Floor Statements

Would my colleague yield for a question?

Mr. President, what my colleague seems to be stressing-- and it is something I share--is that there is an urgency here. In my State, we have a couple with premium hikes of 500 percent. They feel like they are getting hit by a healthcare wrecking ball.

And what I am also deeply concerned about--and we have talked about it in the Finance Committee--is that with all these cuts in public programs, we are going to have a massive shift to those who have employer-sponsored coverage. It is 154 million people. For 60 percent of working age Americans with coverage, it comes from their employers. They are going to have a massive shift onto them.

And what I believe my friend is saying and what he is stressing and seeing in Vermont is the urgency of this. If you could speak to that as we review this first of what I think may be other colleagues coming to speak.

Would my colleague yield briefly?

I think the remarks my colleague has made are thoughtful. He knows that since my days as director of the Gray Panthers, I have always wanted to work in a bipartisan fashion. But how do you do it if, in fact, in the Finance Committee, we have not had, by my calculus, a healthcare hearing in 400 days? Isn't that what my colleague is saying, is that we ought to have these hearings and we ought to work in a bipartisan way? That is what we did in the PBM bill, where we got a 26- to-nothing vote.

I see my friend from California, a new Member. You can't get a vote around here 26-to-nothing to order a can of Sprite but it was because colleagues like Senator Welch wanted to find some common ground and get going.

Isn't that what my colleague is saying, is that we want to work with Republicans in a bipartisan way and we are available 24/7 to do it? Is that correct?

Mr. President, I rise to promote the passage of S.J. Res. 88, a resolution to repeal Donald Trump's price-hiking global tariffs.

American families are being squeezed by prices going up and up and up. More than three-quarters of families say their monthly expenses have increased by more than $100 a month.

There is however, colleagues, something the Senate can do today. Today, it is possible for the Senate to focus on bringing families relief to their wallets. Congress can vote to repeal Donald Trump's trade taxes and stop taking money out of Americans' pockets.

Trump imposed these global tariffs by declaring an economic emergency. In my view, Donald Trump's actions clearly go beyond what the law allows, which is why I am urging passage of this bill to finally end the President's unlawful tariffs.

The average family will see about $2,800 in higher costs because of the Trump tariffs and taxes. The Senate ought to cancel that tax hike.

Let's cancel this tax hike. Let's cancel this tax hike.

Donald Trump won't do it. He is paying for tax cuts for billionaires on the backs of working families.

Fortunately, Congress, not the President, has got the final word on tariffs and taxes and trade. Senators can vote today to end the harmful and dangerous global tariffs.

It has been 6 months since the Senate tied 49-49 on this same proposal. Since then, our Nation's trade policy has looked pretty much like a dog chasing a squirrel: more tariffs threatened, added, taken away.

Thousands of packages are being destroyed because the Customs Service wasn't prepared.

There are secretive deals to lift tariffs for certain companies and products that have influence with the White House.

People across the country are being harmed by tariffs. In my State, tariffs take a chunk out of the bottom line of everybody, from blueberry farmers to brewers, to small manufacturers, to our crucial semiconductor industry. Thousands of good-paying jobs in my State are under pressure because of tariffs.

In many ways, red States and rural areas are being hit the hardest. In Columbus, IN, thousands of jobs depend on manufacturing, mostly diesel engines for export markets. They also use parts from overseas to make the engines. The mayor of Columbus and business leaders warned that tariffs are causing economic damage that will take years--years-- to recover from.

Farmers are getting a double whammy from the Trump trade taxes. They have to pay more for fertilizer and tractors and a variety of inputs, while their markets overseas evaporate.

In Kansas, farmers harvested a bumper crop this year, 20 percent more of sorghum than normal. Farmers called it a ``blessing,'' but they are not better off. Trump's trade war drove buyers to Brazil and Australia. Prices for American sorghum are less than half of what they were in 2022.

Let me close by way of saying--and I thank my colleague Senator Kaine. He and I have been on this floor for days talking about the need to get rid of the Trump taxes.

And we are going to wrap up by saying potato farmers in Oregon, Idaho, and across the West say the same thing. Buyers in Canada, Mexico, and China have slashed orders for french fries, hash browns, and a variety of other frozen potatoes.

The Senate is not a spectator to the workings of the Federal Government. When it comes to international trade and tariffs, in particular, the U.S. Congress has clear authority--not authority that is up for grabs, not authority that hasn't been addressed. It is clear authority. This is Congress's job. It is not a partisan issue. It is a jobs issue, a kitchen-table issue.

I urge all Members to support this resolution. Roll back the arbitrary global tariffs.

I thank Senator Kaine. We have been partners in this effort for months now.

This is the big issue. This is going to affect people not just in our country but all over the world, and we will be better positioned to get more jobs in America if we get rid of these global tariffs.

I yield to my friend.

Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Rhode Island, as well as Senator Klobuchar and Senator Kaine. We have all been teaming up to terminate Donald Trump's blanket tariffs on products Americans buy from Canada.

Once again, we have an opportunity to cancel a Trump trade tax and put money back into the pockets of the American people.

This is a chance for Senators to show our constituents that we are going to act for them, not for special interests or some new Presidential obsession.

Unlike many of the nations Trump has slapped with taxes, there is already a comprehensive trade deal between the United States and Canada. It was written with input from the Senate Finance Committee, and it was bipartisan. USMCA was a trade deal negotiated by Donald Trump himself, and it got a significant bipartisan vote.

Congress approved the deal, put it into black-letter law, and we made sure--with Senator Brown, in particular, leading the fight--to have a bill with tough enforcement--enforcement teeth--to make sure the United States could hold Canada and Mexico to their commitments.

This is the only way to ensure that farmers, workers, and businesses get the full benefit.

But Trump's trade taxes aren't addressing enforcement issues with Mexico and Canada, or making the USMCA work better. Instead, he is unilaterally undermining supply chains across the board.

He has imposed new tariffs on scores of products we buy from Canada, making groceries, housing, energy, and cars more expensive.

He put a 50-percent tariff on steel and aluminum, a singularly bad idea. Beer, appliances, auto parts--all of them--are getting hammered by that tax.

There are 8 million American jobs that depend on trade with Canada. Canada is the biggest export market for 32 American States.

With this trade war, Trump is destroying jobs and harming America and making our people poorer.

Since national security was one of the rationales for the Trump trade taxes on Canada, I have to point out that his trade war against our close ally is making American allies and us less safe.

For one, Canada is a reliable source of energy, raw materials, and critical minerals that China has repeatedly used as a bargaining chip in trade talks. Critical minerals are essential to manufacturing in the high-tech and defense industries. The Trump administration has invested millions in developing the Canadian critical minerals industry as an alternative to China's near monopoly.

But here is a key point: instead of developing Canada as an alternative to China for raw materials, Donald Trump is driving our closest ally straight into the arms of China.

The Canadian Prime Minister said last week that his country is looking to reengage with India and China to find new markets and new allies that are more reliable than the United States. America would get better results on trade by buying spells from an Etsy witch.

Trump's stated reason for blowing up commerce is fentanyl trafficking. Now, I don't take a backseat to anybody when it comes to cracking down on the scourge of fentanyl. Oregon is no stranger to the devastating effects it has wreaked in our communities.

But, in reality, there is no crisis at the northern border. Less than 0.2 percent of fentanyl entering the United States comes from Canada.

Some of my colleagues on the other side have voiced concerns about tariffs but said they want to give Donald Trump more time to strike a deal. I would ask: what in the past 6 months makes you think that this is somehow magically going to get better?

Instead of negotiating, Donald Trump spends his energy having tantrums about TV ads that accurately quote Ronald Reagan's position on tariffs. He has already increased these tariffs on Canada once. He is now threatening to jack up Canada tariffs by another 10 percent because one of their provinces--just one--took out the Reagan ad.

Who would make a deal with a person who acts like this, who ignores a deal that was made just a few years ago and who constantly threatens to annex their country?

That is what Donald Trump has done with Canada.

These tariffs are doing nothing to help Americans. They are unrelated to trade disputes.

I hope every Senator will vote to repeal the taxes on Canadian goods and help lower costs for our constituents.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to support my colleagues Senator Kaine and Senator Paul on their joint resolution to terminate Donald Trump's order placing blanket tariffs on products Americans buy from Brazil. I am going to start with the impact on Americans.

Donald Trump's unilateral tariff spree is an unprecedented tax on American families who are already struggling. The tariffs on Brazil are no different. We get lots of coffee from Brazil, and coffee prices are up 21 percent from a year ago. Ground beef is up 13 percent from last year--that is according to FOX News--and Brazil is a major supplier. But instead of getting rid of these tariffs, Donald Trump is sending $40 billion to subsidize ranchers in Argentina.

I recently held townhall meetings at home, and surprisingly not a single Oregonian told me they wanted to pay more for their morning coffee, or more for a hamburger.

In all, Donald Trump's tariffs are going to cost the average American family more than $2,000 this year, according to the Yale Budget Lab.

That, Mr. President, is the what--higher prices on coffee, beef, and building materials Americans get from Brazil. Now I am going to talk about why.

Donald Trump didn't unilaterally slap those 40 percent tariffs on things we buy from Brazil to help the American worker. No, America had a $7 billion trade surplus with Brazil last year. And while food prices in the United States are shooting up, Trump's tariffs have lowered food prices in Mexico and Brazil.

The real reason--and this is what is crucial--the real reason Donald Trump is imposing these tariffs, by his own words, is to settle personal scores, and pressure the Brazilian Government to let their corrupt former President off the hook. In his letter announcing the tariffs, Donald Trump called the prosecution of former President Bolsonaro ``a witch hunt.'' Colleagues, Mr. Bolsonaro was convicted of masterminding a failed coup.

There is no way that taking money out of Americans' wallets to protect one corrupt politician in South America makes even a bit of sense.

This is a brazenly illegal and corrupt effort by Donald Trump that, in my view, is directly hurting the American people. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Kaine-Paul resolution to end the Brazil tariffs.

This body is going to vote on more of these resolutions in coming weeks. I see my friend from Kentucky here, who is joining me in a crucial one of those. My legislation with Senator Paul would repeal all of Donald Trump's global tariffs.

I am committed to seizing back Congress's constitutional role over trade, which is spelled out in the Constitution. It is my hope that colleagues on both sides of the aisle will exercise their best judgment on these crucial, key tariff issues, listen to constituents, and vote for Americans instead of for Donald Trump and corrupt foreign strongmen.

I yield and look forward to hearing my colleagues talk further today on this issue.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following members of my team be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress: Christopher Stille, Madeleine Vea, Meredith Shea, Eric Gitson, Matthew Trone, Ethan Lukas, Christopher Adair, Cara Levy, Steven Kasparek, and Rami Major.

I thank my colleague very much.

I just want to make sure, from a parliamentary standpoint, would the Senator from Oregon yield for my question?

Mr. President and colleagues, I want to start by commending my partner from Oregon, who has now been on the floor for close to 18 hours. What he is doing is ringing the alarm bells about authoritarianism in America. It is an important public service.

Let me begin by saying, the Wyden family certainly knows a thing or two about watching a democracy slide towards authoritarian rule. I wrote in my book about how the courageous women in my family, in the face of the Nazi takeover of the German republic, recognized the very real threat of the growing authoritarianism in Germany. They pushed the rest of the family to recognize what was happening to their democracy when some of the men didn't want to face reality. Because of the vigilance of women, I am standing here today in the Senate.

Now, further, on this point, as my colleague knows, during the protests in Portland this past weekend, Federal agents dragged a 4- foot-6 blind man named Quinn across a driveway and detained him for over an hour. Apparently, they thought he didn't move out of their way fast enough. It is hard to imagine--it has been reported in publications, in the Oregonian and the like--how anyone could see Quinn as a threat.

As he put it: I think they wanted to make a point, so they picked the weakest person they could find and made a big show about it.

What Donald Trump and the Vice President are offering us is, indeed, an authoritarian playbook: Attack the weakest in order to intimidate the rest of us. That is why it is the obligation of all Americans to pay attention to all of the discussions on this topic and to speak out and not yield. The American abolitionists told me that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty to keep the powerful from stealing from the many for the few.

Senator Merkley, I am interested in what you think Americans should do to secure the benefits of liberty for themselves and their families and future generations and what do you want Americans to take from your speech today?

That is correct.

Senator Merkley, you have said it very well.

It seems to me America is the last bastion of liberty in the world. There is nowhere to flee to, no mighty republic that stands if American democracy fails.

I want to commend my partner from Oregon for taking this exceptionally important stand. This is a message, particularly for all of America, and it is high time it be made on the Senate floor, and I commend my colleague.

I know you have to ask permission. I just want to say that today has been an extraordinary day for Oregon and for the country. We look forward to continuing this discussion. And would the Senator yield?

Would the Senator be willing to continue this discussion in the days ahead? Because I think this has been extraordinary. It has begun to lay out the implications of what this is really all about in terms of authoritarianism. It is important for our State. It is an important debate for the country.

Would the Senator be willing to carry out further kind of discussions? And it might not necessarily be here on the floor of the Senate, but elsewhere as well?

My colleague has richly earned a few hours of sleep tonight, but I am going to make sure that here in the Senate and across the country, people understand that this is the beginning of further discussion, not the end.

I want to thank my colleague for taking this time today to play out what this is really all about in terms of this issue.

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

Mr. President, I join my colleagues, today, in standing up for Americans' basic constitutional rights.

Donald Trump has again deployed agents and troops to my hometown of Portland, OR, and to other American cities. He announced this authoritarian occupation with orders for Federal agents to use ``full force.''

Since then, he has deployed Federal law enforcement from the Department of Homeland Security, and he has activated 200 Oregon National Guard members, over the objection of the Governor of Oregon, local leaders in Portland, and local law enforcement. He has tried to deploy an additional 300 troops from California--from the National Guard there--and 400 troops from the Texas National Guard, all to my hometown.

Colleagues, during this government shutdown, our Guard members will not even be paid for this unnecessary, unwanted deployment. Activating the Oregon National Guard alone is going to cost $10 million and will pull Guard members away from much more important work.

If Donald Trump truly wanted to help Oregon or Illinois or California, the money would be better spent cracking down on fentanyl traffickers, ending his tariffs that are gutting small businesses, and holding down health costs.

Instead, Donald Trump says U.S. cities like Portland ought to be used as ``training grounds'' for the military.

I would say to the Senate: Let that one sink in. The President of the United States thinks it is acceptable to use American cities as training grounds for the military. In my view, that is unconscionable.

My hometown is a vibrant and peaceful city. It doesn't require any deployment of Federal troops or additional Federal agents to keep our community safe. In fact, the Federal judge, who was appointed by Donald Trump himself, has ruled repeatedly against a troop deployment. She said there was ``no showing that military help is necessary to protect law enforcement or the one federal building for ICE.''

Portland's police department has said there is no need for Federal agents in our city, as well, and that the administration's deployment of ICE agents is making it actually harder for them to do their jobs and keep our cities safe.

The notion that my hometown is somehow a war zone in need of saving is a fantasy made up by Donald Trump and far-right trolls.

Oregonians have taken to social media to show that my community is really peaceful. You see it in our gardens, in our vegetable stands. You see it in musicians playing on the sidewalks.

My constituents have long engaged in peaceful First Amendment activity. The Governor and mayor of Portland have the appropriate resources to maintain peace and order in our communities.

My view is this Trump unilateral action is an abuse of Executive authority. He is clearly hoping that he can incite violence and undermine the constitutional balance of power between the Federal Government and our States.

In addition to the judicial ruling in Oregon last month, a Federal judge in California ruled that the Trump administration actually violated black letter law through the deployment of troops to Los Angeles. His Los Angeles deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which explicitly limits the power of the Federal Government to use the military for domestic purposes.

Unfortunately, none of this is new to my hometown. Five years ago, Portland experienced the consequences of an unnecessary and outrageous Federal deployment under Donald Trump's first Presidency.

In the summer of 2020, the White House unleashed Federal agents on Portland. It was like an occupying army, complete with military-grade equipment and violent tactics that were totally unacceptable on American soil. Federal agents shot at Portland residents, tear-gassed families, drove in unmarked vehicles, and grabbed people off the street without an explanation.

Federal agents didn't identify themselves. They didn't wear uniforms. They beat up on those who asked them basic questions about their actions.

There is no question in my mind that another deployment by this administration is going to result in similar abuses, similar violations of Americans' constitutional rights. Inciting violence is clearly Donald Trump's intent.

And I want to make it clear: As Oregon's senior Senator, I am going to continue doing everything to work with my colleagues to fight back against Trump's Federal occupation and show America, from coast to coast, the beauty and the strength of my hometown.

I yield the floor, and I note my partner in the Oregon congressional delegation. He and I have teamed up every step of the way and will continue to do so.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, shortly, the Senate will vote on an important resolution put forward by our colleague and friend Senator Kaine on the topic of U.S. energy production.

As my colleagues know, Senator Schumer and I led the development of the clean energy tax credits, which set in motion the possibility of hundreds of billions of dollars of investment in clean energy and, particularly, a policy that would keep prices down and keep good jobs up. It had policies and ideas in it like technological neutrality that created an opportunity for good science to reign and create incentives for development.

Donald Trump came into office huffing and puffing because he didn't like that. He didn't like that kind of energy dominance based on consumer choice and marketplace forces.

He said our economic problems would go away with one thing: ``Drill, baby, drill.'' Here is the reality. Like so much of his agenda, it doesn't add up, and everything he does is rooted in a sweetheart deal for his wealthy contributors.

Back in February, he signed the Executive order declaring an energy emergency. That is the subject of today's floor action. The emergency declaration has nothing to do with energy dominance, but it has everything to do with giveaways for Big Oil. Donald Trump is looking out for the same oil and gas companies that he solicited for big checks for years and years. His offer to them was: Give me your money. Get me elected. I will let your companies run the show.

I will give you this: Donald Trump kept his promise to Big Oil. He has gutted American energy production, ceded ground to China on the clean energy arms race, and rigged the system. There is no technological neutrality, Senator Kaine. It is all about fossil fuels, to the exclusion of everything else.

After declaring this energy emergency, Donald Trump and Republicans took a wrecking ball to American energy production by gutting the tax credits for wind and solar energy in their budget bill. I was struck, as we were making the decisions, when natural gas leaders came and essentially told the Energy Committee, which at one point I chaired: Look, we are for natural gas, but with AI and all the energy needs for growth, we need solar and wind.

These are the gas people. They are not repudiating gas. They said: We need more energy.

My guiding principle has been crafting that legislation--that legislation that took, really, a decade to put together. After cap and trade went down, it was all about the need to create good-paying jobs and secure a clean energy future--and that those two are not mutually exclusive; you can have both. They go hand in hand.

The tax credits helped to kick off a manufacturing boom in America-- as I mentioned, hundreds of billions of dollars, not through government but through the private sector--hundreds of thousands of jobs. New factories went up around the country. Battery technology, clean vehicles, energy-efficient products for businesses and homeowners--it was already bringing down energy costs for consumers.

In terms of the global arms race for clean energy jobs and investment, the United States went from the middle of the pack, under our efforts, to the front basically overnight--until, at Trump's direction, Republicans destroyed all of that. All of that progress was destroyed, at the first opportunity, by Donald Trump. Why? To pay for more tax cuts for corporations and his wealthy friends.

When Republicans were gearing up to pass a reconciliation bill, I said this would be a bloodbath for clean energy. Fast-forward 3 months: Manufacturing projects are being canceled, jobs are being lost, and utility bills are going up. Their budget bill was a wrecking ball for clean energy, and those workers are going to lose their jobs as a direct result.

Last week, the administration announced plans to cancel over $7 billion in funding for clean energy. Almost every one of those projects was located, as Senator Kaine and I have talked about, in a blue State. Oregon alone had over $400 million in funding canceled.

Are the Republicans stopping there? No way. They have derailed management of our public lands, and now they want to do it to prop up coal. Oregonians see this for what it is--a gobsmacking attempt to hurt American families just to score points with campaign folks they have been close to.

Now, the United States is barreling toward a self-inflicted energy crisis manufactured entirely by Republicans. Energy demand is skyrocketing. Utility bills are rising. Keeping costs low and meeting demand is going to require an all-of-the-above approach based on technological neutrality. Instead, Republicans are focused on giveaways to billionaires--Americans' bank accounts be damned.

It is as clear as our beautiful Crater Lake at home that all the talk from Trump and Republicans about American energy dominance never was going to be a reality. It was just a hollow campaign slogan. The Republican energy agenda is a level of economic self-sabotage that leaves you slack-jawed: How can you make such an unforced error?

It is going to take a huge toll on the economy. Our people thought they were voting for cheaper groceries, utilities, gas, and good-paying jobs and haven't gotten much of any of that. They didn't vote for an energy crisis that benefits nobody except big oil investors.

So beginning, colleagues, with Senator Kaine's resolution, the Senate now has an opportunity, a chance to go to innovation and modernization and bring an end to Trump's manufactured energy crisis. This is a chance for the Senate to use innovation to fight for lower prices, more jobs, and greater energy security, while Donald Trump stands in contrast trying to undermine all that.

I urge my colleagues, when we vote, to strongly support Senator Kaine's resolution.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, in the wake of the violent and senseless murders of multiple lawmakers and political advocates, I rise to seek passage of legislation that will provide a real measure of protection to all Americans for their privacy and security.

Before I do, I also want to point out that I am just back from the so-called ``war-ravaged hellhole'' of Portland, OR--my hometown--and somehow I made it out unscathed. I will have more to say, but I want to make clear that my hometown of Portland is safe; it is vibrant; and Portlanders do not want Federal troops and do not need Federal troops.

Now, with respect to privacy, as it stands today, data brokers have amassed vast amounts of Americans' personal information, which they are willing to sell to anyone with a credit card. Would-be murderers can often find the home addresses and other personal information about their targets within a few search results on Google. Indeed, the assassin who murdered Minnesota State representative Melissa Hortman and shot State senator John Hoffman repeatedly used ``people search'' websites run by data brokers to learn the home addresses of the victims.

I also recognize that Members of Congress receive untold numbers of violent and harassing threats as a result of our jobs, and I want to credit the bipartisan effort in the Senate Commerce Committee to provide privacy protections for Members of Congress. I do not intend to stand in the way of their legislation.

The bill I offer today takes the privacy protections against data brokers in the Commerce Committee's bill and extends them to all Americans. Protecting everyone is the most effective way to protect U.S. military and intelligence personnel, including undercover officers. There have been numerous press reports over the past few years revealing how data brokers are selling sensitive location data collected from U.S. personnel who are working at military bases and other sensitive facilities and that they are willing to actually sell this data to foreign buyers. Members of Congress should not receive special treatment. Our constituents deserve protection from violence, stalking, and other criminal threats.

For that reason, Mr. President, as in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 2850; that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, the Senator from Texas has offered to do a hearing on my proposal, and I do appreciate that.

I simply believe it is unfortunate when the Senate will pass privacy protections for ourselves but not for all Americans and that only shady data brokers, would-be murderers and stalkers, as well as foreign adversaries buying data on U.S. Government officials, are actually going to benefit from blocking this bill.

Mr. President, I want to tell my colleague from Texas I look forward to the hearings on legislation that would ensure that all Americans have these protections because, as you and I have talked about, I think it is critically important there not be a double standard in America. I thank my colleague for the offer of the hearings.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor to recognize and honor an exceptional Oregonian. For 27 years, Kathy Ottele has served as a volunteer for the American Cancer Society and has been instrumental to the work and accomplishments of this unique organization.

The mission to eradicate cancer is deeply personal to Kathy. She is a seven-time skin care survivor, and she lost her dad, her mom, and her two younger sisters to this horrible disease. Kathy understands the importance of sharing her story.

From local community events to the halls of government in both Oregon and the Nation's Capital, she has made it her personal mission to connect with as many people as possible about the critical work at the American Cancer Society.

I have personally seen through my time with Kathy how her advocacy has helped families in a very positive way. Oregonians will long feel the positive impact of her tireless dedication to finding a cure for cancer. At home, we call it the Oregon Way.

She has also made it a personal priority to raise awareness and funding for the cause each year. I could stand here all day and announce a long list of things she has achieved during her 27 years of service. I will name just a few.

Through her efforts, she has consistently been one of the American Cancer Society's top fundraisers. Last year, she raised over $17,000 for this cause. In recognition of her steadfast volunteer and advocacy efforts to help make cancer a national priority, she was named the State Lead Ambassador by the American Cancer Society's Cancer Action Network in 2020.

She has also been a member of the American Cancer Society's organization in Oregon and Southwestern Washington. She has been on the board of directors for the last 7 years.

Part of the reason why she is so deserving of all these important honors and responsibilities has been because of her advocacy and fight for early cancer detection blood testing--hugely important--such as in the bipartisan bill that I sponsor with our colleagues Senators Crapo and Bennet. It is one of the best ways we know of to make sure people can stop cancer early and save lives.

For the last 5 years, Kathy aimed her advocacy efforts at promoting groundbreaking early cancer detection advances--known as Multi-Cancer Early Detection tests--to help more cancer victims learn their diagnosis far earlier and survive the disease at far higher rates. Kathy actually participated in a clinical trial of the new technology conducted at Oregon Health Sciences University, and she came away from that experience committed to winning broader access to this lifesaving, groundbreaking advance.

Kathy has played a critical role in educating community and policymakers in Oregon about the importance of access to multi-cancer early detection screening coverage, and I am proud to be a lead sponsor with Senators Crapo and Bennet, S. 339, the Nancy Gardner Sewell Medicare Multi-Cancer Early Detection--MCED--Screening Coverage Act that will help ensure access to screenings that can detect cancer at earlier, more treatable stages. As a testament to Kathy's advocacy, every single Member of the Oregon delegation serves as a cosponsor of our legislation.

As Kathy celebrates her 27th year as a Society volunteer, she shows absolutely no signs of slowing down. Her rigorous dedication in service continues to make a lasting impact on the mission to ending cancer as we know it, and she does that for everyone.

I know that I speak for Oregonians in every nook and cranny in our State as we express our gratitude for her commitment, her talent, her mentorship, her leadership, and particularly in the constant effort to better cancer research and treatment.

So on behalf of our whole State, this afternoon here on the floor of the U.S. Senate, I would like to thank Kathy Ottele for her tireless work and service. She has literally dedicated her life to this cause, and the people of Oregon are better for it. I look forward to our

continued partnership on these important efforts as I work as a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee, and she continues her incredible volunteering at home.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the GAO opinion letter dated August 27, 2025.

Mr. President, we have been looking at this for well over 3 years now, and what I would like to do with my colleague Mr. Merkley, with all of my colleagues, is make an important point. I wanted to just take stock of where things stand.

The Trump administration came in promising radical transparency on Jeffrey Epstein. Now the fact is that the Epstein files are being suppressed, and the administration is obstructing oversight from the Congress.

The President's story about his relationship with Epstein changes by the day, and that is true of his administration as well. His personal lawyer went to talk to Ms. Maxwell, and who knows what was said in that conversation.

What we do know is that Maxwell has been moved--Epstein's partner in crime--to a minimum security prison without giving any good reason as to why a child sex trafficker deserves that additional comfort.

House Republicans seem no longer interested in having Maxwell testify.

Yesterday, it was reported that a member of Donald Trump's inner circle gave a high-paying job to another close Epstein associate, a man named Darren

Indyke. That sounds about as bizarre and wrong as you can get.

My colleagues and I believe it is a big mistake for the Senate to go out of session without making real progress on real transparency on the Epstein issue. There are a number of ways you can do that.

Let me say a little bit about our investigation, which began 3\1/2\ years ago, so it has been looked at by Democrats and Republicans alike. From the outset, it has been built on the fact that you have to follow the money to be at the core of this global sex trafficking operation, which, on the basis of what we have seen, has been funded lavishly.

We began by examining the financial ties between Mr. Epstein and a Wall Street titan named Leon Black. We found that Black paid Epstein $170 million over just a couple of years. He said it was ``for tax and estate planning.''

The central claim, though, is what is noteworthy. The claim was that Mr. Epstein was a financial wizard, some superstar in terms of looking at taxes and estates, and he could perform accounting miracles. It appears this kind of work for Black and others was one of Mr. Epstein's biggest sources of income.

Now, here is the catch: Epstein wasn't an accountant or a tax attorney at all. And Leon Black, who is extraordinarily well off, already employed the best tax advisers in the business. He didn't need Mr. Epstein to handle his money. Black's lawyers even told our investigators--let me just keep it brief--that Epstein's work wasn't very impressive. He made mistakes, and his work needed to be double- checked by people who were actually tax experts. But, Mr. Black was paying Mr. Epstein more than double the income of the average Fortune 500 CEO.

Mr. Black wasn't the only one paying Mr. Epstein top dollar for this so-called financial advice. That is where we have to go to follow the money.

Last year, my investigators went to the Treasury Department and reviewed thousands of bank documents related to Mr. Epstein's financing. I have spoken at length about those documents here on the Senate floor. There is a whole set of Epstein files in the possession of the Treasury Department, above and beyond the files in the possession of the Department of Justice.

So that is a key point. You have to look, if you are going to follow the money, at the Treasury Department, not just at the Department of Justice.

We have been trying to get those documents. The Trump administration has been blocking us.

We have demanded answers from the new head of the IRS about why its criminal investigators didn't look into Epstein's work for Leon Black or whether they did any investigation of Epstein at all.

We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars paid by ultrawealthy individuals to a known sex trafficker for the purpose of dodging billions in taxes. It is unthinkable that those transactions were never audited or investigated.

A deep dive on this, starting with the IRS criminal investigations operation, could have blown the lid off Epstein's cover story about being a financial genius quite some time ago. It could have helped uncover the financing behind these horrific crimes.

One last point in terms of an update. There are all kinds of pundits out there chattering about whether this is the right political issue to focus on. My message is blunt: This is not about politics. This is not about Democrats and Republicans.

I just want to make it clear, this is about whether there is going to be justice for the victims of a notorious sex trafficker who did not abuse these women and girls alone. This is about whether there is going to be accountability for the people who enabled and participated in Epstein's crimes.

The question really is, as I close: Who is the government looking out for, the rich and powerful, even those who do horrible things, or the powerless, the victims of abuse who have been neglected for too long?

Donald Trump wants this to go away without any accountability. And for him, that might be about self-preservation. But it is clear the Trump administration, based on our detailed work, doesn't want to do the right thing here. I am 3\1/2\ years into my investigation of one aspect of the Epstein story because there ought to be accountability and justice for the victims. I am here to bring my colleagues up to date on the investigation. There will be more this summer, particularly about the Treasury Department, which is sitting on thousands and thousands of Epstein documents of its own, and they shouldn't be allowed to skate on this. We are going to keep investigating. We are going to keep putting the pressure on.

This is not about blue. It is not about red. It is about doing the right thing and making sure something like this doesn't happen again.

Senator Merkley and my colleagues are doing the right thing today. I want it understood, as somebody who has led this investigation for more than 3\1/2\ years, I support them strongly.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from New Hampshire and my colleague from Vermont for both giving extraordinarily thoughtful comments.

The reality is, when you talk about these deals, what you are really talking about, the Trump agreements is essentially giving our country a few lines scratched on a napkin.

There is very little ``there'' there. And I so appreciate my colleagues seeking to free our citizens from crushing new trade taxes, courtesy of Donald Trump's tariffs. He slapped tariffs on things people buy from scores of countries. So he has hit cars and car parts, aluminum, beer, food, and clothing. The list goes on and on. That means just that Americans are going to pay more to buy the things they need because Trump taxes jack up the price.

This month, Donald Trump has been announcing these so-called trade deals from a handful of countries. So as I indicated, these are really much. The USMCA, which was something that Donald Trump participated in, was a real trade deal, was the result of intense negotiations, a transparent process, a bipartisan vote in the Congress.

I was honored to be the ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee as we worked together to get this passed. That deal produced real wins for the American people, like Oregon potato growers were able to ship potatoes to Mexico for the first time in decades.

Donald Trump's latest deals mostly consist of a tariff number, 20 percent on products from Vietnam, for example, with some sort of fake or vague promise that the rest will be figured out later. Instead of having an enforceable, binding agreement that opens markets to U.S. farmers and manufacturers and small businesses now, as I say, we get a little bit of verbiage put on a napkin or a piece of paper.

Not surprisingly, when Trump describes the deals, his story is often enormously different from what these countries say they agreed to. For example, Japan says it will provide up to $550 billion of financing in the United States. That is fine. Donald Trump claims Japan promised to create a $550 billion fund that will be spent at his direction-- essentially, a personal slush fund. Meanwhile, Vietnam has not even confirmed that it has agreed to the deal Donald Trump announced.

What does our country get in exchange for these higher tariffs that are paid by our people? Significant economic pain.

U.S. workers and employers are already getting battered by the trade chaos of Donald Trump. The big three U.S. automakers all announced plunging profits. General Motors lost more than a billion dollars due to tariffs. Instead of making U.S. automakers better off, the new tariff scheme is going to make our cars and trucks more expensive compared to Japanese competitors.

It is going to get worse. Because of Donald Trump's endless flip- flops on tariffs, the real cost of his trade taxes are going to go fully into effect in coming months.

Donald Trump can do all this because he, basically, goes off, does his own thing, and is claiming emergency powers to pursue the tariffs. My colleagues and I are proposing straightforward legislation to clarify the President's emergency powers. We say they have got to be used in emergencies and can't be used to put tariffs on things Americans buy from other countries.

A number of our Republican colleagues have supported Senator Shaheen's proposal in the past. Putting a check on the President's power to land us in trade wars didn't used to be a partisan effort. Senator Welch, Senator Markey, a number of my colleagues, and I want to exempt small businesses from having to pay Trump's emergency tariffs. That is because these small businesses are the least able to absorb big new government taxes on the materials they need to make their goods.

The bill my colleague Senator Shaheen and I are trying to pass today would rein in some of Donald Trump's worst impulses. The Shaheen legislation would clarify that the laws on the books were never meant-- never--to be a blank check for the President to abuse tariffs by using them as a punishment against a country--maybe multiple countries--that are hurting his feelings.

At the same time, my home State of Oregon is fighting these tariffs in court with arguments that will happen tomorrow. Donald Trump and his billionaire allies aren't going to feel the impact of higher tariffs. So I guess that may be why they don't care about the millions of Americans who do care deeply and can't afford higher costs.

Congress and the courts have to make clear that the tariff roller coaster in America has got to be stopped.

I thank my colleagues for their leadership on this issue.

I yield the floor.