Floor Statements

Mr. President, if you look clearly at the facts as they are today, by any measure, Donald Trump's first 100 days have been disastrous--not a success--for regular Americans and our Constitution.

His administration has been marked by mismanagement, poor leadership, prickly egos, and policies that punch down rather than offer a hand up. In fact, that is reflected in the polls--not in January but today-- where his approval rating is the lowest of any President at the 100-day mark, I believe, in the history of this country. And as a result of these policies, America's economy and our standing in the eyes of our allies have fallen significantly.

He has granted Elon Musk free reign to enter any Federal Agency and ferret through the data and files and personal information of every American citizen. And my impression of Mr. Musk: He doesn't do anything unless there is a profit connected to it.

Musk and DOGE are rifling through our IRS and Social Security records. Meanwhile, Americans can't get their questions answered about their Social Security benefits because Mr. Musk and DOGE and President Trump have cut staff and administrative funding. They have even tried to cut the phone lines for basic services. And Trump officials just laugh it off.

Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, a billionaire--which is not unusual in the Trump circuit--said on a podcast:

Let's say Social Security didn't send out their checks this

month. My mother-in-law, who's 94, she wouldn't call and

complain. She just wouldn't. She'd think something got messed

up, and she'll get it next month. A fraudster always makes

the loudest noise, screaming, yelling and complaining.

Well, that is very easy for a billionaire and his family to say: I don't think they would miss their Social Security check. But for working Americans who depend on Social Security, their retirement benefits, their disability benefits--just to make ends meet, to have food on the table--they would certainly miss the delay of a Social Security check.

And it is not just the Social Security Administration. We also know President Trump has purged Federal employees by the thousands, without regard for their job performance or the importance of their work--every agency, from the office that runs the LIHEAP program to the National Weather Service, to the National Nuclear Security Administration.

LIHEAP is essential to my constituents in the wintertime. That is how they stay warm. That is how they are able to live.

The National Weather Service is renowned for its incredibly accurate and detailed and scientifically based forecasts. In fact, we all depend upon it and, I am told, particularly farmers in the Midwest, because if you are trying to figure out the day to plant your crops, you better know what the temperature is going to be in the morning and at noontime and in the evening.

And the National Nuclear Security Administration is critical to protecting our nuclear weapons and developing them. I was in the airport in Providence, RI, and a young woman came up to me and said: Excuse me, Senator, but, 5 days ago, I was fired from the NNSA because I was a provisional worker. I got a call last night to get back as soon as possible--because the ability to protect and to develop our nuclear weapons could not be sustained without the presence of that lady and many others.

And yet, given all of these issues, he has populated his administration with leadership that, at best, is uninterested in the challenges facing average Americans and, too often, unqualified to do the jobs they were hired to perform.

He has withheld funding that was legally and constitutionally appropriated by Congress. He, in fact, has ignored the Constitution and Congress. One of his first acts was to fire the inspectors general throughout the government. Such a measure, by law, requires notice to Congress and 30 days' wait. He ignored that. And why? Well, if you are going to systematically break the law, you might as well get rid of those people who are checking on whether the law is properly enforced.

He is defunding libraries and Head Start centers and halting critical medical research.

He has closed the Agency for International Development and even withheld funding to feed starving children here in America and across the globe, and he has done incredible damage to our standing in the world.

And as a result of his efforts to completely undermine the USAID, what is happening? Well, I will tell you what is happening: China is moving aggressively to take our place. And so, to people across the globe, when they look around and ask: Who is our friend? China?

That is not good for us, and that is not what we, as Americans, have done for many, many years.

He has also essentially extorted law firms to represent him and his causes for free.

He has attempted to dictate how our colleges and universities are run, whom they hire and what they teach, essentially changing a prosperous knowledge-based economy--that is what we were talking about. That is how we would compete in the world. We are the knowledge-based economy. We are the innovators. We are changing everything. When you destroy our university systems and our health research systems, you turn a knowledge-based economy into a failing, ignorance-based economy.

He has deported American citizens, threatened to annex Greenland, boosted Russia, and somehow found a way to alienate Canada, our neighbor and ally.

Each of these items on its own would be a cause for outrage, but Trump hopes that he will overwhelm Americans by ``flooding the zone'' with one stunt after another. But the inescapable fact is, his policies are hurting the American people, and they see it--not last January at the inauguration but today when they are looking at prices that are still too high; when they are evaluating his promise of ending inflation on the first day and solving the Ukrainian crisis on the first day. They see it in the prices they pay at the grocery store, in the cost of a new car or a new home.

Sadly, it looks like it is going to get worse for American families. Researchers at Yale University estimate that Donald Trump's current tariff regime--not including the tariffs he announced then backed away from--the current tariffs in place today will raise costs by $4,900 for families this year while increasing inflation as high as 5.5 percent and cutting economic growth.

Other analysts project new car prices will rise by as much as $12,000 and new home prices by more than $9,000. I have spoken to multiple Rhode Island companies whose suppliers are already sending them higher quotes for their goods.

Goldman Sachs estimates that the President's baseline 10-percent tariff on

all imports would lead to fewer--not more--American jobs. Goldman estimates that this tariff will lead to roughly 400,000 fewer jobs nationwide.

Markets continue to move wildly as he erratically threatens schemes like doing away with the independence of the Federal Reserve, firing the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and trying to seize the power to lower interest rates themselves, manipulating interest rates themselves and future tariffs. We are still in this uncertain period because he just suspended them for 90 days. If these future tariffs come back, it would rock the market again.

And by the way, when the market was collapsing after his grand announcement, where was he? He was in Florida at his golf course where the Saudis and others have sent millions of dollars to him so they could host a tournament, and he could play golf with them. That is not the definition of Presidential leadership.

Before Trump undertook his campaign of economic chaos, the economy was on a good trajectory. In fact, that chart illustrates the trajectory. These Trump tariffs have been a huge blunder. Instead of implementing a thoughtful policymaking process to boost key domestic manufacturing, the President has chosen a blunt, blanket-tariff approach. In doing so, he has treated allies like enemies and driven global partners into the arms of China.

What we are seeing now and what we will experience in the coming months: higher prices for families, fewer jobs, smaller retirement accounts, and a weaker economy. And it is entirely on the shoulders of the President. It is a self-inflicted wound on the economy and the American people.

But it appears that the President isn't done. He wants a ``big, beautiful bill.'' And what is in that ``big, beautiful bill?'' Big cuts for Medicaid and SNAP, which feeds children and disabled Americans, and big giveaways to the donors who financed his campaign and populate his administration. The American people see it, and survey after survey proves they do.

The question is whether my colleagues, Senate Republicans, will go along with that. Will they listen to the people of America or will they still be under the thrall of Donald Trump?

Americans deserve better than cuts to Medicaid. They deserve an economy headed upward, not backward. And they deserve a President who respects the Constitution and the rule of law that made our society and our economy the ``shining city on the hill,'' as President Reagan once said.

The first 100 days of chaos and self-inflicted damage must end. It is time for America's business leaders and congressional Republicans to stand up and join us all in saying enough is enough.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Noel Simpson, senior director of the Rhode Island Student Loan Authority (RISLA), on his upcoming retirement and thank him for his more than three decades of service dedicated to Rhode Island students, families, and educators.

Noel joined RISLA as a consultant in 1993. At the time, Noel was one of just the handful of employees managing the duties of the organization. Over the next several years, Noel led the rapid expansion of RISLA, developing a full team of professional staff and allowing the organization to become a leading voice on student loans and financial services in Rhode Island. As RISLA grew, Noel's career did as well, with Noel rising through the ranks and being named chief financial officer, deputy director, and eventually senior director.

For the last 25 years, I have been proud to team up with Noel and RISLA to host our annual ``Financial Aid Nights.'' These workshops are dedicated to giving college-bound students and families a chance to learn firsthand from student aid experts about how to access financial aid opportunities for college. Students learn about financial aid eligibility criteria and the application process, such as completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). The goal of this workshop is to educate students who need help paying for college, helping students navigate complicated and unfamiliar financial decisions. Noel has regularly served as moderator for these sessions, sharing his deep expertise and enthusiasm for student aid and financial literacy and making higher education more accessible.

Indeed, Noel has been instrumental in bringing a variety of resources to college hopeful students throughout the Ocean State. For many years, Noel brought College Planning Sunday to Rhode Island, where high school seniors gathered to learn about how to

apply for financial aid. Noel also spearheaded the creation of RISLA's College Planning Center, a free service that works directly with thousands of students to guide them through the college application process, including everything from writing a strong essay to selecting a college that best fits their goals. As the father of a high school senior, I can personally attest to the invaluable service the College Planning Center provides.

Today, RISLA helps thousands of Rhode Islanders plan for and finance college, a number that has grown exponentially under Noel's leadership. His dedication has opened the door of higher education for a generation of Rhode Islanders. That is a legacy that has made a difference for our State and for students and families.

I join so many of Noel's colleagues and peers in thanking him for his friendship and kindness and in wishing him a happy and healthy retirement, filled with new adventures, in the company of his wife Patti and their children. He has earned it.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act with the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Hagerty. This bipartisan legislation restricts the use of so-called mortgage ``trigger leads'' and gives prospective home buyers control over their personal credit information.

Trigger leads are essentially tips based on information the major credit reporting bureaus sell to mortgage brokers and lenders when the bureaus learn that a consumer has applied for a mortgage with another lender. Each trigger lead they sell generates dozens of calls and solicitations to the consumer from lenders, ostensibly to provide the consumer with better offers. In fact, one home buyer reported to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that they received over 100 calls within 2 days of applying for a mortgage. Prospective home buyers who are bombarded by these kinds of solicitations typically have no idea their information was sold without their affirmative consent.

Buying a home is often the most consequential financial decision a family will make. Getting spammed with additional offers after a family has already shopped for a mortgage and chosen a lender makes this already stressful process even more stressful. It can be very difficult, if not impossible, for a family to sift through dozens of offers over a few days and actually receive better credit. Consumers who are subjected to a deluge of solicitations as the result of a trigger lead are justified in feeling that their privacy has been invaded.

Many reputable mortgage companies see it the same way. They support curtailing trigger leads since prospective home buyers often blame their lender for selling off their personal information even though it is the credit bureaus that are providing this information.

Unrelenting, aggressive solicitations are more than just a nuisance. Indeed, some companies that buy trigger leads may not use them responsibly and may have poor track records of compliance. In 2018. the Washington Post reported that some mortgage lenders had used trigger leads to misrepresent themselves in calls by suggesting that they are underwriters for the consumer's current lender or by implying that they are calling from a government agency. According to reporting in the Chicago Tribune, unsuspecting home buyers are at risk of inadvertently handing over sensitive personal information, exposing themselves to identity theft.

The current system leaves consumers without control of their personal information when they apply for a mortgage. Our bill will fix the current system by significantly restricting the circumstances in which the credit bureaus can sell home buyers' personal information to generate trigger leads. The credit bureaus would be permitted to sell this information only in the limited circumstances when the consumer already has a significant financial relationship with the lending institution seeking the information or when the prospective home buyer has provided affirmative consent to share this information broadly with other lenders.

The Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act will go a long way towards securing consumers' personal information and will provide much needed relief from the seemingly never-ending solicitations prospective home buyers receive during an already stressful time.

Last Congress, the Senate acted unanimously to pass this legislation, and I would like to thank my colleagues for their support. However, this legislation was unfortunately not taken up in the House. I hope that this Congress, we can work together--on a bicameral, bipartisan basis--to address the abuse of trigger leads once and for all.

I thank the broad coalition of consumer advocacy groups and trade associations for their support, including the Mortgage Bankers Association, the National Consumer Law Center, on behalf of its low- income clients, the National Association of Mortgage Brokers, the Community Home Lenders of America, the Consumer Federation of America, Americans for Financial Reform, the Broker Action Coalition, the American Bankers Association, and the Independent Community Bankers of America.

I urge my colleagues to join Senator Hagerty and me in supporting this commonsense, bipartisan bill.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act with the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Hagerty. This bipartisan legislation restricts the use of so-called mortgage ``trigger leads'' and gives prospective home buyers control over their personal credit information.

Trigger leads are essentially tips based on information the major credit reporting bureaus sell to mortgage brokers and lenders when the bureaus learn that a consumer has applied for a mortgage with another lender. Each trigger lead they sell generates dozens of calls and solicitations to the consumer from lenders, ostensibly to provide the consumer with better offers. In fact, one home buyer reported to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that they received over 100 calls within 2 days of applying for a mortgage. Prospective home buyers who are bombarded by these kinds of solicitations typically have no idea their information was sold without their affirmative consent.

Buying a home is often the most consequential financial decision a family will make. Getting spammed with additional offers after a family has already shopped for a mortgage and chosen a lender makes this already stressful process even more stressful. It can be very difficult, if not impossible, for a family to sift through dozens of offers over a few days and actually receive better credit. Consumers who are subjected to a deluge of solicitations as the result of a trigger lead are justified in feeling that their privacy has been invaded.

Many reputable mortgage companies see it the same way. They support curtailing trigger leads since prospective home buyers often blame their lender for selling off their personal information even though it is the credit bureaus that are providing this information.

Unrelenting, aggressive solicitations are more than just a nuisance. Indeed, some companies that buy trigger leads may not use them responsibly and may have poor track records of compliance. In 2018. the Washington Post reported that some mortgage lenders had used trigger leads to misrepresent themselves in calls by suggesting that they are underwriters for the consumer's current lender or by implying that they are calling from a government agency. According to reporting in the Chicago Tribune, unsuspecting home buyers are at risk of inadvertently handing over sensitive personal information, exposing themselves to identity theft.

The current system leaves consumers without control of their personal information when they apply for a mortgage. Our bill will fix the current system by significantly restricting the circumstances in which the credit bureaus can sell home buyers' personal information to generate trigger leads. The credit bureaus would be permitted to sell this information only in the limited circumstances when the consumer already has a significant financial relationship with the lending institution seeking the information or when the prospective home buyer has provided affirmative consent to share this information broadly with other lenders.

The Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act will go a long way towards securing consumers' personal information and will provide much needed relief from the seemingly never-ending solicitations prospective home buyers receive during an already stressful time.

Last Congress, the Senate acted unanimously to pass this legislation, and I would like to thank my colleagues for their support. However, this legislation was unfortunately not taken up in the House. I hope that this Congress, we can work together--on a bicameral, bipartisan basis--to address the abuse of trigger leads once and for all.

I thank the broad coalition of consumer advocacy groups and trade associations for their support, including the Mortgage Bankers Association, the National Consumer Law Center, on behalf of its low- income clients, the National Association of Mortgage Brokers, the Community Home Lenders of America, the Consumer Federation of America, Americans for Financial Reform, the Broker Action Coalition, the American Bankers Association, and the Independent Community Bankers of America.

I urge my colleagues to join Senator Hagerty and me in supporting this commonsense, bipartisan bill.

Mr. President, I rise to discuss the nomination of Lt. Gen. Dan Caine to be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I am glad that we will soon be voting on this nominee.

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is one of, if not the, most important positions in the U.S. military. The Chairman serves as the principal military adviser to the President, the National Security Council, the Secretary of Defense, and Congress. They are expected

to be an unparalleled strategist, adviser, and manager, and their counsel is invaluable as we confront the multitude of national security issues before us.

General Caine testified before the Armed Services Committee last week and represented himself well. He has had a distinguished career in the Air Force and the Air National Guard as an F-16 pilot with thousands of flight hours and multiple combat deployments. He has also served in senior leadership roles at the Pentagon, the White House, and overseas, including in the special operations and intelligence communities. If confirmed, General Caine would be the first career National Guard officer to serve as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I appreciate General Caine's record of service and thank him for stepping forward to lead once again. However, we must be clear about the unprecedented circumstances that led to General Caine's nomination. Two months ago, President Trump abruptly dismissed Gen. CQ Brown, who was not even halfway into his tenure as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Secretary of Defense Hegseth also dismissed several other senior officers, including ADM Lisa Franchetti, the Chief of Naval Operations; Gen. James Slife, the Air Force Vice Chief of Staff; Gen. Jennifer Short, the senior military adviser to the Secretary; and all three Judge Advocates General for the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Last week, President Trump dismissed Gen. Timothy Haugh, the Commander of U.S. Cyber Command and Director of the National Security Agency, at the urging of Laura Loomer, a fringe conspiracy theorist. And on Monday, we learned that Secretary Hegseth had dismissed VADM Shoshana Chatfield, the U.S. Military Representative to NATO.

To this day, no credible explanation has been given for the dismissal of a single one of these officers.

We cannot pretend that this is normal or acceptable behavior by the Commander in Chief and Defense Secretary. One by one, they are purging officers, threatening others, and undermining the fundamental principles of our military.

I will speak more about this later, but I am deeply concerned that these officers were dismissed for political reasons. I have long warned about the dangers of firing military servicemembers as a political loyalty test, and I will continue to sound the alarm about this behavior. I must say that that the silence from my Republican friends on this issue is very troubling. Even as Republicans vote to confirm General Caine, I hope they recognize the dangerous message that President Trump and Secretary Hegseth are sending throughout the ranks: Don't speak your mind or give your best military advice, or you may face consequences. I urge my Republican colleagues to join me in demanding an explanation from the President and Defense Secretary.

I would take a moment to salute Gen. CQ Brown, who served this Nation honorably for more than four decades and led the Joint Chiefs with dedication and skill. He and each of the officers who were dismissed had outstanding careers in the military and represented our Nation with great courage, honor, and distinction. We owe all of them a debt of gratitude for their service and sacrifice.

We are fortunate that General Caine understands the fraught situation within which he has been nominated to be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. During his hearing, General Caine repeatedly agreed that the military must remain apolitical. When he was asked how he would guard against politicization of the military, General Caine said, ``It starts with being a good example from the top and making sure that we are nonpartisan and apolitical and speaking the truth to power every day.''

I was also relieved by General Caine's response to my question about President Trump's claim that that he once said he ``loved'' President Trump and would ``kill'' for him while donning a ``Make America Great Again'' hat. During the hearing, General Caine categorically denied that this incident happened and stated, ``I've never worn any political merchandise or said anything to that effect.''

As the Nation's seniormost military officer, it will be his responsibility to understand the needs of America's servicemembers and to be their greatest advocate. If confirmed, he will be the most visible military officer in the Nation. It will be critical for him to represent the force with total professionalism and trustworthiness. In my conversations with General Caine and after speaking with those who know him best, I have found him to be an honest, smart, and principled military officer. He understands the momentous national security challenges we face and has pledged to represent our servicemembers with professionalism and discipline.

Ultimately, I am optimistic that General Caine will provide his best military advice to the President and the Secretary of Defense, even if that advice not what they would want to hear. The Senate Armed Services Committee approved his nomination by a wide, bipartisan margin, and I intend to vote in favor of General Caine now.

Mr. President, we have a longstanding adult literacy crisis that affects the quality of life for individuals and families and holds our economy back, and the latest international assessments show that it is only getting worse. It is time for a major expansion of adult education. Today, I am proud to introduce bipartisan legislation--the Adult Education Workforce Opportunity and Reskilling for Knowledge and Success Act--or the Adult Education WORKS Act--with my colleague Senator Young.

Adult education provides numeracy, literacy, digital literacy, English language skills, work readiness, soft skills, high school equivalency, and numerous wraparound services to millions of adult learners nationwide. These essential skills can make the difference between earning a family-sustaining wage and struggling to make ends meet. A study commissioned by the Barbara Bush Foundation estimated that getting all U.S. adults to the equivalent of a sixth grade reading level would generate an additional $2.2 trillion in annual income for the country. Without the opportunities provided through adult education programs, many adults will be left on the sidelines.

The latest results for U.S. adults on the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, PIAAC, are sobering. Between 2017 and 2023, literacy and numeracy skills sank, with the percentage of adults at the lowest performance levels increasing from 19 to 28 percent in literacy and from 29 to 34 percent in numeracy.

Building a sustainable economy that truly works for everyone is going to require helping these individuals acquire the basic skills they need to succeed. Unfortunately, we are reaching only a fraction of these individuals today. A recent study from the Adult Literacy and Learning Impact Network, found that over 80 percent of the adults surveyed indicated a strong or moderate interest in developing their skills, but only 20 percent reported knowing about existing programs in their communities. At current funding levels, the Department of Education reports that 1.1 million individuals were served, with over one-third of programs reporting waiting lists.

In my home State of Rhode Island, there are over 61,000 adults who could benefit from English language instruction and nearly 64,000 working-age adults without a high school credential. Yet, under current funding levels, the adult education program serves just over 5,100 individuals.

The Adult Education WORKS Act provides a roadmap for addressing this crisis. It calls for increased resources, nearly doubling funding for adult education by 2030. At the same time, it makes significant improvements to the adult education system. It calls for a new emphasis on digital and information literacy, which are essential for success in the workplace and in navigating everyday life. It enhances the role of adult education providers, with a special focus on public libraries and community-based organizations throughout the workforce development system, ensuring coordination and efficient use of resources. It invests in the professionalization of the adult education field, strengthening State certification policies, encouraging full-time staffing models, and expanding professional development opportunities and career pathways for adult educators. It provides support for college and career navigators in public libraries and community-based organizations to support adult learners where they live. Finally, it invests in innovation and accountability through pilot projects that test new approaches for measuring program performance and learner outcomes.

In developing this legislation, Senator Young and I worked closely with key stakeholders, who are on the frontlines in the adult education community. I am pleased to count the American Library Association, the Center for Law and Social Policy, the Coalition on Adult Basic Education, the National Coalition for Literacy, National Skills Coalition, ProLiteracy, the TESOL, Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, International Association, and the Urban Libraries Council among the supporters of this legislation.

I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation and work with us to ensure it is passed on its own or as part of legislation to reauthorize the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.

Mr. President, we have a longstanding adult literacy crisis that affects the quality of life for individuals and families and holds our economy back, and the latest international assessments show that it is only getting worse. It is time for a major expansion of adult education. Today, I am proud to introduce bipartisan legislation--the Adult Education Workforce Opportunity and Reskilling for Knowledge and Success Act--or the Adult Education WORKS Act--with my colleague Senator Young.

Adult education provides numeracy, literacy, digital literacy, English language skills, work readiness, soft skills, high school equivalency, and numerous wraparound services to millions of adult learners nationwide. These essential skills can make the difference between earning a family-sustaining wage and struggling to make ends meet. A study commissioned by the Barbara Bush Foundation estimated that getting all U.S. adults to the equivalent of a sixth grade reading level would generate an additional $2.2 trillion in annual income for the country. Without the opportunities provided through adult education programs, many adults will be left on the sidelines.

The latest results for U.S. adults on the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, PIAAC, are sobering. Between 2017 and 2023, literacy and numeracy skills sank, with the percentage of adults at the lowest performance levels increasing from 19 to 28 percent in literacy and from 29 to 34 percent in numeracy.

Building a sustainable economy that truly works for everyone is going to require helping these individuals acquire the basic skills they need to succeed. Unfortunately, we are reaching only a fraction of these individuals today. A recent study from the Adult Literacy and Learning Impact Network, found that over 80 percent of the adults surveyed indicated a strong or moderate interest in developing their skills, but only 20 percent reported knowing about existing programs in their communities. At current funding levels, the Department of Education reports that 1.1 million individuals were served, with over one-third of programs reporting waiting lists.

In my home State of Rhode Island, there are over 61,000 adults who could benefit from English language instruction and nearly 64,000 working-age adults without a high school credential. Yet, under current funding levels, the adult education program serves just over 5,100 individuals.

The Adult Education WORKS Act provides a roadmap for addressing this crisis. It calls for increased resources, nearly doubling funding for adult education by 2030. At the same time, it makes significant improvements to the adult education system. It calls for a new emphasis on digital and information literacy, which are essential for success in the workplace and in navigating everyday life. It enhances the role of adult education providers, with a special focus on public libraries and community-based organizations throughout the workforce development system, ensuring coordination and efficient use of resources. It invests in the professionalization of the adult education field, strengthening State certification policies, encouraging full-time staffing models, and expanding professional development opportunities and career pathways for adult educators. It provides support for college and career navigators in public libraries and community-based organizations to support adult learners where they live. Finally, it invests in innovation and accountability through pilot projects that test new approaches for measuring program performance and learner outcomes.

In developing this legislation, Senator Young and I worked closely with key stakeholders, who are on the frontlines in the adult education community. I am pleased to count the American Library Association, the Center for Law and Social Policy, the Coalition on Adult Basic Education, the National Coalition for Literacy, National Skills Coalition, ProLiteracy, the TESOL, Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages, International Association, and the Urban Libraries Council among the supporters of this legislation.

I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation and work with us to ensure it is passed on its own or as part of legislation to reauthorize the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Weatherization Assistance Program Improvements Act, along with Senators Collins, Coons,

and Shaheen. Our bipartisan bill will make critical updates to ensure this important program can effectively serve even more households across the country.

Since 1976, the Weatherization Assistance Program has helped more than 7 million low-income households reduce their energy bills by making their homes more energy efficient. The Department of Energy estimates that these upgrades help each household save $372 or more in energy bills annually. Those energy savings free up limited financial resources for essentials, like groceries and medicine.

In addition to traditional services like attic and wall insulation, the program also provides services that help with home health and safety measures, such as installing smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. Energy efficient homes also help cut down on our carbon footprint, reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.

An independent study of the Weatherization Assistance Program by Oak Ridge National Laboratory found that children in weatherized households miss less school, improving educational outcomes. Adults miss less work, increasing both their own incomes and their contributions to the economy. Families also reported experiencing fewer flu and cold symptoms and emergency room visits, decreasing costly medical expenses.

The Weatherization Assistance Program also helps boost our economy. The Department of Energy has reported that the program supports over 8,500 jobs while increasing our national economic output by $1.2 billion per year.

The program is a win-win for all involved. That is why, as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I have led my colleagues in supporting strong funding for it every year. And that is why I am introducing this bill--to ensure it continues to work for years to come.

This bill will help expand the program to many more low-income households that are currently unable to receive weatherization services because their homes need minor structural repairs before they can be weatherized. The bill will authorize a weatherization readiness fund to repair structural issues and prepare homes for weatherization assistance, increasing the number of homes the program is able to serve.

At the same time, it will raise the amount of funding allowed to be spent on each home to keep up with current labor and material costs, and it will raise the cap on the amount of funding allowed to be spent on renewable energy upgrades in each home. These provisions are essential updates to a program that has helped so many families over the past few decades.

I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this commonsense legislation.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Weatherization Assistance Program Improvements Act, along with Senators Collins, Coons,

and Shaheen. Our bipartisan bill will make critical updates to ensure this important program can effectively serve even more households across the country.

Since 1976, the Weatherization Assistance Program has helped more than 7 million low-income households reduce their energy bills by making their homes more energy efficient. The Department of Energy estimates that these upgrades help each household save $372 or more in energy bills annually. Those energy savings free up limited financial resources for essentials, like groceries and medicine.

In addition to traditional services like attic and wall insulation, the program also provides services that help with home health and safety measures, such as installing smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. Energy efficient homes also help cut down on our carbon footprint, reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.

An independent study of the Weatherization Assistance Program by Oak Ridge National Laboratory found that children in weatherized households miss less school, improving educational outcomes. Adults miss less work, increasing both their own incomes and their contributions to the economy. Families also reported experiencing fewer flu and cold symptoms and emergency room visits, decreasing costly medical expenses.

The Weatherization Assistance Program also helps boost our economy. The Department of Energy has reported that the program supports over 8,500 jobs while increasing our national economic output by $1.2 billion per year.

The program is a win-win for all involved. That is why, as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I have led my colleagues in supporting strong funding for it every year. And that is why I am introducing this bill--to ensure it continues to work for years to come.

This bill will help expand the program to many more low-income households that are currently unable to receive weatherization services because their homes need minor structural repairs before they can be weatherized. The bill will authorize a weatherization readiness fund to repair structural issues and prepare homes for weatherization assistance, increasing the number of homes the program is able to serve.

At the same time, it will raise the amount of funding allowed to be spent on each home to keep up with current labor and material costs, and it will raise the cap on the amount of funding allowed to be spent on renewable energy upgrades in each home. These provisions are essential updates to a program that has helped so many families over the past few decades.

I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this commonsense legislation.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1645 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, this amendment is cosponsored by Senator Kaine and 18 of my colleagues.

Our amendment would simply prevent any cuts in healthcare coverage for a Medicaid beneficiary, something we should be able to agree on, I hope.

We all have talked about the need to protect Medicaid. Now we have to stand up and do that. This vote is an opportunity to put our money and our votes where our words are. And the question is, Will you protect the nearly 80 million Americans who rely on Medicaid or do you vote for tax giveaways for the wealthiest at the expense of everyone else?

I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, well, we are back here again with another variation of the Trump plan and the Republican plan to do further damage to our economy and to the working men and women of this country. It has been sliced and diced and repackaged and unpackaged, but it still boils down to a very simple equation: big tax cuts for the very, very wealthy and cuts to Medicaid and other key programs that are essential to Americans.

This resolution is going to cost a lot of money--about $5.8 trillion with a ``t.''

Yesterday, President Trump unveiled his tariff policies and today, the markets reacted. They lost $2.5 trillion of value. He is just taking a sledgehammer to our economy and a sledgehammer to the working families who depend upon these programs like Medicaid and a sledgehammer to our universities and medical schools and research laboratories, which have made us the premier center for research innovation and healthcare in the world. And with these sledgehammer blows, I don't think we can maintain that status.

These proposals by the President and my Republican colleagues are designed to take away the healthcare coverage from millions of Americans--seniors, kids, veterans, individuals with disabilities--and they particularly seem to focus on Medicaid.

Medicaid provides essential healthcare services for the most vulnerable populations in the country. It covers nearly 80 million people, if you combine those covered by the Children's Health Insurance Plan, CHIP.

In my home State of Rhode Island, over 300,000 people--and that is about one-third of my State--depend on Medicaid. And the Republicans are talking about cutting this program by at least $880 billion, which would be devastating. Looking at the Medicaid recipients in Rhode Island. It is interesting. One in five adults ages 19 to 64 are covered; one in three children are covered. And we all know how critical healthcare is for children because a childhood problem left untreated can lead, often, to much more serious health consequences as they grow older--much more dependency on social programs, which are paid for by us. Good healthcare as a child guarantees, in many, many, and most cases, success in school, success in life, and a healthy life--one in three children in Rhode Island need Medicaid.

Five in eight people residing in nursing homes in my home state are also receiving Medicaid. Let me tell you what is going to happen when Medicaid is cut by this extraordinary amount of money, $880 billion. A lot of nursing homes will close because their margin, the difference between opening the doors and closing them, is the Medicaid money they receive. When that goes, where are you going to put your ailing mother or grandmother?

I will tell you what you do. You are going to do it like they did it before Medicaid. When I was a young kid, it was not unusual to go visit someone, and in the front room there would be the hospital bed, the grandmother, and the mother was taking care of the person and that was healthcare back then. But after Medicaid, we were able to create a much more effective healthcare system.

And this will touch not just the very poor; this touched working families. It is the only way they can keep, really, their mother or father or older relative or a child with a very serious illness in a safe, protected place where they can receive appropriate care.

Three in seven Medicaid recipients in Rhode Island are working-age adults with disabilities. This is a situation where these people, because of their physical limitations, cannot work and need assistance. Some are severely disabled, others are significantly disabled, and they are going to be left, literally, out in the cold.

I must say there is a corollary here because just a few days ago, the President announced that he was going to take the IDEA education program and move it into the Department of Health, which at the same time is trying to shed thousands and thousands of workers. So my fear, of course, is that--again, going back into my youth, the fifties and the sixties--that children with disabilities will be sitting in the back of the room by themselves trying to keep themselves occupied because what we have created through IDEA--a system of education tailored to the individual child's disability--will be unsupportable.

And that is the kind of damage he is doing. It is the working people. It is

the families. It is the kids. It is, I think, inexcusable. Throughout the country, 38 million children rely on Medicaid. And 2.3 million children with disabilities, as I said, throughout the country, rely on Medicaid. And also, as I have said, throughout the country, not just Rhode Island, 7 million seniors count on Medicaid to afford nursing home care or other health care services.

So we are in a situation now where we are basically undercutting our healthcare system, and it is not just these people who feel it. Everyone will feel it. If these Medicaid cuts go through, it will create so much turmoil in my State that our healthcare delivery system will be under great pressure--but, I think, so much pressure that it will not work.

Where do people go when they don't have healthcare? They go to the emergency room. So if you or I or somebody who might even have healthcare insurance and we have a serious problem, well, we can go to the emergency room and just get in the back of the line that is going all the way around the block and through the parking lot and everyplace else because these hundreds of thousands of people without healthcare, that is where they will have to go when it is so painful they can't go to work.

This is a disaster in the making. And, again, we saw last week and weeks before, President Trump talking about, ``I am going to put tariffs in and we are going to fix the whole economy.'' Nonsense. It is a disaster. It is killing our markets.

And, once again, ``Oh, I am going to go in there and take out Medicaid,'' et cetera, et cetera. It will be a disaster. I think we must avoid it.

We are better off because of Medicaid--better healthcare outcomes in this country. It is a different country, literally, than it was prior to the introduction of Medicaid, and we are better for it. It provides healthcare coverage, for example, for 17 million women of reproductive age so they can have the healthcare they need. And it helps families grow and prosper. And by making seniors and people with disabilities get the care they need, we are, I think, living up to the aspirations of this country, which is to ensure that those who need care get care.

You know, there have been a lot of men and women who served in the Armed Forces of the United States. I was proud to do it myself. And they weren't risking their lives so that a very wealthy individual could have five Mercedes rather than four. They were risking it so kids could have healthcare who needed it, so that their mother and father could have a place to be when they were sick and ill in their older years. And what we are doing? We are forgetting that sacrifice. We are saying: No, we are just here to pay off the rich people, the rich people who paid so much through the President's campaign to get him elected.

The one thing I want to emphasize, which is very important and often overlooked--going back to Rhode Island--74 percent of adults on Medicaid are working in my state. There is this insidious notion that this is just a free giveaway to people who don't work, who don't deserve it, et cetera. That is why we can get rid of it.

Seventy-four percent of the adults in Rhode Island on Medicaid are working, and they are working very hard. By the way, my guess is they are not getting a big benefit from these tax cuts because they are minimum wage or a little bit more.

So we are really doing something that is so unjust and, I believe, un-American in rewarding the wealthy--some of whom have worked hard to get it, some of whom just were lucky enough to be born to the right parents. And we are giving them a fortune, and we are taking away basic healthcare from working men and women.

We are in a very, very difficult situation. I don't think we can touch Medicaid, for the moral reasons I tried to suggest and for the economic reasons.

If those 74 percent of Medicaid adults in Rhode Island who are working can't get to work because they are ill, how do we get the jobs done? We don't.

The impact on the Nation in terms of these cuts is going to be horrendous, and this impact is going to be everyplace in the country. I have talked a lot about Rhode Island, but one of the ideas the Republicans are advancing to cut Medicaid is to eliminate the Medicaid expansion provided for under the Affordable Care Act.

Now, according to the Urban Institute and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, this cut would cost 41 States over $44 billion. States would have to increase their share of Medicaid spending by 25 percent. States like North Dakota, Indiana, Montana, and Nebraska would see their costs go up by more than 30 percent.

So I hope my colleagues from these States are ready, willing, and able to go out and tell their constituents: Your healthcare costs are going up 30 percent.

Now, obviously, I oppose this resolution that is being proposed. We have to do more, not less. And it is not just about the moral commitment I feel we have to people who need healthcare coverage; it is about the economics of caring for people early before it becomes more expensive, providing facilities for people who need those facilities rather than letting them languish at home.

With that, I yield the floor.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

First, thank you for continuing to highlight the harm that is being done by the Trump administration and that it is inflicting on working Americans: flouting the law, withholding Federal funds, illegally shuttering Federal Agencies, ruining longstanding alliances, increasing prices and taxes on American consumers. It goes on and on and on.

Last week, the Department of Health and Human Services announced it would fire 20,000 employees. Those cuts appear to be taking shape right now. Is the Senator aware that there are reports that thousands of HHS staff have been locked out of their offices this morning?

If the Senator would yield for another question.

President Trump and the Secretary of HHS, Secretary Kennedy, are, as I indicated and made you aware, firing a host of people today, but the critical staff functions will be undercut--for example, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which focuses on worker safety.

LIHEAP, as you know, provides essential support to literally keep people warm in the winter and cool in the summer in our Southern States. With LIHEAP undercut like that, there will be effects. People will become unhealthy. In fact, they probably could even pass away.

NIOSH, on the other hand, is an Agency that looks after 164 million people in this country so they are safe.

We all know--we all remember back--all of those stories about the Gilded Age, which sometimes, I think, the administration wants to bring back, where children labored in shops, where garment workers were killed in fires because there was no way to get out, as all the exits were sealed. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health prevents that.

Work-related injuries and illnesses cost our economy $250 billion annually. So that will double, triple, quadruple.

We are seeing all sorts of reports about the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the CDC. They do critical work, and they are under the gun.

We are seeing reports that the Director of the FDA Center for Tobacco Products has been fired. We can see that President Trump and Secretary Kennedy would rather stand up for Big Tobacco than for young kids who get hooked on it, and it ruins their health.

These are just a few of the cuts, and I know you are aware of them. I know you are focused on these. They are going to destroy years of progress, and, basically, it is being shouldered by working Americans. Nobody who lives in Mar-a-Lago needs LIHEAP heating. Nobody who dines at Mar-a-Lago needs Occupational Safety and Health deployed, but the waiters do, and the grounds people do.

So, Senator, what are your thoughts about it?

Mr. President, I rise to join my colleague Senator Whitehouse, the ranking member on the Environment and Public Works Committee and the foremost voice for sensible climate policies, someone who for years has warned us of the approaching dangers of climate change and today once again has demonstrated his great insights-- particularly with respect to the cost to homeowners--of climate change. He is raising the alarm about President Trump's environmental policy and the effect it will have on the health and well-being of Americans. I want to thank him for his leadership on this important issue.

Earlier this month, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced that his Agency would move to repeal 31 environmental and health protections. This Trump environmental plan will undo restrictions on air pollution from powerplants, cars, and trucks. It would allow harmful discharges into our water systems, relax restrictions on emissions of mercury and other known neurotoxins, ease limits on soot and haze pollution, and the list goes on and on and on.

These rollbacks appear to be a quid pro quo for President Trump's fossil fuel donors, whom he reportedly asked to donate a billion dollars to his campaign last year.

One of Trump's most concerning proposals is the repeal of the EPA's longstanding scientific finding that greenhouse gases are pollutants. After losing in the Supreme Court in 2006, the fossil fuel industry has been out to overturn this so-called endangerment finding for nearly two decades. Repealing it would degrade the EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, meaning it could no longer act to curb emissions from vehicle exhaust, factories, powerplants, and many, many more locations. Relaxing these standards will result in more pollutants in our air and in our water.

The fact is, these pollutants are not just numbers on a chart; they are the reason millions of Americans are suffering from asthma, heart disease, and other respiratory conditions. Several studies have shown that air pollution can negatively impact maternal health and lead to miscarriages and low birth weights. These health impacts will particularly harm low-income communities, where the effects are disproportionately severe.

Mr. Zeldin claims these actions will ``unleash American energy,'' but really they will just unleash more pollution on the American people. Mr. Zeldin claims that these actions will drive down costs for American families, but the evidence shows otherwise. Indeed, EPA previously found that for every $1 the country spends to reduce air pollution, it is estimated to yield $30 in economic benefits in return.

These actions will worsen climate change and contribute to more flooding and coastal erosion, which have cost homes and businesses in my home State of Rhode Island millions of dollars in just the past few years.

Mr. Zeldin claims that by rolling back these protections, he is simply giving power back to the States, but we know that pollution does not respect State lines.

We are all in this together to protect our air, water, and human health. The Trump administration is taking us backwards and hurting hard-working families in the process.

I firmly oppose the Trump EPA's misguided plan and will continue to join Senator Whitehouse and my other colleagues in pushing back against this administration's harmful agenda.

Once again, let me salute Senator Whitehouse for his leadership on this critical--indeed, this existential--issue.

I yield the floor to Senator Welch.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Rhode Island Fishermen's Fairness Act along with my colleague Senator Whitehouse. I am also pleased that my colleagues Representative Magaziner and Representative Amo will be introducing a companion measure in the House of Representatives.

Our legislation will give Rhode Island a voice and voting representation on the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, MAFMC, which manages some of the most important fish stocks for our State's commercial fishing industry--chief among them squid. The National Marine Fisheries Service reported that Rhode Island led Atlantic States in the harvest of squid in 2023--the most recent year for which data is available. Fishermen landed more than 30.7 million pounds of squid in Rhode Island, helping make Point Judith one of the most productive and valuable commercial fishing ports in the United States. For years now, Rhode Island's landings of stocks managed by the MAFMC have outpaced the landings of those managed by the New England Fishery Management Council, where Rhode Island is represented. Moreover, Rhode Island has a larger stake in the mid-Atlantic fishery than many of the States that currently hold seats on the MAFMC.

Because so much is at stake for our State in every decision the MAFMC makes, our bill would expand the MAFMC by two seats in order to ensure that Rhode Island will have the minimum number of seats guaranteed to other States on the council. It will allow Rhode Island to continue to have representation on the New England Fishery Management Council, where it still has significant interests.

This proposal is not unprecedented. In fact, it is modeled on a provision of the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act that added North Carolina to the MAFMC in 1996 while allowing it to retain its membership on the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. Moreover, it will join States like Florida and Washington which all have representation on more than one fisheries management council.

Mr. President, this is a commonsense proposal and one that my colleagues

and I will be working to advance either on its own or as part of the reauthorization the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Rhode Island Fishermen's Fairness Act along with my colleague Senator Whitehouse. I am also pleased that my colleagues Representative Magaziner and Representative Amo will be introducing a companion measure in the House of Representatives.

Our legislation will give Rhode Island a voice and voting representation on the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, MAFMC, which manages some of the most important fish stocks for our State's commercial fishing industry--chief among them squid. The National Marine Fisheries Service reported that Rhode Island led Atlantic States in the harvest of squid in 2023--the most recent year for which data is available. Fishermen landed more than 30.7 million pounds of squid in Rhode Island, helping make Point Judith one of the most productive and valuable commercial fishing ports in the United States. For years now, Rhode Island's landings of stocks managed by the MAFMC have outpaced the landings of those managed by the New England Fishery Management Council, where Rhode Island is represented. Moreover, Rhode Island has a larger stake in the mid-Atlantic fishery than many of the States that currently hold seats on the MAFMC.

Because so much is at stake for our State in every decision the MAFMC makes, our bill would expand the MAFMC by two seats in order to ensure that Rhode Island will have the minimum number of seats guaranteed to other States on the council. It will allow Rhode Island to continue to have representation on the New England Fishery Management Council, where it still has significant interests.

This proposal is not unprecedented. In fact, it is modeled on a provision of the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act that added North Carolina to the MAFMC in 1996 while allowing it to retain its membership on the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. Moreover, it will join States like Florida and Washington which all have representation on more than one fisheries management council.

Mr. President, this is a commonsense proposal and one that my colleagues

and I will be working to advance either on its own or as part of the reauthorization the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.