Floor Statements

Mr. President, for the past 2 years, we have made historic, steady progress to strengthen the American economy. Under President Biden's leadership, we have successfully navigated one challenge after another, from the COVID pandemic to Putin's invasion of Ukraine, to supply chain snarls and persistent inflation.

While America's economy has remained resilient in the face of these challenges, it is not invincible. We received a reminder of that just a few days ago when financial regulators took swift action to prevent a catastrophe.

Over the weekend, Federal regulators seized a major bank that was teetering on the brink of collapse, First Republic, and sold it to JPMorgan Chase. These actions not only protected First Republic's depositors, they could have saved our economy from potential recession. Why do I say that? Well, First Republic was the third major bank to fail in 2 months. In fact, it was the second largest bank failure since 2008. So think about what could have happened had regulators failed to contain the damage from First Republic's collapse. Today, we would be reading headlines about panicking investors, panicking depositors, and turmoil throughout the financial system. Thankfully, we avoided that outcome. It is because the Government had the good sense to step in and maintain confidence in the banking system.

Now, Federal regulators stepped in to protect our economy when the crisis at hand was a bank with $229 billion in assets, but that $229 billion bank asset pales in comparison to a much larger undertaking we are facing in Washington today--the future of America's $23 trillion economy.

Right now, in the U.S. House of Representatives, Speaker McCarthy is threatening our economy with the first-ever Federal debt default, the first time ever in our history. Let's put Speaker McCarthy's dangerous gamble in context.

Just days ago, some of the smartest financial minds in the world were convinced that a $229 billion bank could be the difference between financial stability and financial calamity. Well, that $229 billion is a tiny fraction of the $23 trillion economy that Speaker McCarthy is gambling with.

We are only weeks away from the deadline of June 1. That is when Secretary Yellen says America could default on our Federal debt. So every day the House Republicans refuse to perform the most basic responsibility of government--paying our bills--they are spreading uncertainty throughout the global economy. That uncertainty is dangerous and costly.

Over the past few years, our Nation has emerged from the depths of a once-in-a-century pandemic; we have navigated one market disruption after another; and, today, we are finally moving in the right direction. But now, Speaker McCarthy, in the House, wants to throw all of that historic progress away. Why? To please the most radical members of his party. The debt ceiling proposal House Republicans passed last week is not a budget;

it is a MAGA manifesto. It is a ransom note to the American people: Either suffer the disastrous consequences of debt default or face devastating cuts in services and programs that millions of Americans rely on every day.

I just left a hearing in the Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services. Appearing before that committee was the National Institutes of Health. This is the premier medical research Agency in the world. Of the 500-plus new prescription drugs, they are responsible for almost all of them in basic research. Just this week, we had a dramatic announcement in Chicago by Northwestern University in its doing medical research. And I am going to try to say this properly as a liberal arts-trained lawyer when I get into medicine and science. But they have finally found a way to successfully breach the blood-brain barrier. What does it mean? We had two of our most famous Senators in modern times--Ted Kennedy and John McCain--both pass away because of glioblastoma--brain cancer. The Presiding Officer understands that personally more than any other Member of this body. We watched as they went through surgery, which was the only technique that could be used on this brain cancer, in an attempt to remove the tumor and all of the cancer cells. Well, naturally and unfortunately, that process is not as good as it should be. Tumor brain cells remained and, ultimately, took their lives.

Well, now these doctors at Northwestern have found a way to breach this blood-brain barrier so that they can apply chemotherapy drugs to the brain directly. It is a dramatic development that could have applications as well when it comes to Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. That was discovered this week because of an NIH grant, a National Institutes of Health grant--millions of dollars to these researchers that could transform the way we treat brain cancer in America as well as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.

So what does Speaker McCarthy want to do with the budget of this Agency, the National Institutes of Health? He wants to cut it by 20 to 25 percent. That is an outrage to think that we would forestall the research that could save lives and alleviate suffering across America and the fact that our leadership and the world of medical research would be jeopardized because of gamesmanship by Speaker McCarthy on the issue of the debt ceiling.

His proposal for a budget--if you want to call it that--is a MAGA manifesto. They don't care. They are determined to preserve the Trump tax cuts at any expense. When you look at cutting 20 to 25 percent from medical research, it is true that they will go to the extreme.

What would debt default look like?

Well, it would wipe out also trillions of dollars in savings of families across America, and the 401(k)s would take a beating. It would kill millions of jobs and force businesses to grind to a halt, and it would send our economy into a recession.

Does Speaker McCarthy believe that any of us were sent to Washington to achieve that goal?

Defaulting would send interest rates soaring, making costly credit cards and mortgages even more expensive. It is a nonstarter, but so is accepting any of the destructive cuts that I have described.

Their MAGA manifesto would cause needless suffering all across America. It would hurt virtually everybody in this Nation except the top 1 percent, which would have their Trump tax cuts preserved.

To start, this Republican bill would decimate funding for America's veterans--eliminating 80,000 jobs in the Veterans Health Administration--and threaten housing and food security for them as well.

This proposal would also wipe out 30,000 law enforcement and Border Patrol jobs.

Next week, we have got a watershed event occurring on the border. I am sure the Presiding Officer is aware of it as he represents the State of New Mexico.

The question is, What is going to happen when we eliminate title 42? Are we going to have an onslaught of thousands of people seeking asylum in this country, and are we ready for them?

I have heard many Members of the Senate from the other side of the aisle suggest they are unhappy with the situation. I am, too, but we need to respond to it in an orderly, direct fashion. Defunding Border Patrol agents is a ridiculous outcome, and to think that Speaker McCarthy would defund Border Patrol agents in this country at this moment in history is just nonsensical.

I would just say that, when it comes to the defunding of the police and Border Patrol agents, it is a bad idea even if it comes from the Republican Speaker.

If this proposal became law, I might add--the proposal by Speaker McCarthy for his budget--we would also cut 1 million senior citizens' Meals on Wheels. What does this program do? For many of our elderly citizens, particularly those who are in a compromised medical state, this is the only social contact they have each day--perhaps with the mailman as well. That is it. To eliminate this Meals on Wheels in order to preserve the tax cuts from the Trump administration is just unfair.

Let me tell you what the cuts would mean in my State of Illinois.

The Republican proposal would force 13,000 children in our State to lose childcare and preschool. It would strip food assistance from 55,000 women, infants, and children. Does that make any sense at all? It would threaten the medical care for more than 186,000 veterans in Illinois, and 50,000 seniors would lose their Meals on Wheels in my State.

Yesterday, my office heard from the Greater Chicago Food Depository-- a food bank that is one of the best. It provides meals to seniors and families. Here is what one of their staff members said:

These proposed cuts are coming at a time when the need

we're seeing in the community is as high as it was during the

beginning days of COVID. Families are really struggling.

These are the families who Speaker McCarthy would abandon with his MAGA manifesto. And for what purpose is he doing this? I will tell you--to keep tax cuts for the wealthiest people and the most profitable corporations in place--another windfall for the well-off.

We can and should debate our spending practices for the year to come, but this is not it. This is not the place to do it, and this is not the time to do it with the debt ceiling looming. Right now, we have one responsibility--to maintain the reputation of the United States of America in upholding the full faith and credit of standing behind our debts and making our payments. That is our constitutional duty. The path forward is clear. We need a clean bill for the debt ceiling, and then we can debate the issue of the budget and appropriations.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today, the Senate will vote to confirm Judge LaShonda Hunt to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

Born in Mississippi and raised on the South Side of Chicago, Judge Hunt received her bachelor's degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and her J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School.

After working as a staff attorney for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Judge Hunt clerked for Judge William J. Hibbler on the Northern District of Illinois. Immediately following her clerkship, Judge Hunt worked for 2 years as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Illinois. In 2010, she returned to this role and served for another 5 years. As a Federal prosecutor, she handled cases involving employment discrimination, civil rights violations, healthcare fraud, and more. After leaving the U.S. Attorney's Office, Judge Hunt worked for the State of Illinois in the Department of Corrections and the Department of Central Management Services. In 2017, the Seventh Circuit appointed Judge Hunt to serve as a U.S. Bankruptcy Judge for the Northern District of Illinois. She has presided over approximately 22,000 bankruptcy cases and adversary proceedings, about 75 of which have gone to verdict or judgement.

The American Bar Association rated Judge Hunt ``well qualified,'' and she received a strong bipartisan vote in committee. Given her extensive experience, dedication to public service and deep knowledge of the Northern District of Illinois, Senator Duckworth and I strongly support Judge Hunt. I am honored to vote for her confirmation, and I urge my colleagues join me.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, yesterday the Senate confirmed Judge Wesley Hsu to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Born in St. Louis, MO, Judge Hsu received both his bachelor's degree and J.D. from Yale University.

Judge Hsu began his career in private practice as an associate and contract attorney at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, where he worked on a range of intellectual property matters.

After working in private practice, he served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the same district to which he is now nominated. In this role, he gained significant litigation experience in both criminal and civil proceedings.

During his time at the Department of Justice, Judge Hsu successfully prosecuted a defendant who trafficked computer networking equipment, which the Department named as one of its most significant intellectual property operations to date.

In 2017, Judge Hsu was appointed as a Superior Court Judge for the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Since his appointment, he has presided over more than 200 criminal and civil cases that have gone to verdict or judgment.

The American Bar Association rated Judge Hsu unanimously ``well qualified,'' and he has the strong support of Senators Feinstein and Padilla.

Judge Hsu's deep ties to the California legal community, combined with his significant courtroom experience, will make him an excellent addition to the Federal bench.

I thank my colleagues for confirming his nomination.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, the National Institutes of Health here in the Washington, DC, area is the leading health research Agency in the world--in the world. And we are very proud of that fact.

One of the leaders of the NIH, through Presidents of both political parties, was Dr. Francis Collins, who still is part of the Biden administration. But as head of NIH, he really brought the research capacity of that Agency to a historic high.

I visited him about 6 years ago and said: What can I do as a Member of the Senate to help you when it comes to medical research?

He said: Well, the researchers that we count on to come through with the breakthroughs in medical research are never sure what Congress is going to do. Are you going to fund us this year as much money as last year or are you going to cut our budgets? Some of the researchers give up even on promising projects because they are uncertain about the future. He said: The best thing you can do, Senator, is to get 5 percent real growth in the spending at the National Institutes of Health year in and year out.

I said: Dr. Collins, I will take you up on that.

I came back here to the Senate and discovered that the person I needed to win to my point of view on this was Republican Senator Roy Blunt from Missouri. He chaired the Appropriations subcommittee, which funded that Agency. So I went to Roy, and I said: Here is what Dr. Collins said. We all respect him. For a man who discovered the human genome, we should respect him. He thinks 5 percent real growth can make a difference.

Roy Blunt, Republican, said: I need to have Lamar Alexander and another Republican Senator on my side, and you need to make sure Patty Murray is on your side. I said: I am sure she is, but I will double check.

So we put together a team of four of us--two Democrats, two Republicans--and we did it--5 percent real growth in the budget of NIH--about 6 years ago.

The response was positive across the Nation. Researchers said: If this is going to be the future, we are going to stick with our research to see what we can find to help people alleviate suffering.

So our team put together an effort that raised the annual budget of the National Institutes of Health from $30 billion to $40 billion. It was a bipartisan effort and a good effort. Luckily, some of the research that they had undertaken was of practical value to families across America during the coronavirus epidemic. So we felt pretty good about it.

Let me switch to another topic. One of the most insidious diagnoses that a person can get is to learn that they have brain cancer, glioblastoma. There are 40,000 Americans each year who are diagnosed with brain cancer. It usually gives them 2 years to live when they receive that diagnosis--14,000 Americans each year.

Ironically--coincidentally--it seems to have touched this body more than most. It was glioblastoma that took the life of Teddy Kennedy and John McCain and one of our great friends in the Democratic cloakroom, Tim Mitchell. I don't know why. I don't know if that is just a coincidence, but it certainly drove home to all of us what a serious diagnosis this is--glioblastoma, brain cancer.

I am going to delve into territory here where my education has not prepared me. I am a liberal arts major and have a law degree. I will be talking a little about science, but, luckily, I will be reading it to make sure I get it right.

One of the real obstacles to treating brain cancer is what is known as the blood-brain barrier. You can give--inject--a medicine into an ordinary person, and it will flow through their veins, but it won't get into the brain. So the treatment of many brain cancers is very basic-- surgery--to try to remove the tumor with surgery. But the problem is, of course, surgery can't capture every errant cancer cell that might be flowing through the brain, and eventually, the brain cancer overcomes even surgical attempts. So there has always been a barrier, the blood- brain barrier.

The treatment has been dealing with and trying to find a way to get into the brain with chemotherapy. The good

news is that this morning, it was announced that Northwestern University--which I am proud to represent in the city of Chicago--has made some breakthroughs. If you will bear with me for a moment, I want to make sure I state this properly:

For the first time, previously unusable chemotherapy drugs

reached brain tumors in humans after a cutting-edge procedure

at Northwestern University team [in Chicago].

Doctors achieved the breakthrough with an innovative mix of

ultrasound and microbubbles that opened the blood-brain

barrier to allow the drugs to pass through.

Dr. Adam Sonabend, one of the co-lead investigators, said:

This is a starting point to open the doors for . . . 95% of

drugs that are usually not [even] considered for treating

brain diseases.

The Northwestern team released a report on the use of the

procedure to treat 17 patients with glioblastoma, the most

common and malignant form of brain cancer that has been

viewed as incurable. The treatment led to a four- to sixfold

increase in drug concentrations in the patients' brains, the

researchers [said].

Dr. Sonabend goes on to explain the situation: The blood-brain barrier that blocks many drugs used to treat cancer also blocks the dye that they were using to see if they could finally go through with this procedure. Dr. Sonabend said when he injected the dye while using the new ultrasound procedure, the dye appeared first in the patient's blood vessels, but then it passed the blood-brain barrier and spread into the brain. The patient's brain lit up on the x ray that was taken during this procedure to show the effectiveness of this approach.

Dr. Roger Stupp, chief of neurooncology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine also helped to lead the project. He said that ``This is the first trial that has taken it to the next level with chemotherapy drugs'' that you ordinarily could not use for brain tumors.

Dr. Sonabend said:

``In glioblastoma patients, cancer cells scattered through

the brain surrounding the tumor inevitably linger after

surgery. They have been impossible to get to . . . ''

Now we have an avenue that might be promising to start dealing in more effective ways, not only with brain cancer but also with Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.

It is amazing to me. It literally made my day to read that story, that these researchers funded by the National Institutes of Health here in Washington may have finally come through with the ultimate breakthrough that will allow us to treat brain cancer more effectively. Can you imagine the hope this creates in the hearts and minds of so many families who have a victim of brain cancer in their family?

Now why do I raise this on the floor other than to tell you, I think, a fascinating and important story? I do it because it is a political issue. We just heard the Republican leader of the Senate come forward and tell us that he supports the proposal by the House Republicans on budget cuts.

Do you know what the House Republican budget does to medical research at the NIH?

Let me read it to you. They propose ending the bipartisan commitment to the National Institutes of Health by cutting more than $10 billion in 2024. That is 25 percent of the budget for medical research and more than $100 billion over the next 10 years. That will shutter hundreds of labs across the country, lead to fewer drugs being developed for cancer, diabetes, serious mental illness, and other devastating conditions. It will decimate American biotechnology innovation and economic growth. Sadly, it will allow China to become the global leader in biomedical R&D.

So when we talk about the budget here and budget cuts and they say: We are just going to cut $10 billion, we have got to step back and say: Well, what does that do for medical research in America? Take a step backwards. The hard bipartisan work that brought us to $40 billion is wiped away overnight. Researchers like those at Northwestern may lose heart and worry whether or not there is enough money to continue their research projects and innovation.

What will we lose in terms of quality of life? We will lose the opportunity to come up with the cures that people count on.

That is why this means so much to me. It is a small part of the cuts that have been proposed by the Republicans in the House, but it is the part that troubles me the most. We have got to keep our commitment to medical research for the good of this Nation and for the families that count on us to make certain we come up with new cures.

We are blessed in America to have the best researchers on Earth. I would take them over any other country, and most Americans would. But are we going to stand by them, or are we going to make the deep cuts in areas like medical research as part of this political debate?

Mr. President, today the Senate will vote to confirm Orelia Merchant to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Ms. Merchant received her B.S. from Dillard University, an M.A. from the College of William and Mary, and her J.D. from Tulane University Law School. She began her legal career as assistant regional counsel for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Ms. Merchant then served as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Louisiana before transferring to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York. She spent 17 years in the civil division of the U.S. Attorney's Office, handling matters involving asset forfeiture and various forms of fraud including environmental, healthcare, and mortgage fraud.

Since 2019, Ms. Merchant has worked in the New York Attorney General's

Office as chief deputy Attorney General for State counsel. In this role, she manages 250 attorneys and oversees more than 8,000 active cases, including prosecution and defense actions in State and Federal court on behalf of State officials, the State legislature, and State agencies. Nearly the entirety of Ms. Merchant's practice has involved litigation and the vast majority of her experience has been in Federal court. She is a seasoned litigator whose expertise will be an asset to the Eastern District of New York. The American Bar Association has rated Ms. Merchant as ``qualified,'' and she has the strong support of Senators Schumer and Gillibrand.

I will be supporting her nomination, and I urge my colleagues to do so as well.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) and the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) are necessarily absent.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) and the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) are necessarily absent.