Floor Statements

Madam President, Republican members and Democratic members of staff negotiated through the night in good faith. The Senate is moving toward the plan I laid out yesterday to spare the American people a manufactured crisis. All year, the Democratic government has made unprecedented and repeated use of reconciliation to pass radical policies on party-line votes.

So, back in July, Republicans informed our colleagues they would need to pursue any long-term increase in the debt ceiling through the same process. The President, the Speaker, and the Democratic leader had 3 months' notice to do their jobs, but for 2\1/2\ months the Democratic leaders did nothing and then complained that they were actually short on time.

The majority didn't have a plan to prevent default, so we stepped forward. The pathway our Democratic colleagues have accepted will spare the

American people any near-term crisis while definitively resolving the majority's excuse that they lacked time to address the debt limit through the 304 reconciliation process. Now there will be no question; they will have plenty of time.

Or, if our colleagues would instead prefer a more traditional bipartisan discussion around basic governance, they can stop trying to ram through yet another reckless taxing-and-spending spree that would hurt families and help China. That would be the path toward that kind of discussion.

Madam President, now on a related matter, Washington Democrats are behind closed doors trying to hammer out a multitrillion- dollar reckless taxing-and-spending spree, but we already know a lot about this bill.

First and foremost, we know their reckless legislation would hurt American families and actually help China. It is that simple: inflicting pain on American workers and families while putting us at a global disadvantage.

Just look at the radical climate policies Democrats have packed into the spree to satisfy their far-left base. The apples haven't fallen far from the awful Green New Deal. In the name of clean energy performance, Democrats want to force electric utilities to model their grids off of the high-cost, blackout-prone system that liberals have set up in the State of California; move all 50 States' electric grids toward California's.

As one group of major power providers observed, not only would this be logistically unworkable, it would also threaten to send consumers' electricity costs totally out of control. And in the words of a member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission who testified before our colleagues just last week, the scheme would be ``H-bomb''--``H-bomb''-- for the electricity markets.

At the same time, Democrats are also pushing a brand-new natural gas tax they call a methane fee. It is a natural gas tax is what it is. Just as our friends in Europe are facing soaring natural gas costs and the threat of winter shortages, just as it seems Russia may be willingly supplying less and less gas to the free world, Democrats want our Nation to declare war on natural gas, kill tens of thousands of jobs, drain billions from the economy, and increase costs for our families--at a moment when U.S. natural gas futures just hit a 12-year high.

There is no limit to the harm Democrats will inflict on America to force the heartland to accept elite liberal fashions. Their legislation includes special giveaways for electric cars that are disproportionately the preferred option--you guessed it--of wealthy people, jacking up America's gas bills and utility prices in order to turn 49 other States into California. It is a bad idea at an awful time and just one more way their reckless taxing-and-spending spree would hurt families and help China.

Madam President, now, on a related matter, while Americans contend with Democrats' self-created border crisis and inflation crisis, our foreign policy is in crisis as well.

The Biden administration's disastrous retreat from Afghanistan may be over, but the danger to the American citizens and Afghan partners it left behind certainly is not over. Around the world, adversaries and allies alike are drawing new conclusions from President Biden's Afghanistan disaster about America's will to defend our allies and our interests.

Pyongyang is putting on another master class in how despots disdain the so-called rules-based international order. Literally, while a North Korean official was haranguing the U.N. in a speech about the ``consequences it will bring in the future in case it tries to encroach upon [its] sovereignty,'' the Kim regime punctuated the speech with yet another provocative round of U.N. sanctions-violating ballistic missile tests.

Iranian disregard for international norms and the Biden administration's efforts to enforce them continues apace. Tehran is ramping up its nuclear activities, demanding bribes to even return to the negotiating table, as well as stepping up its use of terrorist proxies to threaten its adversaries all across the region.

In light of our retreat from Afghanistan, we should not be surprised if Iranian-backed groups redouble their efforts to inflict U.S. casualties and otherwise pressure the Biden administration to turn tail and run from Syria and Iraq.

When it comes to near-peer competitors like Russia, the Biden campaign's tough talk has been replaced by the Biden administration's desperate rhetoric of diplomacy. Putin is unfazed and undeterred.

Repression at home, manipulation of energy markets abroad, military modernization, cyber mischief--this doesn't exactly scream ready for good-faith engagement.

Most of all, the administration's hollow rhetoric has done nothing to deter the growing threat from communist China. Just this month, Beijing has sent a record number of military aircraft on provocative missions into Taiwan's airspace. As senior Pentagon officials have warned, ``we are witnessing a strategic breakout'' by China, Democrats still refuse to let us adequately fund our own military and defense.

The Biden administration's budget falls woefully short of our requirements for greater competition with China and with Russia--all the more so given the inevitable growing terror threat. And here in Congress, Democrats are doubling down on this reckless misstep. Democrats want to spend trillions of dollars on a socialist wish list at home while leaving the servicemembers who keep us safe overseas in the lurch.

Now, I don't expect Chairman Sanders or certain radicals in the House to be keen on using reconciliation to fund our military--hardly. But Senate Democrats have left Congress's most fundamental tool for influencing defense policy--the historically bipartisan NDAA--in procedural limbo literally for months.

The Democratic leader's latest public statement on his caucus's spending priorities did not even mention the defense authorization bill. Apparently, he is content to let it languish behind their leftwing wish list.

So, Madam President, America is staring down serious and historic threats. And somehow, with unified control of government, the only actions Democrats have managed to take on foreign policy have made them worse.

The American people deserve a lot better than this. Our servicemembers deserve better. Our allies deserve better. But Washington Democrats are proving they cannot deliver.

Madam President, now on one final matter, it is a small group of people who become familiar faces right here on the floor of the U.S. Senate. There are the Senators themselves, the nonpartisan professionals on the dais, the Capitol Police, and doorkeepers.

And then, Madam President, you have the men and women of each party's cloakroom. These small and tight-knit teams keep information flowing from the Senate floor to Members' offices and vice versa. They track legislation and amendments. They negotiate procedure across the aisle. And in a thousand other duties, they all add up to tense days, late nights, and a truly front-row seat to Congress.

For the last decade, one of those special few has been a daughter of Kentucky and an alumna of my own office: Megan Mercer.

Megan's Senate story started about 15 years ago, when she spent a summer as a page. Before long, this impressive young woman took an internship in my personal office, serving Kentucky; then an entry-level position in my leadership office here in the Capitol; and then Megan came here to the floor, to the Republican cloakroom.

A decade ago now, she took a seat behind their big desk. She answered phones. She answered questions. She learned the ropes. And over 10 years, she worked her way up to a key role of senior floor assistant.

Pick any important vote, and Megan has been right here in the well, at this table, tallying the count for our side. She has cleared legislation and consent

requests. She has negotiated with Democrat counterparts on a daily basis.

Through it all, Megan's colleagues have come to admire her patience, level-headedness, and the institutional knowledge she has built up; and so have we Senators.

Fortunately, the work has not been thankless. I remember Megan was especially thrilled when Senator Lamar Alexander made sure that Megan's help with the Music Modernization Act yielded a signed ``thank you'' note from Dolly Parton--one of her all-time favorites.

So as we, unfortunately, prepare for Megan's upcoming departure from the Senate, I want to thank her for her fine public service. Megan has made her native Kentucky proud; she has made her parents Dr. Albert and Robin Mercer very proud; and she has made me proud as well.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, for 2\1/2\ months, the Republicans have provided a clear and consistent roadmap for Democratic government to raise the debt ceiling. Democrats have had

2\1/2\ months' notice to use the fast-track, party-line reconciliation process, which they have already used happily this year and already intend to use once again. But the Democrats who run Washington have done nothing. They have squandered week after week after week. The Senate has been voting on midlevel nominations. And 2\1/2\ months later, our colleagues complain that time is running out to do their job. They are frantically asking our side for shortcuts.

Now, in the past 2 days, I have had the surreal experience of watching both the President of the United States and the Senate majority leader be asked about the future of the U.S. economy. Their respective responses were ``That's up to Mitch McConnell'' or ``Ask Mitch McConnell.'' Well, what about the third Democratic leader, the Speaker of the House? Well, she has headed to Europe--headed off to Europe. I can only presume she hopes the full faith and credit of the United States will get sorted out without her.

That is the level of leadership and accountability the country is getting from the Washington Democrats who run the country. These are the leadership skills of people who spent 2\1/2\ months doing nothing and then complain they are short on time. That is the attitude that has gotten Democrats a self-created inflation crisis, border crisis, Afghanistan crisis, and free-falling favorability with the American people.

Now, it is not clear whether the Democratic leaders have wasted 2\1/ 2\ months because they simply cannot govern or whether they are intentionally playing Russian roulette with the economy to try to bully--bully--their own Members into going back on their word and wrecking the Senate. Either way, it is exactly the kind of recklessness that has this unified Democratic government's public approval in total free fall--free fall.

Even now, while the Democratic leader complains that he is short on time, he continues to waste time with partisan stunts that are dead on arrival. He has scheduled yet another vote this afternoon which he knows will fail. The majority has known for 3 months that show votes like this would go nowhere.

This year, Democrats requested and won new powers--new powers--to repeatedly reuse the reconciliation process. In the past few days, Democrats in both the House and Senate have publicly admitted their party could handle--could handle--the debt limit that way. Our colleagues have plenty of time to get it done before the earliest projected deadline. There would be potential for time agreements to wrap it up well before any danger. But the Democratic leaders haven't wanted solutions; they have wanted to turn their failure into everybody else's crisis. Playing risky games with our economy; using manufactured drama to bully their own Members; indulging petty politics instead of governing--their entire failed approach to governing in a nutshell, on full display for the country to see.

Mr. President, while the American people are battling inflation at its worst since 2008, Washington Democrats are behind closed doors, writing another reckless taxing-and-spending spree that would have the government borrow trillions upon trillions more. While our economy still struggles to fully recover from last year's COVID lockdowns, President Biden wants to slap Americans with the biggest tax hike in half a century.

You know, it is really remarkable to watch senior, established leaders in the Democratic Party take their marching orders from the radical left. We are hearing claims and arguments that are absurd on their face as top Democrats try to wrestle with the positions they have literally been forced into.

Yesterday, for example, President Biden's Twitter account made the following two claims in the space of two sentences. First, the ``Build Back Better Agenda costs zero dollars.'' And then in the next sentence: ``We're going to pay for it by ensuring those at the top and big corporations pay their fair share.''

How amazing, Mr. President. It's the first time in human history something can be totally free, yet, nevertheless, needs to be paid for. The Democrats' socialist logic has become so advanced, they have transcended mathematics itself.

Of course, the truth is that the Democrats' massive tax hikes would not only hit the wealthy. It never works that way. There is no way to set up the kind of massive, never-ending new entitlements the Democrats want without coming hard--hard--after the middle class.

Oh, and, sure enough, nonpartisan experts have already confirmed the Democrats' reckless taxing-and-spending spree would hit the middle class and shatter President Biden's promise of no new taxes for anybody earning less than $400,000 a year.

But as my colleague, the junior Senator from South Carolina, has put it, as much as the reckless cost of their wish list would hurt Americans, the reckless content of the legislation may be even worse. Just look at what Democrats want to do to American families' healthcare and prescription medicines.

Last month, a new report from the Medicare trustees confirmed that the trust fund for Medicare Part A is on track to reach insolvency in just 5 years--5 years from now. More than 54 million American seniors rely on Medicare, and the promises we have already made are getting more and more expensive to keep.

Last year, for example, for the first time ever, the amount the Federal Government spent on Medicare alone exceeded everything that we spent on our national defense.

With Medicare 5 years from real fiscal problems, the last thing we need right now are politicians stretching the program even thinner, but that is exactly what Democrats are doing behind closed doors at this very moment.

Their reckless taxing-and-spending spree would heap hundreds of billions of dollars in new expenses and obligations onto the already troubled Medicare trust funds; hundreds of billions of dollars in new obligations for untested new programs, for big new pools of people, all using the care seniors count on as the Democrats' piggyback, with the program already on unsure footing.

Even some of our colleagues on the Democratic side are calling this craziness what it is. As one of our colleagues said recently, we have to ``stabiliz[e] what we have, before we start going down this expensive [road]'' or else it would be ``fiscal insanity.''

But that isn't the only damage the Democrats' bill would inflict on our health system. At the same time, they want to impose socialist price controls on the prescription medicines that Americans need. This is another example of magical thinking: If we just pass a law saying something ought to be cheaper, it will be cheaper.

But here in the real world, arbitrary price-setting on prescription drugs would cut down the private sector's incentive to keep innovating. Expert research shows Americans and the whole world would be left with fewer new drugs, fewer new treatments, and fewer new cures.

Mr. President, this isn't an abstract thing. This is a human cost. In the world Democrats want to create, some Americans would get sick and some would die who would have lived if new treatments had come into existence instead of being squashed--squashed--by bad policy.

One University of Chicago academic and past leader of the Council of Economic Advisers has calculated that over one decade, House Democrats' prescription price controls could rob our Nation of 15 to 20 times as many collective years of life as the entire COVID pandemic has stolen so far.

Let me say that again. This expert believes that the Democratic war on

prescription drug innovation could result in a total loss of American life that is 15 to 20 times that which COVID has caused thus far.

In a serious world, any discussion of this terrible policy would stop right there. But Democrats need to slash our investment in treatments and cures because they need to cannibalize that money for other parts of their partisan wish list.

It is the same reason Democrats are clinging to their absurd, new IRS spying provision that would let Big Brother snoop on citizens' transactions in excess of $600--another perfectly awful idea, but they need the money.

These desperate cash grabs capture the essence of this partisan bill the Democrats are drafting behind closed doors--jeopardizing seniors' Medicare funding, killing huge numbers of Americans indirectly by attacking new treatments and new cures.

And for what?

For a liberal hodgepodge of new entitlement programs when we can't even shore up the ones we already have. It is just a few more of the hundred ways this reckless taxing-and-spending spree would hurt the families of America.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I want to begin today with a quotation:

Because this massive accumulation of debt was predicted,

because it was foreseeable, because it was unnecessary,

because it was the result of willful and reckless disregard

for the warnings that were given and for the fundamentals of

economic management, I am voting against the debt limit

increase.

Now, Madam President, that was then-Senator Joe Biden in March of 2006, right before every single Democratic Senator voted against raising the debt limit and made a unified Republican government do it alone.

Here is another quote:

Today's fiscal mess . . . is the inevitable outcome of

policies that consistently ignored evidence and experience.

My symbolic vote against raising the debt limit would have

been a protest of the policies that have brought us to this

point, and a demand that we change course.

Well, that same speaker, then-Senator Biden, 2 years earlier in 2004.

As Senate Republicans have made clear since last July and as I reminded the President in a letter just this morning, his sentiments then are our sentiments now. His sentiments then are our sentiments now.

For the last few weeks, Washington Democrats tried to forget that they lined up to oppose debt limit increases during unified Republican government. They pretended these votes are always bipartisan. Well, that was simply not true.

So now our colleagues have moved on to yet another new argument that is equally flimsy. Now they claim they would be perfectly happy to handle this responsibility with 51 votes done one way, but they would rather risk the Nation's credit than doing it with 51 votes a slightly different way--two different ways to achieve 51 votes. I am not kidding. This is the position they are taking. The President said it today.

The reconciliation procedure would be slightly more inconvenient, they said--a few more days, a few more votes they would rather duck. The Democratic leaders running America are saying with a straight face that the entire U.S. economy should live or die based on the procedural convenience--convenience--of Washington Democrats.

Now, they have got no problem using the party-line process over and over and over to spend trillions and transform the country, but now, for this purpose only, they suddenly and mysteriously find it unappealing.

Democrats could not be more capable of handling this on their own. Just months ago, the Democratic leader won new powers to reuse reconciliation over and over. They don't even need our consent to set a vote at 51 instead of 60. They need even less help raising the debt limit than majorities needed in the past. So trust me, Madam President--if Republicans were sitting on a hidden veto power to stop reconciliation bills, you would have heard about it way back in the springtime. The majority doesn't need our votes. They just want a bipartisan shortcut around procedural hurdles that they can actually clear on their own, and they want that shortcut so they can pivot right back to partisan spending as fast as possible. They want a bipartisan shortcut to get right back to more partisan hardball. And Republicans have spent 2\1/2\ months--this is no surprise; 2\1/2\ months ago-- explaining that this is the way they needed to go forward on the debt ceiling.

This unified Democratic government is having trouble governing. They couldn't even pass the bipartisan infrastructure bill which the President negotiated and the Speaker of the House promised would pass last week.

The majority needs to stop sleepwalking toward yet another preventable crisis. Democrats need to tackle the debt limit. We gave them a roadmap and 3 months' notice. I suggest that our colleagues get moving.

Madam President, now on an obviously related matter, speaking of Democrats' reckless taxing and spending, this unified government is behind closed doors brainstorming ways to make inflation even more painful for American families. Their next reckless taxing- and-spending spree is packed with radical, leftwing policies and the biggest tax hike on the American people in half a century.

So far, the bill is more than 2,400 pages long, but it can be summarized in just four words: hurts families and helps China. Hurts families and helps China.

Wasting trillions and trillions of dollars on socialism would be a bad idea any day, but it is a uniquely bad idea at a time when American families are already being hammered by inflation and soaring costs.

The government's own data continue to indicate that the historic and painful inflation that began to take hold of our economy this spring isn't going anywhere anytime soon. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve acknowledged last week that rising prices have become an increasingly broad and structural problem. Last week, the Commerce Department reported that inflation has continued to rise faster than at any time since 1991. The Democrats' inflation is so bad that even though the average American worker has gotten a multiple-percentage-point pay raise over the last year, their actual purchasing power has actually been cut. Their paychecks have gone up, but their buying power has gone down.

Wholesale inflation just marked the steepest 12-month jump on record. Even dollar stores are having to raise their prices. Just ask any American family about the last few trips to the supermarket, the gas station, or the toy store. Heaven forbid if they have had to participate in the housing market or the auto market anytime lately.

And the Democrats are uniting around yet another multitrillion-dollar taxing-and-spending spree? I guess our colleagues think they can inflate their way out of inflation. That is going to be an extraordinarily painful experiment for the middle-class families of our country.

Madam President, today the Senate will consider and pass a government funding bill and do our part to avoid a shutdown.

The continuing resolution contains a number of key items that Republicans called for. That includes supplemental funds to help resettle vetted Afghan refugees and hurricane recovery aid for Louisiana.

It is seriously disappointing that the Democratic side would not let us include funding for Israel's Iron Dome in the base text. It honestly baffles me that defensive aid to our ally Israel has become a thorny subject for the political left.

But, overall, this is encouraging progress. The Democratic majority has begun to realize that the way forward on basic governing duties matches the roadmap that Republicans have been laying out for months. On government funding, what Republicans laid out all along was a clean continuing resolution without the poison pill of a debt limit increase. That is exactly what we will pass today. Earlier this week, the Democratic leader tried to muscle through something different through a partisan jam, but it failed. Now the government will be funded as we laid out. That is step 1.

Next will come step 2: the debt ceiling. And we have clearly laid out the way forward there as well. As I have explained since last July-- last July--Democrats need to begin the fast-track process for handling this issue through reconciliation. Clumsy attempts at partisan jams by the majority will not change that reality. It didn't work on government funding, and it won't work on the debt limit. They will just be wasting valuable time.

I think this reality is hopefully starting to dawn on our colleagues. Multiple leading House Democrats acknowledged just this week that their unified Democratic government is fully capable--fully capable--of fast- tracking a debt limit increase on their own. Nonpartisan experts have confirmed that they have plenty of time to get this done before late October.

At the same time that the Senate Democratic leader says, incorrectly, that he doesn't have enough time, he has spent weeks of the Senate's time processing midlevel nominations. Today, the majority is spending multiple hours to confirm a Bureau of

Land Management nominee who literally collaborated with ecoterrorists, fiddling away day after day after day while they pretend they lack the time to do their most basic job.

Senate Republicans have been totally transparent. We have given Democrats a step-by-step guide to governing in this environment and months of advance notice to get it done. The conclusion to draw from this week is very clear: Clumsy efforts at partisan jams do not work. What works is when the majority accepts the reality of the situation.

We are able to fund the government today because the majority accepted reality. The same thing will need to happen on the debt limit next week.

Tribute to Sue Tharp

Now, Madam President, on an entirely different matter, few public servants know Western Kentucky and its people as well as my good friend Sue Tharp. Sue has served as my team's Paducah-based field assistant since 1985. She is retiring this month after nearly four decades of uninterrupted service to the Commonwealth.

Sue holds the record for being the longest continually serving employee from my entire career in public service. She has been with me since day one of my Senate service.

So, today, I would like to honor this one-of-a-kind Kentuckian whose steady leadership in Western Kentucky has been integral to my office's mission to serve the Bluegrass and the people who call it home.

Now, when you ask Sue's colleagues to describe their coworker, you hear one word again and again and again: dedicated. In 36 years, Sue has scarcely missed a day in the office. She tackles each constituent problem with her quick wit and her smile. Her knowledge of Western Kentucky is encyclopedic. And Sue has played a key part in training almost every other field staffer on our team, sharing hard-won wisdom with the next generation of public servants.

So when I think of Sue's service to Kentucky, two images come to mind. The first is Sue winning over even the most impassioned callers to my office, whether the call started out friendly or not. Sue will listen carefully, record their concerns, and do all she can to help. But then she also invariably will end up discussing other favorite topics, such as quilting. Sue is an avid volunteer at the National Quilt Museum in Paducah. So when the conversation wraps up, Sue will be smiling, and you know the person who just hung up on the other end is smiling too.

The second image comes from an event called Fancy Farm, which is an annual picnic in Graves County. It is the crown jewel of Western Kentucky's heritage. Sue is one of the event's most enthusiastic attendees. She often travels down early to peruse the area's many antique stores. She loves attending the church barbecue, taking in the speeches, and cheering with the crowd. Any politician who steps up to that podium is guaranteed to notice Sue amidst the throng.

Sue's day job has been public service for more than three decades, but even that hasn't soaked up all of her love and service for her community. She is also an enthusiastic volunteer, a frequent participant in Paducah's ambassador program, and one of the city's all- around biggest boosters.

If you sample a Paducah boat tour or roll into town for a ribbon- cutting, it might well be Sue Tharp welcoming you to town, decked out in the ambassador's characteristic red jacket. Visit the Quilt Museum, and it will be Sue handing you a brochure. Vacation in one of Western Kentucky's beautiful parks, and Sue Tharp will be waving to you from the door of her RV.

Sue's dedication to Western Kentucky and its people is boundless. For all these years, she understood that while my staff report to me, all of us report to the people of Kentucky. In fact, at one point I believe Sue even lived directly across the street from our Paducah office.

So while Sue is departing our team, I am positive she isn't finished serving Kentucky. This is just the next chapter. More time to volunteer, more time to be generous to her friends and her neighbors, and more time with her husband Dan and son Benjamin.

So, Sue, I couldn't be more grateful. Thank you for your decades of hard work and for your lasting impact on the Commonwealth.

Tribute to Jane Lee

Madam President, on one final matter, the pressing matters I discussed at the beginning of my remarks suggest I could not find a more appropriate time to honor the sterling staff expert who has advised me on budget issues and appropriations for over 5 years. But, in another sense, it pains me to say there couldn't be a worse time because the occasion for this tribute is that Jane Lee is soon taking leave of the Senate and taking the next step in her career.

Jane arrived in my office with a big job to do but the perfect skill set to do it. She studied at a couple of schools called Stanford and Columbia. She had worked in the private sector, risen through the ranks at OMB during the Bush 43 administration, worked for a House Budget chairman named Paul Ryan, and held leading rolls with Senate Appropriations and Republican Whip John Cornyn.

Jane's resume was impeccable, her references unimpeachable. She was already a force of nature on Capitol Hill, so my expectations, as you can imagine, were high from the start. But for about 5\1/2\ years, day in and day out, through a never-ending catalog of serious challenges, Jane kept raising the bar higher and higher.

Jane's colleagues throughout the Senate admire her determination and her dogged focus. She is methodical and meticulous. She grasps both the big political picture and the finest policy details much more capably than most people could hope to grasp either.

When you handle budget talks and funding negotiations for a leadership office, you are kind of a hybrid player-coach to offices and committees all across the Senate. Jane is a skilled leader. She can get a diverse team driving toward a goal with warmth and good humor but also tenacity and total professionalism.

For countless major bipartisan and bicameral compromise bills over the past 5 years, Jane has been one of very last staff experts on either side holding the pen. She is a principled fighter, but once negotiations concluded, everyone on both sides trusted Jane to be an honorable and honest broker. That speaks volumes.

Earlier this week, one of Jane's colleagues remarked simply, ``I don't think I've ever worked with someone like Jane.'' This turns out to be the universal consensus of everyone. Her knowledge and her instincts spill outside her portfolio and make everyone look better. The high standards to which she holds herself are infectious.

She marshals the knowledge and the relationships that come with many years of government service but also inexhaustible earnestness, energy, and enthusiasm for the fray.

So Jane is exactly the kind of person you would hope to find in the government, just the kind of worker a Senate office is lucky to find, and just the sort of public servant the country deserves.

I don't think anyone would be terribly surprised if, one day, the Senate finds itself refamiliarizing ourselves with Jane's qualifications in a formal capacity.

I have to note that Jane would hasten to redirect all this praise toward her parents Michael and Jean, as well as her grandmother Hee Soon. She is a proud daughter of first-generation Americans and small business entrepreneurs whose love of country and commitment to hard work have shaped their daughter's life at every step.

At clutch moments, these qualities have benefited not just me, not just our conference, but our entire country. Today, one such time especially stands out in my memory.

It was a year and a half ago when COVID thrust our country into a health crisis and an economic crisis at the very same time. During the bipartisan scramble that built a historic CARES Act, Jane, our Swiss Army knife, wound up as my liaison to the Small Business Committee. She poured herself into helping Senators set up, preserve, and protect the landmark Paycheck Protection Program that saved a huge, huge number of jobs and countless small businesses exactly like the ones she grew up watching her parents manage.

But while Jane's commitment to her work has been peerless, her commitment to her family is greater still. Her beloved husband Tom and her son Mitchell and her parents and grandmother need to see more of her than

her bottomless Senate portfolio has often permitted. So while the whole institution will sorely miss her, we also join her in celebrating the new adventures to come.

To our incredibly competent budget expert, our cherished colleague, and one of the Senate's most talented jazz and rock-and-roll singers, we say not just ``farewell'' and ``good luck'' but ``bravo'' on a simply outstanding performance.

Recognition of the Majority Leader

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

Mr. President, the American people continue to hear about a steady stream of really bad ideas that Washington Democrats are packing into their next reckless taxing-and-spending spree.

There is one clear thread that sort of ties it all together--pain for American families and profit for our adversaries, hurting families and helping China. It is a perfect policy storm that would stick working Americans with higher prices, higher taxes, fewer jobs, and less freedom, while also putting America at a global disadvantage.

That is true about the radical environmental policies, as I explained yesterday. It is true about the Big Government healthcare provisions that would leave us with fewer new drugs and fewer cures. It was true about the Democrats' efforts to stuff a big amnesty for illegal immigrants into the bill. And it is especially true about the tidal wave of huge tax hikes and IRS snooping that Democrats are putting together behind closed doors: taxes on small businesses, taxes on family farms, double taxes on the ones who pass the reins to the next generation, new taxes that would make America one of the least hospitable places in the world to invest, grow a business, or create jobs.

Nonpartisan analysis has confirmed there would be new taxes for big chunks--big chunks--of the 98 percent of Americans who make less than $400,000 a year, shattering President Biden's pledge to leave their wallets alone.

And then there is the bizarre, unpopular new plan to give the IRS big new power to snoop into all of America's personal financial transactions in excess of a few hundred dollars.

Currently, the government has special authorities to demand information on citizens' transactions in excess of $10,000. In theory, this is a targeted tool for sniffing out things like money laundering, terrorism, or massive tax fraud.

Now, the Democrats want to create a new reporting requirement, not for $10,000 transactions but for anything over a few hundred bucks. If American families are sending or receiving $600 from their checking accounts, Democrats want the IRS to snoop through it--a massive new dragnet that would sweep up all kinds of ordinary transactions that normal, law-abiding Americans make all the time. In effect, Democrats want to let the IRS systematically snoop through normal families' checking accounts as though they were all potential financial criminals until proven otherwise.

And then there was the latest fascinating statement from the authors of this awful plan. President Biden recently tried to suggest that, because they want to pair their reckless spending with their biggest tax hike in half a century, that somehow makes the entire package free. The President says it is free? Democrats want to jack up Americans' tax rates, drain money from people's pockets, spend it on socialism, and then say the whole thing nets out to zero dollars?

This might be the best encapsulation of Washington-Democrat thinking I have ever heard. They want to print and borrow trillions of dollars and then set it on fire. But as long as they send your taxes skyrocketing at the same time, it is all a wash. Heads, they win. Tails, you lose. Heads, Democrats waste your money. Tails, they hike your taxes.

This silly magical thinking rightly earned our President multiple-- multiple--Pinocchios from fact-checkers. And Democrats' reckless taxing-and-spending spree will earn it zero votes from Senate Republicans.

Mr. President, now on a completely different matter, yesterday, under oath, General McKenzie and General Milley both confirmed they also agreed with the commander on the ground. They agreed we should keep 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. These top generals gave President Biden exactly the advice the President told the American people he had not received.

To be very clear, the Commander in Chief gets to make the final decision, no matter what the advisers suggest. But he needs to own his decision.

The President publicly misstating what advice he got from his top generals is corrosive to the civil-military dynamic that keeps America safe.

The military did their job. They gave their best military advice. It was rejected. So they saluted and executed the order of the Commander in Chief. That is the way it is supposed to work. But having rejected their advice, the President doesn't get to claim he never received it, nor does he get to claim, as he has since tried to pretend, that the only alternative to his botched retreat was sending 10,000 soldiers back to Afghanistan.

That is a false choice. We have heard directly from the two senior military officers in the chain of command, as well as the President's principal military adviser, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

Everyone with an ounce of common sense knows President Biden's botched retreat was not the extraordinary success the President claimed. As General Milley acknowledged, it is more accurate to describe the withdrawal as a strategic failure.

We have now heard confirmation from our top military officers that the terrorist threat in Afghanistan is already growing. And relying on over-the-horizon counterterrorism leaves us with much less ability to do anything at all about it.

What a debacle. We face a greater terrorist threat from Afghanistan than we did before we withdrew, we have less intelligence about that growing threat, and we have fewer tools with which to combat it. This administration gave our enemies in Afghanistan everything they wanted and got less than nothing in return.

So, Mr. President, I know some of my colleagues want to unilaterally declare an end to the War on Terrorism. Ah, if only it were that easy. But the terrorists aren't through with us.

I hope my Democratic colleagues will think twice before they compound the failures in Afghanistan by trying to narrow or repeal the 2001 authorization for the use of military force. I, for one, will strenuously oppose any further efforts by the Democratic administration or this Democratic Congress to take away any more tools or authorities that our military servicemembers and intelligence professionals need to keep our country safe from our enemies.

At some point we will have a different administration that will better understand how to protect America for the long term. At this rate, they will need all the tools they can possibly get.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, yesterday, Senate Democrats blocked a vote on a clean government funding piece of legislation. Senator Shelby and I put forward legislation that could pass the Senate easily and keep the government open. We were ready to avoid a shutdown, get urgent relief to Louisiana, help vetted Afghans who helped America, and continue supporting Israel's Iron Dome, which saves innocent lives.

Senate Republicans were ready, and House Democratic leaders say they will act on whatever CR we send them. But Democrats blocked the Senate from even considering our legislation. Instead, the Democratic leader held a vote that he knew would fail on a bill he knew was a nonstarter--game-playing instead of governing.

So look, Mr. President, for more than 2 months--2 months--Republicans have explained that the unified Democratic Party government will not get bipartisan support for a debt limit hike while they write a partisan taxing-and-spending spree behind closed doors. It is as simple as that.

Bipartisanship isn't a light switch that Democrats can switch on when they need to borrow money and flip off when they want to spend money. If Democrats want to use fast-track, party-line procedures to ram through trillions more in inflationary socialism, they will have to use the same tools to handle the debt limit. They have known this for more than 2 months. I made it perfectly clear 2 months ago.

The debt suspension that expired in August covered all the debt that had been actually accumulated by that date. Let me say that again. The debt suspension that expired in August covered all the debt that had been accumulated by that date. This is an argument not about the past but about the future, a future that Democrats have willfully decided they want to own on a party-line basis.

There is no constant tradition that says one-party governments get bipartisan help with the debt limit. That has been said over and over by the press, by the Democrats. Let me make it clear. There is no constant tradition that says one-party governments get bipartisan help with the debt limit.

Just between 2003 and 2010, there were five--five--occasions when the party in power had to get a debt limit hike through the Senate by themselves--five times. Interestingly enough, then-Senators Biden and Schumer voted no on raising the debt limit under President Bush 43 and made the united Republican government do it by themselves.

So, look, it is time for our Democratic colleagues to stop dragging their heels and get moving. They have had more than 2 months to accept it. Secretary Yellen just announced a new estimate that action on the debt limit may be necessary as early as October 18. Democrats will need to handle the debt limit before then.

But Democrats in Congress don't seem to be acting with any urgency. The Senate spends day after day on midlevel nominations, and our colleagues spend all their time in backroom talks over partisan plans while their basic duties sit here in limbo. So far, Democrats' partisan ambitions have taken precedence over basic governance. That needs to change. According to their own Treasury Secretary, they have a few weeks to finally get moving.