the Commodities Future Modernization Act, and President Bill Clinton signed it into law.

Proponents of the bill claimed that the new law would provide legal clarity, promote innovation, reduce risks, protect consumers, and advance U.S. competitiveness. After all, people said, surely some kind of regulatory framework was better than nothing at all.

But the bill established a weak set of rules loaded with loopholes-- just as the industry wanted. Sound familiar?

The result was a disaster. Derivatives moved from the edge of the financial system to the center of it. After all, with regulation, these derivatives now seemed to have the implicit blessing of the U.S. Government, and buying, selling, and designing derivatives became a more mainstream activity on Wall Street. In less than 8 years, the market for over-the-counter derivatives grew sevenfold and embedded itself into the core financial system.

By simultaneously boosting the derivatives industry and lightly regulating it, the bill Congress had passed helped set the stage for the 2008 financial crash. After the meltdown, Congress came back and cleaned up the mess in Dodd-Frank, but that was long after hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts had been handed to Wall Street, while 10 million families had lost their homes and millions more had lost their jobs.

Mr. Johnson's Nobel Prize is an impressive credential, and his warning should carry great weight. But we should also pay special attention to the thoughts of his coauthor Brooksley Born. She was one of the few people who saw the 2008 train wreck coming and opposed the derivatives bill at the time, and now she is ringing the alarm again.

The parallels to the Commodity Futures Modernization Act are striking. Industry is the driving force behind the GENIUS Act. Proponents argue the GENIUS Act will provide legal clarity, promote innovation, reduce risks, protect consumers and advance U.S. competitiveness in a new financial market.

Passage of the GENIUS Act is expected to significantly grow the market from $200 billion now to an estimated $2 trillion in a short time. And the GENIUS Act is riddled with loopholes and contains weak safeguards for consumers, national security, and financial stability.

Yes, it all sounds very similar. But there is one big difference between the GENIUS Act and the CFMA: President Clinton did not own a derivatives company. President Trump does own a stablecoin company.

Through his crypto business, President Trump has created an efficient means to trade Presidential favors--like tariff exemptions, pardons, and government appointments--for hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of dollars from foreign governments, from billionaires, and from large corporations. This is the single greatest corruption scandal in American history, and by passing the GENIUS Act, the Senate is about to not only bless this corruption but to actively facilitate its expansion.

The New York Times ran a front page essay this week by Ben Rhodes, President Obama's former Deputy National Security Advisor, on Trump's corruption. Rhodes interviewed Sandor Lederer, who heads a Hungarian anti-corruption organization and has witnessed the disintegration of Hungary's democracy under Viktor Orban. Lederer warned that ``the pressure corruption puts on a political system [is like] a river bearing down on a dam. Once the dam breaks, you're washed downriver by currents you can't control. If you try to rebuild the dam, it's too late.''

Instead of fortifying the dam, the Senate is now hacking away at it. In April, President Trump's crypto company, World Liberty Financial, launched its own stablecoin, called USD1. That stablecoin is already the fifth largest stablecoin in the world, and foreign investors have already begun to exploit this avenue for corruption.

A UAE state-backed investment firm used Trump's USD1 to finance a $2 billion investment in a crypto exchange whose owner is reportedly lobbying President Trump for a pardon, essentially giving Trump a cut of this $2 billion deal. This is the model: Deposit your money in the ``Bank of Trump'' and use his stablecoin to make payments. He earns money by investing those deposits in other assets, like a bank, and also earns money on every transaction that occurs whenever the stablecoin is used as a means of payment.

Even more publicized than his stablecoin, Trump launched a meme coin, another type of crypto asset. The coin was issued shortly before Trump's inauguration, and it initially soared in value. When people lost interest and the value of the coin began to sag, Trump launched a new scheme to make money.

A few weeks ago, he hosted a dinner for the top holders of his meme coin, which, again, juiced the price and increased trade and volume. The meme coin has netted more than $320 million in transactions fees alone and has inflated Trump's net worth on paper by billions of dollars.

And the favors for people who bought millions of dollars of Trump's coins have just begun. For example, one of those top holders at the dinner was crypto executive Justin Sun, who recently had his SEC lawsuit quietly dropped. Another was an investor with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

There is nothing in the GENIUS Act to stop this corruption. In fact, the Senate bill would accelerate the corruption. The bill would expand the reach of USD1 and grow its size. It would make Trump the regulator of his own financial company, and, importantly, the regulator of his competitors. Senator Merkley is leading an amendment to fix this--an amendment that Leader Thune has blocked.

There are other serious problems with the GENIUS Act--problems that Democrats and Republicans have amendments to fix. The bill permits Big Tech companies and other conglomerates to issue their own private currencies and take control over the money supply. It includes a special carve out that makes it even easier for private companies like X to issue a stablecoin.

Musk has made it clear that, in a few years, he wants his new X Money payment platform to be ``half of the global financial system.'' Senator Hawley and Senator Blumenthal have an amendment to fix that. Leader Thune has blocked that amendment.

Community banks have warned us that by creating a parallel, lightly regulated banking system, the stablecoin market will drain deposits from our local communities. There will be less funding available for small businesses and households all across our country. Senator Hickenlooper has an amendment to fix that. Leader Thune has blocked that amendment.

The bill would also mean easier access to money for terrorists and cartels. Even today, the crypto industry's own analysts are calling stablecoins ``the new kingpin of illicit crypto activity.'' According to Chainalysis, a blockchain analytics firm, stablecoins account for more than 60 percent of all illicit crypto transactions. Unfortunately, the GENIUS Act massively expands the marketplace for stablecoins, while failing to address the basic national security risks posed by them.

It also includes glaring loopholes that would allow Tether, a notorious foreign stablecoin issuer now based in El Salvador, access to U.S. markets. Just this week--just this week--prosecutors charged a Russian national in New York for using Tether to help Russians evade U.S. sanctions. Senators Schumer, Reed, Shaheen, and Blunt Rochester have amendments to fix those problems. Leader Thune has blocked those amendments.

The bill also increases the likelihood that consumers will get ripped off and scammed in financial transactions involving stablecoins. It jeopardizes the CFPB oversight and the suite of consumer protections that people enjoy

when they are using their Venmo app or an ordinary bank account. If you get cheated using a stablecoin, you may just be out of luck.

The vast majority of stablecoin issuers won't even be required to undergo financial audits to make sure that they aren't committing fraud. Senators Durbin and Warnock have an amendment to fix this. Senator Thune has blocked that amendment.

And, finally, the GENIUS Act lacks the basic safeguards necessary to ensure that stablecoins don't blow up our entire financial system. The bill permits stablecoin issuers to invest in risky assets and allows them to engage in risky, nonstablecoin activities, like private credit or derivatives trading. At the same time, the bill constrains regulators' ability to apply capital and liquidity safeguards to limit the chances of stablecoin failures. Again, we have amendments to fix this. And, again, Leader Thune has blocked those amendments.

Over the past few months, Democrats seem to have forgotten that we actually have some power. This is an opportunity to use that power. Democrats can withhold their approval of this bill today and say that the bill will not go forward unless we have the opportunity to vote on some amendments, precisely as Leader Thune promised we could do.

Democrats should show a little spine and insist on amendments as the price for helping advance this bill. We don't have to speculate on what could go wrong if this bill advances without changes. We have already seen it. The next time Trump is cut into a corrupt deal by a foreign government using his stablecoin or the next time North Korea uses stablecoins to add to its nuclear arsenal or the next time a person falls victim to a stablecoin scam or the next time the financial system is stressed by a stablecoin run, it is likely that the resulting harm will be traced right back to the inadequacies of the GENIUS Act.

I urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill.

Mr. President, I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 293, confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 144, James O'Neill to be Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services.

I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 294, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 120, John Andrew Eisenberg to be an Assistant Attorney General.

I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 295, confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 120, John Andrew Eisenberg to be an Assistant Attorney General.

I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 296, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 111, Brett Shumate to be an Assistant Attorney General.