Floor Statements

Mr. President, politicians live in a world of advocates. The rich and powerful engage effective people to represent them. Those less fortunate strive to keep up in the world of politics. It was 1982 as I, first-time congressional candidate, received a questionnaire from the Children's Defense Fund. My first thought was: Is this for real? Helping kids is the right thing to do, but who would make the most vulnerable people in America their ``cause''? Enter Bill Harris.

Bill was born on March 11, 1940, in Saint Paul, MN, to Irving and Rosetta Harris. While they moved around frequently in his youth, his family eventually settled in the Chicago suburb of Highland Park. Bill's father Irving was one of the most amazing people I have ever met, and anyone who knew him would understand how Bill developed a passion for advancing the interests of children. Across the United States, Irving invested in charities and institutions that supported childhood development. He helped create the Yale Child Study Center at Yale University, the University of Chicago's Graduate School of Public Policy Studies, which bears his name, and the Erikson Institute for Advanced Studies in Child Development. He worked tirelessly for the rights of all children and was so proud that Bill ended up working for children as well.

After graduating from Highland Park High School, Bill left the North Shore to attend Wesleyan University in Connecticut, where he graduated in 1961. He went on to work at Janus Films in New York, where his interest in childhood development programs blossomed. In his position he had the opportunity to work with Fordham University to create novel media programs for underserved youth. In this position, he founded a newsgathering team, a radio station, and a newspaper all made for and run by children. In bringing new media to impoverished areas, Bill gave children more than just a job, he gave them a chance to advocate for themselves and their interests. Bill would end up writing his doctoral thesis at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on his work, and it would continue to leave a deep impression on his life.

And in his work, Bill received his life's greatest blessing. While organizing a film festival at the Lincoln Center, Bill met his wife Robie. She had submitted an entry to the festival titled ``Child's Eye View,'' which documented her work teaching underserved children. The two felt an instant bond over their passion for childhood development, and they soon married in 1969. Their relationship flourished for 55 years, with both advocating for vulnerable children throughout their union.

After Bill completed his doctorate, he reflected on his work with children and how he could make more of an impact. At the time, nearly every large corporation and labor union in America had an organization devoted to fundraising and advancing its priorities in government, except for children. Bill set out to change this. He felt that children were a public good, whose needs were far greater than what private companies or philanthropy alone could protect. Only the government possessed the power and responsibility to adequately address the best interests of children.

In 1981, Bill formed Kidspac to raise money to back politicians who supported evidence-based policies for children and families. Since its inception, Bill and Kidspac remained at the forefront of the major childhood welfare reforms of the past 40 years. Bill's efforts led to the creation of Early Head Start under the Clinton administration; he pushed Congress to change the Child Tax Credit to be fully refundable so the poorest families would be able receive its benefits; and he helped establish the National Child Traumatic Stress Initiative to treat the mental health impacts of childhood trauma. In the years since, I have been honored to help carry that torch and double the funding for this critical program to improve our knowledge and expand services for children who are exposed to trauma. Bill was relentless in pursuit of his mission to push politicians to advance the best, most evidence-based practices that would support children.

In his work, Bill was not content with only assisting children at home. He advocated for international HIV and AIDS relief funding long before the establishment of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief under the Bush administration. I had the great fortune of traveling with Bill to Sub-Saharan Africa to examine the effects of international investment in the region, and one memory of our trip stands out to me. Shortly after we arrived in Africa, I learned that the airline had lost my luggage. When I told Bill, he did not hesitate to offer me access to his wardrobe. He was ready to give me the shirt off his back. That was the kind of person Bill was.

Bill never stopped advocating for children, and he did so without an ounce of vanity or desire for personal recognition. His passion was born out of a true sense of altruism that could not be tainted or subdued. Although Bill is no longer with us, his legacy lives on through his children David and Ben. David worked together with Bill to support the expansion of the Child Tax Credit, and he serves as executive director at the Children's Research and Education Institute, a nonprofit organization that Bill founded to educate policymakers and the public about the policies that best serve children. Ben worked for many years as a clinical professor at the Psychological Center at the City College of New York, where he provided therapeutic services in the same neighborhoods that his father made children's news programs five decades prior. Today, he continues to work in clinical psychology. Loretta and I send our deepest condolences to David and Ben; their wives Emily and Hilary; Bill's sister Virginia Polsky; and Bill's grandchildren Ella, Rosie, Sam, and Daisy.

Bill was an optimist. He believed that there was no limit to what a child could achieve if they received the right support from their families and their country. With no ego or agenda, Bill gave his life to providing children with that support. His work has left a permanent mark on America's children, families, and politics. He will be dearly missed. Bill Harris was truly one of the good guys.

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

Mr. President, this month, January 2026, marks a new era for Medicare. After decades of empty promises about lowering the cost of prescription drugs, the prices of the 10 most expensive drugs under Medicare will finally fall.

Starting this year, 2026, seniors who rely on medications to treat blood clots, diabetes, heart disease, and certain cancers will see discounts of up to 79 percent for these essential drugs. There are 9 million American seniors who will save a total of $1.5 billion in annual out-of-pocket costs, including nearly 300,000 seniors in Illinois who take 1 of those 10 drugs.

Why did it take so darned long to lower these prices? Politicians have been talking about it for years. For years, Medicare was blocked from negotiating the price of drugs by the pharmaceutical companies. They didn't want to cut into their profits. That changed when Democrats passed the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022 under the Biden administration. This law empowered Medicare to bargain for fair prices for medications used by seniors.

Not one single Republican voted for this bill in 2022. Let me say that again. Democrats overcame the objections of congressional Republicans and Big Pharma, who were complaining about how negotiating drug prices was socialism--socialism. Now seniors will be saving hundreds of dollars a month because Democrats rolled up our sleeves to deliver price cuts on prescription drugs.

What has President Trump done to make healthcare more affordable? Nothing. Instead, he decided to slash Medicaid by $1 trillion with the passage of the so-called big beautiful budget bill.

Because of this law, many hospitals across Illinois and across the country, especially in rural areas, may not survive. Rural hospitals are the backbone of communities in my State and in many others. They are the anchors of the local economy. Several hospitals that are barely squeaking by today have told me they will fall into the red because of the Republican healthcare cuts in this law. Recently, I surveyed all of the hospitals in Illinois, and 129 responded to my survey. They wrote to me to say they will struggle greatly with these cuts from the big beautiful budget bill of the Trump administration. These hospitals will face longer emergency room wait times. They will be forced to cut services, including behavioral health and maternity care. They will have to lay off doctors and nurses, which is exactly the opposite of what we need in rural America.

My Republican colleagues know exactly how devastating these Medicaid cuts will be. That is why they attempted to remedy the situation by including a $50 billion rural health transformation grant in their Big Beautiful Bill. Let's do some math here. They are cutting $1 trillion out of Medicaid, and they are trying to fill that gap with $50 billion. I am a liberal arts major, but I think I can do basic math. What they are talking about doing is restoring 5 percent of the $1 trillion they are cutting from Medicaid--5 percent.

In addition to cutting $1 trillion from Medicaid, congressional Republicans refused to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced premium tax credits under Trump's Big Beautiful Bill. Last year, 22 million Americans relied on these credits to afford their healthcare, but now they have expired. Despite pressure from patients, physicians, and providers, congressional Republicans refused to extend them.

What is the impact of refusing to extend this program that makes health insurance more affordable? I am afraid it is obvious. During the 2026 open enrollment period, millions of people decided to drop their health insurance coverage. Others are being forced to make impossible choices between food, car payments, and housing costs. If we fail to immediately solve these problems, millions of people will become uninsured in this country, and those who will retain coverage will pay double or triple for their healthcare plans.

It is not too late to do something even though we are hopelessly divided on most of the issues facing us. Let's hope that health insurance will be the exception. Congress can extend the tax credits and reopen the signup period before the worst impact is felt.

At least some of my Republican colleagues recognize the pain their refusal to negotiate has caused. Last month, four Senate Republicans-- four--broke ranks to vote with Democrats to extend the enhanced premium tax credits and help people pay for their health insurance--four Republicans. In the House, four House Republicans signed a discharge petition to force a vote later this week to extend the tax credits. We must be ready to act when the bill arrives in the Senate.

Americans do not have time for Congress to litigate the entirety of the U.S. healthcare system, but we do need to triage now. Let's do something to help these people keep their health insurance. I have spoken with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and have made it clear we want to help Americans pay for these bills. I want to join them. It should be done on a bipartisan basis, and we should waste no time.

Mr. President, it is a heady experience to go through a classified briefing at the highest levels of our government, and virtually every U.S. Senator of both political parties had that opportunity this morning. I took advantage of it. It is rare and important. It was an explanation by our leaders in the Cabinet and the administration of what happened in Venezuela just a few days ago when Mr. Maduro was removed from power and brought to the United States to be held accountable for his actions in narcotics terrorism.

This is not a new issue to me. In 2018, I took a trip to Caracas and met with President Maduro, his First Lady, and members of his administration. It was clear to me that Venezuela was in trouble. You could see it on the streets. People were literally starving, and hospitals were going without medicine. It was pretty clear to me that Maduro was ruling not by democratic appeal but by the force of his power in office.

He was facing an election in just a few weeks, and I told him at that time that, if he did not have international observers at his election to verify that it was an honest election, the world would not believe the results. He ignored my advice, which was no surprise. He went ahead with the election and had a disputed result. He claimed victory, which others said didn't happen, and he did it again a few years

later. So he discredited himself in the eyes of the world community, and his country continued to suffer.

Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Venezuelans abandoned Venezuela, saying it was impossible to live there under his authoritarian rule without the basics of life: food, medicine, and shelter. So this decision to remove him is not one that causes tears in my household. We believe he was unfit for office. He was defeated in the election, and he had to pay a price for it. I am glad that he is not in power today.

During the course of our briefing this morning, our military leaders and others spelled out the details of how he was physically removed from office just a few days ago. He still is going to be held accountable in the courts of law in the United States--that is for sure--but there is also discussion about where we go from here.

If you remove the President of a country, what happens next?

Under their constitution, a woman named Delcy Rodriguez, the Vice President, was sworn in as his successor. I met her during my visit there. She is a hard-liner when it comes to the politics of the region and her brother even more so. We spoke for a period of time, and I became convinced that they would be difficult to deal with, although that is the reality of the moment.

Here is the point I want to make: I understand why our administration was very careful in disclosing information about the removal of Maduro from office. The lives and futures of the men and women in uniform from the United States were on the line, and we should not compromise their safety in any way to achieve our goal; but there comes a point--and that point should be immediately--when this administration decides to trust the American people and tell them the whole story. I believe there are things that can be said which will not compromise the safety of the United States or our friends but that explains to the American people what is at stake here.

What happened in that raid to remove Maduro from office?

Most of the details are an amazing display of military superiority, which the United States enjoys, but there were other questions that were raised, too, during the course of this.

In addition, the question is, Where do we go from here? What is going to happen to Venezuela's future? What is our responsibility? What are we accepting?

The American people need to be in on that conversation. It is easy, I learned in my time in the House and Senate, to get into a war but that it is far more difficult to get out of one. I worry that, many times, we have blundered into a situation which looks so simple in terms of nation building, and it turned out to be so complex. Then the war went on for years and years and years at the expense of not only American taxpayers but, more importantly, American lives. It is time for the American people to be part of that conversation. Why do I think so? Because the Constitution explicitly says it.

The Constitution says that the power to declare war in the United States resides in this Chamber and in the House of Representatives. Congress has the only authority to declare war. This President, like many others of both parties, has ignored that requirement and, I think, at his own peril. They are engaging us in a long-term conflict which could cost us dearly, and they are not engaging the American people in the discussion and rationale of our ultimate goals in the region.

This briefing this morning was a good one. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia asked a question, and I think it was the right question: When are we going to trust the American people enough to tell them exactly what happened in Venezuela leading up to the removal of Maduro and what is likely to follow? It is an important, critical question. It will be costly in terms of the future of the United States of America if we are not explicit and honest with the people of this country. Now is the time for that honesty.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand), the Senator from California (Mr. Padilla), and the Senator from California (Mr. Schiff) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, today, the Senate will vote to confirm Sara Bailey, nominated to lead the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Ms. Bailey, like so many of President Trump's nominees, was chosen for her loyalty and MAGA bona fides, rather than any policy expertise or leadership experience. Ms. Bailey has spent years fanning flames of division and hatred in this country, attacking immigrants, Members of Congress, and praising dictators who indiscriminately strip the rights of their citizens.

America is experiencing a drug crisis. Illegal narcotics trafficked from other countries and the abuse of prescription opioids have taken the lives of too many people. This great challenge demands an experienced, accomplished leader to serve as drug czar. Past nominees have been law enforcement professionals who have taken down drug smuggling rings, State public health experts, or physicians with a deep understanding of addiction. Ms. Bailey lacks any serious qualifications for this role. She is not a physician or addiction specialist. She has never been a prosecutor or law enforcement official.

To prove her MAGA loyalty to President Trump, she endorsed the President's irresponsible and deadly plans to cut funding to the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Program, which is on the frontlines of keeping illegal drugs off our streets and out of our country. If she were an expert on addiction, Ms. Bailey would know that kneecapping the Federal Agencies that provide substance abuse and mental health services would have deadly consequences.

With his recent pardon of high-profile drug kingpin and former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez and his nomination of Ms. Bailey, President Trump has proven once again that he prioritizes loyalty and political favors ahead of the safety and well-being of the American people.

For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose her nomination.

I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Ms. Blunt

Rochester), the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Warnock), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Welch) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, earlier this year, the Trump administration began a calculated show of political theater in force designed to spread fear and terror in Chicago and surrounding Illinois communities.

Masked Federal agents pepper-sprayed, punched, body slammed, and even shot individuals, including U.S. citizens, during violent immigration enforcement actions. Virtually all of what I just said was captured on video. They deployed tear gas canisters against clergy, broke into apartments, zip-tied children.

When they were required by the Federal courts to disclose how many people had been detained recently, they came up with 614 names; 16 of the 600 had any criminal record that presented a threat to public safety whatsoever--16 out of 614.

President Trump has not gone after the worst of the worst as he promised. Instead, he has brought some of the worst, most unprofessional, and most poorly trained Federal law enforcement officers and agents into our city.

Because of his so-called Operation Midway Blitz, children are afraid to go to schools, businesses are closing, and families are being torn apart. Yet the Trump administration shows no regret. They are reveling in the fear and chaos they are creating.

Look at the Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino. On Tuesday, he returned to Chicago after leaving last month and bringing his campaign of fear to North Carolina and New Orleans. As soon as he arrived back in Chicago, Mr. Bovino went to the picket line of Local 705 of the Teamsters at Mauser Packaging Solutions.

These workers are on strike for better benefits, safer working conditions, and measures to prevent ICE from entering their workplace without a Federal judicial warrant.

Bovino brought Federal agents to this picket line to intimidate and interrogate these workers. He laughed in their faces as they demanded better working conditions. In court testimony, Mr. Bovino has praised Federal agents' use of excessive force as ``exemplary,'' even after multiple U.S. citizens were hospitalized following their encounters with his Federal agents.

When addressing Federal agents prior to a confrontation with peaceful protesters, Mr. Bovino stated that ``if someone strays into a pepper ball, then that's on them.''

Bovino has tear-gassed peaceful crowds, encouraged his agents to fire pepper balls at protesters, and threatened to go ``even harder on the streets,'' when Federal judges dare to order him to follow the law. But Mr. Bovino is not alone in his cruelty. Many Trump officials have been posting and gloating about their clear violations of constitutional rights.

While President Trump has given them carte blanche to violate the law, there is a reality ahead. One day President Trump will not be in the White House. When he goes, those who ordered these unlawful activities finally may be held accountable and prosecuted. Section 242 of title 18 of the United States Code makes it a crime for a Federal law enforcement official acting under color of law to violate the constitutional rights of any person.

I have no expectation that President Trump's Justice Department will investigate these violations currently taking place in Chicago. But the statute of limitations from these provisions is 5 years. The next administration will be well within its rights to hold accountable anyone who violated an individual's constitutional rights or directed others to do so during this Trump administration.

While the Supreme Court's outrageous decision in Trump v. The United States may have personally immunized President Trump from prosecution, it provided no such protection for these agents.

The Trump administration officials responsible for the use of excessive force or unlawful detention may face criminal consequences for their role in the Midway Blitz. That is why, today, my colleague Senator Duckworth and I have submitted a criminal referral to the Justice Department regarding the unlawful actions of senior Trump administration officials and Federal immigration agents in Operation Midway Blitz.

To take one example, a Border Patrol agent shot a Chicago woman multiple times. Body camera video reportedly shows the agent threatening the woman, saying ``Do something,'' and then I will delete the next term he used, prior to shooting her.

Afterward, the agent bragged in text messages to other agents about shooting the woman, writing ``5 shots, 7 holes.'' As ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have directed my staff to continue gathering

evidence of potential violations of section 242, and we will provide this evidence to the Justice Department in due course.

In addition, Illinois elected officials are hard at work documenting crimes committed by these Federal agents. The mayor of Evanston has opened an investigation after Federal agents pinned down a man and struck him in the head. The Village of Broadview is conducting criminal investigations related to ICE's use of tear gas and rubber bullets against first responders and peaceful protesters.

Tomorrow, the Illinois Accountability Commission will hold its first public hearing, which will examine the widespread use of chemical agents during Midway Blitz. There will come a time when the people responsible for these assaults, tear-gassing, and unjust detention during this unlawful immigration action will face real accountability.

These officials swore an oath when they began their service to preserve and protect the Constitution, but in their role as Federal law enforcement officials, there is ample evidence they violated the very rights they promised to defend.

Today, I am putting those participating in Operation Midway Blitz on notice: You can continue to terrorize people. You can ignore the rulings of our courts, our laws, and our Constitution. You can hide behind your masks. You can ignore due process requirements in the Constitution. The day will come when justice will be served. The day will come when you will be held accountable. The day will come when this pitiful display of meanness and intolerance will become one of the saddest chapters in our Nation's history, and you will be held accountable.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) and the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, this December marks the seventh anniversary of the passage of the First Step Act, the most significant reform to our criminal justice system in a generation.

That victory was born out of years of bipartisan negotiations led by myself and my colleagues Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, and Senator Mike Lee of Utah--Democrats and Republicans working together. The end result was and continues to be life-changing for the people who were impacted.

The First Step Act delivered much needed reforms to our outdated sentencing laws and provided real opportunities for incarcerated Americans to safely reenter their communities. Those reforms have reduced populations in overcrowded prisons, reunited families, and revitalized communities these men and women reenter as productive neighbors. The evidence backs it up. Just look at the numbers.

Of the more than 40,000 people released under the law through January 2024, just under 10 percent have been rearrested--40,000, under 10 percent. Compare that to the Bureau of Prisons' overall recidivism rate, which is 45 percent. The difference between 10 percent and 45 percent is striking, and it shows what we can achieve when we are smart on crime and follow the data.

I want to take a moment to highlight the story of one woman from Alton, IL. So often in my congressional career, things that have inspired me come from stories of real people and real lives. This is one of them.

Her name was Eugenia Jennings. As a teenager, she, sadly, experienced the injustice of our antiquated sentencing laws firsthand. She was terribly abused as a child, and by age 15, Eugenia Jennings was addicted to crack cocaine. At age 23, as a mother of three, Eugenia was sentenced to over 20 years in Federal prison for selling less than 14 grams of a drug.

In prison, she turned out to be a model for others. She took all of the courses available to her, overcame her addiction, and talked to students about the dangers of drug addiction. Sadly, while she was incarcerated, she developed leukemia.

I asked President Barack Obama, my former colleague in the Senate, to commute Eugenia's sentence, and he did just that. It was the first commutation he issued. Eugenia was released just in time to see her oldest daughter graduate from high school. I cannot tell you the joy in her voice when she told me that.

She passed away 2 years later, but her story has lived on and served as a driving force behind my efforts to reform our Federal drug sentencing laws.

Eugenia's story led me to meet more individuals whose lives were forever altered by unfair sentencing laws, including Matthew Charles. Matthew also had a difficult childhood, enduring both physical and verbal abuse. He joined the Army at age 18 but found himself still filled with anger and hurt. He eventually turned to what he called wayward living and selling drugs. He received a State conviction and then a Federal conviction. Because he had a prior conviction when he ended up in Federal court because he had been selling crack rather than powdered cocaine, Matthew received a sentence of 35 years--35 years.

While in prison, he worked as a GED tutor and law library clerk in addition to mentoring young people. He helped other incarcerated individuals who could not read to understand their letters and court documents, and he drafted filings for them. In 21 years in prison, Matthew did not receive a single disciplinary infraction.

After Matthew's conviction and sentence, Congress passed a law I wrote called the Fair Sentencing Act, which reduced the disparity in sentencing between crack and powder cocaine offenses, but the law was not retroactive. When Eugenia and Matthew were sentenced, the hands of their sentencing judges were tied because Congress severely limited a judge's discretion to

impose an individualized sentence and, instead, mandated overly harsh, one-size-fits-all penalties.

The First Step Act took one giant step toward correcting that unfair system. Among other reforms, it made the Fair Sentencing Act retroactive. Matthew Charles was one of the first people released from prison after the First Step Act became law.

But, as the name of the First Step Act suggests, it is just that, one first step. There is more to be done. To make our system fairer and our communities safer, we need to continue to reform our sentencing laws in a smart way. That is why Senator Grassley and I reintroduced a package of bipartisan bills to expand on the progress of the First Step Act.

One of those bills is the First Step Implementation Act, which is legislation, among other things, that would retroactively apply the First Step Act sentencing reforms to sentences imposed before the law's passage. This would impact people like Matthew Charles, who was sentenced before Congress reformed outdated statutes.

People like Eugenia and Matthew deserve a second chance. The First Step Implementation Act would make redemption for more individuals likely impossible. The First Step Act's passage was a glimmer of bipartisanship in a political arena that has become increasingly polarized. It was signed into law by President Trump in his first term. This success shows what we can accomplish on behalf of the American people when we put aside our political differences, when we come to the table with reasonable approaches.

We need evidence-backed solutions to reduce crime and make our communities safer.

So, as we celebrate the seventh anniversary, I will continue to work with my colleagues to reform outdated sentencing laws. Let's rekindle the spirit of bipartisanship and get something done in the Senate. I call on my colleagues to support the Grassley-Durbin legislation, the First Step Implementation Act. Together, we can reduce crime, improve our justice system, and make America's communities safer.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, in Skokie, IL, a few miles north of Chicago, is America's second largest Holocaust museum. Those who visit see thousands of artifacts from victims and survivors and their families. There is one lesson that every visitor takes away: All who walk through its doors learn the importance of tolerance, the need to choose love over hate. I have been reflecting on this lesson in the wake of the two awful acts of violence that took place this past weekend.

On Sunday night, in Australia, hundreds of people gathered at Bondi Beach to celebrate the first night of Hanukkah. Two men opened fire on the crowd. The attendees at Bondi Beach were targeted for simply one reason: They were Jewish, and they were out to celebrate their faith.

At least 15 people were killed, and dozens more were injured. I am offering my prayers for the victims and their families. I am thankful for the heroic actions of first responders and civilians to end the gunmen's rampage.

This act of violence is a grim reminder that we cannot stop combating anti-Semitism. This tragedy occurred just hours after Brown University, in Providence, RI, here in the United States, experienced its own mass shooting.

In the aftermath of these two tragedies, I am in awe of the bravery and sacrifice displayed by those caught up in the attacks.

One of them, Ahmed al-Ahmed, tackled one of the shooters at Bondi Beach in Australia, saving countless lives. He is now going through surgery. I wish him a swift recovery.

Another, Spencer Yang, after being shot in the leg, continued to help one of his fellow students at Brown hide from the gunman. To Spencer, too, I wish a full and swift recovery.

Ahmed, Spencer, and countless others should never be put in these unimaginable situations. Yet their selfless acts in the face of such violence are the ultimate demonstration of love--a willingness to risk their own lives to save a stranger.

As we seek to address the scourge of anti-Semitism and gun violence, may we act in the path of these brave upstanders, who in crisis chose humanity and love over violence and hate.

Mr. President, on an unrelated matter, America's health system is in critical condition. In 17 days, 22 million Americans will be asked to pay double or triple for their current health insurance premiums. Rural hospitals will be facing closure, small businesses won't be able to cover expenses, and more than 4 million Americans will lose their insurance if we fail to do anything in Congress.

Last Thursday, Senate Democrats put forward a bill to prevent this catastrophe. Our bill would have provided a clean extension of the Affordable Care Act's enhanced premium tax credits, which 22 million Americans rely on to help them pay their insurance premiums. These credits expire at the end of this year.

But too many Senate Republicans voted against extending them and, instead, rushed a vote on a partisan proposal that would upend the Affordable Care Act and the American healthcare system, less than a month before the

insurance premiums spike. Their bill, which was introduced last week, has never been debated in committee, and no Member had a chance to amend it.

I say this to my friends on the other side of the aisle: You are in the majority. You have the power to set matters for a congressional hearing. You have the power to go through a serious process to reform healthcare. You are in the majority.

But, first, we need triage. First, we have to stabilize the patient. Americans who are about to pay thousands of additional dollars cannot wait as Republicans attempt to change the entire healthcare system in a week.

Four Senate Republicans understood this and voted with all the Democrats to extend these tax credits. I thank them for their singular political courage.

Each additional day we delay an extension of the enhanced premium tax credits, more Americans forgo their health insurance because it is just too darn expensive.

Time is running out.

I recently spoke to a waitress at Lou Mitchell's restaurant in Chicago--in downtown Chicago, across from the train station. She is personally worried that she will not be able to afford her healthcare next year without the enhanced premium tax credits. She sees her health insurance bill doubling or more.

This waitress does not care about who is winning the political fight in Washington. She cares about whether she and her family can pay for their doctors' appointments and medications.

I want to go back to that restaurant soon and tell my friend that the Senate did something to help her. We can help her, so long as we act on a bipartisan basis.

If you don't like our proposal for a clean, 3-year extension, counter it with a reasonable offer. Show that there is a beating heart that cares to address the real problems Americans face. Let us come together and give American families the gift of health coverage they can afford for Christmas.