Floor Statements

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

Mr. President, earlier this month, I had the pleasure of meeting with leaders from Joliet, IL--including Mayor Terry D'Arcy, city manager Beth Beatty, fire chief Jeff Carey, deputy chief of health services Aaron Kozlowski, emergency management coordinator Dr. John Lukancic, and Sister Mary Francis Seely.

I take dozens of meetings every week in my office here in Washington, but I was struck by the remarkable work underway in Joliet. Joliet is the third-largest city in Illinois, and like all communities, it faces its share of challenges. But over the past few years, Joliet has launched an incredible program to address mental health and addiction among its residents.

Starting in 2020, Joliet noticed that mental and behavioral health calls accounted for a growing percentage of the 9-1-1 calls. The fire department was spending less time putting out fires--and more time responding to people in mental health crisis. Some residents were dialing 9-1-1 regularly--several times a week--because they were facing underlying mental health needs. This cost the city money. It strained resources. But most of all, it meant residents of Joliet were suffering. So they decided to do something about it.

Joliet began by training 200 firefighters and paramedics in ``crisis first aid,'' to be able to respond appropriately to callers in mental health distress. You see, after experiencing trauma--like witnessing a shooting or seeing their home destroyed by a fire--people can suffer. Exposure to trauma can harm the brain, changing the way people see and interact with the world.

We know that young people who experience trauma have a shorter life expectancy, are more likely to misuse drugs, attempt suicide, commit violence, or not graduate from high school. By providing Joliet firefighters with the tools to help individuals facing trauma, these first responders are able to recognize the signs of stress, and plant the seeds of a healthier tomorrow. It also helps the firefighters understand their own mental health needs from the strains of the job, so we can keep them healthy, too.

Additionally, after being dispatched to one of these serious calls, the Joliet Fire Department pays a follow-up visit within 48 hours. These visits help to show residents that someone cares and is looking out for them; it helps calm them down and can help provide referrals to additional services the residents may need.

In less than 3 years, the Joliet Fire Department has provided more than 2,000 Joliet residents with these mental health services. Think about this for a moment: Rather than just throwing up their hands and saying, ``Sorry, we just fight fires,'' Joliet is taking ownership of the community's needs and preventing future 9-1-1 calls.

But they are not stopping there. Of course, not every patient's mental health needs can be addressed by first responders; some individuals require specialized treatment from a professional. But in Joliet, like most places across the country, there is a shortage of counselors and psychologists, causing waitlists that can last for months until the next available appointment. And what Joliet had realized was that, if a patient couldn't see a mental health provider, they were resorting to calling 9-1-1 and taking an ambulance to the emergency room.

It is similar to a problem that the University of Illinois Hospital in Chicago was seeing: where 48 individuals accounted for more than 776 visits to the emergency room in a single year. The reason? They were homeless. That hospital realized they could save money and better treat these patients, by paying for supportive housing.

Joliet is applying a similar lesson. They have partnered with the local hospital and a mental health company to offer free mental health services with a clinician, usually within 24 hours. Whatever insurance won't cover, the city has set up a fund to pay the co-pays and other out-of-pocket expenses for the mental health care of its residents.

What has been the result of this effort? Well, in the year before the program launched, Joliet area high schools experienced 12 teenage suicides. But in the last 2 school years, there have been zero teen suicides. Across all ages, citywide suicides have decreased by 50 percent. That is lifesaving work. It is being recognized, too. Joliet recently received the Congressional Fire Service Award for Excellence.

I hope to support this effort in any way I can. Illinois recently received Federal approval to use Medicaid to cover preventive mental health services in the community, which can reduce costs down the line. And with Senator Capito, I have worked on Federal legislation to increase funding for trauma-informed care in schools and with first responders, to help break the cycle of mental health challenges.

I applaud the city of Joliet's efforts, which are serving as a new national model for emergency medical services and using first responders to address the root causes of suffering in the community. I look forward to working with them to identify additional Federal resources and opportunities to grow this project.

But to do that, my Republican colleagues need to understand a few things: We must fund the Federal Government and the critical programs that pay our first responders--and not allow

Elon Musk to decide what he thinks is worthwhile spending; and Medicaid is the insurance program that pays the largest share of mental health services; we cannot slash the Medicaid program to pay for billionaire tax breaks.

These may sound like distant debates in Washington, but when it comes to preventing suicides in Joliet, IL, it is a critical investment. And I will work every day to defend these programs.

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

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

Mr. President, it has been almost 6 weeks--maybe a couple of days beyond 6 weeks--of the new administration of Donald Trump and his second term. It is a lot different than his first term. I was here for that occasion as well.

What we have found is unique is a blizzard of Executive orders issued by President Trump from the beginning of his administration. Among those Executive orders was his declaration of an energy emergency-- energy emergency. It turns out that claim is not based on fact. There is no energy emergency in America.

Under the Biden administration, we saw record deployment of wind, solar, biofuels, batteries, oil, gas, and nuclear. In fact, the United States is producing more power than ever. Last year, the United States of America produced more oil than any other nation in the history of the world. Yet President Trump continues to insist that America is on the verge of nationwide blackouts and that clean energy will raise prices. It is simply not true.

So what is the reason for the President to try to mislead the American people? The short answer is that he wants to give handouts to his billionaire buddies in the fossil fuel industry. Before Elon Musk showed up with his multibillion-dollar fortune, it was reported that then-Candidate Donald Trump invited fossil fuel executives to Mar-a- Lago to ask for--hold on to your seats--a $1 billion campaign contribution--1 billion bucks.

Now that he is in office, President Trump is doing everything he can to keep those billionaires happy. That means tax cuts for the ultrawealthy--which is on its way, I am afraid--opening up Federal lands and waters for drilling, and, yes, declaring this phony energy emergency.

Why is he doing it? Declaring an emergency grants the President additional statutory authority. Donald Trump is using these authorities to fast-track pipelines and drilling in the Gulf of--may I say it?-- Mexico. But there is nothing in this declaration to support fossil fuel's cleanest competitors: wind and solar.

If Trump doing the bidding of billionaires wasn't bad enough, his so- called emergency will also raise the electric bills of thousands of families. Wind and solar are the cheapest energy in the world, and those cheap prices get passed on to the families who take advantage of them.

I know personally. A few years ago, my wife and I made the decision to install solar panels on the roof of our home. Our home project gave union workers in my community a good-paying job, and it was just one project contributing to hundreds of thousands of jobs created in the Biden administration.

Since Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act was enacted 2\1/2\ years ago, more than 1\1/2\ million Americans have installed solar panels. Was it a good idea? Well, I compared the electric bills I had been receiving in my home before and after the solar panels. Before the solar panels were installed on my roof, my monthly bill was about $115 for electricity. Now it is $15 because of the solar energy.

Every one of these installations also helped to create good-paying jobs for electricians, carpenters, and other workers, and supplying those panels created thousands of new jobs at factories around the country. But President Trump is not impressed. He wants to eliminate those jobs.

We have an opportunity to undo the harms of one of President Trump's many lies today. I want to thank Senator Kaine of Virginia for leading this effort. We need to raise up American workers, lower utility bills, and put America back on track to lead the world on clean energy.

I urge my colleagues to support the Kaine measure.

January 6 Pardons

Mr. President, on January 6, 2021, a solemn constitutional proceeding was disrupted when a mob of thugs, egged on by President Trump, attacked and trashed the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn the results of a Presidential election.

The grim result of that insurrection was the subsequent death of 5 law enforcement officers and injuries to approximately 140 others, many of whom are still paying the price to this day.

It came as a shock when, on the first day of Donald Trump's Presidency, he issued a blanket pardon for those who had been convicted for that January 6 attack on the Capitol.

We all saw the videos. We all saw the photographs. Here is an illustration of one of them.

Listen to what President Trump said about 1,600 pardons at a recent press conference when he was asked: Why did you pardon all those people who attacked the police officers at the Capitol Building?

He said:

I pardoned people that were assaulted themselves. They were

assaulted by our government. . . . They didn't assault. They

were assaulted, and what I did was a great thing for

humanity.

The American people overwhelmingly disagree with the President, and they disagree with his decision. In fact, 83 percent of them oppose the pardons that he gave. That includes 70 percent who lean Republican in their voting.

Despite this overwhelming opposition, the Justice Department has now broadened the scope of President Trump's pardons for January 6 rioters to include separate charges stemming from searches conducted during those investigations. I will describe a couple of them to you.

Federal prosecutors recently dropped explosives and firearm crimes being pursued against two January 6 defendants pardoned by President Trump: Daniel Ball and Elias Costianes.

Ball and Costianes had both been charged in separate proceedings with illegally possessing weapons that law enforcement discovered during the January 6-related search.

Ball had been accused of throwing an ``explosive device that detonated upon at least 25 officers'' during the Capitol riot and of ``forcefully'' shoving police who were trying to protect the Capitol.

Ball was barred from possessing firearms because of his prior criminal

record. Listen to this prior criminal record of a man who was pardoned by Donald Trump: Before January 6, Ball was convicted of domestic violence battery by strangulation, resisting law enforcement with violence, and battery on a law enforcement officer.

President Trump says that poor man was assaulted by the police. Does it sound like it? Remember, President Trump told us Ball and his fellow rioters were the actual victims. No wonder so many of the January 6 perpetrators have shown a stunning lack of remorse.

Just last Friday, just a few days ago, a number of these pardoned individuals decided to hold their own press conference outside the U.S. Capitol to announce their intent to sue the Justice Department for prosecuting them for this--dangerous individuals, including former Proud Boy leader Enrique Tarrio, who had been serving a 22-year sentence for seditious conspiracy before the Trump pardon; Proud Boy Ethan Nordean, who had been serving an 18-year sentence; Dominic Pezzola, the first rioter to breach the building on January 6, who was serving a 10-year sentence for stealing a police riot shield and using it to break a window. I will bet you saw that video. I did.

The group paraded through the Capitol after the press conference, following the same route they took on January 6, 2021. They posed for photos, chanting as they did that day:

Whose house? Our house.

After the press conference, Mr. Tarrio was even arrested again outside the Capitol for assaulting a female counterprotester.

Tarrio also posted video of himself stalking Michael Fanone and Harry Dunn, former police officers who had defended the Capitol on January 6. Tarrio was following them through the lobby of a hotel where the officers were attending a conference. While Tarrio followed them, he was calling out at them that they were ``cowards'' and telling them to ``keep walking.''

Does this sound like a man ashamed of his actions on January 6 and full of remorse? Does this sound like an innocent victim of assault? No. This sounds like a man who now thinks he is above the law with his Trump pardon and expects to be bailed out by President Trump for every crime he decides to commit.

In another horrifying turn, the same hotel that I discussed earlier where these rioters were stalking policemen had to be evacuated after someone claiming to be MAGA emailed a threat about four bombs--two in the hotel and one in Officer Fanone's mother's mailbox. After listing the names of several of the conference attendees and singling out Officer Fanone, the email said they ``all deserve to die.''

These are men and women in police forces who risked their lives for Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives on January 6.

The perpetrator of this tweet claimed to be acting ``to honor the [January] 6 hostages recently released by Emperor Trump''--his words.

These are just last week's updates on the January 6 rioters President Trump pardoned. The list of crimes committed by these thugs just keeps growing longer and longer.

We must be clear that these individuals are a threat, and the more power and freedom they are given, the more danger they pose to our democracy and the law enforcement officers and families of those officers that they are harassing.

Just this month, dozens of January 6 offenders joined forces on social media to compile and publicize the identities of at least 124 individuals who had been involved in their convictions, including prosecutors, judges, and FBI agents. The post, which has received at least 60,000 views, included names, photos, disparaging remarks, and demands for accountability.

In January, another pardoned January 6 defendant who pleaded guilty to assaulting police officers, Ryan Nichols, Sr., identified in a Twitter post ``officers in the DC Jail who need to be investigated for corruption and abuse,'' adding the names and LinkedIn profile photos of two DC jail employees.

This is stalking and harassment of law enforcement men and women who were assigned to this Capitol to protect us. The men and women who bravely defended the Members of this body deserve better than this, and we should honor them for their heroic efforts on that day, not excuse the rioters who attacked this Chamber and the ideals it represents. Government employees should not fear for their safety or that of their families for simply doing their job.

I hope that all of us, regardless of our political persuasion, will finally agree on one thing: Violence has no place in a democracy, and Donald Trump's pardon of these 1,600 January 6 attackers is not only an insult to the Capitol Police who risked their lives to stop them but has emboldened these convicts to harass these officers and their families.

The question for the Senate is simple: Whose side are you on--the police or the rioters'?

I yield the floor.

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

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

Mr. President, did you see over the weekend Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, dancing on a stage with a chain saw? Did you see that? Most Americans did. That was his approach to DOGE government efficiency--take a chain saw to it, put an

Agency like USAID in the ``wood chipper,'' in his words. Does this sound like a thoughtful approach to making government more efficient or does this sound like a meat-ax approach from a man who has no business being there, an unelected individual who somehow has been given authority by this President to lop off tens of thousands of jobs day in day out?

Yes, we have gone to court. Many of the Agencies in the government-- the employees and their representatives--have gone to court to question this ham-handed approach to making this government work, and they have been successful in the overwhelming percentage to receive temporary restraining orders and the like because on its face, serious questions are raised as to the authority of this President.

We have time-honored traditions when it comes to things like impoundment of Federal funds. The President cannot make that decision unilaterally. The power of the purse happens to be with the article I agency of the government, the legislature, not with the article II agency, the executive. As a consequence, when the President decides to do this unilaterally, he is being challenged in court, and he should be challenged in court.

This is not just a political issue, as one Senator just described; it is more importantly a constitutional issue and a legal issue, and it is going to be resolved ultimately by the court. Perhaps the President will win some of his cases and lose others. But this is a legitimate exercise of the authority in the Constitution.

I might add that this notion that we are going to start lopping off air traffic controllers and people who are responsible for aviation safety--I would just say to those who are for that and believe that is draining the swamp: Pay attention to what is happening across America. These terrible aviation disasters like the one that happened here in Washington, DC, should be taken seriously by us every day, and putting people in charge of these Departments who don't have adequate staff to monitor the flights of our Nation is active irresponsibility, as far as I am concerned.

The same thing is true with avian flu. Yes, the price of eggs is terrible. One of the reasons is avian flu is killing off the flocks of laying hens. As a consequence, we have fewer eggs and higher prices.

It is a very real concern because the avian flu is going to jump from these birds and fowl into the human chain, and we will face another pandemic. Do we want that? For God's sake, no. But the notion that we are going to lop off employees that are responsible for public health one after the other and somehow make this a safer nation is irresponsible on its face. Should it be challenged in court? Of course it should be, and I stand by that.

I just want to say to the Senator and others who make these comments: Think about what you are inviting here, to give the President the authority this Congress has, the authority under the Constitution--to just give it away. Are we going to give away our responsibility under the Constitution because of the popularity of this President with some Members? I pray that we won't.

(The remarks of Mr. Durbin pertaining to the introduction of S. 710 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I announce that the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) and the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, over the years, Federal funding for medical and scientific research has helped split the atom, defeat polio, create the internet, map the human genome, and so much more. No nation has ever made such a significant investment in science and medicine--none. And no nation's researchers have done more to approve the quality of life, not only here but around the world.

But we are in a pivotal moment in history. All the progress we have made--all the progress we hope to make--is in danger because of Donald Trump and Elon Musk. That is right. These two men promised to bring down the price of eggs and gasoline and make housing more affordable. Well, none of that has happened. Instead, they are carrying out an unprecedented and devastating campaign to cut research on cancer, ALS, Alzheimer's, dementia, and infectious diseases.

Instead of making life better for Americans, they want to slash research funding for the National Institutes of Health. If you have never heard of this Agency, I hope you will Google it or take a look and research to figure out who they are and what they do. It is the premier medical research agency in the world.

If you or someone you love receives a dreaded diagnosis, you turn to the doctor and ask: Is there a cure? A surgery? A medicine? I know I have been there and asked those very questions.

There is a difference between the doctor saying, ``I'm sorry, there is nothing we can do'' and ``I have got some good news; there has been some research at NIH we should look into.''

You know all the miracle drugs you see on TV? You can't get away from them, can you? And 99 percent of those drugs approved in the last 10 years were the product, in some way, of NIH research. NIH funding is why people are beating cancer, why babies are being spared from preventable diseases, why HIV is no longer a death sentence, why progress is being made on dementia and other neurological diseases.

Since the start of this administration, we have seen the White House unleash a lawless chaotic attack on everything from funding for farmers to biomedical research. Planes are crashing, and they are cutting aviation safety. Avian flu is on the rise and threatening to make that leap to humans, and we are cutting public health experts. Elon Musk dances across the stage with a chain saw; people laugh and cheer. First, let me tell you this: There is nothing to cheer about when it comes to medical research.

It was this bizarre memo from Office of Management and Budget that illegally froze Federal grant funding. They even prohibited the recipients of Federal grants and medical research from physically meeting in the same place. Oh, you are going to hear arguments: We have got to cut back on the waste and fraud and abuse. I am all for that. But having researchers unable to even sit down and talk about the next breakthrough, how can that possibly be good for our country?

These cuts that were announced by this administration were quickly halted by a Federal judge in a Federal court. There was comment on the floor earlier today that too many people are going to courts. Thank God they went to courts to keep this policy from being implemented by this administration.

But it seems, even though the court made a ruling, this administration is still holding up funding in violation of the court's order. As a result, NIH is delayed awarding approximately $1 billion in grant funding, delaying research at institutions nationwide. Does the delay hurt? Not unless you are the one sitting in that waiting room at a doctor praying to God there is a breakthrough to save your child.

Listen to what is at stake for one of my constituents, Dr. Timothy Koh, professor of kinesiology and nutrition at the University of Illinois in Chicago. For 15 years, Dr. Koh has been researching why people with diabetes develop wounds that do not heal, as well as researching treatments to address these wounds.

While having steady Federal funding for his research through the years, Dr. Koh was recently informed in the last few weeks that his NIH grant application is on hold because of the Trump-Musk Federal funding freeze. His current grant is scheduled to end on Friday of this week. And if his grant is not renewed, he will have to lay off his lab staff and will see major setbacks in the research he has been involved in. Dr. Koh said:

It's going to potentially put an end to my research career

and we won't be able to develop these new therapies for

diabetic [patients].

Is diabetes research important? If it is someone in your family, it is very important.

Make no mistake, under the Constitution, Congress is supposed to have the power of the purse--that is what it reads. But over the decades, bipartisan Members of Congress have worked in concert on a bipartisan basis to do something about NIH funding. It was a little over 10 years ago--Francis Collins, I consider to be an American hero and a saint. He headed up the NIH. And I went out to see him, and I said: I can't double your appropriation. I would do it if I could. What can I do to help you?

He said: Give the NIH Agency 5 percent real growth every year, and I will tell you this: Two things will happen. We will line up the scoreboard with breakthroughs and cures for diseases in America; and, secondly, my researchers will take heart because one of the things that destroys their interest in pursuing a career is the uncertainty of Federal funding.

Well, we went from $30 billion to $48 billion in 10 years because we had a bipartisan team to do it. Patty Murray joined me on the Democratic side. She has always been a champion of medical research; and on the Republican side, Senator Blunt of Missouri was the leader. He was the best. When he chaired a subcommittee on Appropriations that funded this Agency, he was committed to the 5 percent. And then Lamar Alexander of Tennessee--both of those gentlemen have retired. The four of us put together an effort to raise the NIH funding from $30 billion 10 years ago to $48 billion--a dramatic, dramatic increase.

We did it because we all agreed this is not a partisan issue. It should never be. We knew that NIH funding leads to new cures and treatments for patients in need. It supports well-paying jobs nationwide. And it cements our global leadership.

Illinois universities and hospitals receive approximately $1.2 billion in NIH funding a year, which supports 14,000 jobs in our State and 3.5 billion in economic activity. But I will tell you, Mr. President, virtually every State in the Nation can tell that story in one form or another.

Each year, the State of Wyoming receives approximately $12 million in NIH funding. Now, Wyoming is a small State, but they clearly have good research facilities that merit NIH grants. This money supports 265 jobs in Wyoming and $49 million dollars in economic activity. The top NIH funded institution in Wyoming is the University of Wyoming.

With this NIH funding, researchers at the University of Wyoming have recently conducted the following projects. See if any of these sound close to home or close to your family:

No. 1, why Alzheimer's disease and dementia can worsen at specific hours of the day.

No. 2, a project in Wyoming, links between menopause and cardiovascular disease in women.

And developing a new noninvasive tool to help treat people suffering from epilepsy, schizophrenia, anxiety, and autism.

They all sound like worthy projects to me.

Unfortunately, President Trump and Elon Musk aren't finished there. They tried indiscriminately to slash how NIH pays for indirect costs. Without funding, universities wouldn't be able to afford the technology that allows them to conduct research. Cuts to indirect costs are, simply, cuts to research, period.

The other day, we had a debate on the floor on this NIH. One of the Republican Senators talked about the outrageous outlying indirect cost in this country. Let's look at them. Let's review them.

But to stop all meetings of all medical researchers while we do this, to stop the funding for all the grantees, to stop all of the medical research because there might be 1 or 2 or 10

schools that ask for too much or hospitals--thankfully, the Illinois Attorney General, along with 21 other States' leading attorneys general, sued and secured a temporary reprieve for universities and researchers.

Trump and Musk illegally froze Federal medical research funding. They tried to illegally cut funding for medical research, and now they are firing the medical researchers themselves.

Reports indicate that 1,200 NIH employees have been fired so far, from experienced vaccine researchers to the next generation of scientists to the Acting Director of the NIH's Alzheimer's and dementia program.

Further, Trump and Musk have reportedly ended a popular trainee program that brought 1,600 young scientists just out of college to the NIH world-renowned campus in Maryland to get them started working in labs and eventually running labs. They are our future when it comes to medical research, and the Trump and Musk chain saw of chaos of budget cuts has made them victims.

How does this make us a greater nation? How does this make us a healthier nation? A better nation? It doesn't.

NIH research leads to new cures and treatments that extend, improve, and save lives, which is why I am introducing this resolution today to simply say to Senators of both sides of the aisle: Let's pledge our support to make NIH an exception. Let us not let wanton cuts stop something very valuable.

The resolution is straightforward. It says: The work of NIH should not be subject to interruption, delay, or funding disruption in violation of the law--in violation of the law. And it reaffirms that the workforce at NIH is essential to sustaining medical progress.

Can we really debate that point? Do we think the best medical research Agency in the world is being staffed by people who aren't the best? This is not controversial. It shouldn't be. Americans get sick on a bipartisan basis; shouldn't we support medical research on a bipartisan basis?

For as long as I can stand and for as long as I can speak, I will fight to protect NIH and medical research. I hope my Republican colleagues wake up and join me before it is too late.

So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 93, submitted earlier today; further, that the resolution be agreed to, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, if standing in this Senate and asking Republicans and Democrats to come together to preserve and build medical research is a waste of time, what in the world are we doing here?

If you were asked to take the Federal budget and put your priorities in there, maybe No. 1 would be national defense. Well, I might make that No. 1 as well; but I can tell you, No. 2 is medical research.

Because what happens when you reach a point where you cut off medical research? These researchers leave the laboratories and say: Honey, I don't know if I will have a job here next year. Let's start looking someplace else.

That is not an unusual thing to occur. So the next generation of researchers are being discouraged by the uncertainty of funding, and this notion that we have to get spending under control--how much does it cost to find a cure? What does it cost to have no cure? Let's get down to the bottom line here. We are talking about how long people stay in the hospital or whether they are alive at the end of the experience or not.

Some of these medical treatments they have to turn to are extremely expensive, unless you can find a cure at the front end of it. And you don't find it by saying, Well, maybe next year we will spend some money on medical research. That isn't the way it works. You want to have a good doctor you can trust from year to year, not a new one every year with a question mark.

The same thing is true with researchers. If you have the best researchers, why in the world would you discourage them from their continued work?

I listened to this comment about $48 billion. It is a lot of money, for sure. That is taxpayers' money, and I take it very seriously. But how much do you think it would cost if we didn't find these cures, didn't find these drugs? What would it cost in human terms and the experience of families who would give up hope because there is no place to turn? That is the reality.

We all have friends--and I had one today--I won't get into the details--who has just learned that he has pancreatic cancer. We don't have a cure yet. If we could find one, do you know how that would change the lives of so many people and their families? Is that worth putting our research into, our tax dollars into, or is it, as the Senator who objected to my resolution said, just wasting time here on the floor?

Well, I am going to come back and waste time over and over again. I am not giving up on this. I am not giving up on families who are waiting for cures and research. I am not giving up on the researchers who dedicate their lives to finding them.

Of course, if we have some overspending, whether it is at Harvard or Illinois or even the University of Wyoming, let's clean it up. But is it possible to clean that up without jeopardizing the basic mission of the National Institutes of Health? I certainly hope so. To think that we would have to close down the whole Agency because a handful of schools are overcharging the Federal Government--and there is no

proof that they are--I think that is part of the reality.

This is an issue that is important to every single American whether they know it or not. We can get spending under control and do it thoughtfully but not at the expense of the best researchers in the world and the expense of cures which would give families hope once and for all.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, now on a totally different subject, I would like to tell you about one of my constituents. He is a man from New Lenox, IL, in the suburbs of Chicago.

Late last year, he received an urgent phone call from someone claiming to be a deputy in the Will County Sheriff's Office. This self- proclaimed deputy informed my constituent that he had missed jury duty. As a result, the deputy said, there is a warrant out for your arrest.

The man was stunned. Don't worry, the deputy further explained. The man could avoid arrest, put the whole matter behind him. All he had to do was pay the fine. But he couldn't pay it by check or credit card. The deputy directed the man to a local cryptocurrency ATM machine and told him to deposit $15,000 into the machine, pay the fine, and all would be forgiven.

If you have been following the news, you might have guessed by now that the man on the phone wasn't a sheriff's deputy at all; he was a scammer. Once my constituent deposited his money into the crypto-ATM, it was gone--gone. There was no way to trace the transaction to the scammer and no way to get the money back.

This is just one example of a growing and alarming trend of crypto- ATM fraud. There are now more than 30,000 crypto-ATMs in this country, and they are being used by criminals to cheat Americans out of their hard-earned savings, to the tune of $114 million in 2023 alone. Most of the victims are senior citizens.

While these scams aren't all identical, they generally play out just like the one I described. A stranger calls and pretends to be from the government or the victim's bank. They make claims of unpaid fines, a frozen bank account, a credit card in default, or even threaten arrest.

The scammer then tells their victim that they must immediately go to a crypto-ATM at a nearby grocery store, gas station, or convenience store. Often, the scammer will try to stay on the phone with the victim throughout the scam, warning of dire consequences if they don't make the payments immediately. It is a way of preventing their victim from getting a moment to take a breath and just maybe realize what is going on.

Once the victim arrives at the crypto-ATM, the scammer will walk them through the process of depositing real money--cash--into the machine, buying Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency, and sending it to the scammer's digital wallet.

Last summer, a small business owner in my hometown of Springfield, IL, removed a crypto-ATM from the store after witnessing senior after senior walk in, talking on their phones, looking stressed, and depositing huge sums of cash into the machine. He said:

One hundred percent of the time that we saw somebody at the

machine they were being scammed.

This is in a small store in Springfield, IL.

It wasn't just happening there. There are tragic stories of seniors losing their savings through these machines in every State in America.

A South Carolina retired couple lost $390,000 over the course of several months through a scam involving crypto-ATMs. Just this month, a sheriff's office in Walton County, FL, reported a resident that was cheated out of $129,000 through a crypto-ATM.

It is past time that we put some commonsense guardrails in place to stop fraud in this largely unregulated industry. That is why, today, I am joining with Senators Blumenthal, Reed, and Welch to introduce the Crypto ATM Fraud Prevention Act. This bill will require crypto-ATM operators to warn consumers about scams and take reasonable steps to prevent fraud at their machines.

It will also put in place measures to limit the amount that consumers lose when they do fall victim to scams and would give law enforcement new tools to track down and fight back against criminals.

I want to share a few key measures in this bill with you. First, the bill will provide special protection for consumers during the 2 weeks after they make their first transaction at a crypto-ATM, the period when a consumer is most likely to be a victim of fraud. During this time, customers will be limited to deposits of $2,000 per day and $10,000 total. While this is still a lot of money, it ensures people's entire life savings are not put at risk.

The bill will also require crypto-ATM operators to obtain verbal confirmation via a live phone call for any transaction with a new customer over $500. Do you remember when I told you scammers often stay on the phone with victims until the money has been deposited in their digital wallet? Well, this requirement will break that communication, give victims a chance to think, perhaps reach out to another member of the family, and make sure crypto-ATM operators can assess whether the customer is being scammed.

Next, the bill requires crypto-ATM operators to give prominent, clear warnings about the risk of fraud and tell consumers about common types of scams. While warnings alone are not enough, they are part of the key to preventing fraud.

Operators also will be required to issue paper receipts to customers after each transaction. The receipt will include, among other things, the date, time, and amount of the transaction and the transaction hash, which will allow law enforcement to more easily trace the transaction, collect evidence of the crime, and maybe even recover the stolen funds.

Next, operators will be required to use the analytics to screen for suspicious, illicit transactions. Some companies are effectively using this technology already. It should be used across the board.

Finally, crypto-ATM operators will be required to issue refunds to consumers who are victims of fraud. As long as victims make a sworn report to law enforcement and notify the operator within 30 days of the transaction, they will be entitled to a full refund. New customers will get full refunds. All other customers will be entitled to a refund of, at minimum, any fees associated with the transaction.

These measures are commonsense guardrails that will prevent countless Americans, particularly senior citizens, from losing thousands of dollars of their hard-earned savings to criminal scams. I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me to pass this bill into law. We don't have any time to waste.

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

Mr. President, now on a totally different subject, I would like to tell you about one of my constituents. He is a man from New Lenox, IL, in the suburbs of Chicago.

Late last year, he received an urgent phone call from someone claiming to be a deputy in the Will County Sheriff's Office. This self- proclaimed deputy informed my constituent that he had missed jury duty. As a result, the deputy said, there is a warrant out for your arrest.

The man was stunned. Don't worry, the deputy further explained. The man could avoid arrest, put the whole matter behind him. All he had to do was pay the fine. But he couldn't pay it by check or credit card. The deputy directed the man to a local cryptocurrency ATM machine and told him to deposit $15,000 into the machine, pay the fine, and all would be forgiven.

If you have been following the news, you might have guessed by now that the man on the phone wasn't a sheriff's deputy at all; he was a scammer. Once my constituent deposited his money into the crypto-ATM, it was gone--gone. There was no way to trace the transaction to the scammer and no way to get the money back.

This is just one example of a growing and alarming trend of crypto- ATM fraud. There are now more than 30,000 crypto-ATMs in this country, and they are being used by criminals to cheat Americans out of their hard-earned savings, to the tune of $114 million in 2023 alone. Most of the victims are senior citizens.

While these scams aren't all identical, they generally play out just like the one I described. A stranger calls and pretends to be from the government or the victim's bank. They make claims of unpaid fines, a frozen bank account, a credit card in default, or even threaten arrest.

The scammer then tells their victim that they must immediately go to a crypto-ATM at a nearby grocery store, gas station, or convenience store. Often, the scammer will try to stay on the phone with the victim throughout the scam, warning of dire consequences if they don't make the payments immediately. It is a way of preventing their victim from getting a moment to take a breath and just maybe realize what is going on.

Once the victim arrives at the crypto-ATM, the scammer will walk them through the process of depositing real money--cash--into the machine, buying Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency, and sending it to the scammer's digital wallet.

Last summer, a small business owner in my hometown of Springfield, IL, removed a crypto-ATM from the store after witnessing senior after senior walk in, talking on their phones, looking stressed, and depositing huge sums of cash into the machine. He said:

One hundred percent of the time that we saw somebody at the

machine they were being scammed.

This is in a small store in Springfield, IL.

It wasn't just happening there. There are tragic stories of seniors losing their savings through these machines in every State in America.

A South Carolina retired couple lost $390,000 over the course of several months through a scam involving crypto-ATMs. Just this month, a sheriff's office in Walton County, FL, reported a resident that was cheated out of $129,000 through a crypto-ATM.

It is past time that we put some commonsense guardrails in place to stop fraud in this largely unregulated industry. That is why, today, I am joining with Senators Blumenthal, Reed, and Welch to introduce the Crypto ATM Fraud Prevention Act. This bill will require crypto-ATM operators to warn consumers about scams and take reasonable steps to prevent fraud at their machines.

It will also put in place measures to limit the amount that consumers lose when they do fall victim to scams and would give law enforcement new tools to track down and fight back against criminals.

I want to share a few key measures in this bill with you. First, the bill will provide special protection for consumers during the 2 weeks after they make their first transaction at a crypto-ATM, the period when a consumer is most likely to be a victim of fraud. During this time, customers will be limited to deposits of $2,000 per day and $10,000 total. While this is still a lot of money, it ensures people's entire life savings are not put at risk.

The bill will also require crypto-ATM operators to obtain verbal confirmation via a live phone call for any transaction with a new customer over $500. Do you remember when I told you scammers often stay on the phone with victims until the money has been deposited in their digital wallet? Well, this requirement will break that communication, give victims a chance to think, perhaps reach out to another member of the family, and make sure crypto-ATM operators can assess whether the customer is being scammed.

Next, the bill requires crypto-ATM operators to give prominent, clear warnings about the risk of fraud and tell consumers about common types of scams. While warnings alone are not enough, they are part of the key to preventing fraud.

Operators also will be required to issue paper receipts to customers after each transaction. The receipt will include, among other things, the date, time, and amount of the transaction and the transaction hash, which will allow law enforcement to more easily trace the transaction, collect evidence of the crime, and maybe even recover the stolen funds.

Next, operators will be required to use the analytics to screen for suspicious, illicit transactions. Some companies are effectively using this technology already. It should be used across the board.

Finally, crypto-ATM operators will be required to issue refunds to consumers who are victims of fraud. As long as victims make a sworn report to law enforcement and notify the operator within 30 days of the transaction, they will be entitled to a full refund. New customers will get full refunds. All other customers will be entitled to a refund of, at minimum, any fees associated with the transaction.

These measures are commonsense guardrails that will prevent countless Americans, particularly senior citizens, from losing thousands of dollars of their hard-earned savings to criminal scams. I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me to pass this bill into law. We don't have any time to waste.

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

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Warnock), and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine), are necessarily absent.