Floor Statements

Mr. President, I certify that the information required by Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate related to congressionally directed spending items for H.R. 3944, as reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee, has been available on a publicly accessible congressional website since approximately 10 am Eastern Time on July 18, 2025.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from Minnesota Senator Smith to introduce the Kay Hagan Tick Act Reauthorization. I would also like to recognize Senator King, who is joining as an original cosponsor. Our bill is named after our colleague, former Senator Kay Hagan, who passed away in October 2019 due to complications from the tick-borne disease known as the Powassan virus. This bipartisan legislation will reauthorize Federal programs that provide local communities and States with resources for prevention, early detection, and treatment of tick-borne and other vector-borne diseases.

Tick-borne diseases like Lyme have become a significant public health concern, with the incidence exploding over the past 20 years. The number of Americans with tick-borne diseases has been rising at an alarming rate. In 2003, Lyme disease infected around 30,000 Americans. Last year, there were an estimated 500,000 cases, an increase of 1,400 percent. In my Sate of Maine, we recorded a record 3,200 cases of Lyme disease in 2024, and experts predict a increase in tick populations this year after a winter that was not consistently cold enough to reduce their numbers.

Far too many Americans with Lyme disease experience a complex diagnostic odyssey that takes months or even years. One of my constituents, Adina Bercowicz from Yarmouth, shared with me her harrowing journey of diagnosis and treatment after a tick bite during her pregnancy. Prior to getting sick, Adina was working full-time and regularly attended yoga and martial arts classes, had an active social life, and traveled frequently for work. She then began to experience symptoms such as chronic fatigue, sharp joint pain, memory loss, cognitive decline, and migraines. It took several doctors and dozens of tests for Adina to be diagnosed with late-stage, chronic Lyme disease, but at this point, her symptoms were debilitating. She still struggles with daily symptoms, but along with her husband Yan, has worked to found LymeTV, a nonprofit in Maine that seeks to raise awareness about Lyme disease.

In addition to the physical and emotional toll that Lyme disease can impose, it also can be expensive. Medical costs of Lyme disease are estimated at $2 billion per year. When accounting for indirect medical costs, including inability to work, in some cases, the annual costs balloon to $75 billion per year.

A correct and early diagnosis can reduce costs and improve the prognosis. We have a long way to go, but I am encouraged that we have made progress since the original Kay Hagan Tick Act was signed into law in 2019. For example, a clinical trial for a Lyme disease vaccine for people is underway right now at the MaineHealth Institute for Research. Reauthorizing the Tick Act would allow crucial developments such as these to continue.

The Tick Act uses a three-pronged approach to address Lyme and other tick and vector-borne diseases. First, it would require HHS to continue to implement and update as appropriate its National Strategy for Vector-Borne Disease. This strategy was required by the original legislation and released in 2024. I look forward to working with the Department to achieve its target of reducing the number of Lyme disease cases by 25 percent by 2035.

Second, the Tick Act would reauthorize the Regional Centers of Excellence in Vector-Borne Disease, which Congress established in 2017 in response to Zika. Since then, tick-borne diseases have accounted for three in four vector-borne diseases in the U.S., and

these centers have led the scientific response. Our legislation would reauthorize funding for these centers for another 5 years.

Finally, the bill would reauthorize funding for CDC grants, awarded to State Health Departments, to improve data collection and analysis, support early detection and diagnosis, improve treatment, and raise awareness for vector-borne diseases.

The Kay Hagan Tick Act takes a comprehensive approach to address tick-borne diseases. I urge all my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from Minnesota Senator Smith to introduce the Kay Hagan Tick Act Reauthorization. I would also like to recognize Senator King, who is joining as an original cosponsor. Our bill is named after our colleague, former Senator Kay Hagan, who passed away in October 2019 due to complications from the tick-borne disease known as the Powassan virus. This bipartisan legislation will reauthorize Federal programs that provide local communities and States with resources for prevention, early detection, and treatment of tick-borne and other vector-borne diseases.

Tick-borne diseases like Lyme have become a significant public health concern, with the incidence exploding over the past 20 years. The number of Americans with tick-borne diseases has been rising at an alarming rate. In 2003, Lyme disease infected around 30,000 Americans. Last year, there were an estimated 500,000 cases, an increase of 1,400 percent. In my Sate of Maine, we recorded a record 3,200 cases of Lyme disease in 2024, and experts predict a increase in tick populations this year after a winter that was not consistently cold enough to reduce their numbers.

Far too many Americans with Lyme disease experience a complex diagnostic odyssey that takes months or even years. One of my constituents, Adina Bercowicz from Yarmouth, shared with me her harrowing journey of diagnosis and treatment after a tick bite during her pregnancy. Prior to getting sick, Adina was working full-time and regularly attended yoga and martial arts classes, had an active social life, and traveled frequently for work. She then began to experience symptoms such as chronic fatigue, sharp joint pain, memory loss, cognitive decline, and migraines. It took several doctors and dozens of tests for Adina to be diagnosed with late-stage, chronic Lyme disease, but at this point, her symptoms were debilitating. She still struggles with daily symptoms, but along with her husband Yan, has worked to found LymeTV, a nonprofit in Maine that seeks to raise awareness about Lyme disease.

In addition to the physical and emotional toll that Lyme disease can impose, it also can be expensive. Medical costs of Lyme disease are estimated at $2 billion per year. When accounting for indirect medical costs, including inability to work, in some cases, the annual costs balloon to $75 billion per year.

A correct and early diagnosis can reduce costs and improve the prognosis. We have a long way to go, but I am encouraged that we have made progress since the original Kay Hagan Tick Act was signed into law in 2019. For example, a clinical trial for a Lyme disease vaccine for people is underway right now at the MaineHealth Institute for Research. Reauthorizing the Tick Act would allow crucial developments such as these to continue.

The Tick Act uses a three-pronged approach to address Lyme and other tick and vector-borne diseases. First, it would require HHS to continue to implement and update as appropriate its National Strategy for Vector-Borne Disease. This strategy was required by the original legislation and released in 2024. I look forward to working with the Department to achieve its target of reducing the number of Lyme disease cases by 25 percent by 2035.

Second, the Tick Act would reauthorize the Regional Centers of Excellence in Vector-Borne Disease, which Congress established in 2017 in response to Zika. Since then, tick-borne diseases have accounted for three in four vector-borne diseases in the U.S., and

these centers have led the scientific response. Our legislation would reauthorize funding for these centers for another 5 years.

Finally, the bill would reauthorize funding for CDC grants, awarded to State Health Departments, to improve data collection and analysis, support early detection and diagnosis, improve treatment, and raise awareness for vector-borne diseases.

The Kay Hagan Tick Act takes a comprehensive approach to address tick-borne diseases. I urge all my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. President, the Town of Whiting, ME, observes its bicentennial this July with a 3-day celebration that includes a Revolutionary

War reenactment, displays of antique farm and lumbering tools, historical presentations, quilts and other local crafts, great food, and good friendship. This long-planned event demonstrates why Whiting prides itself on being a small town with a big spirit.

The Revolutionary War reenactment is especially significant as one of the early settlers of the wilderness of far Downeast Maine after America won its independence was a hero of that conflict, General John Crane. A Massachusetts carpenter, Crane was a leader of the Sons of Liberty and was the only rebel injured during the Boston Tea Party.

Crane recovered and was commissioned as a Continental Army artillery officer who distinguished himself at Bunker Hill. Despite losing part of a foot to a cannon shot in 1776, he continued to serve and became the top commander of the U.S. Corps of Artillery. After the war, a grateful new nation granted the remarkable patriot a land grant on the coast of Maine.

With vast forest lands and fast-moving rivers, General Crane's settlement soon became a bustling lumber center with two sawmills. The fertile soil produced productive farms of crops and livestock, and pristine lakes, ponds, and streams supported abundant wildlife. When the general died in 1805, he was laid to rest with honors in the village cemetery.

Originally called Orangetown, after the river that powered the sawmills, the town was renamed Whiting upon its incorporation in 1825 after Timothy Whiting, an early settler and the town's first representative to the Maine Legislature.

Today, Whiting is a nature lover's paradise of gorgeous scenery and year-round outdoor recreation. The beautifully maintained Union Meeting House, built nearly two centuries ago, is a wonderful example of traditional New England church architecture and a worthy addition to the National Register of Historic Places.

Another major landmark is the Mill Pond Dam, built in 1830 where the Orange River meets Whiting Bay. In addition to creating a place of scenic beauty, the pond created by the stone dam has long been a crucial source of water for firefighters. Many residents recall how that precious water saved the town from destruction during a massive forest fire in 1985.

In addition to structural repairs, the dam needed a new fish passage. The Orange River is designated as Critical Habitat for Atlantic Salmon and supports herring and other important fish species and wildlife important to the economy and the ecosystem.

The people of Whiting stepped forward with investments of more than $1 million for the watershed restoration project, and I was pleased to join the effort by securing $2.9 million in Federal funds. During the legislative process, many students at Whiting Village School wrote letters supporting the Mill Pond Dam project. When I discussed this funding with my Senate colleagues, those letters made a difference. It was impressive to see young people getting involved in the future of their community.

This 200th anniversary is not just the passing of years. It is about the people who for more than two centuries have pulled together, cared for one another, and built a community. My congratulations to the people of Whiting, ME, and my best wishes for the future.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 2812 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, my amendment would increase funding for the Rural Healthcare Provider Fund to $50 billion and expand the list of eligible providers to include not only rural hospitals but also community health centers, nursing homes, ambulance services, skilled nursing facilities, and others.

Rural providers, especially our rural hospitals and nursing homes, are under great financial strain right now with many having recently closed and others being at risk of closing.

When these facilities close their doors, the people they serve are often left behind without access to healthcare. This amendment would help keep them open and caring for those who live in these rural communities.

The additional funding is fully offset through a modest increase in the top marginal tax rate equal to the pre-2017 rate for individuals with income of about $25 million and married couples with income of about $50 million.

I urge support for this amendment to provide the additional funding for rural and Medicaid providers who desperately need it.

Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Vote on Motion

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 5:45 p.m., the Senate execute the order of June 24 with respect to the Kies nomination, and following disposition of the Kies nomination, the Senate resume legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, the senior Senator from Illinois and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Durbin, to introduce the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act of 2025. This bill would update and reauthorize Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs, which have provided lifesaving services and housing for America's homeless youth for nearly half a century.

Homelessness is affecting youth in truly staggering numbers. According to the National Network for Youth, an estimated 4.2 million young people experience homelessness at some point each year. Some of these youth may be away from home for a few nights, while others have been living on the streets for years. No area of this country is immune from the scourge of homelessness, as it affects rural and urban communities alike.

Tragically, runaway and homeless youth are at high risk of victimization, abuse, criminal activity, and even death. This population is at greater risk of suicide, unintended pregnancy, and substance abuse. Many are unable to continue with school and are more likely to enter our juvenile criminal justice system. The reality is that available data likely underestimate the scale and consequences of this problem.

I have met with teachers, social workers, and others from Maine who work directly with young people experiencing homelessness. We talked about the pressure that student homelessness places on teachers, school administrators and their already strapped resources, and, most important, the homeless students themselves. I have also visited New Beginnings in Lewiston, where I saw firsthand how Runaway and Homeless Youth Act resources are providing essential safety nets for young people in need. The staff at New Beginnings helps young people with case management, provides referrals to State and local agencies, assists with housing needs and access to shelter, and connects individuals to local educational and employment programs.

Several years ago, as the chair of the Senate Transportation and Housing Appropriations Subcommittee, I held a hearing that featured testimony from Brittany Dixon, a former homeless youth from Auburn, ME, who gave powerful testimony on her personal experience with homelessness. After becoming homeless, Brittany was connected with New Beginnings. In her testimony, she said, ``New Beginnings provided many resources I could use to succeed, including assistance with college applications and financial aid . . . New Beginnings has helped me to develop critical life skills and to become self-sufficient.'' ``Programs that support homeless youth are important to so many young people like me,'' she added. ``It gives young people the chance to have a safe place to stay while they get their footing and figure out what they want to do in their lives.''

Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs helped make Brittany's success story possible. Sadly, however, there are still many homeless youth who do not have the support they need. We must build on our past efforts because homeless youth should have the same opportunities to succeed as their peers.

The three existing Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs--the Basic Center Program, the Street Outreach Program, and the Transitional Living Program--help community-based organizations reach young people when they need support the most. These programs help runaway and homeless youth avoid the juvenile justice system, and early intervention can help them escape victimization and trafficking.

The Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act would reauthorize and strengthen these programs that help homeless youth meet their immediate needs, and it would help secure long-term residential services for those who cannot be safely reunited with their families. Our legislation would also create a new program--the Prevention Services Program--designed to help prevent youth from running away and becoming homeless in the first instance. Moreover, our bill supports wrap-around services for victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation.

Mr. President, the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act will support those young people who run away, are forced out of their homes, or are disconnected from their families. A caring and safe place to sleep, eat, grow, study, and develop is critical for all young people. The programs reauthorized and modernized through this legislation help extend those basic services to the most vulnerable youth in our communities.

I thank Senator Durbin for his partnership on this bill and urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, the senior Senator from Illinois and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Durbin, to introduce the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act of 2025. This bill would update and reauthorize Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs, which have provided lifesaving services and housing for America's homeless youth for nearly half a century.

Homelessness is affecting youth in truly staggering numbers. According to the National Network for Youth, an estimated 4.2 million young people experience homelessness at some point each year. Some of these youth may be away from home for a few nights, while others have been living on the streets for years. No area of this country is immune from the scourge of homelessness, as it affects rural and urban communities alike.

Tragically, runaway and homeless youth are at high risk of victimization, abuse, criminal activity, and even death. This population is at greater risk of suicide, unintended pregnancy, and substance abuse. Many are unable to continue with school and are more likely to enter our juvenile criminal justice system. The reality is that available data likely underestimate the scale and consequences of this problem.

I have met with teachers, social workers, and others from Maine who work directly with young people experiencing homelessness. We talked about the pressure that student homelessness places on teachers, school administrators and their already strapped resources, and, most important, the homeless students themselves. I have also visited New Beginnings in Lewiston, where I saw firsthand how Runaway and Homeless Youth Act resources are providing essential safety nets for young people in need. The staff at New Beginnings helps young people with case management, provides referrals to State and local agencies, assists with housing needs and access to shelter, and connects individuals to local educational and employment programs.

Several years ago, as the chair of the Senate Transportation and Housing Appropriations Subcommittee, I held a hearing that featured testimony from Brittany Dixon, a former homeless youth from Auburn, ME, who gave powerful testimony on her personal experience with homelessness. After becoming homeless, Brittany was connected with New Beginnings. In her testimony, she said, ``New Beginnings provided many resources I could use to succeed, including assistance with college applications and financial aid . . . New Beginnings has helped me to develop critical life skills and to become self-sufficient.'' ``Programs that support homeless youth are important to so many young people like me,'' she added. ``It gives young people the chance to have a safe place to stay while they get their footing and figure out what they want to do in their lives.''

Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs helped make Brittany's success story possible. Sadly, however, there are still many homeless youth who do not have the support they need. We must build on our past efforts because homeless youth should have the same opportunities to succeed as their peers.

The three existing Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs--the Basic Center Program, the Street Outreach Program, and the Transitional Living Program--help community-based organizations reach young people when they need support the most. These programs help runaway and homeless youth avoid the juvenile justice system, and early intervention can help them escape victimization and trafficking.

The Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act would reauthorize and strengthen these programs that help homeless youth meet their immediate needs, and it would help secure long-term residential services for those who cannot be safely reunited with their families. Our legislation would also create a new program--the Prevention Services Program--designed to help prevent youth from running away and becoming homeless in the first instance. Moreover, our bill supports wrap-around services for victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation.

Mr. President, the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act will support those young people who run away, are forced out of their homes, or are disconnected from their families. A caring and safe place to sleep, eat, grow, study, and develop is critical for all young people. The programs reauthorized and modernized through this legislation help extend those basic services to the most vulnerable youth in our communities.

I thank Senator Durbin for his partnership on this bill and urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. President. I wish to recognize George Castro on his retirement after more than 40 years working for Congress, including nearly 22 years serving as a staff member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations.

George began his work on Capitol Hill in 1985, working for the Architect of the Capitol. He transitioned to the Appropriations Committee in 2003, under the leadership of then-Chairman Ted Stevens and Vice Chairman Robert Byrd. Since then, George has faithfully served the committee under nine different chairs, including the Republican leadership of Senators Ted Stevens, Thad Cochran, Richard Shelby, and now me.

Combining clerical precision, intuitive executive support, and a keen ability to form lasting professional bonds, George has helped to ensure that the wheels of the Appropriations Committee move forward in service to the American people. He has been a valued member of the Senate community and will be missed by his colleagues and friends as he retires to spend time with his wife Loee, his daughter Vanessa, and his grandchildren.

On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank George for his years of service. We wish him all the best in his well-deserved retirement from the Senate.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act with my colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Shaheen. I want to thank Senator Shaheen for her partnership on so many issues affecting individuals with diabetes. Our bipartisan bill would allow nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe therapeutic shoes under Medicare. This will enable Medicare beneficiaries who have diabetes to more easily access this important preventive care, should they need it.

As cochairs of the Senate Diabetes Caucus, Senator Shaheen and I are focused on advancing policies that will improve the lives of the more than 37 million Americans who live with diabetes. Therapeutic shoes help prevent some of the costly and painful complications related to diabetes, such as foot ulcers, which almost 1.6 million individuals with diabetes have. If they do not receive timely care, these individuals are at risk of serious health complications, such as lower limb amputations. Only 10 percent of qualifying Medicare patients receive the diabetic shoes they need because of difficulties accessing qualifying providers. By reducing barriers to this preventive care, the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act will enable more individuals with diabetes to receive the medical care they need to avoid some serious complications.

Nurse practitioners and physician assistants in Maine and across the country provide the full range of care to patients with diabetes. Many patients see an NP or a PA as their preferred primary care provider for treating diabetes. When the treating NP or PA determines that the patient may need therapeutic shoes, however, the NP or PA must send the patient first to a physician to make the same determination, and then the physician must send them to a podiatrist to actually fit the shoes. To make matters more complicated, under current law, the certifying physician must take over all treatment of the patients diabetic condition. This process not only forces a patient to change providers but also delays patient access to effective treatment for diabetes.

In rural States such as Maine, patients often have to drive long distances to see a podiatrist or even a physician. One nurse practitioner from Bangor shared with me that the closest podiatrist she is able to send patients to is an hour-long drive away and has a many- months long waitlist. Patients with diabetes simply cannot afford to wait months and months for treatment. The removal of this outdated and unnecessary barrier means NPs and PAs would be authorized to certify the need for therapeutic shoes for patients with diabetes and ensure they get the care they need in a timely fashion.

Finally, passage of this legislation will reduce Medicare spending by removing the unnecessary and duplicative certifying visit requirements. Data demonstrate that NPs and PAs manage the care for patients with diabetes in a cost-effective manner that results in healthcare savings. The estimated total annual cost of an individual patient with diabetes is $17,000. If the patient does not receive treatment in

time, though, and develops a serious complication, the estimated annual individual cost rises to $52,000. Our bill will create savings for Medicare by reducing the long-term costs of care.

Passage of the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act will make it possible for NPs and PAs to continue providing high-quality care for their Medicare patients with diabetes. It will also reduce Medicare spending by eliminating duplicative services, improve the timeliness of care for patients with diabetes who need therapeutic shoes, and allow the patient to continue receiving care from the provider of their choice. I urge all of my colleagues to join Senator Shaheen and me in supporting the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act with my colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Shaheen. I want to thank Senator Shaheen for her partnership on so many issues affecting individuals with diabetes. Our bipartisan bill would allow nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe therapeutic shoes under Medicare. This will enable Medicare beneficiaries who have diabetes to more easily access this important preventive care, should they need it.

As cochairs of the Senate Diabetes Caucus, Senator Shaheen and I are focused on advancing policies that will improve the lives of the more than 37 million Americans who live with diabetes. Therapeutic shoes help prevent some of the costly and painful complications related to diabetes, such as foot ulcers, which almost 1.6 million individuals with diabetes have. If they do not receive timely care, these individuals are at risk of serious health complications, such as lower limb amputations. Only 10 percent of qualifying Medicare patients receive the diabetic shoes they need because of difficulties accessing qualifying providers. By reducing barriers to this preventive care, the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act will enable more individuals with diabetes to receive the medical care they need to avoid some serious complications.

Nurse practitioners and physician assistants in Maine and across the country provide the full range of care to patients with diabetes. Many patients see an NP or a PA as their preferred primary care provider for treating diabetes. When the treating NP or PA determines that the patient may need therapeutic shoes, however, the NP or PA must send the patient first to a physician to make the same determination, and then the physician must send them to a podiatrist to actually fit the shoes. To make matters more complicated, under current law, the certifying physician must take over all treatment of the patients diabetic condition. This process not only forces a patient to change providers but also delays patient access to effective treatment for diabetes.

In rural States such as Maine, patients often have to drive long distances to see a podiatrist or even a physician. One nurse practitioner from Bangor shared with me that the closest podiatrist she is able to send patients to is an hour-long drive away and has a many- months long waitlist. Patients with diabetes simply cannot afford to wait months and months for treatment. The removal of this outdated and unnecessary barrier means NPs and PAs would be authorized to certify the need for therapeutic shoes for patients with diabetes and ensure they get the care they need in a timely fashion.

Finally, passage of this legislation will reduce Medicare spending by removing the unnecessary and duplicative certifying visit requirements. Data demonstrate that NPs and PAs manage the care for patients with diabetes in a cost-effective manner that results in healthcare savings. The estimated total annual cost of an individual patient with diabetes is $17,000. If the patient does not receive treatment in

time, though, and develops a serious complication, the estimated annual individual cost rises to $52,000. Our bill will create savings for Medicare by reducing the long-term costs of care.

Passage of the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act will make it possible for NPs and PAs to continue providing high-quality care for their Medicare patients with diabetes. It will also reduce Medicare spending by eliminating duplicative services, improve the timeliness of care for patients with diabetes who need therapeutic shoes, and allow the patient to continue receiving care from the provider of their choice. I urge all of my colleagues to join Senator Shaheen and me in supporting the Promoting Access to Diabetic Shoes Act.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join today with my friend and colleague from Virginia Senator Kaine to introduce the Religious Workforce Protection Act.

Our bill would allow foreign-born religious workers in the United States to continue to perform essential work in their communities all across the Nation, including the State of Maine.

I would also like to thank our friend and colleague Senator Jim Risch, who joins us in introducing this important bill.

Like my colleague from Virginia, I, too, learned about this problem from my local parish in Maine. In the summertime, I tend to attend Catholic mass in either Lincoln or Howland, ME. Both parishes are served by the same priest. The priest, until last year, came from India--Father Tony. We all loved him. Unfortunately, when he went back home, there was a change in his visa status, and he was unable to return.

Our legislation would grant the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to extend the temporary R-1 status for a religious worker past 5 years until he or she receives a decision on the permanent EB-4 visa application. In doing so, the bill would provide a solution to the significant problems that religious organizations and workers are experiencing with our current system.

Our bill would help religious workers of all faith traditions continue their work providing services, such as acting as a chaplain at a hospital, conducting worship services, and serving as religious educators.

The issue religious employees have faced with our visa system have evolved over time, but the result is the same: Religious organizations are harmed, communities are hurt, and religious workers are unable to pursue their missions.

In 2021, the severe backlog in the processing of religious workers' visa petitions was worsened by the COVID pandemic. It forced many religious employees who were already in the United States to leave the communities that they were serving so well and for which they were so essential or cease working altogether, such as a Catholic priest being unable to perform mass for fear of violating immigration law. There were also additional workers outside of the United States awaiting entry, unable to serve in our religious communities.

Although the backlog did decrease as Embassies and consulates reopened post-COVID, other issues have arisen.

Due to a change in the statutory interpretation made by the State Department in 2023, many religious workers who are in the United States on temporary R-1 visas are unable to receive decisions on permanent EB- 4 visa applications within the maximum 5-year duration of an R-1 visa. In other words, their R-1 visa expires before they get a decision on their EB-4 permanent visa. The result is that they have to leave our country and the communities, parishes, mosques, synagogues, and churches they are serving for at least 1 year before they can return.

In Maine, local communities have experienced this problem firsthand and would be greatly helped by our legislation. Of the 50 Catholic parishes in Maine, 35--more than half--benefit from the ministry of international priests. Recently, three rural Maine communities--St. Agatha, Bucksport, and Greenville--were left without any priests at all for months. These priests were unable to work because their R-1 visas expired before their EB-4 applications could be fully processed.

If this issue is not addressed, religious organizations in Maine and across the Nation will continue to lose pastors, priests, rabbis, and other religious workers who lead and support their congregations and communities.

As I explained, this bill solves this problem by granting the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority simply to extend the temporary R-1 status past the 5 years until the religious worker receives a decision on the permanent EB-4 visa application. This just makes sense.

Senator Kaine and I have pressed the Departments of State and Homeland Security to do everything they can to administratively address this problem.

When I first learned of the issue in 2021, Senator Kaine and I wrote to the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to express our concern about the long backlogs in processing religious worker visa petitions.

In 2023 and 2024, we again wrote to the two Secretaries about the change

in interpretation that had the effect of worsening the problem by further lengthening the time it takes for applicants from most countries to receive their employment-based visas.

Although some progress has been made as a result of our efforts, a true and lasting fix requires an act of Congress.

I want to be clear that our bill is carefully tailored. It is extremely narrow. It does not change any requirement or bars to obtaining an employment-based visa. It does not allow entry for any person who is not already permitted under the law to enter the United States. Religious workers would continue to face the same vetting and other requirements that are applicable to other noncitizens who are seeking to work in our country.

Let me also emphasize that there is no doubt that our country has faced an illegal immigration crisis, but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about people who have lawfully entered the United States under a religious worker visa, and we simply provide a tailored, carefully crafted solution for those who are lawfully present in our country and serving our churches, our parishes, our synagogues--our religious organizations. They are of many different faiths, and they have developed important ties to their communities.

As we have highlighted in a letter that we sent to the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, these employees provide basic necessities to those in need. They care for and minister to the sick and dying in hospitals. They work with adolescents and young adults to help them. They counsel those who have suffered severe trauma and hardship. They serve as educators and mentors, and they are critical as faith leaders.

Surely, this is one area where we should be able to come together as Republicans and Democrats and do something worthwhile, something that will have a real-world impact in communities across this country.

The broad support for this effort is shown by the many organizations of different faiths that have endorsed our legislation.

I urge my colleagues to support our efforts so that we can allow much needed religious workers to continue their ministry and their service in communities all across America.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the resolution introduced by my colleague from Virginia, Senator Kaine, to overturn the emergency declaration for the northern border that is being used to impose tariffs on goods imported from Canada.

The Maine economy is integrated with Canada, our most important trading partner. From home heating oil, gasoline, jet fuel, and other refined petroleum products, to Maine's paper mills, forest products businesses, agricultural producers, and lobstermen, the tariffs on Canada would be detrimental to many Maine families and our local economies.

Of course I share the President's goal of stemming the tide of dangerous fentanyl that flows into the United States. I commend him for taking far stronger actions to halt this dangerous and deadly flow than did the previous administration. I do not, however, agree with his invoking the powers of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs on Canadian goods and products.

The fact is, the vast majority of fentanyl in America comes from the southern border. In fiscal year 2024, less than 1 percent of fentanyl seizures occurred at our northern border. And our Canadian neighbors are working collaboratively and cooperatively with our government to stop that trafficking.

One of the best examples of the intertwined relationship between Maine's economy and Canada can be seen at the Twin Rivers Paper mill in Madawaska, ME, way in the north on the Canadian border. Twin Rivers produces lightweight specialty paper for packaging materials, for our Nation's newspapers and our retailers' catalogs, for food and environmentally safe papers used in restaurants, and for a wide variety of other paper goods that are used all over the country.

The raw pulp for this paper mill in Maine is piped across the St. John River from Edmundston, New Brunswick, to Madawaska, ME. There literally is a pipeline through which the pulp travels between these two sister mills. A tariff placed on this pulp would jeopardize the financial well-being of this vital paper mill, which employs more than 500 people in rural northern Maine. There is not another big employer in that area that could possibly compensate for the loss of those 510 direct jobs, and that doesn't include the indirect jobs--the truckdrivers, the loggers, the restaurant owners who would be harmed by the closure or reduction in the operation of this vitally important mill. The tariff would not only devastate Twin Rivers but also harm hundreds of Maine families.

Another example of our integration with Canada is in energy. Ninety- five percent of the heating oil that is used by most Mainers to heat their homes comes from refineries in Canada.

Irving Oil, a Canadian-based company, has 150 gas stations in Maine and supplies two-thirds of the State's gas, diesel, and heating oil. This includes 100 percent of the jet fuel that is used by the Air National Guard base in Bangor. Maine consumers, Maine businesses, and the U.S. Department of Defense--our own Department of Defense--would bear the cost of that Canadian energy tariff.

Canadian tariffs would also harm many Maine farmers, lobstermen, and fishermen. According to the Maine Potato Board, 90 percent of the potash, which is the fertilizer used for growing potatoes, is imported from Canada. Fertilizer accounts for 11 percent of total input cost to grow our great Maine potatoes. Tariffs on imports like fertilizer will only hurt Maine potato growers.

I grew up in Aroostook County. I know these potato growers. I picked

potatoes as a schoolchild when I was growing up.

Just recently, a farmer from Mars Hill, ME, told me that just the threat of tariffs is causing a price increase on seed and equipment. This farmer supplies potatoes to a Canadian company with facilities on both sides of the border. The different facilities have specialized equipment to process potatoes for different uses--hash browns in one plant, curly fries in another. A tariff on potatoes as they cross back and forth between Maine and Canada would cause terrible harm to this and other growers.

Other products are processed back and forth across the border as well. For example, many Maine blueberries are processed in Prince Edward Island.

Maine also sends between $200 million and $400 million worth of lobster to Canada each year for processing. There are 240 lobster processing plants in Canada but only 15 in the United States.

I share the President's goal of getting more of that manufacturing done in the State of Maine, done in the United States, but the fact is that if we impose these tariffs on Canadian processing, it is going to be our Maine lobstermen who will bear the cost; it is going to be consumers who bear the cost.

I would like to make mention of another industry that would be affected as well, and that is the aquaculture industry. In Washington County in far eastern Maine, Cooke Aquaculture is one of the largest employers, with more than 200 direct jobs throughout the State. While they have a processing plant in Machias, ME, the first step of their salmon processing occurs in Canada before reentering the United States for finishing.

At a time when the Maine aquaculture industry is growing, these tariffs on Canada would jeopardize current jobs and also block future ones.

Close relationships between and among families on both sides of the border are very common in the State of Maine. It is typical of communities, ranging from Calais in the east, Fort Kent in the north, and Jackman in the west. You see it all across the northern, eastern, and western parts of our State because our communities are so integrated.

It is not surprising to me that I had a conversation with members of the tourism industry in Maine just this morning who told me that they are seeing cancelations by Canadian tourists who had come for years to vacation in Maine. Old Orchard Beach, for example, is known for the number of Canadian tourists. We don't want to discourage these Canadian tourists, who are so vital to Maine's economy, from vacationing in Maine because they are so angry at what has happened.

Maine families benefit from more than $900 billion in goods and services that are exchanged between our two countries every year. It is crucial that we remain a dependent and vibrant global trading partner, particularly with Canada.

Now, I want to distinguish that I think there is a strong case to be made for tariffs on Mexico, on our adversary China, but I don't see the case for Canada.

There are areas where Canada does need to do better, and the dairy industry is one, and I hope we will see that resolved.

Let me conclude my remarks by reaffirming my support for ensuring that the Department of Homeland Security has every tool at its disposal to stem the flow of fentanyl into our Nation, but, unlike Mexico and China, Canada is not complicit in this crisis.

And we should continue working with our Canadian allies to secure the northern border, not unfairly penalize them. Our consumers, our manufacturers, our lobstermen, our blueberry growers, our potato farmers will pay the price.

Mr. President, the price hikes that will happen for Maine families every time they go to the grocery store, they fill their gas tank, they fill their heating oil tank, if these tariffs go into effect, will be so harmful. And as price hikes always do, they will hurt those the most who can afford them the least. Therefore, I will support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so likewise.

I want to thank the Senator from Alaska, who is an extraordinarily talented leader on the Appropriations Committee, for her comments.

Mr. President, I rise to urge passage of this funding measure to prevent an unnecessary, harmful, and costly government shutdown at midnight tonight.

Government shutdowns are inherently a failure to govern effectively and have negative consequences all across government. They inevitably require certain government employees, such as Border Patrol agents, members of our military and Coast Guard, TSA screeners, and air traffic controllers, to report to work with no certainty at all on when they will receive their next paycheck. That is just unfair.

Shutdowns also put critical investments in our national defense on hold. Training exercises would be limited, which could hurt our Nation's readiness. New programs would be paused, delaying new capabilities from getting to our warfighters. That is why we have always, in the past, avoided CRs for the Department of Defense. At our borders, the men and women performing vital law enforcement activities would have to do so without pay and without the assistance of support staff, putting more pressure on frontline operators.

Other harmful potential impacts include curtailed operations to the Veterans Benefits Administration, resulting in the closure of education and GI bill call centers and the suspension of career counseling and transition assistance for our veterans; the closure of our wonderful national parks to visitors; increased travel delays as the onboarding of additional TSA agents would stall, and some FAA employees would face furloughs; and costly delays for projects at the Army Corps of Engineers and critical water infrastructure projects.

That is just a very partial list of the harm that would be done from a government shutdown. This unfortunate situation that we are in with a continuing resolution should, however, have been avoided. The Senate should have finished these bills last year. I called for that repeatedly, as did many other Members.

Senator Murray and I worked as a team, provided leadership, consulted with the members of our Senate Appropriations Committee. Each of us worked so hard to report 11 of the 12 bills with overwhelming bipartisan support, including 6 which came out of our committee unanimously. Unfortunately, these bipartisan bills languished on the calendar for months, never being brought to the floor for consideration.

This decision by the then-Senate majority leader denied Senators the opportunity to debate and amend our reported bills and denied the House and the Senate the chance to go to conference and work out the differences among the bills. Similarly, attempts since January by House Chairman Tom Cole and I to reach agreement with our Democratic counterparts regrettably were not successful, despite my making five good-faith offers. Now that opportunity is gone. A yearlong CR is, by no means, my first choice, but our focus now, given where we are, must be on preventing a government shutdown.

For the most part, this is a straightforward CR that simply continues fiscal year 2024 funding levels. Now, it does include--and this is important--a number of needed anomalies that are aimed at addressing pressing needs.

For example, the CR realigns funding in the appropriations accounts for the Department of Defense to meet current global threats and covers the cost of pay raises for junior enlisted personnel.

It provides increased funding for housing assistance and for what is known as the WIC Program--for Women, Infants, and Children--to maintain support for these vulnerable families.

Within the Department of Homeland Security, the continuing resolution includes targeted increases to support ICE operations, to avoid furloughs of TSA airport screeners, and to fund much needed pay raises for members of our Coast Guard.

It also includes increased funding for the FAA so that more air traffic controllers can be hired to make our Nation's airspace safer.

We can delay no longer. It is essential that the continuing resolution be adopted today in order to prevent a harmful government shutdown. I urge its adoption. Let each and every one of us here commit to working together on the fiscal year 2026 budget so that we can enact appropriations bills prior to the start of the new fiscal year.

Madam President, I am pleased to introduce this bill with Senators Van Hollen, Murray, Alsobrooks, Warner, and Kaine. It has been endorsed by President Trump and also by the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Tom Cole.

This bill would simply fix a mistake in the House CR that prevents the District of Columbia from spending its own tax dollars as part of its budget, which Congress routinely approves. Congress approves the authorization of the expenditure of DC local funds, which are paid for by DC tax revenues.

The first CR that we enacted last year included language to approve the DC's fiscal year 2025 budget, and that language was continued in the second CR. However, the House did not extend this anomaly in the yearlong CR. As a result, unless this bill is passed, DC would have to operate under its fiscal year 2024 budget for the remainder of 2025, potentially requiring $1.1 billion in local spending cuts.

Reducing DC's local funding expenditures will not result in a dollar of Federal savings. Since October 1 of 2024, the District has been operating under and spending at its approved level for the fiscal year 2025 budget. According to the CBO, this bill does not have any budgetary cost to the Federal Government. There are no Federal dollars involved. The issue here is just allowing the DC Government to proceed to spend its own tax revenues.

Accordingly, I urge all of my colleagues to support this measure to correct a true inequity.