are coming in higher than projected, that's because there was inflation after the pandemic. so c.b.o. in 2017 and 2018 didn't predict that there was going to be a once in a 100 generation pandemic and therefore didn't assume that inflation would go up and therefore the nominal levels are too low. but if you take c.b.o.'s projection and you adjust that for inflation that actually did happen, revenues are coming in right in line with expectations. so it's just revenues are coming in right in line with expectations. it's not true this thing was going to pay for itself as revenues come in above. that not -- >> we're leaving this's now but you can find it on our website c-span.org. we continue our live gavel to gavel coverage from capitol hill where the senate is about to gavel in. today, senators are considered the nomination of billy long to the irs commissioner as well as legislation aiming to regulate

payment stablecoin in the crypt of currency market. live coverage of the senate starts now. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will open the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. god of our farmers and mothers whose almighty hand leads forth in beauty all the starry bands of shining worlds in splendor through the skies, our grateful songs before your throne arise.

lord, give the members of this body your special grace. the responsibility they face is difficult and daunting. lord, let your light and truth infuse this place today, and may our lawmakers depend completely upon your transcendent wisdom. use them as children of light and heirs of your everlasting inheritance. may their lives ever praise your wonderful and holy name. in the name of him who is perfect justice and unlimited compassion. amen. the president pro tempore:

please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of the treasury, william long of missouri to be

commissioner of internal revenue. mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: 38 years ago on january 12 -- or, june 12, 1987, president ronald reagan stood at the brandenburg gate and called for the general secretary of the soviet union to tear down the berlin wall. that wall was originally built to prevent people from fleeing communist east germany into democratic west berlin. the legendary line that mr. reagan -- president reagan spoke, quote, mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall, end of

quote -- now, those lines were nearly out of the speech after the advisors from the state department and the national security council claimed that the statement was, in their words, too provocative. but president reagan stood his ground. he wanted to speak directly to the hearts of the divided world and take a moral stance against tyranny. president reagan's words resonated with millions of east germans. these east germans dreamed of freedom. two years later, the wall came down. it turned out that reagan's

words were prophetic, not provocative. russia only understands strength. we still know that today. i have reminded my colleagues of this fact in the context of the russian invasion of ukraine. weakness is what provokes the kgb man like putin. president biden was too timid in his approach, trying to manage escalation. had the west instead given the ukrainians what they needed earlier, they might have pushed the russians out of the their country by now. president trump ought to not make the same mistake that president biden made. i think putin thinks that he can

play president trump. putin's lackey, the former puppet president medvedev, admitted recently what russia wants is not peace but, in his words, swift victory and, again in his words, a complete destruction of the ukrainian government. putin will only respond to strength, and this congress ought to give president trump the tools to stand up to putin with strong sanctions that plug the loopholes in the current biden sanctions. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of -- oh, no -- i

don't -- i yield the floor. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the minority leader. mr. schumer: mr. president, donald trump's order mobilizing u.s. troops to an american city sets a dangerous precedent for our civil liberties.

as i've said, violence is not the way to achieve justice. freedom of speech is fundamental, but it must be exercised peacefully and lawfully, and the vast majority of protests, the overwhelming majority of protests have been peaceful, and they're exercising their american right, their privilege to peacefully protest. that's been with our country since its founding. but sending troops to an american city against the wishes of local officials is outrageous, unnecessary, and wreaks of authoritarian i am. that's what authoritarian countries do. u.s. troops -- using troops on u.s. soil should only ever be used as an absolute last resort. the last time it happened without state consent was 60 years ago to protect civil rights heroes. what donald trump is doing, rather, is spoiling for a fight. he wants chaos.

he'd love to make -- he'd love any excuse to divert attention, and doing it this way, he does it all the time. this is one of the most shameful, awful ways you can do it. our troops don't deserve to be exploited in this way, to be used as pawns in a nakedly political fight. it's a deep disservice to them and to all servicemembers and law enforcement who serve our country and protect our community. and why is donald trump doing this? to divert attention. he knows that his big, ugly bill is highly unpopular with the american people. the more they learn about it the more they hate it. he knows he's got big trouble in his fight with erstwhile friend usc in. he knows that the tariffs are hurting the american people. so he seeks to divert attention. that's his m.o. but p what it does is -- but what it does is create chaos and

the american people don't like chaos. and so i urge the president to immediately reverse course at once, remove all of the troops and the marines, and let local law enforcement do their jobs to keep the peace, as the governor of california and the mayor of los angeles said they're perfectly capable of doing. on reconciliation, when republican congressmen went home after voting for their big, beautiful bill, they got a lot of flak from people back home because the more americans look at this big, quote, beautiful bill, the more they realize it is an ugly mess. by now we've heard from so many republicans in the house saying they didn't like this provision, they didn't like that portion of the bill. some say it cuts medicaid too deep. some say it adds too much to the debt. some say they didn't even get to read the bill, particularly the energy provisions, the clean energy provisions, very popular, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs, reducing our dependence on china, was done in the dark

of night at the last minute. so it virtually kills the clean energy tax credits that have been so popular in this country. the pom line is this, though -- the bottom line is this, though. a congressman's core power is the power to vote. that's what the constitution gave them. and house republicans who say they don't like the bill should exercise that power today. they have a unique opportunity to make the very changes they have been talking about for weeks. because of technical mistakes that we democrats pointed out, the republicans had to take their -- send their -- that i can their bill back -- take their bill back and not send it over here until they make those technical corrections. but if even a handful of republican congressesmen who say they don't like this provision or that provision vote no, until those other provisions, those much more serious provisions are changed, they could get it done. they could stop the vicious cuts

to medicaid, they could stop the closures of rural hospitals, they could restore the clean energy tax credits and save jobs in their own district. remember, at least 70% of those clean energy projects are in red states. whatever policy they told the people back home they didn't like, they can now change t it is a golden opportunity. if republican house -- if house republicans mean what they say, those who say they don't like the bill -- this part or that part of it -- if they truly want to change the bill, now this is their chance. ness the golden -- this is the golden key, republicans in the house. you have a chance, a real chance to change the bill. it's in your hands. but don't go home and tell your constituents you're really against this provision if you don't act on it. the vote will show whether house republicans are worried about the cuts to snap, to medicaid, to medicare, to cleaning energy jobs, like they claim, for it was just empty talk.

house republicans, vote no and you can change the bill for the better. but if you go along and vote yes after all that complaining, you'll show people back home that when push comes to shove, you'll cave to donald trump. on climate, this week republicans continue their tortured efforts to ram donald trump's big, beautiful bill through the senate. now, some senate republicans are starting to balk at the fact that their bill is a clean job killer, virtually ends all of the tax credits that we gave to wind, solar, and other clean energy. if senate republicans have any desire to lower energy costs, avoid shipping energy jobs overseas, they should hit the eject but the on on this big, beautiful bill and start over. experts from across the political spectrum interest starting to agree to -- are starting to agree that donald trump's bill is far too radical and deeply flawed and it was passed in the dark of night where even many republicans didn't know what's in it and a

few even admitted that publicly. on jobs, the bill could kill over 800,000 clean energy jobs. that would a disaster just as clean energy is taking off. clean energy tax credits made them possible. and 85% of the investment generated by these credits have gone to red states. did you hear that, republican colleagues? if republicans proceed with the bill, they'll put americans out of work in their own states. and the american people and these workers in particular are starting to see it. just last week a battery plant in south carolina paused a billion-dollar project because of policy uncertainty. in other words, because of republican sabotage. and the closure in south carolina is a canary in the coal mine if there ever was one. if donald trump's bill passes, more jobs disappear. and talk about costs, it's going to add $32 billion on household

energy costs. and today we got the news that donald trump's bill is worse than we thought. americans will now pay up to $170 billion, not $32 billion more on energy. let me say that again. $170 billion more for the american consumer to pay on electric bills, for small business to pay on electric bills. republicans test. because they just want to so embrace the radical, anti-clean energy fossil fuel group, that they'll raise americans' costs by a dramatic amount. they also make us dependent on china. china is gaining in solar energy. if we cut it off, china will dominate the world, and our children and grandchildren will be at china's behest. it will push about 80 billion in solar and battery manufacturing jobs overseas.

more jobs in china, fewer in cleveland and charleston. we all know a.i. and crypto will cause american energy demand to spike in the coming years. why the heck cut off one of the sources? many say all of the above. okay, but why cut off one part of that all of the above because the radicals, not the mainstream but the radicals, in the fossil fuel industry are almost religious in their hatred of clean energy, because they know it is the future and will eventually displace them. on the irs nomination, and that's why this week i have been working 24/7 with so many different people, whether it's workers or companies or gove governors, to spread the word how bad this is, and ask all of america, if you don't like these provisions, if you think it will lose your job, if you think it will raise your cost, call your republican senator and tell them

to change. most of the republicans didn't like it, but it was rushed through in the dark of night. finally, on the irs nomination, mr. long at the irs would be a gut punch to the american taxpayer. it's clear that anyone with a pulse, to anyone with a pulse that long was only suggested to run the irs because of his longtime fealty to trump. we know donald trump prioritizes loyalty over experience. even by the president's standards long is a shockingly bad nominee. ideally, at the very least, you want the person in charge of collecting federal taxing to be independent, qualified, and free of scandal. when it comes to independent, qualified, and free of scandal, long is 0-3. he is neither independent, qualified, nor clean from scandal. his only quality of the job is fealty to donald trump. during his time in congress long didn't amass any credible tax experience, he didn't serve on the ways and means committee, never authored a single original

piece of legislation. instead, he advocated for the irs to investigate his political opponents. after leaving congress, long lined his pocket in the tax scam industry, where he peddled fake tax credits and took advantage of small businesses. the american people don't want the irs to be run by a tax cheat. they don't want the irs to be motivated by politics. they don't want an irs that looks out only for the ultra wealthy, so the senate should reject mr. long's nominations. i yield the floor and thank leader thune for his courtesy of letting me go ahead of him.

mr. thune: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. thune: is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: no. mr. thune: mr. president, a significant number of americans are engaging with cryptocurrency. that includes americans who use stablecoins. then there are the individuals and businesses around the world that access the american dollar through the use of dollar-backed stablecoins. mr. president, stablecoins are a relatively recent financial innovation, but they've quickly caught on. they offer easy payments with speed and security of a block chain and security and usability of the dollar bill. there are roughly a quarter trillion dollars of them now in circulation. traditional financial institutions are said to be considering getting into the stablecoin business. companies like uber and air bnb are exploring integrating them into their businesses. it is clear that crypto currency is here to stay. it's time we bring it into the mainstream.

passing the genius act is a good first step. the genius act provides a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins. it would ensure americans can trust who they're doing business with, when they purchase stablecoins, allowing the american people to exercise financial freedom with confidence. the genius act would also protect against threats to our national security and from criminal activity. it would require stablecoinish you'res to -- issuers to monitor and report suspicious activity, comply with u.s. sanctions, and block illicit transactions. plus, the vast majority of stablecoins are backed by the u.s. dollar, which means this bill will create demand for the u.s. dollar and u.s. treasuries. something that is good both for our national security and our fiscal house. it's yet another reason why we should want stablecoins to be made in america. mr. president, the genius act

recommends the bipartisan consensus on clear rules of the road for this new financial innovation. today, stablecoinish you'res operate in a legal gray zone. companies that want to follow the rules can't be sure what rules to follow, and the biden administration didn't help matters with its numerous lawsuits, which left many u.s.-based companies contemplating moving out of the ens united states altogether. we want america to lead in financial innovation. we want to bring cryptocurrency into the mainstream. ed genius act will help us do that. mr. president, it's time to pass this bill. the version of the genius act we will invoke cloture on today reflects months of hard work and negotiations from members on both sides of the aisle. it's a good product that, as i said, represents the bipartisan consensus on the way forward. the appreciate the leadership of senators hagerty, lummis, and chairman tim scott in getting the genius act to this point. it's been a long haul.

it began in march with the markup in the banking committee, where senators considered 40 different amendments to this bill. it ultimately passed out of the committee by a vote of 18-6. before we began floor debate, negotiations on the bill continued, and a number of changes were made to the bill, most of them to accommodate demands from democrats, while maintaining the full-throated support of the administration. three weeks after the bill came to the floor, mr. president, it's time to move forward and pass this legislation. i hope that we'll see another strong bipartisan vote on the genius act later today, and in the coming days, as we conclude our work. and i who ep that the house will -- and i hope the house will quickly take up this bill and send it to the president who is eager to sign this legislation. mr. president, as i said last month at the beginning of the floor process, the genius act will not be the last word on crypto legislation. there's more work to be done, including on market structures legislation. i know our colleagues have begun bork on that as well.

this remains a priority for many in our conference, and it's the next logical step in making the united states the crypto capital of the world. and i'm looking forward, mr. president, on continued progress bringing crypto currency into the main stream and securing american leadership in financial innovation. mr. president, digital assets are the future, and we're working to ensure that future is one where america leads. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

how can my colleagues and i do something similar at the federal level and specifically at the bankruptcy context to ensure sensitive data doesn't end up in the hands of the wrong people, or the wrong country, as a result of a bankruptcy proceeding bistro let's review the don't sell my data act. >> i think the don't so my data act is exactly the right idea. i will say that, i think what's important is the idea of affirmative consent. that's what is central to the bill upon the transfer. we have had good reason why we can't go back to these people and ask if you can affirmatively consent to the data. i would love to see congress push that and beyond bankruptcy to other kinds of sales of information as well. >> part of the market value 23

and me is a service that is individually genetically identifying that gives you information about one of the most private things that could be, which is whether or not you are susceptible to certain diseases, what is your genetic ancestry and that sort of thing. if that is not stand to reason although logistically challenging, going back to every individual who is given there personally identifying genetic information and affirming their consent would actually build the market value by reinforcing this kind of service is something people can count on it to protect their data privacy regardless of whether there are damages available. >> i think if you build your company on a reputation of trust and autonomy and empowering people, this is exactly the thing you want to sell to customers to say we believe in so much we say we are going to do it upon sale or bankruptcy. >> in the end i think it

ultimately serves the entire segment of personally identifying genetic consult because it builds trust. thank you for a chance to question. >> i will take my turn. in 23 enemy march 23 press release the company indicated the data privacy would be important contamination in any potential sale. but when there was a motion to appoint consumer privacy in the bankruptcy 23 and me first oppose the appointment of independent ããto ensure the genetic data was protected in the sale. white of the company oppose appointing a privacy? >> 23 enemy was the first to suggest that the bankruptcy court appoint a customer data representative. which would look at the privacy

issues and the particular bankruptcy case. 23 enemy in the time did not believe a consumer privacy on the budget meant as needed and the reason the differentiation there is the consumer privacy on the bondsman is required in the bankruptcy when there is a change in the privacy policy from one company to the next. in this particular case, we as part of the bidding process for 23 and me were requiring that any company that was considering acquiring 23 enemy's assets including database and customers, would be required to retain the privacy policies and consent moving forward. >> i think that answers that question. so, is 23 and means priority just so consumer genetic information to the highest bidder or to ensure the genetic data it has collected will be protected according to a

privacy policy. >> our customers data and privacy is a top priority in this process. for the special committee overseeing the process it's not just the highest bidder. we have required that basically any better and the two remaining debtors have affirmatively said they would continue the privacy policies and consent and put it into writing in their asset purchase agreements and contracts. >> also, the plaintiff bankruptcy is " marshall assets in a way that maximizes the value for the benefit, primarily of predators, and then once the predators are paid, for owners. and your written testimony you agree with the aim of maximizing the value of the business for stakeholders but

placing as little restrictions on the customer data as possible, it makes the data more valuable to the buyer. would you characterize janome data as a bankruptcy assets? >> i believe that genomic data is an asset. we have 23 and me is treating it and not only maximizing the value for predators and our shareholders but also one of the most important pieces and parts of 23andme as the customer trust, we are putting their privacy and security as part of the process and top of mind for everybody and special committee overseeing the process. >> based upon your yes answer, isn't your duty to protect consumer data intention with

your duty to maximize the value of the estate assets? >> i think we are looking at both of the duties combined. >> i think you are saying that consumer data doesn't have higher value on the estate? are you a little bit in conflict with some other things he says? >> basically, protecting our consumers data privacy and consent as part of the process is a large consideration and it is not just accepting the highest dollar amount or the assets. >> my last question will be, mr. klein, in 2019 the dod advised members of the armed services not to use direct to consumer genetic testing devices. the guidance noted the risk of

mass surveillance and the ability to attracted originals without authorization. how could foreign adversaries use either the personalized or the aggregated genetic information of u.s. servicemembers to harm u.s. interest in military operation? >> thank you senator. we know that intelligence services and police agencies like the young use genetic data to identify people of interest. and foreign adversaries certainly have a great interest in members of our military. where they go, what they do so that would certainly be a concern for me and hewe can be assured they are looking at that and trying to use b& t the vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: mr. president, when americans turn on their tv sets, what they are seeing happening on the streets of los ang angeles, i believe the memorial feel sickened, horrified and outraged, and yet we stood here

and saw the minority leader in the united states senate come to this floor this morning and he said that these were overwhelmingly peaceful. nancy pelosi yesterday said they were moments of exuberance. do they not see the news? do they not watch the news? let's look at the "new york times" front page story. this is a burning police car. these are people on an overhang looking down on it. the headline is protesters burn a highway patrol vehicle. in los angeles. peaceful protest? absolutely not. these are riots. they threaten the public safety. and my democrat colleagues call them peaceful. look, i've been saying for the last four years that democrats are wrong on this, that, and the next thing, and this is something that the american people l absolutely p understand. the democrats are wrong. these are not peaceful.

these are attacks upon law enforcement community of our nation. and republicans will not stand by as the violence rages in our country's second-largest city. the california governor, los angeles mayor, call them out, gavin newsom, karen bass, unwilling and unable to restore the law. they refuse. they have coddled the criminals from day one. and many of these criminals are illegal immigrants. but who did democrats stand by again and again and again? they stand by the guy on the roof of the burning car waving a mexican flag instead of standing with law-abiding citizens who just want to live a life with safety. that's what the american people want -- safety, prosperity. it's not what the democrats are standing for. no. americans are seeing local

police officers as well as members of immigration and custom enforcement being brutally attacked with rocks, with bricks, with bottles, with concrete. additionally, looters are using the unrest to break into local businesses. yeah, the police have occupied a house, let's break into local businesses including gas stations, an apple store, jewelry stores. let's go where the money is. the mayor of l.a. thinks it's fine, mostly peaceful. governor, same thing. the minority leader of the united states senate this morning, mostly peaceful. that's not what the people are seeing when they turf on their tv's -- turn on their tv's or turn to the front page of "the new york times." so this riot in los angeles is because president trump is rightfully deporting violent illegal immigrant criminals. the l.a. times, the local

newspaper in the area, reported this week l.a. officials struggle to curb disgusting vandalism. this is "the l.a. times." this is "the new york times." what are the democrats not seeing that the rest of america is seeing? thefts, fire, violence in downtown l.a. the los angeles chief of police admitted his officers were overwhelmed. i guess he must be wrong and the governor must be right there in the governor's mansion. how liberal can you get? radically liberal. dangerously liberal. it's scary how liberal they are. the police chief says violence has gotten out of control. he's right. president trump is right to bring in the national guard. this is not to escalate. this is to end the destruction, the devastation that's happening in that community, to provide safety for citizens. they're there because gavin newsom, the governor and mayor

karen bass refuse to restore order. that's why they're there. here you have it, the official stance of today's radical democrat party is to side with the gleam immigrants, the rioters -- the illegal immigrants, the rioters, not the law-abiding american citizens. so let's talk about who the democrats are protecting. murderers, rapists, child abusers, drug dealers, gang members, the worst of the worst. that's who the democrats are standing with day after day after day. let me tell you about a few of these criminals. i.c.e. officers arrested this past weekend a number of criminals in l.a., an gleam immigrant from vietnam -- an illegal grant from vietnam convicted of murder, an gleam immigrant from ecuador convicted of drug traffic. welcome by the biden administration and all the democrats who love these guys. an gleam immigrant from honduras

who was arrested for dealing drugs. illegal immigrant from mexico convicted of manslaughter. that's who has come into the country and arrested this weekend in l.a. an illegal immigrant convicted of molesting a child. an illegal immigrant from the philippines convicted of rape. this is the list the democrats are vowing to protect. it is shameful. president trump has taken all of these criminals off the streets. president trump and republicans are committed to public safety, committed to enforcing the law. it's the most important thing that we do. and it's actually a pretty popular thing in this country today, mr. president, and the polls prove it. just this weekend cbs started their show "face the nation," showed americans feel safer today under president trump's immigration policies. not by a slim margin, not by a

few points. by 12 points, safe by double digits because of what president trump is doing. a strong majority of americans are happy with president trump's deportation policies and the way he's carrying them out, and they have -- this poll, mr. president, was before the riots began in l.a., so let's take a look at what's happened since because support for president trump's policies have gotten even stronger since the riots began and the inaction by the mayor and the governor of california. the refusal to take action. so just yesterday an insider advantage poll found the majority of americans approve of president trump's decision to deploy the national guard amid the riots in l.a., and it is by 20 points. this is a rock solid call for law and order in america.

americans want safety, they want security. american families deserve safe communities. for too many, like those in l.a., that safety feels out of reach. safety for their families, a kid playing out in the yard, going to school. safety in their communities, safety at local businesses. republicans have a bold solution to change what is happening in these communities overrun by illegal immigrants. it starts with securing our borders, deporting illegal criminals. we have to pass this as quickly as possible. the american people are demanding it. the budget bill that we're working on invests $175 billion to stop the flood of illegal immigrants and illicit drugs into our communities. it hires 10,000 new immigration and customs enforcement agents. it hires 3,000 new border

control agents. it provides bonuses to recruit, retain and reward our brave i.c.e. and border patrol agents. our bill finishes the wall. all of these will deter illegal immigrants. our bill surges new technology to the border. this is going to cut off the pipeline of green new deal drugs and criminals -- of illegal drugs and criminals. it will allow us to swiftly deport illegal criminals who threaten our safety. republicans aren't stopping there. no, they're not, mr. president. our bill stops liberal states such as california for continuing to pay for health care with taxpayer dollars for 1.4 million illegal immigrants. these are illegal immigrants who are receiving medicaid benefits. we need to stop paying for them to strengthen the medicaid program for those who need it, those who deserve it, those for

who it is designed for. this bill is about delivering safe communities and a safe country for every american. and safe communities start with secure borders. safer communities mean families can live free from the constant fear of crime and from crime. children can play in the streets, college students can go on runs on their campuses, neighbors can open small businesses. everyone can build a brighter future. this is a future worth fighting for, and republicans have commonsense plans to make it a reality. so what have the democrats come? they've come to the floor of the senate and said we're going to fight you all the way. they have vowed to fight us every step along the way as we try to provide a safer, more prosperous america. every one of them still supports open borders. the minority leader talks about this like, hey, things are fine,

this is all peaceful. they have been singing that song for the last four years, what we've seen with the southern border of this country and the flood of illegal immigrants has been a disaster. with every state a border state democrats have learned nothing. they continue to be the party of crime and criminals. republicans are focused on results, mr. president, because we know that americans want safe cities, not sanctuary cities. that's what the people voted for, that's what they demand, and that is what we're going to continue to deliver. we're not going to stop fighting at all because we're going to continue to fight to make america safer. thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i also ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum call with respect to the long nomination. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. ba mr. barrasso: thank you, mr.

president. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. it is not designed for other rules often called upon to fill other goals to hear the bankruptcy process is designed to protect consumer privacy but also to protect our national security interest. what rejections are built into the bankruptcy process to

prevent foreign adversaries from taking advantage of the process to access sensitive information i know the concern was generally rise but we are talking about a specific area of the law, bankruptcy law, when we talk about personally identifying information or national securities information. >> thank you for the question, this is one area that have been encouraging changes, we are not defenseless, and the firm law back in 2018 congress did give the committee on foreign investment in the same not the ability to reach into the bag bankruptcy process and block sales and transactions. as you all know, that body and the executive branch is one of our main protections against key intellectual properties, sensitive data, slipping out the back door to foreign adversaries. >> how much of the sensitive information if any potential buyers access before a sale becomes final stop.

>> i would refer that to the bankruptcy experts in the panel. >> anybody? >> can you repeat your question. >> how much access to the very sensitive information whether personal sensitive information or national security sensitive information could a potential buyer access before a sale becomes final. >>. >> or an area where the actions b&. >> within a bankruptcy proceeding there is allowance for due diligence procedures that will be determined by the bankruptcy court and from case to case. to the extent there is no protections outside bankruptcy law, i don't know, bankruptcy law does not produce additional protections that don't otherwise exist. >> a potential area for needed

congressional action is what i'm hearing. >> outlook client, and the bankruptcy process can cvs get involved and do you have recommendations about whether they should be involved early in the process? the recent report found the united states is historically not treated biological data as a strategic asset. like agricultural base, oil reserves, despite its importance in advancing biotechnology and ai. mr. klein, what's your assessment of the ccp's effort to sweep up as much biological data of americans and our allies and partners abroad to

advance. >> thank you for the question. the ambitions are comprehensive they want to dominate critical sectors and use information like this to enhance their military paralysis and potentially and very worryingly given the tension between our countries, to conduct asymmetric congressional attacks potentially including biological tax. i'm sure you saw the past two weeks the eastern district of michigan claimant attorney's office has indicted two separate sets of chinese national defendants on smuggling biological materials into the united states. is also seen the report on the reedley biolab where a person of chinese nationality citizenship was in california running an unregistered biolab, we don't know exactly what was going on. some of the reports are very disturbing. we don't have a complete picture but we know the system 's 9/11 commission is blinking if not read at least dark orange and we need the

imagination and i'm glad the committee is doing it to first see how they might conduct unconventional attacks against our homeland in the event of an conflict. >> you have recommended actions for the committee or congress as a whole to take to better protect our biological data while striking the important balance of promoting scientific research that depends on the datasets.>> thank you. bankruptcy is one factor we are covering that today. cybersecurity cyber attacks is another major factor, we know it's very hard for companies to defend against a nationstate level attack we can at least make it harder for them.we can force them to expand their very best most exquisite exploits to try to get in and spread the techniques they have as thin as possible. but i will flag another vector, insider threat, this is something those of us who have led organizations and the government dealing with classified material worry about everyday but also true in the private sector.

is an insider who has authorized credentials and son of a company wants to take a bowl datasets whether genomic weapons designs, what does the company have in place to prevent the exfiltration. that's another very problematic vector. >> thank you so much. >> if i could just start with you. how many customers do you have approximately? if you told a good number of minors is correct? >> what i said was i don't have trust and respect to have the genetic data. >> we have genetic data for particular number of minors and i will be providing. >> people under the age of 18, he is not correct. >> so i'm defining a minor. >> so your customers give you

their genetic information for you to run various tests, is that right? >> yes that's correct. >> that's pretty sensitive stuff, isn't it? is there anything more personal than that?>> i would agree with you that genetic data is sensitive information. >> now you sell all of it? 15 million people bunch of kids, maybe millions just sold in the open market. >> bidders or buyers of the company when is regeneron. >> big pharma company? that doesn't make me feel any better a large pharmaceutical company. >> are 15 million americans genetic information and sell it to somebody, your metrics to us today is to trust us it will be fine maybe the big pharma company maybe we'll get lucky maybe they will treat it right to privacy call your privacy equipment separate consumers have a right not to have their

information shared quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: thank you. mr. president, if you heard that a leader of a foreign country was sending armed soldiers into his own cities, you would correctly call it authoritarian behavior. if you heard them say that the bar for unleashing troops on their own civilians is, quote, what i think it is, you'd put them in a long line of dictators throughout history and the world. the fact that this is happening right here in the united states against fellow citizens at the direction of the president does not make it less dangerous. but here's the thing -- the price of everything is going up under donald trump and instead of doing anything about that, republicans are racing to pass a deeply unpopular bill that would cut taxes for billionaires by throwing 16 million people off of health insurance and so trump does what he always does -- creates a

spectacle out of nowhere in order to distract people from what is actually happening. which is they are cutting medicaid, they are slashing nutritional assistance for children and families, they are jacking up everyone's health insurance premiums and energy bills, and the reason they're doing all of this is to take the money that they have saved -- and by saved, i mean really taken from you, food, electricity, health care -- and providing the biggest tax cut to the wealthiest individuals who have ever walked the planet. so, yes, we are witnessing a dangerous rubicon being crossed in realtime and anyone on any side of the political side of the aisle believes that we ought to call this what it is -- creeping authoritarianism. this is there is a distraction meant to distract people's attention from a really unpopular piece of electricals. here's what's going to happen if

republicans pass this bill. anyone making $4 million a year or more will get a very nice tax break. the more you make, the more you'll get. if you are a millionaire, you will get $70,000. if you are a billionaire, you're looking at $300,000. what about me? i'm not a billionaire or a millionaire? what do i get? next to nothing. next to nothing. worse than that, you're going to be subsidizing these enormous tax cuts with cuts to your services and benefits. people will lose coverage through medicaid because of these cuts meaning even when people get sick, they will not be able to afford it. then they will turn to emergency care because they have no choice. tens of millions of people will see their insurance premiums and co-pays go up by hundreds of dollars every single month. i promise you, no one asked nor

this in the last election. a lot of people voted for dodges for various reasons, but no one wants their premium support to go away. no one wants their monthly health care bill to go away. no one wants electricity shortages. no one wants nutritional assistance to be cut all for people making more than $4 million a year. and tucked into this bill is also a whole bunch of special interest nonsense. for instance, it prevents judges from holding people accountable for violating court orders, for violating court orders. it defunds the ability to enforce a court order. another provision gives people buying gun silencers a $200 tax break. and here's what i think about this. these are individual provisions that will offend and may not even survive the senate process. but it shows that they're going for all the marbles. it shows they think this is their one chance to pass all of their special interest hobby horses. a tax credit for side of the

aislers? like who's asking nor that? even strong isn'ted people are not complaining about how expensive silencers are and they need a subsidy for that. donald trump and the republicans are behaving as if there is no tomorrow. and they're going for all the marbles. the bad news for the rest of us is that we're going to be stuck with the short end in every way imaginable, in terms of our health, finances and quality of life. trump will continue to try to distract us all, but make no mistake, every day we're not talking about this bill and how terrible it is and unfair it is and economically stupid it is, is a good day for donald trump and every day, every moment that we are all talking about what a miserable piece of legislation this is is a good day for us and a good day for the american

people. we can still kill this bill. it felt like this right before we blocked them from repealing the affordable care act. it looked like they had the votes. it looked like it was inevitable. they had the trifecta. it was about to happen. then people rose up and said, please don't do this to me. what we need is a bunch of people saying don't cut medicare, don't cut medicaid, don't cut food assistance and certainly don't use all of those cuts to provide resources to the wealthiest people who have ever walked the planet. we're going to fight as hards a we can. -- as hard as we can. we need four republicans to say enough is enough. i yield the floor. mr. warner: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. warner: i agree with my colleague from hawaii. i ask the senate move to the

12:00 vote now. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of william long of missouri to be commissioner of internal revenue for the remainder of the term expiring november 12, 2027, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the mandatory quorum call under rule 22 has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of william long of missouri to be commissioner of internal revenue for the remainder the term expiring november 12, 2027, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin.

mr. banks. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. ms. blunt rochester. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mrs. britt. mr. budd. ms. cantwell. the clerk: mrs. capito. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. chairman crapo, and members of the committee, i'm honored to

be here today as the nominee for the commissioner of the internal revenue service i want to thank trump for believing in me to leave this important agency. and others been some confusion but i am not the one big beautiful bill that he had spoken about. to paraphrase lou gehrig, i've said here istoday the luckiest man in the world. i have the opportunity to make real transformational change to an agency that needs it more than any other federal agency or i could go back home to southwest missouri where the fish are biting and he ain't going to catch themselves. i feel lucky on either side. ...

the irs most engaged as he changes are made so once they get over to the irs we will have a comprehensive understanding of congress intent. here's something you will find unusual cover of a set of the most unusual congressman because things come into my head, , pop-up, ideas, things i think of. i know any other irs commissioner that the relayed this proposal. but i have pledged to arrive 90 minutes before the office opens every single day to let anyone in the facility on my schedule for ten minutes in the morning to tell what's going on in her life, what's going on at the irs and how to improve things. we have to listen. i think there's a lot of wasted brain cells over in the building

because no one has ever asked them for their opinions on how to make things better, make it a better place for them to work and a better place to serve the american public. my two main concerns will be my employee partners at the irs and the hard-working american taxpayers who deal with them. i don't want either one of in that equation to be intimidated by the other side. and congress i had as many democrat friends as a did republicans. i would encourage any of you who have reservations about how i operate to walk the halls of congress where i was for 12 years. this isn't since december 5 or 4th 2 now. this is over the last 12 years to talk to democrats over there and see how i served and what i'm like, what things that we worked on together. you can talk to debbie dingell, doris matsui, brendan boyle.

there is just on and on the north. mark takano. diana degette i will talk about her for a second. we coach of the congressional study group on japan and let a bipartisan delegation for five years in a row. very good friends with prime minister abe and we had, diane and i would walk in a room over that would be rock stars. they would be hauling diana, diana. but if you're going to represent and see some of the allies we have around come yet to go and have boots on the ground. some say i can't talk come people think am i'm travelinn their dime and everything but i took joe kennedy and his wife to meet his aunt when she was ambassador to japan. but i would take diana degette would be a good one to ask who i served and in this committee alone out of 27 people on the

committee i think, 27 people, and nine i worked with in the house. ben ray lujan i was upset within what a way to his office, always wears a bolo tie. i won the one -- i wonder when jim mcdermott gave me. we were good friends. he didn't have his bolo tie on that day. but we, there's so much we can accomplish together. i want to have a good time today. i hope you all do. i'm going to have a good time and i, i appreciate that question and whatever. nominees, you know, have an opportunity like to work with you on an issue. if i tell you that, i mean it. i want to come to office, i want to sit down. you'll have my cell phone. be the most open, i used to take a class on ufos. upbeat friendly and open. that's how, i mean my staff in the house used to say other

staffers would come up and they say your boss just talked to in the foyer. i speak everybody. like i said i'm a people person like the present set. again i appreciate the nominated me for this position. but i want to make it a better place for the employees by meeting, who's going to come in 90 minutes every single day? i talk to one cup a treasure indeed been at the irs before. when you're over there take a couple pictures of the commissioner's office. i want to see the layout how it is so i could of know. i like to conference table so we can bring people in and talk. he looked at me and he said early, i i was or 15 years and have never been invited to the third floor. never been invited to the commissioner's office. i want to change that at the irs. you got to look, ben franklin have been frank and drop f the page and he put pluses and minuses. look at the pluses for me to take this position. which i have found any yet.

the minuses are like 17 things long. you've got to ask why i want this job. i wanted because i care about people. i did talk radio for secured under wasn't a week they went by i didn't say you can call the irs on five days in a row with the same question to get six different answers. nothing has changed about that. i've been watching and i pledge to get around the country. charles told me he was not made by clinton, a republican but had to have a republican to get by a republican senate back in those days. charles if you go to -- he was considered the best irs commission of all times. he told me get out of the office. go to all these, all the same 90 minute trip every office i go to run the country but i'd love to serve. i know i'm going to get a lot of questions today, and that's fine. but ran into sherry at the restaurant in the ash told a group nobody doesn't like billy long. i want her to say that in the

next few hours because i think the will be a lot of people who don't like billy long. ms. warren. mr. welch. >> thank you very much. i'll start with questions and congressman long of a number of questions for you but first i want to confirm a few basic facts. because of time constraints i ask you to just gimme a yes or no responses to the next two questions. have you ever met or interacted with anyone who works at white river? >> no, sir. >> was your role with respect to all of your tax advisory work solely limited to provide referrals to other professionals like those lifetime advisors capital and strategy and commerce sheriffs consulting pgh

yes. >> did you ever provide or attempt to provide tax advice? >> no. >> when referring to potential clients, a potential client to others did you always specify that they should have the own business legal or accounting counsel involved in any discussions or negotiations? >> yes. >> with respect to clients you refer to capital edge strategies. you relied on a descriptive credits provided to you by capital edge and at the time of referral you were not aware of any facts to indicate or suggest that christ did not exist, correct? >> yes. >> turning to campaign debt, you disclose that matter to the federal election commission, correct? >> yes. >> fully aware of your business arrangements the career office of government ethics, oge's to compared an agreement with you to provide any and all potential come to address any and all

potential conflict of interest and you intend to completely abide by the terms of the letter, correct? >> yes. >> thank you. the next question i have for you, you can go beyond yes or no if you would like. the mission statement of the irs changes, charges its employees to provide america's taxpayers top-quality service i helped them understand and meet the tax responsibilities and enforced along with integrity and fairness for all. american taxpayers expect the irs will live up to its mission statement on administering tax law fairly. and impartially. regardless of one's political affiliation which i can say is unfortunately not something most americans believe is always true. can you share your thoughts on how vital it is for the irs to uphold the standards of fairness and impartiality while

administering the tax code, and what were you due to uphold the standard? >> fairness is one of the main drivers of what needs to be done over the irs make sure we treat everyone fair regardless of the income level or who they deal with. there is no room in my irs to do anything other than treat everyone fairly and follow the law. i will follow the law and do exactly what it calls for. >> thank you very much. given your service in congress, you are uniquely aware of how important it is so open and regular communication between executive branch agencies and the respected respectl committees of jurisdiction. given the significance of tax policy and its administration is critical the irs is transparent with congress. if confirmed we commit to provide prompt and thorough feedback to the members of the senate finance committee? >> yes.

>> that concludes my questions. senator wyden. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, and colleagues let me stipulate for purposes of this morning that this witness is a very entertaining individual. that's not what is at issue this morning. what's at issue are the facts and that's what want to go through with you, mr. long. after leaving, she city $5000 referring your friends to tax promoters who claim that they acquired income tax credit issued to a native american tribe and then sold these credits to investors. there's a problem. the irs said in march that the credits do not exist. they are fake. they are a scam. now you are asking to be put in charge of the irs, and irs confirms that these are not real. tell the committee you believe the so-called tribal tax credits

actually exist? >> thank you for the question. my only involvement in this matter, like i said numerous times in the written correspondence back and forth with members of the committee, was to connect interested friends of mine, not robocall, not paying kids toy five dollars an hour to call but friends if they had any interest and i would say you want to get on zoom and i was never on the zoom speeders that's not my question. my question speeders i'm sorry misunderstood. >> you believe that the so-called tribal tax credits actually exist? yes or no? >> i do, i can't answer yes or no because i do not know. i think the jury still out on that. i know since 2022 they been accepting them, so now they claim that are not and they have been i think that all this is going to play out. i want to have in the skater just as you do. i know you are in the subject. i am, to. >> i released a recording of

investor called on this scheme last week when person on the call said they had sold $20 million worth of credits and they had all been rejected by the irs. so can you name a single native american tribe that you or any other promoter acquired these tribal tax credits from? >> i work through capital edge strategies. i didn't work through -- of talking buddy come companiy at white river and i drive anyway to know who the tribe is. >> well most of your experience with tax involves selling tax shelters that don't exist for a native american tribe that you can't name, and that's what i'm troubled by. so let's go now to the question of pay to play. in the past year you made $65,000 referring clients to promoters of what appears to be dissed fraudulent tribal tax

credits. the president announced your nomination on december 4th. within a matter of weeks that same tribal tax credit group of promoters contributed $165,000 to your old campaign, even though you left office years ago. you then transferred the money from the campaign to your pocket. after you and i made it to the irs commissioner, who did you talk with to solicit the $155,000 in donations? >> you know as well as i do anytime you're dealing with the ftc have to follow guidelines and that's exactly what i did all the way through -- >> i want to know you talked with -- >> up report these things and it comes out exactly, if i thought something was wrong with that i sure -- >> money doesn't just fall out of the sky. you had to talk to somebody. who did you talk to about the

$165,000? if it's relevant speeders everyone i talk to and if one of the dealt with or didn't talk to was fec compliance, sir. >> can get a list of those you talk to to? >> i gave it all i give everything to the fec so everything we did was speeders do you expect us to believe that the money just a lot of the sky and showed up in your campaign treasury? i i find that a little bit implausible. let's go on to the next one. promoting the employee retention tax credit. we talked about your experience selling tribal tax credits as a gimmick. now let's talk about your other tax experience. in 2023 you've been paid as a referral agent or employee retention tax credit and promoters piggy stayed on a youtube video everybody qualifies for the employee retention tax credit and you urge listeners to ignore cpa's who said they didn't qualify. do you really think everybody

qualifies? >> if you listen to that video i hate to correct you but it didn't say everyone qualified for i sent virtually everyone qualifies, meaning that most people virtually most people. virtually present, i listen to give it a to make sure. >> so basically overwhelmingly everybody qualifies. you want to quibble with that? i think this is wrong and that's what i'm troubled by. >> you've voted for it. i voted for it. >> i voted for it when we all come during the heart of the covid period were trying to take employers and employees and give them some help. this problem which learned about from the commissioner took place after covid receded and that's why we're so troubled by the fraud. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator bennet. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, congressman long for being here. you were going to be the most important tax person in this administration.

i was curious about whether you are aware that yesterday the 30 year bond actually touched 5% interest rate. >> yes. >> why do you think that was? >> i didn't follow it but he heard about it, yeah. >> do you think it might've had to do with the fact that moody's strip the united states of our aaa rating last friday? >> i'm not aware. i know -- >> are you worried, congressman long, that moody's strip the united states --th >> yes. >> why are you not just aware of it but why are you worried about that? >> when i get into congress in 2011, our national debt was $14 trillion. i voted against every spinnaker. now it's 37. i think spinney people do here in cox has a lot to do with what people are very concerned about our meeting. >> i would agree with that

because i think one out of seven dollars we spend is not on interest. would you agree that's true? >> yes. >> we are spending more now as the country on interest than we are on defense. that's before yesterdays sell america trade, as it was called, that lifted bond, interest rates to 5%. would you agree that's tied our deficit you just mention it? >> i speedy you just mention how much it is increased. it's at $29 trillion today. how much more is that then when donald trump enacted his tax cuts in 2017? >> 2017 i don't have any recollection. >> would it surprise you know that it's twice as much as it was when he enacted his tax cuts in 2017? >> that are deficit -- >> twice as much as was probably three times it was when you joined the congress to begin with?

>> i don't have any independent recollection of that so unsure if you've got the figures, , i'l go with your judgment. >> that is, congressman long, what the facts tell us and for the reason we were just talking about, our interest expenses only going up and up and up. would you agree that as he goes up that that makes are deficit even worse than it already is? >> if what goes up? >> the interest rate, that we have to pay because -- >> of course. >> of. >> the cousin country is being downgrade because of fiscal responsibility of congress. say and administration that is adding $3 trillion to our debt when we are not in recession because, among other things they want to give tax cuts to the wealthiest people in america. what do you say to people? is it fair to people in misery that they should have -- >> i fought all the spinney for 12 years i was here and it fell on deaf ears. people don't want to cut come you don't want to cut company

cut will guide going the tree and that's company with your conservative or liberal everybody says they want to do something waste, fraud, and abuse. >> what do we owe, you are the most important tax person in america now if you get this job and you have that view of our deficit which i know you said that you do. what would you say to an administration that is not adding $3 trillion of debt, and where our credit rating has now lost its third come the last aaa rating that the trend of america had that people in missouri are counting on, people in colorado are counting on, that we have now lost that aaa rating and we are still going to spend like drunken sailors on your watch? what do you say to people at home about that? >> the same thing i said for 12 years. in congress. we have to get it under control.

i'm not in congress and more. i can vote on legislation. >> isn't any evidence? i make you understand math. you're a smart person. they haven't passed the bill yet in the house is going to add another $3 trillion on top of the $30 trillion that's already here. why isn't your message to them, don't do it? >> what? what. >> why isn't your message to them don't do a come to at any more debt to the people in misery? >> we need to start paying down our debt. i said that for 12 years. you are here, you're able to -- >> what you going to say to the american people when you leave this administration and the debt is even, is far worse today than, far worse than when you're leaving than it is today? >> we are going to have a lot of conversation with a lot of folks come with you and other people in congress and the white house and try to work in the same direction.

>> iay know i'm adding into, mr. chairman, but let me just say, i want the market to reflect that we're having this conversation three days after we lost the aaa rating of the debt of the united states, and in the after interest rate, 30 year bond touched 5% as a result of the fiscal irresponsibility of this administration. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator cortez masto. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to the ranking member. congressman long, a series of public reports last year and failed a scheme by several countries for so-called tribal tax credits to investors. these credits are entirely fake. in fact, this committee received confirmation from the current irs that confirm that these tax credits that only did not exist, taxpayers who claimed credit

snooping since are subject to penalties and possible examination. and furthermore that promoters of these credits may be subject to civil or criminal penalties. the irs goes on to say we might all taxpayers to beware of tax scams encourages taxpayers to consult with the reputable tax advisor. in your follow up to the public financial disclosure report that you provided to the committee you identified the work that you have done. you said you received $65,000 from capital edge strategies. and that the cd 5000 was related to referrals involving tribal tax credits sold by white rock river. in response to that question, is that true what you said all my work with capital edge was related to tribal tax credit, is that correct? >> yes.

>> and so moving forward, as the commission of the irs knowing that is illegal preferred tribal tax because it is a scam, had a seizure now and say that you have no conflict of interest? >> i have no involvement other than recommending they get their cpa, cfo if they're interested. if they weren't interested that was fine. i was, their perversion of one to look at to see the ramifications speedy but you admit all your work with capitol edge was related to tribal tax credit and it is clear from the treasury and the irs that that is a scam, they don't exist. we had you were referring those big effect you said many tribal responses question, travel tax credit referrals did you work on for capitol edge and white river, and responded less than ten close friends and acquaintances to capitol edge. so he did refer tribal tax credits to individuals, correct? >> i referred them to capitol edge strategies, yes.

>> okay. so knowing that their illegal and i was a center illegal how do standard before this committee and tell the chairman just take minutes ago that you have no conflict of interest? >> because the offset government ethics which is career professionals that i've signed controls all about, and i did not have any perception whatsoever that these did not exist. and when asked in her hearing the other day or be with the staff, i said, they said the irs says they don't exist. and i said who said that? we can't tell you. i mean this needs to be investigated. senator wyden has a saying -- >> let me stop you right there and shall back to this. because on april 14 both senator wyden and i in this committee acts are sent a letter to the acting commissioner of the irs to investigate this. are you aware of that letter? >> no. i know that you'll sent several

letters to several people but i'm not aware of that particular. >> let me make you aware of it and will submit again for the record that we've asked the irs to investigate these travel tax credits and the scam any companies that were involved in some copies allegedly that were involved or white river energy corporation. a company could you seek compensation for. isn't that correct? >> no. >> yes or no? >> i did not receive compensation from white river. all my work was for capitol edge. i've said several times i've never met anyone at white river. i don't know anyone at white river. i simply referred to capitol edge where the credits came from or how that works. >> on your financial disclosure statement you disclose sick if i thousand income from referral fees on capitol edge strategies, correct? >> i believe that's correct. >> it stated the source the income was white river energy corporation, correct? >> that was what oge wanted speedy that's what you filled

out. that's what you filled up. >> my understanding was -- >> i i can only go with what you gave me. i can only go with information and the fact that you gave me. that's it you filled up. i question to you is if you don't think it's a conflict that you pedal in this scam as the irs commission and have considered today and say this of conflict knowing now that there's an investigation underway with the irs and we are asking them to look at this scam and it may involve a company that you affiliate with? how would you handle that as irs commissioner? >> i cannot have anything to do with any company or people that i dealt with because oge formed, and so i'm not pushing back on investigating -- >> on x about the four. your nominee as a irs commissioner. you know there's a potential investigation underway as a company that you are affiliated with. how would you handle that as irs commissioner? >> how what? on source. how would you handle that as a

irs commissioner? >> i would do whatever is illegal and lawful and check with the legal staff and expand the situation to them and say i work for capitol edge strategies, and they barely had an arrangement with white river and he restrained on that the one information different than they wanted on the other things. but speed is congressman long, my time is up. my time is up and and i appe the indulgence of the chairman. i'm going to submit the rest of my question for the record. my concern is the fact that this company also contributed to one of your send created packs, some money after you were nominated to the irs. that's concern. that is concern that a company that has pedal in frog fras that there's potential investigation from the irs is now providing you money knowing that you are now being nominated to the irs. i was in my question for the record. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. senator blackburn. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

mr. long, we appreciate your being here today. one of the things that is been so frustrating the tennesseans is when the a call the irs they can't get answers. they get different answers and the culture there has been the people don't even show up to work. they are working remount. you spoke a little bit in your opening statement about culture. if you would talk about in the remote work and putting people back in the office and what you're going to do to make certain there is an explicit answer for our taxpayers. >> thank you for the question. a lot of people think i'm still in congress so i get a lot of messages about issues and problems. i got a message within the last five days. it was legitimate and he said i been on hold with the irs for two and half hours, and he said

it's not about a dispute about. it's about the first quarter try to get answers picky set after two and half hours someone picked up the phone. and i had to get some paperwork i had to go look up a w-2 or whatever, and after 12 minutes the person on the phone said i don't have time to wait for you. this is after he waited two and half hours. call times, i mean you call american express, you call american airlines. they say would you like to be put in a queue? let us know, we'll call you back in approximately 28 minutes. i think the irs needs to run more like a business. he went over the bucks county, pennsylvania. we were trying to look at the limestone underground were everybody's papers are help but there's a call center there in bucks county athlete in bucks county. we were allowed to sit and

listen with a headset to the folks there edging and p. these are all former government that was, one just with his mom passed away the day before. he menaces rotund figure out what needed tors happen or whatever. the lady on the phone that i was sitting by was so nice, so polite. the gentleman was so polite. i had other people with me and one of them was listening to nichols under three came in from missouri. what i had in my time in d.c. is at over treasury, over at opm, anywhere that i've been the attitude of these federal employees is i mean, i think they take a ufo class, being open and from it because they all speak you. they don't know me from anybody but they're fairly. think we covered the people working with the need for better systems, better speedy a need guidance and leadership. >> pardon? >> they need that guidance and

leadership and that change of culture. by the ask you about this. we've had lots of complaints about the direct file program. and it is something that was put in place without explicit congressional approval. and what ith would like to knows what you would do with that direct file program. there are a lot of us who think it should be shut down because there are plenty of free programs that are out there that people can file their tax, and so many people feel like this is overly intrusive into their personal information to use direct file. >> it's possibly the hottest one of the hottest topics at the irs. i guess that's is true to e next commissioner. i have never been in the building. when we start having these beating that's one of the first things in which a look at because i know the previous tax

season and wants to something that this tax season they just concluded. people said when i got nominated are you worried about this tax filing? i said no. they had things running smoothly over there. i want to congratulate everyone that was a very in pulling off a very successful tax season. i know they use last year and this year at the next taxis is right around the corner. i know that doesn't sound right on may 20 but don't you do before you know it's one of the first thing i want to down and have meetings on the people both sides have different opinions on direct file to a what to get to the bottom of it to see what is best for the hard-working partners i will have a irs if i'm confirmed and the taxpayers. what's best for those groups just like everything, i i wano develop a culture at the irs is not top-down. i do wanted to be my culture. through these meetings i want people there to tell me what's

going on in her life. i what you're all about direct file. >> my time is expected thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much. senator cassidy. >> okay. how are you? you know, one thing i've been concerned about which has really benefited my state and it seemed that is benefit st. louis when he visited st. louis, is the a stork preservation easement program. it will take an old building which cost to fix up and you get a tax credit to do so and you preserve a structure which as ii was once told is both historic, iconic and catalytic for the neighborhood to upgrade. i saw an old post office in downtown st. louis in which that was done. specifically interested in how the irs will treat as an particularly the property owners

who protect these historic buildings using an historic preservation easement. on multiple occasions the irs office of chief counsel has described as a strategy as relates to historic preservation easement as guidance by litigation. now, ideally the irs would accommodate the taxpayer upfront so that the historic building owner can be confident that the tax deduction claimed under a congressional office program is honored by the irs. by the way congress has repeatedly affirmed this program. ronald reagan has a great quote about this, it goes that far back. so do you agree the irs should reallocate enforcement resources towards front into guidance and and guidance by litigation campaign, which has been used against these easements? >> yes, i would most certainly

and earlier i mentioned one of the things i've unusual to bring to its hill. i mention eyster woodmanager and carcass including yourself just on this one committee here. and being someone that just left congress two and half years ago i want my people have access with your permission to the finest comedic of the ways and means committee so we know when these are written, how to carry them out. we got to guess for ten, 12, 50 months before this decide how to do so i agree, just. >> i appreciate t that. ion is a.

>> good morning, everybody. genetic data is the blueprint to a person.

it's sensitive. it's personal, and in the wrong hands they can be dangerous. as technology and biotechnology rapidly expand, they bring new and serious challenges. consumers deserve to know how their data is going to be used, and americans deserve protection from foreign threats. that's why we're here today. the 23 and the saga has unveiled a serious and concerning issues regarding consumer protection, data privacy and national security. we've explored these issues in this hearing but today's hearing focuses upon genetic data. 23andme collected genetic data from roughly 15 million people. and when it did, it told the

consumers that their data be safe. they said they would be protected under their privacy policy. but now 23andme is in bankruptcy and is selling off its data americas genetic re we call? the presiding officer: we are not. ms. warren: i ask for recognition. the presiding officer: the senator is recognized. ms. warren: i rise to address the genius act and how it affects our democracy. i expected to be on the floor to adopt a series of amendments filed by democrats and republicans, amendments that would fix the core problems with this bill. for weeks leader thune promised that senators would have a chance to vote on amendments on

the stablecoin bill. this bill goes forward without a single chance for a single senator to offer a single amendment. even changes that have widespread bipartisan support are left aside as leader thune decides to strong arm the bill through the senate. before i outline the specific dangers posed by this bill, it's worth taking a step back to ask a simple question. why is the cryptoindustry so vigorously lobbying for a bill that proponents claim will bring much-needed regulation to the market? simon johnson, a noble prize winning economist, the former chair of the commodity futures trading commission, answered this question in a recent op-ed by reminding us we've seen this

movie before. back in the late 1990's, derivatives were a nooesh market but a new --os investors didn't understand what it was or what they did, but the derivatives industry came knocking, begging for so-called regulation. congress was ready oblige. in 2000, congress passed the commodities future modernization act and president bill clinton signed it into law. proponents of the bill claimed that the it new law would provide legal clarity, promote innovation, reduce risks, protect consumers and advance u.s. competitiveness. after all, people said, surely some kind of regulatory framework was better than nothing at all. but the bill established a weak set of rules loaded with

loopholes, just as the industry wanted. sound familiar? the result was a disaster. derivatives moved from the edge of the financial system to the center of it. after all, with regulation these derivatives now seem to have the implicit blessing of the united states government and buying, selling and designing derivatives became a more mainstream activity on wall street. in less than eight years, the market for over-the-counter derivatives grew. by simultaneously boosting the derivatives industry and like -- likely regulating, it set the stage for the 2008 financial crash. after the meltdown, congress came back and cleaned up the mess in dodd-frank, but that was

long after hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts had been handed to wall street while ten million families had lost their homes and millions more had lost their jobs. mr. johnson's noble prize is an impressive credentials and his warning should carry great weight. but we should also pay attention to the thoits of his -- thoughts of his coauthor. she saw the 2008 train wreck coming and opposed the derivatives bill at the time and now she is ringing the alarm again. the parallels to the commodity futures modernization act are striking. industry is the driving force behind the genius act. proponents argue the genius act will provide legal clarity,

promote innovation, reduce risks, protect consumers and advance u.s. competitiveness in a new financial market. passage of the genius act is expected to grow the market from $200 billion now to an estimated $2 trillion in a short time. the genius act is riddled with loopholes and contains safeguards for consumers, financial security, and financial stability. yeah, it all sounds very similar. but there is one big difference between the genius act and the cfma. president clinton did not own a derivatives company. president trump does own a stablecoin company. through his cryptobusiness, president trump has created an efficient means to trade presidential favors like tariff

exemptions, pardons, and government appointments for hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of dollars from foreign governments, from billionaires, and from large corporations. this is the single greatest corruption scandal in american history. and by passing the genius act, the senate is about to not only bless this corruption, but to actively facilitate its expansion. "the new york times" ran a front-page essay this week by ben rhodes, president obama's deputy national security advisor on trump's corruption. he interviewed sander letterler who heads an anticorruption organization and has witnessed the disintegration of hungary's democracy under viktor orban. he warned, quote, the pressure corruption puts on a political

system is like a river bearing down on a dam. once the dam breaks, you're washed down river by currents you can't control. if you try to rebuild the dam, it's too late. instead of fortifying the dam, the senate is now hacking away at it. in april, president trump's cr cryptocompany world liberty financial launched its own stablecoin called usd1. that stablecoin is already the fifth largest stablecoin in the world and foreign investors have already begun to exploit this avenue for corruption. a uae state-backed investment firm used trump's usd1 to finance a $2 billion investment in a cryptoexchange whose owner is reportedly lobbying president trump for a pardon, essentially

giving trump a cut of this $2 billion deal. this is the model. deposit your money in the bank of trump and use his stablecoin to make payments. he earns money by investing those deposits in other assets like a bank and also earn else money on every transaction that occurs whenever the stablecoin is used as a means of payment. even more publicized than his stablecoin, trump launched a meme coin, another type of cryptoasset. the coin was issued shortly before trump's inauguration and it initially soared in value. when people lost interest and the value of the coin began to sag, trump launched a new scheme to make money. a few weeks ago he hosted a dinner for the top holders of his meme coin which again juiced

the price and increased trading volume. the meme coin has netted more than $320 million in transactions fees alone and has inflated trump's net worth on paper by billions of dollars. and the favors for people who bought millions of dollars of trump's coins have just begun. for example, one of those top holders at the dinner was crypto executive justin sun who recently had his scc lawsuit kwooiftly dropped. another was an investor with close ties to the chinese communist party. there is nothing in the genius act to stop this corruption. in fact, the senate bill would accelerate the corruption. the bill would expand the reach of usd1 and grow its size.

it would make trump the regulator of his own financial company and importantly the regulator of his competitors. senator merkley is leading an amendment to fix this, an amendment that leader thune has blocked. there are other serious problems with the genius act, problems that democrats and republicans have amendments to fix. the bill permits big tech companies and other conglomerates to issue their own private currencies and take control over the money supply. it includes a special carve-out that makes it even easier for private companies like x to issue a stablecoin. musk has made it clear that in a few years he wants his new x money payment platform to be, quote, half of the global financial system. senator hawley and senator --

senator blumenthal that will has an amendment to block that. community banks have warned us that creating a parallel lightly regulated banking system, the stablecoin market will drain bes to sits from our local communities. there will be less funding available for small businesses and households all across our country. senator hickenlooper has an amendment to fix that. leader thune has blocked that amendment. the bill would also mean easier access to money for terrorists and cartels. even today the crypto industry's own analysts are calling stablecoins, quote, the new kingpin of illicit crypto activity. around to a blockchain analytics firm, stablecoins account for more than 60% of all illicit cryptotransactions.

unfortunately, the genius act massively expands the marketplace for stablecoins while failing to address the basic national security risks posed by them. it also includes glaring loopholes that would allow tether, a notorious foreign stablecoin issuer now based in el salvador, would allow tether access to u.s. markets. just this week, just this week prosecutors charged a russian national in new york for using tether to help russians evade u.s. sanctions. senators schumer, reed, shaheen, and blunt rochester have amendments to fix those problems. leader thune has blocked those amendments. the bill also increases the likelihood that consumers will get ripped off and scammed in financial transactions involving stablecoins. it jeopardizes the cfpb

oversight and the suite of consumer protections people enjoy when using their venmo app or ordinary bank account. if you get cheated using a stablecoin, you may just be out of luck. the vast majority of stablecoin issuers won't even be required to undergo financial audits to make sure that they aren't committing fraud. senators durbin and warnock have annual amendment to fix this. senator thune has blocked that amendment. and finally, the genius act lacks the basic safeguards necessary to ensure that stablecoins don't blow up our entire financial system. the bill permits stablecoin issuers to invest in risky assets and allows them to engage in risky, nonstablecoin activities like private credit or derivatives trading. at the same time, the bill

constrains regulators' ability to apply capital and liquidity safeguards to limit the chances of stablecoin failures. again, we have amendments to fix this and again, leader thune has blocked those amendments. over the past few months, democrats seem to have forgotten that we actually have some power. this is an opportunity to use that power. democrats can withhold their approval of this bill today and say that the bill will not go forward unless we have the opportunity to vote on some amend amendments, precisely as leader thune promised we could do. democrats should show a little spine and insist on amendments as the price for helps advance this bill. we don't have to speculate on what can go wrong if this bill advances without changes.

we have already seen it. the next time trump is cut into a corruption deal by a foreign government using his stablecoin or the next time north korea uses stablecoins to add to its nuclear arsenal or the next time a person falls victim to a stablecoin scam or the next time the financial system is stressed by a stablecoin run, it is likely that the resulting harm will be traced right back to the inadequacies of the genius act. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill.

[inaudible question] >> sure. right now it's keeping california safe. if gavin is and isn't going to keep california safe, we are. they imposed a curfew last night. that helped a bit but today we wanted them to declare, they could declare an economic disaster of the with all the businesses. had they done that kelly loeffler and small business association could have come in

and help given federal aid to all of these businesses in california. we have been saying on the news all of these drugstores getting robbed, getting looted, the apple store just got raided. we are all watching this light on the news. this isn't just looting, people just run and take something leave and nothing happens. we are using the hobbs act, we're charging robbery to protect californians under, if you lived a stork were going to charge it with robbery under the hobbs act and you look at maximum 20 years in prison. but were going to prosecute you for that. identifying people now is a different world. it's the guy with a cinder blocks. we were able to identify them,, great fbi work, atf dei work together with ice and homeland security. great partnership. our national guard to go back to question our national guard armory have come in to protect our buildings, to protect the marines have come to protect the national guard. it is total chaos out there.

we're all watching it on the news and they're throwing bricks. bricks. we had a law enforcement officer injured. they're throwing bricks at cars. this is very orchestrated. they are not to send a break. they had hammers in place, break-in muppet we've all seen what the sidewalks, the coming in with huge sledgehammers breaking up the sidewalks and take at least huge pieces of concrete, throwing them off a bridge throwing in the people. it's truly a miracle that no one has been seriously injured or killed yet. but we're going to do everything within our legal authority to protect our law enforcement officers and all the people in california right now. ..

much different situation. law enforcement needs to have their hands on tide where they can do their job is that right now in california what we are doing is working. by bringing in the national guard. by bringing in the marine. to back them up to protect our federal buildings to protect the highways to protect the citizens so right now in california a good point. we are not fighting to do something else, if we need to. right now we are hoping it's

going to get under control. we hope the curfew will work and we will continue to do everything we can to keep california safe but the government california is not going to help. interns in my office be granted floor privileges until june 12, jude abher and sophia donilis. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: i can honestly say that louisiana fuels my state, and it's true. louisiana accounts for 60% of u.s. energy exports last year. the united states is the world's la largest lng exporters and we have some of the largest

exporters in the world. a lot of the natural gas we export is in northwest louisiana and that comes down to hackbury, louisiana, where president trump went when it opened, that exports four million metric tons annually. there are 30 million metric tons -- and in blacksman parish is also exporting. president trump wants to re-establish american energy dominance and that starts in my state. i can probably say louisiana has the infrastructure, strategic location, most importantly, the workers to put the united states back on top. louisiana's ports, railroads and

pipelines provide oil and gas to be exported from our ports to around the world. some is transported by rail and the only place in the united states of america where six major railroad carriers converge is in my state of louisiana. we have a 50,000 mile pipeline network and 11,000 of state highways, makes louisiana an obvious choice when considering who can transport these goods. when your state has the mouth of the mississippi where it drains into the gulf of america, besides our lng exports, we have six combined deep drop ports, we are removing oil and gas, and also the refined products from that oil and gas which is part of fueling the world. so louisiana's critical to the production and the distribution of fuel and fuel products. i'm making these points because

restraebing -- re-establishing america energy dpom unanimous creates better jobs, higher-paying jobs which can change the trajectory in my state and families elsewhere in the nation. by the end of president biden term, after four years of attacks of american production, the department of energy reported tens of thousands of jobs lost. now, tens of thousands of jobs is a statistic, but these are real people, real families we're speaking of. think of the young couple with three kids and the husband comes home and tells his wife that he has lost his job. he would have lost his job because of some activity the biden administration did. the wife immediately wonders how they're going to pay the house note. the husband feels humiliated, he feels as if he's letting his family down and suddenly there's

sparks of arguments between two people who have always gotten along and kids see conflict that there never was before. these are human stories and those stories are relived over and over when these almost 30,000 jobs were killed. by the way, they were killed not because the fuel was not needed but because the last administration decided they felt uncomfortable with that fuel being produced in the united states of america. well, tens of thousands of americans suffered under that prejudice under president biden. the war on american energy was a war on american jobs, which is a war on american families. now, that war on the american family is over. i recognize president trump -- i recognize, president trump recognizes, that american energy dominance, fueling our state and the country and giving enough manufacturing of refined

products, creates high-paying jobs for americans who should never have been out of work in the first place. woodside energy announced the largest single foreign investment. a $17.5 billion investment for new lng export facility. this will support 15,000 jobs during construction, once operational, thousands more. by the way, there's other things to do with this plentiful abundant energy. last month, a steel company announced an investment to build a new next-generation steel production facility, a facility expected to generate $4.1 billion in annual revenue and bring 1500 direct jobs to the state and thousands of indirect jobs. low-cost energy paving the way for more opportunity. by the way it benefits my state,

our nation, but guess who else benefits? our allies. europe imports energy from the united states but they get 20% from russia. if we send them 45% of the lng, that is a growth from the russian-ukraine war what that number was only 27%. there is a bill that puts stricter sanctions on russian, if they buy less natural gas from russia they will need it from us. we want to send more natural gas across the atlantic ocean creating tax revenue for my parish governments, work for our workers, helps our national security, helps our economy, helps working families. the european union using more u.s. liquefied natural gas

throws a wrench in vladimir putin's war machine. last year the e.u. paid 22 billionure rose for -- billion euros for russian natural gas. after putin's brutal invasion of ukraine in 2022, the united states helped ukraine stand up against putin, europe did too. let's use our energy to do it even more so. we can help them by saying don't buy putin's gas to fuel his war. by ours. and louisiana is ready to help. america has the resources, we have the abundance, let's put it to use. with that, mr. president, i yield.

later today on the house opportunity to stop the gop tax scam and address the concerns that have been raised by dozens of house republicans with

respect to be damaged that the one big bill will do to everyday americans. the gop tax scam represents the largest assault on healthcare in american history. more than 16 million americans will lose access to healthcare in the united states america as a result of the one big ugly bill. hospitals will close, nursing homes will shut down and people die because they access to the care that they need. tens of millions of additional american will pay higher premiums, co-pays, and deductibles. there are more than a dozen you have indicated they don't support cutting medicaid for the people they represent.

they have a chance to stop this bill from leaving sent over to the united states senate by voting no on the rule today. other that they don't support the cuts to the clean energy tax credits that have generated jobs and economic opportunity in their communities. yet somehow mysteriously they voted for the one big ugly bill, but now these house republicans have the ability to stop the gop tax scam to be sent to the united states senate. strange to me that you have republicans who voted for a bill that they apparently dislike and then publicly sent a letter to their senate republican colleagues to say,

stop these provisions from ever becoming law. that's the height of irresponsibility. vote yes and then hope for the best. know you have a job to do in the house of representatives. and now you have a second chance to actually stop this one big ugly bill and the provisions that you disagree with, whether it's cuts to medicaid or the to clean taxpayers or the prohibition against regulating artificial intelligence across all 50 states. or the aggressive overreach that many republicans have complained about in terms of trying to strip the ability of federal courts to issue contempt orders against an out-of-control executive branch. every single one of those

republicans them, now have an opportunity to actually act responsibly, vote no against the rule that will be on the floor the house and stop gop tax scam from even going over to the united states senate. i'm thankful for the leadership and presence of chuck schumer it's my honor to lead yield to him. >> it's great to be back in the house. now is the opportunity to make the changes that they told their constituencies that they don't like in the bill. the bottom line is, what if the

congress members core power, embodied in the constitution. the power to vote and they are to exercise that power to vote this afternoon. because it's a unique opportunity to change this bill. if it's because they didn't technically provide the right bill to pass the senate has to be sent back to the house. even if a handful of republicans don't know they will have the opportunity to change the vicious cuts on medicaid that hurt so many that will close well hospitals and many other districts, they have the opportunity to restore the tax credits on clean energy because if they don't it's going to affect their

districts. if they want to stop the vicious cuts to snap, if they want to prevent billionaires from getting taxes wherever they went home and told people he didn't like it if you said they didn't read the bill. and many whispered we didn't know this was on the bill lightly on the energy tax credits which was done at the dark of night because chip ryan is right-wing texans just have hatred of clean energy. so the time it's a golden opportunity if they really mean what they say and want to change the bill was the golden opportunity. you, mr. president

mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to discuss the so-called genius act which we're going to vote on in a few minutes here in this chamber. it's a bill that i think could have gotten to a place where it made sense, but i'm not going to be supporting the less because, among other things, we haven't had a real debate on it. and we have had no opportunity to offer amendments to make the bill better. and it has still fallen short in some fundamental ways that i'm really worried about. i'm really worried about the risk to money laundering that i don't think is well addressed in this bill. i'm really worried about the regulatory structure which looks absolutely nothing like the structure that is required for our banks and for foreign banks that want to do business here in the united states. i think we may come to rue the day that we didn't put the guardrails in place to protect

the american people from what could be a catastrophic effect on our economy because we had the failure to have the foresight to see the potential risk that we could face. for example, just one example, mr. president, we commonly require financial institutions toik banks to -- like banks to have a subsidiary here in the united states that is regulated by the laws of the united states before they're able to offer banking services. to my constituents in colorado and to all the 330 million americans that we have, there's nothing like that in this bill. there's nothing like that in this bill. if some administration official deems a foreign jurisdiction is somehow good enough woul actually being good -- without actually being good enough, without having the benefits of the best environment in the

world which is ours, then they could do business here issuing crypto, in this case stable koings. i think this is a big mistake. as a member of the intelligence comm committee, i think it's a huge misthat that we didn't take on the issues of money laundering that cryptocurrency are presenting and the challenges it's causing to law enforcement. i think that's a big problem. it's either we couldn't have fixed it but we chose not to fix it. and as i mentioned earlier, there has not been an effort to make the bill better. there's been no amendment process. mr. president, i had an unusually -- i had an amendment in this bill for one brief, shining moment. i came down to the floor and offered an amendment, and it actually was accepted. it's been decades around this place, i think, since that's happened. and all that amendment said was -- it said the president and the vice president and the

members of congress should not issue crypto. in this case stablecoins. i would be surprised to learn that 90% of the american people think the president or the vice president or the members of congress should issue their own crypto coins while they're in office. that would be shocking to learn. and the american people clearly would like a legal regime here that prevents their elected officials, including the people in this body, including in the house of representatives, including and most particularly in the white house should not enrich themselves while they're in office. that was my very simple

amendment. that was referred to as the bennet amendment. i'm proud of that fact. this is not even hard. there is no reason the president, any president should be issuing crypto while they're in office or a vice president. there's no reason any person on this floor should do it or anybody in the house of representatives should do it. and now in a partially regulated regime where we're not dealing with that question, we're sending a signal to the american people that this digital currency has the seal of approval of the entire united states government. of our regulators. and that's potentially very dangerous to the financial

institutions that may participate in this and to the american people themselves. i have nothing fundamentally against crypto. i have nothing fundamentally against stablecoins. but i think it's fundamentally wrong that elected officials should be able to enrich themselves in this new digital environment. and i think -- i'll say maybe it's not 9 #% -- 98% but i bet you nine out of ten americans agree with me. and i'll say, mr. president, that this is just one more indication of the u.s. senate not doing the people's business, of not living up to the expectations of the folks that designed this chamber to begin with. this bill is going to pass with votes from the democratic party, even though there was not a

single amendment voted on as part of this bill. i object to that as a democrat. i can't stop it because there's 60 votes for this legislation. but i think we would have been a lot better off on this bill just like with almost any bill that comes to the floor of the senate to have an open amendment process. i would have loved to have had the opportunity to see people vote on a bill that banned members of the senate and from the house and the president and the vice president from issuing their own cryptocurrency. i would have liked to have had a debate that said is it a good idea to have foreign governments or foreign investors speculating publicly in the cryptocurrency that a president has issued. is it a good idea to have foreign entities making $2

billion investments in currency that is issued by american politicians? that is crazy. and we could have fixed that in this legislation. and not only did we not fix it, we didn't even have a debate about it. we didn't even have a single amendment come to the floor. we were in such a hurry to do the bidding of the proponents of this legislation. mr. president, i would urge all my colleagues to vote no on this procedural motion, to go back to the drawing board to have a proper negotiation, to write a piece of legislation that actually would provide the seal of approval in a meaningful way

to american investors and to american consumers. and when it comes to the issuing of cryptocurrency and stabl stablecoins, that we would have heeded the common sense of the american people who would have said do not ratify the corruption that's going on in our capitol. i don't think that's too much for the american people to ask for, mr. president. and i hope my colleagues will reconsider their position and we'll have the chance to have a proper debate and a proper negotiation on this bill. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor, and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. if you look at some of the imagery we received from the department of homeland security and i.c.e. and law enforcement on the ground, see boxes and boxes of very professionalized masks and writing dropped off so it's a good question the president is raising about who's funding the insurrectionist and writers and protesters and illegal criminals and i have updates on

the numbers. since june 6 there is 330 that is part of the riots in los angeles. 113 of those illegal aliens had prior criminal convictions and overall and this includes arrest of american citizens there's been 150,000 people arrested for assault and obstruction related charges including the attempted mother of a police officer with the molotov cocktail. so who's funding the illegal aliens who are coming in with a very professional riot gear, that's the question everyone in this room who cares about truth should be asking. and we encourage or help in trying to get to the bottom of that question. the president acknowledged the statement he sent out this morning and he's appreciative of it. we are continuing to focus on business of the american people >> has the administration

started a review of musk government contracts. >> what you mean? >> has the administration started review of the contract that musk and the companies. >> on everything that we've seen so far that the president's response to the la protests, there is criticism that. [inaudible] >> the president responded to the la riots condemning the violence, the president saw images of border patrol and i.c.e. agents being hailed with rocks and molotov cocktails. he saw vehicles being burned to the ground with illegal aliens

flying foreign flags that prompted the president to have the respondent that clearly works because last night in los angeles you didn't see many of those images present i would ask the governor and the mayor to actually do more patient i know gavin newsom had abated address to the nation last night, i guess he thought that's what it was for future political ambitions. but he spoke a lot of words we haven't seen action. california has been a mess for years because of the incompetence of gavin newsom, the president was responding to that only. >>. [inaudible] >> i can't speak for a letter that came from the department of homeland security i can't speak for the president and what's currently happening on the ground right now the

president federalize the national guard under us code 10. are united states marines are helping to create a peaceful environment united states marines on the ground or providing reinforcements to ensure the environment is peaceful so the raids and deportations can continue. >>. [inaudible] >> are trying to conflate a letter that set the online security to the president legal authority the president understands the legal authority that he invoked about the current situation right now. >> what is the specific criteria the president is using what he's deciding to do that. >> the president was asked, he wants to see an end to the

chaos and violence he doesn't want to see law enforcement officers being attacked want to see peace wants law-abiding californians to bring their kids to school to be able to go to work without seeing violence in the streets. that's why he's taking ction. there will be military families around the country flying in and it's to protect the spectators who will be enjoying this incredibly patriotic show on saturday and i hope you join us there. >> secretary pete had staffs testify today he was asked

about the administration's view of vladimir putin's intentions. specifically whether or not as intentions go beyond ukraine secretary concepts is not clear at this point, how does the president view this issue. >> the president believes ukraine was always the apple of putin's eye and he made it very clear up to putin in his first term not to invade ukraine, he didn't invade ukraine because of the president trumps peace through strength foreign policy agenda and the effect of deterrence policies implement it in the first term. unfortunately because the

weakness and incompetence of the previous frustration, vladimir putin made the decision to invade ukraine now we have this brutal war which the president is working hard to end. >>. [inaudible] >> the president absolutely supports peaceful protests he supports the first amendment he supports the right of americans to make their voices heard from he does not support violence of any kind. he does not support assaulting on for some awesome service simply trying to do their job. it's clear for the president what he supports and what he does not unfortunately for democrats that line has not been made clear and they allow the unrest and violence to continue. >> of course president support peaceful protests, what a stupid uestion.

>> right now the president views the situation in israel and gaza as deeply unfortunate and needing to enter. the president is realistic about the current space of affairs in this region of the world and that's why the president has said the number one focus of the priority of the administration is to release the hostages from gaza and and the conflict is possible. >> open government corruption that few of us thought could occur here

in the united states of america. we sometimes recognize it and expect it in countries far away, where authoritarian figures take a slice of every contract that goes through government, but not here in the united states of america. but yet, here we are. president trump has planted a "government for sale" sign on the white house lawn. individuals and foreign governments are funneling money into his pocket and his family's pocket in order to gain access and influence. the genius act attempts to set up some guardrails for buying and selling a type of cryptocurrency, one type called a stablecoin. while we need guardrails that ensure that government officials aren't openly asking people to buy their coins in order to increase their personal profit or their family's profit.

where are those guardrails in this bill? they're completely, totally absent. the genius act doesn't set up guardrails for the president or the vice president, doesn't set up guardrails that prevent an open invitation for people to buy access and influence by buying cryptocurrencies that -- crown crypto coins that increase the wealth of elected officials. this bill should never pass. we have the opportunity now to debate anticorruption amendments. but i understand the majority leader has decided to cancel any amendments from being considered here on the floor of the senate. whether those are amendments that protect the consumer from scams in which seniors are directed to go and change their

cash for did exchange their cash for crypto coins at an atm, a new way of sending money overseas that doesn't go through a bank tell their might possibly warn against a scam; whether it's plugging the many holes in this bill in order to have a proper regulatory framework, or whether it's to address the open corruption. none of those amendment are going to be considered, not a one, after the majority leader promised an open amendment process. i would say to my colleague, if you promise an open amendment process, deliver it. because people made votes on the motion to proceed to this bill based on that promise, and now you've broken it. that is a breach of trust that is simply wrong in this body,

where your word is your bond. now, i understand that you changed your mind because you didn't like one of the amendments your own member proposed, your own republican caucus member proposed an amendment you didn't like. a convenient opportunity to prevent this body from debating a whole set of important ideas related to this bill to protect consumers, to have better regulatory safeguards, and to end the corruption that's so evident right now. even at this last moment, i would say, colleagues, vote against ending debate on this bill because without those votes to protect consumers, to increase the safeguards for regulation of this industry, and to address the corruption, this bill shouldn't go forward.

so vote against it and restore the vision the majority leader laid out, that we would have that type of debate on this bill when the motion to proceed was voted on. the public deserves us having that debate as well. and shouldn't they know where we stand on these issues? because that's the feedback loop for the next election. where do we stand? but if we dodge having a real debate on real issues on the floor of the senate, they don't know where we stand on improving the regulatory safeguards. they don't know where we stand on blocking the personal scams ripping off the our seniors. they don't know where we stand on the crypto scams that were becoming so familiar -- that we're becoming so familiar w you all heard of a meme coin. maybe you haven't. a meme coin -- it is basically a digital baseball card, and

president trump has one. it is called the trump coin. the trump coin you can own, you can buy t you pay a dollar to the trump family and you get -- well, what do you get? nothing. nothing. you don't even get an e-mail with a picture of a coin. but you can think about it like that. you get, you know, a register on an investment site that shows you now own a dollar coin. you get nothing. this coin can't even be used to buy anything. so what it is is the president saying, give me your money, open your wallet, and i'll give you nothing -- nothing of tangible value. maybe the closest approximation would be a digital baseball card. that's it. now, he held a dinner at his golf course out in virginia, and

at that dinner he said, i'm going to invite the 220 meme give me the most -- people who give me the most people by buying my meme coin. open your wallet, give me your dollars. you'll get special access, and i will give you a digital baseball card. anyone who thinks that those 220 people who spent some $140-plus million to attend to dinner were seeking to buy digital baseball card, well, we've got a london bridge to sell you in the middle of the desert in arizona. nobody gave the president millions of dollars through acquiring his meme coins in order get a digital baseball card. they did it because they knew that that was the price to pay for access and influence. they're responding to the "government for sale" sign on the lawn of the white house.

it isn't just conjecture that that's the case. we know i.t. the case because -- we know it's the case because they told us. javier announced that his company bought $2 million of meme coins. they had given trump $2 million. and he said, we want to buy $20 million. whether they did or not, i don't know, because there's no disclosure. and he said, i want to buy that $20 million of coins -- that is, to give $20 million to president trump -- so he'll have a better policy regarding movement of freight between mexico and the united states of america. thank you to the ceo of freight technologies for laying out very clearly what everyone knew. this is a scheme to sell influence on the u.s. government to make the president and his family megarich.

there is a second type of coin the trump family is involved in, and this one can be used as currency in international transactions. now, this type of coin, why would you use it? well, maybe you want to launder money. that would be a good reason to use it. maybe you want to smuggle arms around the world. maybe you want to be involved in drug transactions. maybe you are plotting a terrorist act. those would be good reasons rather than using dollars or another currency that's being overseen by basic banking regulations around the world. you want a currency where people can't see -- you buy it, can't see you own it. you can buy it here, convert it back into cash somewhere else. great for money laundering, great for crime. so along comes a company called mgx and that company is headed

by the national security advisor of the united arab emirates, and that company says, hey, president trump... we will buy $2 billion of your special digital coin that we can use to invest in another company called binance, and with this coin, what does the president get? he gets that $2 billion. rather, his company does. and they put that into investments and mr. trump and his family keep the proceeds of those investments. even if that investment is earning only 4%, over the course of a year that's $80 million being given to the president's family in order to gain influence. and what did uae want? they told us, united arab emirates said what we want are a.i. chips, and we want an a.i.

center in the emirates. well, that was in march. and then they announced that they're going to buy trump's $2 billion of coins. then what did president trump do? he went to the middle east, and he said, you know what? i have a great idea. let's give you a.i. chips to create an a.i. center in abu dhabi, one of the emirates. uae requested a policy. they bought $2 billion of trump coins. and trump delivered the policy. that's corruption. that is the mount everest of corruption. that is corrupted at a level never seen in the history of the united states of america. we could vote on an amendment on this bill to end that corruption if the majority leader honors his commitment to an open amendment process.

so, i request of the majority leader that he honor his commitment and have that open amendment process. otherwise, it's an endorsement of this corruption. and i don't think any member, certainly on this side of the aisle, wants to endorse corruption. and i would suggest that i don't think my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to endorse corruption. so let's vote on an amendment to end it. and certainly, this provision wouldn't apply just to the president and vice president. not just to senior advisors. it applies to us too. we shouldn't be selling meme coins as an open way for people to give us personal gifts. not one of us should be saying, you want access and influence? buy my digital baseball card, and buy it at high volumes, make me a rich man, make my family rich for a generation to come,

and you get special access. well, that's exactly what's going on right now. so, colleagues, again, this is the moment. we are on a bill related to cryptocurrencies. in fact, the entire bill is about cryptocurrencies. so let's make this the moment that we actually debate amendments that improve the regulatory structure that's been laid out in the bill, that proceeds to address some of the consumer scams, including atm's that convert dollars into digital coins, being used to scam our seniors out of their life savings. and yes, let's debate amendments that end this type of crypto corr corruption. let's rip that signed off the white house lawn, that government is for sale. let's never again have a ceo say i'm buying $2 million of trump's

coins in order to influence a policy involving trade between mexico. let's never again have a company tied to the government of uae say we're going to buy $2 billion of trump coins in order to influence policy and get an a.i. center established in our nation. never, never, never should our government be up for sale in this fashion, and this is the moment when we can take that on, if the majority leader honors his commitment to an open amendment process. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mrs. gillibrand: i rise in

support of the hagerty-gillibrand amendment to regulate stablecoins. over the past several years, top u.s. financial regulators, both democrats and republicans administrations have repeatedly called on congress to do their job, regulate this new industry, do your work, do the oversight, do the accountability, write legislation and pass a law. they've repeatedly called on congress to regulate stab stablecoins, recognizing their global role in the global economy. both administrations have recognized that for the united states to remain the financial capital of the world, congress needs to pass clear regulatory rules that protect consumers and foster innovation here at home. i started working on this legislation three years ago,

with cynthia lummis. this is not a bill written quickly for any reason but to regulate an industry that needs ro rules of the road. to date, congress' failure to act has left the digital access space as a wild west where american consumers are vulnerable to scams and businesses are desperate for the regulatory clarity they need to compete with foreign countries, foreign entities that do business in our markets effec effectively. doing nothing and protecting the status quo is not only irresponsible, it's unac unacceptable. unlike the u.s., our global competitors have moved to regulate this space. in 2023, the european union passed comprehensive cryptocurrency regulation and

numerous meaningful provisions went into effect last year. china's central bank has been promoting the digital yuan, which threatens the u.s. dollar's role as the global reserve currency. global commerce will soon be conducted using stablecoins. it is imperative to keep the u.s. dollar as the global reserve currency of the world, and for stablecoins to be pegged to the dollar, not the chinese yuan. there's reason for both consumers and small retailers to be supportive of this legis legislation. stablecoins offer faster, more affordable ways to settle transactions that will benefit everyone. earlier this year, senators hagerty, alsobrooks, scott, lummis, and i introduced the bipartisan genius act, which is the strongest effort to date to regulate and create a clear regulatory framework for the

payment stablecoin industry. it has a number of commonsense provisions relating to consumer protections, reserve requirements, illicit finance, national security, foreign issuers, separating of banking and commerce rules, just to name a few. it has an excellent markup in the senate banking committee, where senators had many of their concerns addressed, bipartisan amendments were accepted, the result was a true bipartisan product that passed with strong bipartisan support, including votes from five democrats. over time and through subsequent negotiations, this bill has only become stronger, with several additional improvements to strengthen consumer protection, clarify disclosure rules for members of congress, and implement other changes that close loopholes, prevent money laundering and establish stricter and more specific standards. the latest version of this bill earned support from a bipartisan majority of both republican and

democratic members of the senate banking committee. the strong bipartisan nature of this effort has been demonstrated by the fact that the bill has continued to pick up new support with each additional vote. i'm very grateful to senator hagerty, who is here. together, we had a very strong bipartisan working relationship. if you could see a document itemizing every change since the minute we introduced this bill, it is volumes long. it's extraordinary how open this process was, how many senators were able to give serious critical thinking to the bill, to make it better, to bring bipartisan support behind this effort, and i can't thank senator hagerty enough for his leadership, his patience, and his willingness to create a bipartisan regulatory framework for an industry that desperately needs it.

i've been in the senate now since 2009. i've never seen a more generous bipartisan process than i saw in this legislation. i've never seen a more serious group of senators get together to try to write legislation of first impression that i saw in this process. and i know the people who are adverse to this bill have their own political view. i think it's extremely unhelpful that we have a president who's involved in this industry. and i would love to ban his activity. but that does not diminish the excellent work in this legislation. it does not diminish the hard work the bipartisan group of senators put into this to make a difference and to write a law that can protect consumers, that can protect our financial services industry, that can protect the strength of the

dollar, and that can protect people who would like access to capital. 30% of americans are unbanked or underbanked. many of those americans have found access to the capital markets, access to capital through crypto currency and block chain technologies. this stablecoin bill represents the first incident that we are trying to make access to capital a reality for more americans, to have our safety and soundness rules, our know-your-customer rules, our illicit finance rules, our protection of the one-to-one dollar banking. none of that exists today. because of the work of this legislation, we have a regulatory framework that can protect consumers in the future. i just want to thank senator scott and senator hagerty for their extremely honest and thoughtful approach in working

on bipartisan legislation which i'm very proud of the effort we have made. i yield the floor. mr. hagerty: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. hagerty: mr. president, i'd like to ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to speak up to ten minutes, followed by senator scott of south carolina up to five minutes prior to the scheduled vote. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hagerty: thank you, mr. president. i rise today in support of my legis legislation, the guiding and establishing national innovation for u.s. stablecoins act, otherwise known as the genius act. i'd like to thank senator gillibrand for her kind comments and her hard work in this. senator scott, who so ably chaired our committee. i'm very pleased to say we're at a point now where america can actually see a comprehensive and clear regulatory framework come to bear for payment stablecoins. for too long the lack of any such framework forced digital asset innovation beyond our

borders here in america and into foreign countries. it's jeopardized our nation's financial leadership. and frankly, as senator gillibrand said, it's put american consumers at risk. meanwhile, our slow and outdated payment rails, frankly rails developed back in the 1970's and 1980's, have failed to keep pace with many other overseas jurisdictions. to modernize our payment system and to restore our nation's committive edge, we -- competitive edge, we must act now. that's why i've introduced the genius act. this legislation takes a commonsense bipartisan approach to regulating stablecoins. allow me to concisely explain what the genius act does. it clearly defines a payment stablecoin as a digital asset pegged to a fixed value, backed by u.s. treasuries, and used for

transactions. it describes clear procedures for institutions to issue stablecoins. it establishes a regulatory regime that balances the responsibilities of both federal and state authorities. it implements standards that ensure safety, stability, and consumer protection. and it blow advise -- it provides rigorous safeguards to increase transpersoncy and aid the -- transparency and aid the vital work of law enforcement. these are pragmatic and forward looking, bow protecting consumers and -- both protecting consumers and innovation. they represent bipartisan agreement reflecting that both democrats and republicans recognize the vast potential of this emerging technology. the benefits of stablecoin innovation are immense. by reducing friction in the payment process, they can improve the speed and efficiency of cross-border transactions.

faster and cheaper transactions can unlock much needed working capital for american businesses and provide individuals with more effective tools for making international payments. moving aspects of our payment system has been shown to increase efficiencies in capital markets. innovators are constantly uncovering transformative use cases and the rapid pace will increase with regulatory clarity. stablecoins advance a vital national interest by driving demand for u.s. treasuries. a recent report forecasts that with a well-crafted u.s. regulatory framework, stablecoin issuers could become one of the top holders of u.s. treasuries by the end of this decade. frankly, it could happen even sooner. this would strengthen our fis position and cement the dollar status as the world's currency.

if we fail to act now, not only will these benefits slip away, we'll also fall behind in global competitiveness. without a regulatory framework, stablecoin innovation will proliferate overseas and not in america. and if we fail to act, americans using this new technology will be left with no choice but to rely on foreign stablecoins that lack vital consumer protections and critically inaction would surrender our leadership to the chinese communist party. a party that aggressively advances its own digital currency. we can avoid this outcome but only if we all unite behind this legislation. in the spirit of patriotic cooperation, i want to thank senator scott, senator lummis, senator gillibrand, senator alsobrooks who cosponsored an earlier iteration of this bill and who have worked hard with me every step of the way to make this a strong bipartisan effort.

and i also extend gratitude to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who supported this legislation in the banking committee and contributed to the consensus product we see before the united states senate. we have an opportunity to submit america's financial dominance for decades to come and demonstrate that this body can come together and pass legislation that benefits our country and its citizens. i urge all my colleagues to join me in advancing the genius act, and i urge those watching from afar to view this critical vote for what it is -- a statement of support for a vital innovative technology and a demonstration of our willingness as a body here in the united states senate to work for america. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south carolina.

mr. scott: thank you, mr. president. i rise in support of the genius act. today, mr. president, is a good day to watch a bipartisan coalition do what we were sent here to do -- work on behalf of the american people. today the united states can take a bold and historic step forward not just for financial innovation, but also for american leadership, consumer protection, and economic opportunity. with the bipartisan genius act, we can do more than just pass a bill. we can deliver results for the american people. we can bring clarity for a sector that's been clouded by uncertainty and we can make it known that the united states will lead, not follow, in the digital asset revolution. when i became chairman of the senate banking committee, i promised to prioritize

innovation, accountability, and smart regulation in the evolving digital economy. and we have the opportunity to deliver on that promise. the genius act will be the most significant digital assets legislation ever to pass the u.s. senate. it's the product of months of bipartisan work. and i also want to thank the bill sponsor, bill hagerty, who went out of his way to make this legislation a bipartisan success by partnering with senator alsobrooks, working with senator gillibrand along with our colleagues on this side of the aisle, senator lummis and myself. i am incredibly proud to see the hard work senator hagerty pay off not for him, but for the

american people. that's what makes this process such a special one. it's what makes the united states senate the most deliberative body in the world today. this is a victory for working families, small businesses, and everyday americans who deserve faster, cheaper, and safer access to financial services. it's a win for innovation because this framework will give entrepreneurs the confidence to build here in the united states of america and not abroad. and it's a win for national security, because the genius act brings stablecoin issuers under strict anti-money laundering standards, cracking down on bad actors at home and abroad. let me be clear, this did not happen by accident. it happened because we led. to those who said washington

could not act, to thoes -- those who doubted bipartisanship, let's prove them wrong. let's show that principled leadership, conservative values, and common sense can still move this country forward together. and i would not be complete in my comments if i did not stop and thank the senate banking staff for their hard work and their dedication. it would be incomplete if i did not stop and thank senator hagerty's staff for their hard work, countless hours, and senator gillibrand's staff for her dedication and their dedication to this issue, and certainly senator lummis and her staff who spent countless hours making a good product better. let's finish the job and get this bill to president trump's

desk for signature. thank you. i yield back. a senator: i ask unanimous consent that we waive the mandatory quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: thank you. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on amendment 2307 to calendar number 66, a bill to provide for the regulation of payment stablecoins, and for other purposes, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the mandatory quorum call under rule 22 has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on

amendment number 2307 offered by the senator from south dakota, mr. thune, to s. 1582, a bill to provide for the regulation of payment stablecoins and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin. mr. banks. the clerk: mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn.

the clerk: ms. blunt rochester. mr. booker. the clerk: mr. boozman. mrs. britt. mr. budd. >> that includes americans who used stablecoins here and there are the individuals and businesses that access the american dollar to use of dollar back stablecoins. stablecoins are relatively recent financial innovation but there quickly caught on.

they offer easy payments with the speed andto security of the blockchain and stability and usability of the dollar bill. there are roughly a quarter trillion dollars now in circulation. traditional financial institutions are said to be considering getting into the stablecoin business. companies like uber and a b&b are exploring integrating them into their businesses. it's clear cryptocurrency is here to stay and it's time that we bring into the mainstream. passing the genius act is a good first step. the genius act would provide a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins you would ensure americans and trust who they're doing business with any purchase stablecoins, allowing the american people to exercise financial freedom with confidence. they genius act would protect against threats to our national security and from criminal activity. it would require stablecoin issuers to uphold the same

standards as of the financial institutions to monitor reports suspicious activity comply with u.s. sanctions and block illicit transactions. plus the vast majority of stablecoins are backed by the u.s. dollar which means this bill will create demand for the u.s. dollar and u.s. treasuries come something that is good both for our national security and our fiscal house. it's yet another reason why we should want stablecoins to be made in america. the genius act represents the bipartisan consensus on clear rules of the road for this new financial innovation. today's stablecoin issuers operating in illegal grayson for companies that want to follow the rules can be sure what rules to follow and the biden administration didn'tlu help matters with its numerous lawsuits which left many u.s.-based companies contemplating moving out of the united states altogether. we want america to lead in financial innovation or could

want to bring cryptocurrency into the mainstream and the genius act will help us do that. it's time to pass this bill. the version of the genius act we will invoke cloture on today reflects months of hard work and negotiations from members on both sides of the isle. it's a good product that as a separate since the bipartisan consensus on the way forward. i appreciate the leadership of senator hagerty and senator lummis and chairman scott in getting the genius act to this point. it's been a long haul. it began in march with three of markup in the banking committee where senators considered 40 different amendments to this bill. it ultimately passed out of committee by a vote of 18-6. before. before we begin for debate negotiations on the bill continued and a number of changes were made to build most of them to accommodate dimension democrats while maintaining the full throated support of the administration. three weeks after the bill finally came to. the floor, mr. president, it's time to move

forward and pass this legislation. i hope we will see another strong bipartisan vote on the genius act later today and in the coming days as we conclude our work. i hope the house will quickly take up this bill and send it to the president who is eager to sign this legislation. mr. president, as us the last month at the beginning of the floor process the genius act will not be the last word on crypto legislation. there's more work to be done including on market structure legislation. i know our colleagues of artie begun working in that area as well. this remains a priority for many in our conference and it is the next logical step in making the united states the crypto capital of the world. and i'm looking forward, mr. president, continue progress in bringing cryptocurrency into the mainstream and securing american leadership in financial innovation. mr. president, digital assets are the future. we're working to ensure that future is one where america leads. mr. president, i yield the floor

and and i suggest the absence of a quorum. >> thank you, mr. president. i rise today to talk about the genius act and the threat it poses to our financial system, our national security and our democracy. as this moment i expected to be on the floor urging the senate to adopt a series of amendments filed by both democrats and republicans, , amendments that would fix the core problems with this bill. for weeks leader thune promised senators would have a chance to vote on amendments on the stablecoin bill. today he broke that promise. this bill goes forward without a single chance for a single senator to offer a single amendment. even changes that have widespread bipartisan support our left the side as leader thune decides just too strong on the bill through the senate. before i outline the specific

dangers posed by this bill it's worth taking a a step back tok a simple question. why is the crypto industry so vigorously lobbying for a bill that proponents claim will bring much-needed regulation to the market? simon johnson and nobel prize-winning economist and the former chair of the commodities futures trading commission answered this question in a recent op-ed by reminding us we have seen this movieka before. acting the late 1990s derivatives were relatively niche market, but a new type of product called an over-the-counter derivative have just been developed. most investors didn't understand what you were what they did, but the derivatives industry came knocking, begging for so-called regulation. congress was ready to oblige.

in 2000 congress passed the commodities futures modernization act, and president bill clinton signed it into law. proponents of the bill claimed the new law would provide legal clarity, promote innovation, reduce risk, protect consumers, and advance u.s. competitivenes competitiveness. after all, people said, surely some kind of regulatory framework was better than nothing at all. but the bill establish a week set of rules the road with loopholes, just as the industry wanted. sound familiar? the result was a disaster. derivatives moved from the edge of the financial system to the center of it. after all, with regulation these derivatives now seem to have the implicit blessing of the trended government, and buying, selling

and designing derivatives became a more mainstream activity on wall street in less than eight years the market for over-the-counter derivatives grew sevenfold and embedded itself into the core financial system. by simultaneously boosting the derivatives industry and lightly regulating it, , the bill congrs had passed help set the stage for the 2008 financial crash. after the meltdown congress came back and cleaned up the mess in dodd-frank but that was long after hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts had been headed to wall street, while tens of millions, while 10 million families have lost their homes and millions more have lost their jobs. mr. johnson's nobel prize is an impressive credential, and is warning should carry great

weight. but we should also pay special attention to the thoughts of his co-author, brooks lee board. she was one of the few people who saw the 2008 train wreck coming and oppose the derivatives bill at the time. and now she is ringing the alarm again. that power was to be moderate future mars asian actor striking. industry is the driving force behind the genius act. the genius act will provide legal clarity, most motiva, reduce risks, protect consumers and advance u.s. competitiveness in a new financial market. passage of the genius act is expected to significantly grow the market from $200 billion now to an estimated $2 trillion in a short time. and the genius act is riddled

with loopholes and contains weak safeguards for consumers, national security, and financial stability. that all sounds very similar. but there is one big difference between the genius act and the sea fna. president clinton did not own a derivatives company. president trump does own the stablecoin company. through his crypto business president trump has great and efficient means to trade presidential favors like tariff exemptions, partisan government appointments for hundreds of millions perhaps billions of dollars from foreign government, from billionaires and from large corporations. this is the single greatest corruption scandal in american history. and by passing the genius act the senate is about to not only

bless this corruption but to actively facilitate its expansion. the "new york times" ran a front-page essay this week by the president obama's former security advisor on trumped corruption. he interviewed the head of a hungarian anticorruption organization, and is what is the disintegration of hungary is democracy under viktor orban. he warned, quote, the pressure corruption puts on a political system is like a river bearing down on a damn. once the dam breaks you are washed downriver by current you cannot control. if you try to rebuild the dam, it's too late. instead of fortifying the dam, the senate is now hacking away at it. in april president trump's crypto company world liberty

financial launched its own stablecoin called usd one. that stablecoin is already the fifth-largest cable calling in the world and foreign investors have already begun to exploit this avenue for corruption. i you might be state backed investment firm used trump's usd one to finance a $2 billion investment in a crypto exchange whose owner is reportedly lobbying president trump for a pardon. essentially giving trump i cut of this $2 billion deal. this is the model, deposit your money in the bank of trump and uses stablecoin to make payments. payments. he earns money by investing those deposits in other assets like a bank, and also earned the money on every transaction that occurs. whenever the stablecoin is used

as a means of payment. even more publicized than his stablecoin, trump launched the meme coin, another type of crypto asset. the claim was issued shortly before trump's inauguration, and it initially soared in value. people lost interest and the value of the coin began to sag. trump launched a new scheme to make money. a few weeks ago he hosted a debtor to the top holders of his meme coin, which again juiced the price and increase trading volume. the meme coin has netted more than $320 million in transaction fees alone, and has inflated trump's network on paper by billions of dollars. and favors for people who bought millions of dollars of trump's

coins have just begun. for example, one of those top holders at the dinner was crypto executive justin son who recently had an sec lawsuit quite a a drop. another was an investor with close ties chinese communist party. there is nothing in the genius act to stop this corruption. in fact, the senate bill would accelerate the corruption. the bill would expand the reach of usd1 and grow it. would make trump the regulator of his own financial company and importantly the regulator of his competitors. senator merkley is leading an amendment to fix this, and in limit the leader thune has blocked. there are other serious problems with the genius act come problems that democrats and

republicans have amendments to fix. the bill permits a tech companies and other conglomerates to issue their own private currencies and take control over the money supply. it includes a special car about that makes it even easier for private companies like ask to issue a stablecoin. musk has made it clear that in a few years he wants his new x money payment platform to be quote, half of the global financial system. senator hawley and senator blumenthal have an amendment to fix that. leader thune has blocked that amendment. community banks have warned us that by creating a parallel lightly regulated banking system, the stablecoin market will drain the posits from our local communities. there would be less funding available for small businesses and households all across our country.

senator hickenlooper has an amendment to fix that. leader thune has blocked that amendment. the bill would also mean easier access to money for terrorists and cartel come even today the crypto industries own analysts are calling stablecoins, quote, the new kingpin of illicit crypto activity. according to chain analysis, stablecoins account for more than 60% of all illicit crypto transactions. unfortunately, the genius act massively expands the marketplace for stablecoin while failing to address the basic national security risks posed by the. it also includes glaring loopholes that would allow tether, and notorious issuer based in el salvador would allow

tether access to u.s. markets just this week, just this week prosecutors charged a russian national in new york for using tether to help russians evade u.s. sanctions. senator schumer, senator reed, shaking and blunt rochester have amendments to fix those problems. leader thune has blocked those amendments. the bill also increases the likelihood that consumers will get ripped off and scanned the financial transactions involving stablecoin. it jeopardizes the cfpb oversight and the suite of consumer protections that people enjoyed when they're using their venmo at or an ordinary bank account. if you get cheated using a stablecoin, you may just be out of luck. the vast majority of stablecoin issuers won't even be required to undergo financial audits to make sure they are not committing fraud.

store dermot and senator were not have members to fix this. senator thune has blocked that amendment. and finally the genius act lacks the basic safeguards necessary to ensure stablecoins don't blow up our entire financial system. the bill permits stablecoin issue is to invest in risky assets and allows them to engage in risky non-stablecoin activities like private credit or derivatives trading. at the same time the bill constrains regulator stability to apply capital and liquidity safeguards to limit the chances of stablecoin failures. again, we have amendments to fix this, and begin leader thune has blocked those amendments. over the past few months democrats seem to have forgotten that we actually have some

power. this is an opportunity to use that power democrats can withhold their approval of this bill today and say that the bill will not go forward unless we have the opportunity to vote on some amendments. precisely as leader thune promised we could do. democrats should show a little spine and insist on amendments as the price for helping advance this bill. we don't have to speculate on what could go wrong if this bill advances without changes. we have already seen it. the next time trump is cut into a corrupt deal by a foreign government using his stablecoin call for the next time north korea use stablecoin to add to its nuclear arsenal, or the next time a person falls victim to a stablecoin scam call for the next time the financial system

is a stressed by a stablecoin run. it is likely that the resulting harm will be traced right back to the inadequacies of the genius act. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill. >> mr. president, i rise today to discuss the so-called genius act which we we're going to n in a few minutes here in this chamber. it's a bill that i think could have got to a place where it made sense but i'm not going to be supporting the legislation because among other things we haven't had a real debate on it and we have had no opportunity to offer amendments to make the bill better. and it is still falling short in some real fundamental ways that i'm really worried about. i'm really worried about the risk to money laundering that it don't think as well addressed in

this bill. i'm really worried about the regulatory structure which looks absolutely nothing like the structure that is required for our banks and for foreign banks who want to do business here in the united states. i think we may come to rue the day we didn't put the guard rails in place to protect the american people from what could be a catastrophic effect on our economy. because we have the failure to have the foresight to see the potential risk that we could face. for example, just one example, mr. president, we commonly require financial institutions like banks to have a subsidiary here in the united states that is regulated by the laws of the united states before they're able to offer banking services. to my constituents in colorado and to all the 303 million

americans that we have, there's nothing like that in this bill. there's nothing like that in this bill. if some administration official deems a foreign jurisdiction is somehow good enough, without actually being good enough, without it having the benefits of the best rails were invited in the world which is ours, and people can do business here issuing crypto. in this case stablecoins. i think that's a big mistake. as members intelligence committee i think it's a huge mistake that we didn't take on the issues of money laundering thatay cryptocurrency are presenting and the challenges that is causing to law enforcement. i think that's a big problem. it's not that we couldn't have fixed it but we chose not to fix it. and as an agent earlier there has not been an effort to make the bill better. there's been no amendment process.

mr. president, i had come unusual i had an amendment in this bill for one brief shining moment. i came down to the floor and offered an amendment and it actually was accepted. it's been decades around this place since that's happen. all that amendment said was, said the president and the vice president of the members of congress should not issue crypto. in this case stablecoins. i would be surprised to learn that 90% of the american people think the president or the vice president or the members of congress should issue their own crypto coins while they're in office. that would be shocking to learn. and the american people clearly would like a legal regime here

that prevents their elected officials, including the people in this body, including in the house of representatives, including an most particularly in the white house, should not enrich themselves while they are in office. that was my very simple amendment. that was referred to as the bennett amendment. i'm proud of that fact. this is not even hard. there is no reason the president, any president should issuing crypto while they're in office, or if i is. there's no any reason any person on this floor should do or anybody in the house of representatives should do it. and now in a partially regulated regime, , where we're not dealig with that question, we are sending a signal to the american

people that this digital currency has the seal of approval of the entire united states government. of our regulators. and that is potentially very dangerous to the financial institutions that may participate in this, and to the american people themselves. i have nothing fundamentally against crypto. i have nothing family against stablecoin. -- fundamentally. but i think it is fundamentally wrong that elected official should be able to enrich themselves in this new digital environment. and i think, i will say may it's 90% but i but i bet nine n americans agree with me. and i will say, mr. president, that this is just one more

indication of the u.s. senate not doing the people's business, of not living up to the expectations of the folks that design this chamber to begin with. this bill is going to pass with votes from the democratic party even though there was not a single amendment voted on as part of this bill. i object to that as as a dem. i can't stop it. because there's $60 for this legislation. but i think we would've been a lot better off on this bill -- 60 votes -- just almost like any build that come before the senate to open a process. i would've loved to have had the opportunity to see people vote on a bill that ban members of the senate and from the house and the president and vice president for issuing the own

cryptocurrency. i would've liked to that debate that said is it a good idea to have foreign governments or foreign investors speculating publicly in the cryptocurrency that a president has issued works is it a good idea to have foreign entities making 2 billion-dollar investments in currency that is issued by american politicians? that is crazy. and we we could affix that is legislation. and not only do we not face it, we didn't even have a debate about it. we didn't have a single amendment come to the floor. it's such a hurry to do the bidding of the proponents of this legislation.

mr. president, i would urge all my colleagues to vote no on this procedural motion, to go back to the drawing board to have a proper negotiation, to write a piece of legislation that actually would provide the seal of approval in a meaningful way to america investors and to american consumers. and when it comes to the issuing of cryptocurrency and stablecoins, that we would if he did the common sense of the american people who would've said do not ratify the corruption that's going on in our capital. i don't think that's too much for the american people to ask

for, mr. president. and i hope my colleagues will reconsider their position and we will have the chance to have a proper debate and a proper negotiation on this bill. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. >> in a time of open government corruption that few of us thought could occur here in the united states of america. we sometimes recognize it and expect it in countries far away, authoritarian figures take a slice of every contract that moves the government. the niger and the united states of america. and yet here we are. president trump has planted a government for sale sign on the white house lawn. and individuals and 40 governments are funneling money into his pocket and his family's pocket in order to gain access

and influence. the genius act attempts to set up some guardrails for buying and selling i typed of cryptocurrency, one called a stablecoin. while we did guardrails fetish or government officials are not overly asking people to buy their coins in order to increase the personal profit or their families profit. where are those guardrails in this bill? they are completely, totally absent. the genius and doesn't set up guardrails for the president or the vice president. it doesn't set up guardrails that present an open invitation for people to buy access and influence by buying crypto coins that increase the wealth of elected officials. without such a god will this bill should never pass. we have the opportunity now to

debate anticorruption amendment amendments. but i but i understand the y leader has decided to cancel any amendments are being considered here on the floor of the senate. whether those are amendments that protect the consumer from scans in which seniors are directed to go and change their cash for crypto coins at an atm, a a new way of sending their money overseas that doesn't go through a bank teller who might possibly worn against a scam. whether it's plugging the many holes in this bill in order to have a proper regulatory framework, or whether it is to address the open corruption. none of those and minutes are going to be considered. not a one. after the majority leader promised an open amendment

process. i would say to my colleague, if you promise an open and in the process, deliver it. because people may vote on the motion to proceed on this bill based on that promise. now you have broken it. that is a breach of trust. it is simply wrong in this body where your word is your bond. now i understand that you changed your mind because you didn't like one of the amendments your own member proposed, your own republican caucus member proposed an amendment you didn't like. don't convenient opportunity to prevent this body from debating a whole set of important ideas related to this bill to protect consumers, to have better regulatory safeguards and to end

the corruption that is so evident right now. even at this last moment i would say colleagues, vote against ending debate on this bill. because without those vote to protect consumers, to increase the safeguards for regulation of this industry and to address the corruption, this bill shouldn't go forward. so vote against enators duly chosen and sworn have voted in the affirmative. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the bill. the clerk: calendar number 66, s. 1582, a bill to provide for the regulation of payment stablecoins and for other purposes. the presiding officer: cloture having been invoked, the motion to commit with instruction falls. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. a senator: i ask unanimous consent that the senate stand in recess until 3:30 p.m. today. the presiding officer: without objection.

recess: >> theene today considering former congressman billy long to be irs commissione a well as legislation aiming to regulate payment stablecoin in the cryptorrcy market. when senators return be sure to live coverage of the senate here on c-span2. >> looking to contact your members of congress? c-span is making it easy for you with our 2025 congressional directory. get essential contact information for government officials all in one place. this compact, spiral-bound guide contains i hope and contact information for every house and senate member of the 119th congress. contact information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. the congressional directory cost

$32.95 plus shipping and handling, and every purchase helps support c-span's nonprofit operations. scan the code or go to c-spanshop.org to order your copy today. >> in a nation divided, every moment of unity. this fall c-span presents ceasefire where the shouting sops in the conversation begins. in a town where partisan fighting prevails. one table, two leaders, one goal, to find common ground. this fall ceasefire on the network that doesn't take sides, only on c-span. >> welcome back to "washington journal." joining us to discuss thek domestic deployment of the u.s.

military and the law is mary mccord executrix of institute of constitutional advocacy and protection. welcome to the program. >> thanks for having me. could t the institute for constitutional advocacy and protection? guest: we are primarily a litigating institute within georgetown law. we bring constitutional impact litigation across a wide variety of issue areas that includes first amendment, criminal legal system reform, any different things like that. we also engage in public education and policy work and public education as part of why i'm speaking here this morning. host: i want to ask you about u.s. code title 10 that the president has cited as a means for employing troops. i willea some for our audience. it saypresident may call into federal service members -

numbers and units of the national guardf any state in such numbe as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws. what is of the purposes shl be issued to the governors of the states or in the case of the district of columbia through the commanding general of the national guard of the district of columbia. can you explain that and how that applies to the situation in los angeles? guest: listeners should understand that is just one of the provisions of title x that relates to federal icing the national guard. the national guard are a federal system. they are in state status and can be called forth by the commander-in-chief's of their states to respond to national disasters, p karen bass is giving an update.