Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about a bill that Senator Shaheen and I introduced recently. It is called the Improving Needed Safeguards for Users of Lifesaving Insulin Now Act, or the INSULIN Act. This bill would make insulin more affordable for Americans with diabetes.

I would like to also recognize the work of Senators Warnock and Kennedy who joined us in introducing this important bill.

In 1997, I founded the Senate Diabetes Caucus after meeting with a family from Maine who had a 10-year-old son with type 1 diabetes.

I will never forget this young boy looking up at me and saying to me that he wished that he could just take 1 day off from having type 1 diabetes--his birthday or Christmas--just 1 day. But, of course, he could not.

It was then that I knew that I had to dedicate my efforts toward earlier diagnosis, better treatments and technology, and one day a cure.

Since 2009, Senator Shaheen and I have cochaired the Diabetes Caucus in the Senate and worked together to fund vital research and advance policies that will improve the lives of those who are living with diabetes. One of our top priorities has been to make insulin more affordable.

Now, insulin was first isolated more than 100 years ago in Canada, and the scientist who did discover it gave away, essentially, the patent rights because they wanted insulin to be available and affordable to everyone who needed it.

Tens of millions of Americans rely on insulin as part of their daily treatment

for their diabetes. For children, teens, and adults with type 1 diabetes, insulin is not optional; it is literally a matter of life or death. About 20 percent of those with type 2 diabetes are also insulin- dependent. While there are some exciting and extraordinary scientific breakthroughs in cell and gene therapy that may change this--and the sooner the better--the fact is that, today, people who are dependent on insulin still face great anxiety about its affordability.

I have heard from far too many people across Maine and across this country who, because of the escalating costs of insulin, feel they have to ration their insulin and do not take the full dose that their physician has prescribed and that they need to be healthy.

Let me tell you of one example.

Bek Hoskins, of Chelsea, ME, is a young adult. Bek was forced to skip her doses of insulin to try to make it last longer, to stretch it out, because she simply could not afford the cost. In one profoundly memorable instance, Bek pushed her body's limit too far, and she ended up in the emergency room. Her husband Barrett rushed her, through a snowstorm, to the hospital, and she nearly died because she tried to go without insulin for 2 days. Such a dangerous, preventable crisis should never occur. We must address this life-threatening problem.

Senator Shaheen and I have introduced legislation to reduce the price of insulin in the past two Congresses, and we have made some progress. For example, three of the biggest insulin manufacturers--Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi--voluntarily chose to cut their list prices. This is encouraging, but there is more work to be done. We also joined together for reforms in the pharmacy benefit manager system, which encouraged PBMs to choose the highest priced insulin for insurance formularies. That was because their compensation was frequently a percentage of the list price. Much of that we are fixing, and some of it was fixed last year. But we need more legislation to fix the fundamental problems in the insulin market, including limited biosimilar competition, as well as barriers to patients' access.

The INSULIN Act would do just that. Our bill would limit cost sharing for insulin to no more than $35 a month, or 25 percent of the list price per month, for at least one type of insulin for each type that is needed and dosage form, for patients who have commercial insurance.

Our bill would also prohibit insurers and pharmacy benefit managers from placing utilization obstacles such as prior authorization and step therapy on products that have capped costs. These important patient protections will deliver immediate out-of-pocket relief.

The INSULIN Act of 2026 will also promote generic and biosimilar competition in the insurance market to further drive down prices through more competition. The bill would create a new, expedited FDA pathway to promote biosimilar competition. It would take similar steps to enhance regulatory certainty for biosimilar drug companies, such as by requiring the FDA to prioritize actions such as inspections and communications with manufacturers.

We can't have a situation where a biosimilar, which is like a generic for insulin, is launched at a low price but faces obstacles to its approval even if it is absolutely identical to a brand-name insulin, and we can't allow--and we have seen this before--pharmacy benefit managers to refuse to choose that lower priced biosimilar product for the insurance company's formulary simply because they will make less on the deal.

Finally, this bill helps address the insulin needs of uninsured Americans by creating a pilot grant program for States to implement to identify people with diabetes who are uninsured and provide them with insulin at $35 a month. It will also create an insulin resource center and a hotline for people with diabetes who are uninsured to help connect them with programs so that they can secure the insulin that they need in order to be healthy.

The INSULIN Act will help make insulin more affordable for Americans, both those with and without insurance, by capping the cost and addressing fundamental flaws in the insulin market and the FDA approval process. I thank the American Diabetes Association, Breakthrough T1D, and the Endocrine Society for endorsing this much needed legislation.

Let me just add one final point. If individuals who are insulin- dependent are able to use their insulin, they not only are going to be healthier and avoid severe ramifications of not taking insulin; the healthcare system is going to save money. It is far less expensive to help people afford the insulin that they need for their diabetes than to have them hospitalized or at risk of losing a limb or becoming blind or having other severe consequences because they are not able to afford their insulin.

So I would encourage my colleagues to join us in supporting this bipartisan and much needed legislation.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, on May 2, 2026, Maine Maritime Academy bestows an honorary degree upon Dr. James S. C. Chao in recognition of his extraordinary contributions to global shipping, education, and public service. Dr. Chao's lifelong commitment to maritime commerce and leadership development has had a lasting impact on the industry and on generations of young professionals.

It is fitting that the keynote speaker for the academy's 83rd commencement is Dr. Chao's daughter, the Honorable Elaine Chao, who served our Nation with distinction as both Secretary of Labor and Secretary of Transportation. In that latter role, Secretary Chao was a champion of America's maritime academies that prepare the next generation of leaders for our Navy, Coast Guard, and maritime industry. When the new training vessel State of Maine was delivered in March of this year, I was proud to stand with Secretary Chao as cosponsor of that magnificent ship.

Appreciating the vital role the oceans play in commerce, security, and the environment is a family tradition. Dr. Chao was born 99 years ago in a small, rural farming community in China. Despite the danger and privations of World War II and the Chinese Civil War, he excelled in his educational pursuits and became one of the youngest captains in the Chinese Merchant Marines. After being separated by the war, Dr. Chao searched relentlessly for the love of his life Ruth Mulan Chu and finally found her by chance in Taiwan. They were wed in 1951, beginning a marriage that lasted for 57 years until her passing in 2007.

In 1958, Dr. Chao achieved a record-high score on the Chinese Merchant Marine Master's Special Qualification Examination, which gave him the opportunity to continue his studies in the United States. Arriving in New York alone and with little money, he secured a low- paying job with a Chinese shipping company and, with persistence, eventually gained admission to graduate programs at Columbia University and St. John's University. Balancing his studies with three jobs, he finally was able to bring Ruth and their three children to America in 1961.

After earning a master's degree in business administration in 1964, he founded his own company, Foremost Maritime Corporation. Among his early accomplishments was managing emergency food shipments during the wars in Vietnam and Bangladesh. Today, the company, now part of the Foremost Group, is global leader in international shipping, trading, and finance. Foremost Group is a leader in green technology in shipping, continuously upgrading its fleet with energy-saving devices, and building new ships with alternative fuel and carbon capture features.

Foremost's fleet is ranked among the world's most eco-friendly bulk carriers. For his outstanding contributions to the maritime industry, Dr. Chao was inducted into the International Maritime Hall of Fame at the United Nations. Among his many other honors are the Ellis Island Medal of Honor, the Horatio Alger Award of Distinguished Americans at the U.S. Supreme Court, and an Outstanding American by Choice recognition by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Together, Dr. and Mrs. Chao devoted their business success to philanthropy, particularly in providing scholarships to deserving students. Since four of their daughters attended Harvard Business School, the couple endowed the Ruth Mulan Chu Chao Center as part of a $40 million gift to the university that also supports the Chao Family Fellowship Fund.

Dr. Chao credits his remarkable accomplishments to courage, determination, confidence, and trust. As our Nation celebrates its 250th anniversary, we do well to heed his words, as one who achieved the American dream: ``I could not have had the same success anywhere else as I have in this country. In America, you don't need to have a connection or a certain background. All you need is to have a goal. After that, all you have to do is work hard and help others.''

America is so fortunate to have such an outstanding individual come to our shores and contribute so much. I congratulate Dr. James S.C. Chao on this recognition from Maine Maritime Academy and wish him all the best.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two bills: the Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregiver Act and the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act. These bills, which I am introducing today with my colleague from Virginia Senator Warner, would enable family caregivers to better save for retirement.

Family caregivers play an important role in American society, providing uncompensated care for millions who often need assistance 7 days a week. While they devote themselves to providing care for our Nation's children, seniors, and other loved ones, they often suffer economically. According to a study by the Edward Jones Grassroots Taskforce, 64 percent of American women say their caregiving duties have had a negative impact on their ability to save towards their long- term financial goals, and more than half have had to take on fewer professional responsibilities due to caregiving. While it is difficult to put a dollar amount to the value of the devotion, time, and services that these caregivers provide, the Alzheimer's Association has estimated that in 2023 family caregivers provided $350 billion in uncompensated dementia care.

Our retirement system needs to accommodate this enormous commitment by helping ensure that family caregivers do not fall short of what they need for their own retirement. That is exactly what the two bills Senator Warner and I are introducing today would do.

Our legislation would enable family caregivers to contribute to their retirement funds even if they are not making significant income. Under current law, contributions to Roth IRAs are capped at $7,000 or yearly income, whichever is less. This severely limits the amount a family caregiver earning less than $7,000 can contribute to a retirement account. The Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregivers Act would eliminate the yearly income cap for family caregivers, enabling them to contribute up to $7,000 annually to a Roth IRA.

Our current retirement system allows those over the age of 50 to make ``catch-up'' contributions above the statutory limit, the idea being that those in their fifties have more discretionary income to put toward retirement than they did when they were younger. In the same way, the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act would allow family caregivers to take advantage of ``catch-up'' contributions for every year they were sidelined from the workforce as a family caregiver.

These complimentary bills would allow family caregivers to invest more in their retirement funds now and later. The bills have earned the support of important stakeholder organizations

that work with family caregivers, such as the Insured Retirement Institute. In a letter in support of the bills, the IRI wrote: ``While a noble and selfless decision, leaving the workforce is often the only option an individual has when seeking to provide the necessary care for a family member. Not only does this severely reduce or eliminate a caregiver's income, but their ability to participate in workplace retirement savings plans and save for retirement is also lost. The solutions offered by the Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregivers Act and the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act provide caregivers eligibility to contribute to Roth IRAs and enhance their ability to catch up once they return to the workforce.''

I note that both pieces of legislation are also endorsed by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, SIFMA, the American Benefits Council, the Edward Jones Grassroots Task Force, the Insured Retirement Institute, and the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement, WISER. The Alzheimer's Association and the Alzheimer's Impact Movement have also endorsed the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from the Alzheimer's Association and the Alzheimer's Impact Movement be included in the Record immediately following my remarks, along with letters from Edward Jones Grassroots Taskforce, the American Benefits Council, the Insured Retirement Institute, IRI, and the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement, WISER.

I am grateful for the support of these groups who know how important these retirement reforms will be to the financial security of caregivers who sacrifice for their loved ones. I urge my colleagues to support our legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two bills: the Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregiver Act and the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act. These bills, which I am introducing today with my colleague from Virginia Senator Warner, would enable family caregivers to better save for retirement.

Family caregivers play an important role in American society, providing uncompensated care for millions who often need assistance 7 days a week. While they devote themselves to providing care for our Nation's children, seniors, and other loved ones, they often suffer economically. According to a study by the Edward Jones Grassroots Taskforce, 64 percent of American women say their caregiving duties have had a negative impact on their ability to save towards their long- term financial goals, and more than half have had to take on fewer professional responsibilities due to caregiving. While it is difficult to put a dollar amount to the value of the devotion, time, and services that these caregivers provide, the Alzheimer's Association has estimated that in 2023 family caregivers provided $350 billion in uncompensated dementia care.

Our retirement system needs to accommodate this enormous commitment by helping ensure that family caregivers do not fall short of what they need for their own retirement. That is exactly what the two bills Senator Warner and I are introducing today would do.

Our legislation would enable family caregivers to contribute to their retirement funds even if they are not making significant income. Under current law, contributions to Roth IRAs are capped at $7,000 or yearly income, whichever is less. This severely limits the amount a family caregiver earning less than $7,000 can contribute to a retirement account. The Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregivers Act would eliminate the yearly income cap for family caregivers, enabling them to contribute up to $7,000 annually to a Roth IRA.

Our current retirement system allows those over the age of 50 to make ``catch-up'' contributions above the statutory limit, the idea being that those in their fifties have more discretionary income to put toward retirement than they did when they were younger. In the same way, the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act would allow family caregivers to take advantage of ``catch-up'' contributions for every year they were sidelined from the workforce as a family caregiver.

These complimentary bills would allow family caregivers to invest more in their retirement funds now and later. The bills have earned the support of important stakeholder organizations

that work with family caregivers, such as the Insured Retirement Institute. In a letter in support of the bills, the IRI wrote: ``While a noble and selfless decision, leaving the workforce is often the only option an individual has when seeking to provide the necessary care for a family member. Not only does this severely reduce or eliminate a caregiver's income, but their ability to participate in workplace retirement savings plans and save for retirement is also lost. The solutions offered by the Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregivers Act and the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act provide caregivers eligibility to contribute to Roth IRAs and enhance their ability to catch up once they return to the workforce.''

I note that both pieces of legislation are also endorsed by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, SIFMA, the American Benefits Council, the Edward Jones Grassroots Task Force, the Insured Retirement Institute, and the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement, WISER. The Alzheimer's Association and the Alzheimer's Impact Movement have also endorsed the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from the Alzheimer's Association and the Alzheimer's Impact Movement be included in the Record immediately following my remarks, along with letters from Edward Jones Grassroots Taskforce, the American Benefits Council, the Insured Retirement Institute, IRI, and the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement, WISER.

I am grateful for the support of these groups who know how important these retirement reforms will be to the financial security of caregivers who sacrifice for their loved ones. I urge my colleagues to support our legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the revised memberships on the 12 subcommittees of the Committee on Appropriations for the 119th Congress be printed in the Record.

The new assignments reflect Senator Deb Fischer's selection as chair of the Subcommittee on Legislative Branch and Senator Jon Husted's selection as a member of the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies; Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government; Subcommittee on Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies; Subcommittee on Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies; Subcommittee on Legislative Branch; and Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, all for the remainder of this Congress.

Mr. President, I have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. President, In 1851, 31 years after Maine became the 23rd State of the Union, the small, agricultural town of Chelsea was incorporated. Chelsea, named after the town of Chelsea, MA, is known for its peaceful community, with a strong sense of pride in its history. From its humble beginnings to a thriving agricultural center, Chelsea remains a true treasure of central Maine.

The first settlers were farmers, and their fierce determination and hard work made Chelsea an agricultural force. Chelsea became the largest produce market in the county, with apples from the town's sizable orchard a leading fare. By 1856, the first cider mill had been built. In addition, Chelsea shipped more wool than anywhere else in the State during the last half of the 19th century.

Chelsea has also played an important role in honoring those who serve our country. The Togus Veterans Hospital, established by President Abraham Lincoln, was the first Federal facility dedicated to providing care for America's heroes. In its long history, the facility cared for veterans from the American Civil War to the present day.

Thanks to its strategic location on the beautiful Kennebec River, Chelsea served as a significant site in our country's fight for independence during the Revolutionary War. More than 1,000 soldiers followed the Kennebec River north during Benedict Arnold's Quebec Expedition in 1775, using Chelsea as a key staging area to plan and prepare for the long journey.

Aside from the Togus Veterans Hospital, perhaps the building with the greatest historical significance is the Chelsea Grange Hall. Built in 1914, the Grange Hall symbolizes Chelsea's rural heritage and is a place where an organized effort is made to bring people together for good times and to orient the community around family and friendship.

Chelsea's history and its continued service to this Nation make it an absolute pearl of our State. The town of Chelsea has a proud legacy of service, resilience, and close-knit community spirit woven into the heart of rural Maine.

Maine has long played a role in the guidance and leadership of our great Nation. The town of Chelsea, by her safeguarding of our Nation's heroes and her place in our revolutionary history, leads the State of Maine into a future of continued service to neighbors and Nation.

Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to end the reckless Democratic shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security. This shutdown has caused chaos at our airports, delayed assistance to communities hit by disasters, and forced thousands of essential frontline employees at TSA, at the Coast Guard, and at the Cybersecurity Agency to work without any guarantee of when they will be paid.

More than 50,000 TSA agents and officers who help keep us safe are currently working without pay, with many forced to find second or new jobs to make ends meet. Some are so discouraged that they have quit. Over the weekend, we saw security lines at some American airports stretch for more than 3 hours as the result of TSA's staffing shortage.

And what is the Democratic response? According to one Democratic Senator, they are ``very serene with what is going on.'' How can you be serene when you have increased the danger to the United States of contraband being smuggled into this country or a terrorist attack occurring or illegal substances being smuggled into our airports?

I don't like to be partisan, but the fact is the American people need to know that the Democrats created this chaos when they walked away from the bipartisan, fully negotiated DHS funding bill and then blocked repeated Republican attempts to pass a short-term funding measure to prevent these disruptions that are so harmful both to our country, security, and to the employees while the negotiations continue.

They claim that they need meaningful policy changes to support fully funding the Department, but their approach to resolving this impasse has been characterized by a lack of urgency and a lack of seriousness.

We are nearly a month into the shutdown of this vital Department. And today--today--marks 2 weeks of the Senate Democratic leadership sitting on what is a good-faith offer from the White House to end the shutdown.

Democrats have even rebuffed entreaties from Senate Republican negotiators to meet to bridge the differences between the two sides, to discuss the White House offer, which believe me, answers many of the concerns that have been raised, without endangering our law enforcement officers.

Instead, they have put forward a bill that takes the bipartisan measure that we negotiated in January and completely strips the funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.

Now, while defunding ICE and CBP may resonate well with far-left activists, it is not a serious public policy solution.

I want to take a moment to highlight some of the work that ICE and CBP do, which goes far beyond immigration enforcement and helps to keep our country safe.

More than a quarter of ICE's annual appropriated budget is for Homeland Security Investigations. They are referred to as HSI. Let me explain what HSI is.

This unit is charged with investigating the illegal movement of people, goods, contraband, weapons, and sensitive technology into, out of, and through the United States. HSI's agents are tasked with combating cartels, human smuggling, child exploitation, forced labor, and investigating international financial crimes.

Do we really want to defund those vital investigations? I think not.

CBP, too, does far more than just immigration enforcement. It is responsible for facilitating legal trade and travel throughout the United States. It screens goods for drugs and protects U.S. industry through its efforts to detect illegal imports, duty evasions, and counterfeits.

Its Office of Trade works to ensure that products made with forced labor are not allowed into our country and that businesses are unable to profit from human trafficking.

CBP's Air and Marine Operations patrols our maritime borders. Its agricultural specialists work to prevent the spread of pests and foreign plants being brought into this country.

Last Congress, the Democratic leadership of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee held a hearing--an excellent hearing-- entitled ``Combatting Transnational Criminal Organizations and Related Trafficking.'' The witnesses for that hearing were, not surprisingly, representatives of HSI and CBP. These Agencies and their work and the importance of it were highlighted, and I quote the Democratic Appropriations lead who said they are playing ``a critical role in interrupting the flow of fentanyl into the United States.'' That same Democratic Senator said proposed cuts to these accounts would be ``catastrophic'' to their ability to fight cartels.

Now, the other side of the aisle suggests that we defund those exact same efforts.

We cannot continue this way. Real challenges are worthy of a serious response--a response that does not harm our country.

Today, Republicans are again taking steps to restore funding to the Department of Homeland Security and these critical missions. Shortly, we will have an opportunity to vote on allowing the Senate to debate and amend the Homeland Security appropriations bill.

Once on the bill, I believe that we should consider the White House's good-faith February 26 offer, which the Democrats have yet to respond to, even though it addresses many of the concerns that they have raised and that many of us have raised.

This offer would build on the reforms that were included in the bipartisan funding bill negotiated earlier this year, which included new safeguards to protect the American public and our law enforcement and increased oversight.

For example, our bipartisan bill had $20 million, which we added, for body-worn cameras. Those cameras help to protect both law enforcement officers and the people with whom they are interacting.

But the White House offer would go considerably further by increasing substantially the funding for the body-worn cameras. I don't know why my Democratic colleagues would not see that as great progress. It goes beyond what we had previously negotiated in a completely bipartisan way.

There are many other critically important, substantive reforms that are included in the White House's offer. But what do we hear from the Democratic leadership? Nothing--nothing in the 2 weeks since the offer was submitted. They won't even sit down and

discuss the offer. I just do not understand it.

The White House's offer represents a good-faith, honest attempt to find reasonable compromises on the differences with our Democratic colleagues. It deserves a good-faith, reasonable, honest response. Instead, silence.

The stakes are far too high.

To my Democratic colleagues, please, stop playing political games when so much is at stake. Work with us to govern. Let's be responsible.

It is time for our Democratic colleagues to get serious.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Coin Act. Firefighters across Maine and throughout the country courageously and selflessly put their lives on the line to serve their communities, responding to emergencies at all hours to protect the lives and property of others. Tragically, some firefighters make the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty.

When a firefighter falls, the loss is felt not only by his or her family and colleagues but also by the entire community. The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation was established by Congress in 1992 to honor these heroes, to remember their service, and to provide vital support to the families they leave behind.

As our Nation approaches the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, we are reminded once again of the extraordinary bravery and selflessness of America's first responders who answered the call without hesitation and rushed toward danger to rescue others. On that tragic day, 343 members of the Fire Department of the city of New York died in the line of duty. Since then, firefighters and other emergency responders involved in the response, rescue, and recovery operations have fallen sick because of their service at Ground Zero. Their courage continues to inspire and humble us.

Firefighters risk their lives with every assignment they take. Over the years, the NFFF has recognized the sacrifices of 41 Maine firefighters. This year, the annual event will memorialize one more Mainer, Chief Bobby Dorr of Ellsworth, whose cancer was related to his fire service.

In this spirit of remembrance and gratitude, I call on my colleagues to support the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Coin Act, which will recognize and honor our Nation's fallen firefighters with a commemorative coin program to support the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation.

The commemorative coin program has long been a bipartisan way for Congress to recognize those who have made enduring contributions to our Nation. Authorizing a coin program to honor fallen firefighters and raise funds for programs to help those they leave behind, particularly as we reflect on the legacy of 9/11, is a fitting tribute and a meaningful way for Americans to show their appreciation. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to join me in honoring the firefighters who gave their lives in service to others on September 11 and throughout our Nation's history.

Mr. President, I would like to thank my colleagues and fellow Congressional Fire Services Caucus cochairs, Senator Klobuchar, Senator Murkowski, and Senator Peters, for supporting this legislation. I urge the rest of our colleagues to join us in honoring America's bravest.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Coin Act. Firefighters across Maine and throughout the country courageously and selflessly put their lives on the line to serve their communities, responding to emergencies at all hours to protect the lives and property of others. Tragically, some firefighters make the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty.

When a firefighter falls, the loss is felt not only by his or her family and colleagues but also by the entire community. The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation was established by Congress in 1992 to honor these heroes, to remember their service, and to provide vital support to the families they leave behind.

As our Nation approaches the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, we are reminded once again of the extraordinary bravery and selflessness of America's first responders who answered the call without hesitation and rushed toward danger to rescue others. On that tragic day, 343 members of the Fire Department of the city of New York died in the line of duty. Since then, firefighters and other emergency responders involved in the response, rescue, and recovery operations have fallen sick because of their service at Ground Zero. Their courage continues to inspire and humble us.

Firefighters risk their lives with every assignment they take. Over the years, the NFFF has recognized the sacrifices of 41 Maine firefighters. This year, the annual event will memorialize one more Mainer, Chief Bobby Dorr of Ellsworth, whose cancer was related to his fire service.

In this spirit of remembrance and gratitude, I call on my colleagues to support the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Coin Act, which will recognize and honor our Nation's fallen firefighters with a commemorative coin program to support the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation.

The commemorative coin program has long been a bipartisan way for Congress to recognize those who have made enduring contributions to our Nation. Authorizing a coin program to honor fallen firefighters and raise funds for programs to help those they leave behind, particularly as we reflect on the legacy of 9/11, is a fitting tribute and a meaningful way for Americans to show their appreciation. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to join me in honoring the firefighters who gave their lives in service to others on September 11 and throughout our Nation's history.

Mr. President, I would like to thank my colleagues and fellow Congressional Fire Services Caucus cochairs, Senator Klobuchar, Senator Murkowski, and Senator Peters, for supporting this legislation. I urge the rest of our colleagues to join us in honoring America's bravest.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Medical Nutrition Therapy Act of 2026, along with my colleague from Michigan Senator Peters. Our bill will expand Medicare beneficiaries' access to medical nutrition therapy, or MNT, which is a cost-effective component of treatment for obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and other chronic conditions. Increasing access to MNT should be part of the strategy to improve disease management and prevention for America's seniors. The Medical Nutrition Therapy Act would make two important changes to support patients, improve health outcomes, and reduce unnecessary healthcare costs.

First, the bill would expand Medicare Part B coverage of outpatient medical nutrition therapy services to several currently uncovered diseases or conditions, including prediabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, malnutrition, eating disorders, cancer, HIV/AIDS, gastrointestinal diseases including celiac disease, and cardiovascular disease. Currently, Medicare Part B only covers outpatient MNT for diabetes, renal disease, and post-kidney transplant.

Second, the bill would allow more types of providers--including nurse practitioners, physician assistants, clinical nurse specialists, and psychologists--to refer patients to MNT. Right now, only physicians may refer patients to dieticians for medical nutrition therapy. Expanding the types of providers who make these referrals would be especially significant for patients in a rural State like Maine where an NP or PA may be one's trusted primary care provider.

MNT counseling is provided by registered dietitian nutritionists, RDNs, as part of a collaborative healthcare team. It is evidence-based and has been proven to positively affect weight, blood pressure, blood lipids, and blood sugar control. Nutritional counseling by RDNs is recommended by the National Lipid Association to promote long-term adherence to an individualized, heart-healthy diet. Through MST, individuals benefit from in-depth, individualized nutrition assessments. Followup visits help reinforce important behavior and lifestyle changes and increase compliance.

Seniors deserve improved access to this cost-effective medical treatment, but many older adults are missing out under the current Medicare policy. I heard from a dietitian in rural Washington County, ME, who is the only part-time dietitian in the county and works at a federally qualified health center, FQHC. One of her patients is an elderly man with severe tooth decay requiring a modified personalized meal plan. He lost 40 pounds in 1 year despite being cleared for any gastrointestinal or other underlying medical condition that could have caused this extreme weight loss. He became clinically malnourished. Finally, his primary care provider referred him to the dietitian at the FQHC for medical nutrition therapy with a diagnosis of failure to thrive.

Because this patient, however, did not have a diagnosis of diabetes or renal disease, the FQHC at which he received treatment will not receive Medicare reimbursement for the three 60-minute medical nutrition therapy sessions that the dietitian provided. At his third and final session, the patient shared that this dietitian was the most helpful provider with whom he had ever met. He is no longer afraid of eating and has more good days enjoying meals with family and friends.

Another patient from Maine, who is a Medicare beneficiary, was treated for severe obesity with gastric bypass surgery. This patient was unable to afford out of pocket costs to receive post-operative medical nutrition therapy. He struggled with post-operative diet advancement, which led to hospitalization for severe dehydration and failure to thrive within the first 3 months after surgery. One year after surgery, this patient had severe nutritional anemia requiring iron infusion and monthly vitamin B-12 injections. This tragic situation could have been prevented if the MNT he needed had been covered by Medicare. Early treatment with MNT can prevent serious health complications and chronic conditions, particularly in older adults.

In addition to the human cost, there is a financial one: the impact on the Medicare Program. This should not come as a surprise since the health and economic effects of chronic diseases are staggering. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 90 percent of the $4.9 trillion that the United States spends annually on healthcare goes to the treatment of people with chronic diseases and mental health conditions. Preventing chronic diseases, or managing symptoms when prevention is not possible is an effective way to reduce these costs. This is particularly important for the Medicare Program as more than two-thirds of seniors on Medicare live with multiple chronic conditions. As one registered dietitian nutritionist in Maine told me, ``We all know a dollar spent on prevention saves many health care dollars in the long run and is the right thing to do for our seniors at a time when they have limited budgets.''

The Medical Nutrition Therapy Act of 2025 is supported by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, and UsAgainstAlzheimer's. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation to improve access to cost-effective medical treatment for Medicare patients with chronic diseases.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Medical Nutrition Therapy Act of 2026, along with my colleague from Michigan Senator Peters. Our bill will expand Medicare beneficiaries' access to medical nutrition therapy, or MNT, which is a cost-effective component of treatment for obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and other chronic conditions. Increasing access to MNT should be part of the strategy to improve disease management and prevention for America's seniors. The Medical Nutrition Therapy Act would make two important changes to support patients, improve health outcomes, and reduce unnecessary healthcare costs.

First, the bill would expand Medicare Part B coverage of outpatient medical nutrition therapy services to several currently uncovered diseases or conditions, including prediabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, malnutrition, eating disorders, cancer, HIV/AIDS, gastrointestinal diseases including celiac disease, and cardiovascular disease. Currently, Medicare Part B only covers outpatient MNT for diabetes, renal disease, and post-kidney transplant.

Second, the bill would allow more types of providers--including nurse practitioners, physician assistants, clinical nurse specialists, and psychologists--to refer patients to MNT. Right now, only physicians may refer patients to dieticians for medical nutrition therapy. Expanding the types of providers who make these referrals would be especially significant for patients in a rural State like Maine where an NP or PA may be one's trusted primary care provider.

MNT counseling is provided by registered dietitian nutritionists, RDNs, as part of a collaborative healthcare team. It is evidence-based and has been proven to positively affect weight, blood pressure, blood lipids, and blood sugar control. Nutritional counseling by RDNs is recommended by the National Lipid Association to promote long-term adherence to an individualized, heart-healthy diet. Through MST, individuals benefit from in-depth, individualized nutrition assessments. Followup visits help reinforce important behavior and lifestyle changes and increase compliance.

Seniors deserve improved access to this cost-effective medical treatment, but many older adults are missing out under the current Medicare policy. I heard from a dietitian in rural Washington County, ME, who is the only part-time dietitian in the county and works at a federally qualified health center, FQHC. One of her patients is an elderly man with severe tooth decay requiring a modified personalized meal plan. He lost 40 pounds in 1 year despite being cleared for any gastrointestinal or other underlying medical condition that could have caused this extreme weight loss. He became clinically malnourished. Finally, his primary care provider referred him to the dietitian at the FQHC for medical nutrition therapy with a diagnosis of failure to thrive.

Because this patient, however, did not have a diagnosis of diabetes or renal disease, the FQHC at which he received treatment will not receive Medicare reimbursement for the three 60-minute medical nutrition therapy sessions that the dietitian provided. At his third and final session, the patient shared that this dietitian was the most helpful provider with whom he had ever met. He is no longer afraid of eating and has more good days enjoying meals with family and friends.

Another patient from Maine, who is a Medicare beneficiary, was treated for severe obesity with gastric bypass surgery. This patient was unable to afford out of pocket costs to receive post-operative medical nutrition therapy. He struggled with post-operative diet advancement, which led to hospitalization for severe dehydration and failure to thrive within the first 3 months after surgery. One year after surgery, this patient had severe nutritional anemia requiring iron infusion and monthly vitamin B-12 injections. This tragic situation could have been prevented if the MNT he needed had been covered by Medicare. Early treatment with MNT can prevent serious health complications and chronic conditions, particularly in older adults.

In addition to the human cost, there is a financial one: the impact on the Medicare Program. This should not come as a surprise since the health and economic effects of chronic diseases are staggering. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 90 percent of the $4.9 trillion that the United States spends annually on healthcare goes to the treatment of people with chronic diseases and mental health conditions. Preventing chronic diseases, or managing symptoms when prevention is not possible is an effective way to reduce these costs. This is particularly important for the Medicare Program as more than two-thirds of seniors on Medicare live with multiple chronic conditions. As one registered dietitian nutritionist in Maine told me, ``We all know a dollar spent on prevention saves many health care dollars in the long run and is the right thing to do for our seniors at a time when they have limited budgets.''

The Medical Nutrition Therapy Act of 2025 is supported by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, and UsAgainstAlzheimer's. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation to improve access to cost-effective medical treatment for Medicare patients with chronic diseases.

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

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the We Can't Wait Act, a bipartisan bill with my colleague from New Hampshire Senator Hassan. This legislation addresses a pressing and unnecessary hardship in our Social Security Disability Insurance Program. This program, known as SSDI, provides eligible individuals with benefits if they become disabled and are unable to work. Our bill would give eligible individuals with disabilities the option of bypassing the current 5-month waiting period and allow them to access the benefits that they have earned without further delay.

As my colleagues are aware, SSDI benefits are available only to those who have worked long enough and contributed sufficiently through payroll taxes to the Social Security Disability Insurance Trust Fund.

When an individual becomes disabled and meets the program's strict eligibility standards, he or she should be able to rely on the benefits that they paid for, benefits intended to provide critical support during a time of great need.

Imagine that you have worked for many years and you find that you have contracted a disease that is fatal and that you have very little time to live. Surely, you should be able to tap into what essentially is an insurance fund set up for people in exactly that situation. But because of the 5-month waiting period, there are individuals who receive no payments at all.

During those 5 months, no payments are made, even though the disability has been confirmed by the Social Security Administration. This delay prevents individuals from accessing the insurance they have earned, at a critical and difficult time in their lives.

Lack of benefits can make it more difficult to obtain timely medical treatments, cover basic living expenses, and, in some cases where it is not a terminal condition, begin the process of rehabilitation toward an eventual return to work, if possible.

The burden of this delay can be heartbreaking. I have heard from constituents whose loved ones could get no help from SSDI when they were overtaken by a sudden and terminal diagnosis. Faced with a terrible disease that demanded every ounce of their energy and their total focus, they were forced instead to worry over their finances at the very end of their lives.

This just isn't right. The broader disability determination process already imposes significant hardships. A 2020 Government Accountability Office report documented what can be severe consequences of the long wait times for applicants who appealed initial denials for a Social Security disability.

Between fiscal years 2014 and 2019, approximately 48,000 individuals were forced to file for bankruptcy while awaiting a final decision on their appeals. From 2008 through 2019, an estimated nearly 110,000 people died before receiving a final decision.

These heartbreaking outcomes occur even before many applicants reach the point of approval. Yet even once they are approved, the additional 5-month exclusion period compounds the suffering for those who have already proven their eligibility.

Congress has already acted to address this delay in certain circumstances. In 2020, we passed the ALS Disability Insurance Access Act. It eliminated the

5-month waiting period for individuals with ALS, a progressive, terminal disease where every month, every day is critical. That bipartisan reform was the right thing to do, and I was proud to cosponsor it.

The We Can't Wait Act builds directly on that precedent. Under our bill, claimants would have a choice. They could either opt to begin receiving benefits immediately after approval, rather than waiting 5 months, in exchange for a modest actuarially sound reduction in their monthly benefit amount, or they could decide to wait the 5 months and receive the full amount.

As the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration explains in a letter released today, this small reduction in benefits maintains the actuarial balance in the trust fund over the 75-year projection period.

Let me emphasize that this bill makes no other changes in the SSDI Program. It does not alter eligibility criteria, the determination process--although that should be speeded up--benefit levels for those who choose not to bypass the wait, or any other core element in the program.

It is a precise reform that honors the contributions hard-working Americans with disabilities have made while removing an arbitrary barrier to the benefits that they have earned and deserve.

While this reform is carefully targeted, its impact would be profound. It would end the tragic reality in which Americans with disabilities suffer and, in some cases, die during an unnecessary 5- month delay after their disability has been officially certified by the Social Security Administration.

This is a key point made in a letter supporting the bill by a broad coalition of organizations committed to the rights, dignity, and well- being of people with disabilities--groups that advocate every day for those who need this relief most.

The letter, which is signed by more than two dozen organizations, goes on to make the point that the 5-month exclusion period is unnecessary and harms disabled Americans who are often financially hanging on by a thread.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the letter of endorsement from this coalition printed in the Record immediately following my remarks.

The We Can't Wait Act is straightforward, compassionate, and fiscally responsible. It would provide a crucial option to Americans who simply can't wait even 5 months for the benefits they have worked for and desperately need.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense and much needed legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the We Can't Wait Act, a bipartisan bill with my colleague from New Hampshire Senator Hassan. This legislation addresses a pressing and unnecessary hardship in our Social Security Disability Insurance Program. This program, known as SSDI, provides eligible individuals with benefits if they become disabled and are unable to work. Our bill would give eligible individuals with disabilities the option of bypassing the current 5-month waiting period and allow them to access the benefits that they have earned without further delay.

As my colleagues are aware, SSDI benefits are available only to those who have worked long enough and contributed sufficiently through payroll taxes to the Social Security Disability Insurance Trust Fund.

When an individual becomes disabled and meets the program's strict eligibility standards, he or she should be able to rely on the benefits that they paid for, benefits intended to provide critical support during a time of great need.

Imagine that you have worked for many years and you find that you have contracted a disease that is fatal and that you have very little time to live. Surely, you should be able to tap into what essentially is an insurance fund set up for people in exactly that situation. But because of the 5-month waiting period, there are individuals who receive no payments at all.

During those 5 months, no payments are made, even though the disability has been confirmed by the Social Security Administration. This delay prevents individuals from accessing the insurance they have earned, at a critical and difficult time in their lives.

Lack of benefits can make it more difficult to obtain timely medical treatments, cover basic living expenses, and, in some cases where it is not a terminal condition, begin the process of rehabilitation toward an eventual return to work, if possible.

The burden of this delay can be heartbreaking. I have heard from constituents whose loved ones could get no help from SSDI when they were overtaken by a sudden and terminal diagnosis. Faced with a terrible disease that demanded every ounce of their energy and their total focus, they were forced instead to worry over their finances at the very end of their lives.

This just isn't right. The broader disability determination process already imposes significant hardships. A 2020 Government Accountability Office report documented what can be severe consequences of the long wait times for applicants who appealed initial denials for a Social Security disability.

Between fiscal years 2014 and 2019, approximately 48,000 individuals were forced to file for bankruptcy while awaiting a final decision on their appeals. From 2008 through 2019, an estimated nearly 110,000 people died before receiving a final decision.

These heartbreaking outcomes occur even before many applicants reach the point of approval. Yet even once they are approved, the additional 5-month exclusion period compounds the suffering for those who have already proven their eligibility.

Congress has already acted to address this delay in certain circumstances. In 2020, we passed the ALS Disability Insurance Access Act. It eliminated the

5-month waiting period for individuals with ALS, a progressive, terminal disease where every month, every day is critical. That bipartisan reform was the right thing to do, and I was proud to cosponsor it.

The We Can't Wait Act builds directly on that precedent. Under our bill, claimants would have a choice. They could either opt to begin receiving benefits immediately after approval, rather than waiting 5 months, in exchange for a modest actuarially sound reduction in their monthly benefit amount, or they could decide to wait the 5 months and receive the full amount.

As the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration explains in a letter released today, this small reduction in benefits maintains the actuarial balance in the trust fund over the 75-year projection period.

Let me emphasize that this bill makes no other changes in the SSDI Program. It does not alter eligibility criteria, the determination process--although that should be speeded up--benefit levels for those who choose not to bypass the wait, or any other core element in the program.

It is a precise reform that honors the contributions hard-working Americans with disabilities have made while removing an arbitrary barrier to the benefits that they have earned and deserve.

While this reform is carefully targeted, its impact would be profound. It would end the tragic reality in which Americans with disabilities suffer and, in some cases, die during an unnecessary 5- month delay after their disability has been officially certified by the Social Security Administration.

This is a key point made in a letter supporting the bill by a broad coalition of organizations committed to the rights, dignity, and well- being of people with disabilities--groups that advocate every day for those who need this relief most.

The letter, which is signed by more than two dozen organizations, goes on to make the point that the 5-month exclusion period is unnecessary and harms disabled Americans who are often financially hanging on by a thread.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the letter of endorsement from this coalition printed in the Record immediately following my remarks.

The We Can't Wait Act is straightforward, compassionate, and fiscally responsible. It would provide a crucial option to Americans who simply can't wait even 5 months for the benefits they have worked for and desperately need.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this commonsense and much needed legislation.