>> yeah, definitely a force multiplier. i would also add that. you know what we try to do to make sure we work with our federal partners is we assign officers to each of those departments to atf, dea, fbi. we have officers assigned there which keeps them focused on newark and some of our high level crimes at the same time and it allows us to work well. uh, with our partners and intelligence based policing, as you were saying is right on the money. i've been we have the forensics lab right in newark. we have that stuff right there so our partners get to use our resources in the city of newark so we have a better relationship with them because they use our our resources at the same time. >> great. >> that's great. i would like to add what mayor baraka said about funding some of these cbo's and organizations that really prevent violent crime and all crime fromm accruing in first place. i know this year's there's already been our violence disruptors, their organizationa organizational, so right away to

turn to local government to make up that gap. it has speed we will take you live to the u. s. senate on this tuesday come in for more work on assistant defense secretary nomination. vote on whether to confirm daniel zimmerman is set for 2:4. later lawmakers will vote on whether to advance the deputy commerce secretary nomination. live coverage on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will open the senate with prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, the author and finisher of our faith,

inspire us to rejoice in the privileges and blessings you have strewn on our path, help us to use the gift of sacred scripture as a lamp to guide us through the darkness of challenging times. may we use the gift of intercessory prayer as a key to unlock heaven's storehouse in order to provide blessings for those who are going through many dangers, toils, and snares. lord, in hours of hardship permit us to use the gift of your spirit to enable us to be

protected by you from disappointments and self-pity. inshoes our senators with your love. give them a compassion that will prompt them to work for the eradication of injustice and the presence of peace in our world. and, lord, be with our ee ee ro -- illustrious page class as they leave us in three days. we pray in your sovereign name. amen. the president pro tempore: will you please join me in the pledge. the president pro tempore: 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 defense, daniel zimmerman, of north carolina, to be an assistant secretary of defense. mr. grassley: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: having a job gives people purpose and dignities, we should promote policies lifting people out of poverty. in the 1990's, we passed welfare reform with a republican

congress and democrat president. the results, welfare rolls went down, poverty rates decreased and earnings increased. establishing work requirements in medicaid for able-bodied adults with reasonable exemptions then from the previous precedented welfare reform, that all makes common sense yet today. states like iowa are already leading the way in establishing work requirements for able-bodied adults in medicaid. iowa governor reynolds said, quote, if you're an able-bodied adult who can work, you should work. we're doing the same thing at the national level. work requirements under the one big beautiful bill only applies

to able-bodied adults between the ages of 19 and 64. individuals will have to complete a minimum of 80 hours of work a month, or about 20 hours a week, of qualifying community engagement activities like working, job training, going to school, volunteering, or a combination of all these. we have reasonable -- exemptions for veterans with disability rated as total, individuals who are medley frail or -- medically frail or have special needs, individuals who are blind, have substance abuse disorder, a disabling mental disorder, physical or intellectual disability that significantly

impairs their ability to perform one or more activities of daily living or a serious complex medical conditions -- series of complex medical conditions. we also have exemptions for guardians and take cakers -- caretakers for disabled individuals. foster care youth through the age of 26. we give good-cause exemptions for short-term hardships like hospitalization or for an individual receiving psychiatric care. individuals impacted by a natural disaster, living in high unemployment areas or having to travel outside their community for an extended period of time to receive medical service would also be exempted. now, states will obviously be required to establish streamline

process and use reliable data like payroll data to avoid individuals submitting their own documentations. there will also be significant outreach and education to those who will be required to work. labor force participation data for prime-aged men 25 to 54, indicates that between 1950 to 1970, less than one in 30 were out of the labor force. now, maybe it shouldn't be surprising. since then, participation declined steadily so that one in third figure is now one in ten. this represents nearly 70

million prime-aged men absent from the workforce. on top of this, recent research found that nonworking medicaid recipients spent six hours a day on socializing, relaxing, tv, and video games. they spend 125 hours during a 30-day month watching tv and video games alone. that is more than 50% higher than the 80 hours they would be required to work in a month. common sense medicaid work requirements for able-bodied adults take the same approach as welfare reform did in the 1990's. move people from welfare to work and self sufficiency, the contrary being on government programs is a life of poverty. and if you want to get out of poverty, you've got to be in the

world of work and that's what we're trying to accomplish through this legislation, just like we do work requirements for every other government program. i yield. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

it was my great honor to destroy all nuclear facilities and capability and then stop the war. obviously the president has from the beginning diplomacy can stop wars, that it is the thing that we should rely on. he leaned into that and it's continuing to work it's a dynamic that is in play and is i think steady as i was also recognized based on his comment

comments. >> his comments about china being able to purchase all from iran. how does it come together with the ceasefire deal and what does it like going forward? >> those are all very good questions. yes, and it's obvious he a very fast moving, we have used the word fluid many, many times, a very fast moving environment. the president has they don't what he expects come what he's looking forward to. this is a cabinet and the government that asked the nature of what he says and what he wants. in this case i'm not going to discuss what the process will be, the nature of any of the applications of the various departments in this government but clearly we are focused on making sure that guiding hand of president trump prevails and moves discovered forward. we will have to wait and see what when it comes to what that in

some looking like. andrea. >> just to translate, are we the same sanctions as -- >> i'm not going to get ahead of the president or try to guess at what his strategy will be but it will be one that will benefit this country and again he is very clear. i think the difference is obvious and sometimes you don't you're ahead of time about the trajectory of a president. with president trump bespeaks honesty with us. i would suggest to not translate, to not speculate or gas but to watch because things happen quickly and the think we'll find out sooner rather than later. one more. >> quick follow-up. you quoted the president saying my great honor to destroy the facility to stop the war. as far as we know the bombs damage has not been done, the joint chiefs chairman -- how

long it might take. do we had something more consistent that destroy all of the facility? >> while conclusive comet from he would be coming from the president of the united states. i have great admiration for you andrea mitchell but i think he might know more than you do at this point, or the eye, when anyone of us here. at the santa obvious if information we receive any american people receive and which will be public will take some time but president trump has indicated his pleasure at the success of that grade which obviously was very limited in scope and that's a a very good point i think when it comes to the nature of what's occurred. i'm pleased to present is please. sean. >> another comment from president basically stopped the bomb was a message to the israelis. does he believe the israelis complied? is he happy with the term?

>> early on, and again i hear the state department. i know my colleague caroline is very articulate and clear on the nature of the present who she represents and the state department, at the white house. but i think when weekly look at the nature about the day has transpired, there was some activity back and forth and that a stop in the ceasefire has taken effect of the president is pleased. sigh think we take that as an indicator of his feeling about at this point. one more. >> sure. one who thinks from the israeli -- there was a phase, the reserve the right to go back in. do you think that's consistent with what the call for the ceasefire in terms of -- >> i think the statements would look at them care about on the fact that both certainly israel has agreed to the ceasefire. we believe there's a statement from iran that is done so as well. those of the statements we care

about. all right. yes, sir. yes, sir. >> pretty epic diplomatic developer last night. can you walk us through any of the diplomatic steps that are taking the lead to the ceasefire and secretary rubio role? and then a separate of related question. president spoke this morning about the great trading potential with iran. is this administration division of broader -- with tehran the complete to -- [inaudible] >> on both those issues i can't speak directly to them but n say a few things, in that certainly i wasn't there. the secretary of state was in a dynamic with the president that is a private dynamic as that team was addressing a war in the nature of how to stop it. so i can't speak to the transpired or the decisions that were made but obviously a

successful evening, , successful aftermath when it comes to also a very quick ceasefire. in the meantime, for your of the question, which was, , with my making your second question. >> president trump this morning said the potential for trade with speeding the trade question. obviously again while i can't speak obvious to the choices president trump lemay, what we do on the is that he is a businessman. americans appreciate that about him, the nature of how he looks at the issue of national security and safety, and he is in the past address the issue of relationships with this country, keep up nation secure, that where good friend to have, that friendship with the united states isis and helps facilitate the natural national security of another nation. i look at that on his approach to certain things and that's been certain his attitude about it, and it seems to be a correct

one, one i agree what's i think we will see that that effect is the case here and we will find out. >> is any monitoring mechanism for the ceasefire if it continues to hold? whether via third parties is making sure both sides are argug to a ceasefire? >> at the state of from i can't speak to that. i think that is at the unity question in serbia white house question. >> and then how do you view the next deaths are nuclear talks potential resuming mbyte of the ceasefire? is a anything on the schedule? any follow-on conversation between the two sides to try to resume the talks? >> i can't speak to a schedule. i can't i'm a good against respectively but when something might happen. what we do know and president trump throughout this process has been tweeting about the fact that there's a be a good time for negotiations to renew, for these talks to renew.

of course with some disappointment that it got to this point. he has been committed to diplomacy and to discussions. busy has displayed that for these last five months, and i would think that is that changed. the commitment, not just from president trump it also from secretary rubio, to minimize the need and go out of your way for the need to not engage militarily at, scored a hallmark for him and his view of national security and foreign policy as it is for secretary rubio. and i would expect that approach and in the commitment to remain the same. yes, quite. >> just a follow on that. over the weekend the president in many of the kevin olsen said the strikes of usability on iranian facilities had obliterated the nuclear program. because of that you see that as buying more time for these negotiations to play at? has a urgency change works there are reports qatar has tried to

mediate nuclear talks to restart this. are you receptive of qatari efforts? >> that's is that i can address in any detail at all. i do not president who is very confident in his assertion of the destruction of those sites, that was necessary because the point he had from the start of this, which is iran cannot have a nuclear weapon that has been a very singular, clear point. and the understanding as to how they are not going to have one. that clearly might open the door for the people involved in those kinds of decisions about how to move forward. and the strikes indicated that. it was very distinctive limited strike regarding the issue that was at the forefront of the precedence mind that he made clear over and over again, , tht they will not have a nuclear weapon. and now they will not have a nuclear weapon. how we move forward from here is up to the president. >> now that we have a ceasefire

between iran and u.s. in the holding company likely to see -- [inaudible] maybe 400 people got killed in the latest exchanges between israel and iran. in the same pre-mac, 700 citizens hundred citizens of died many of them as the a distribution center. >> this is why and where reminded about why the ceasefire efforts are important. it is a reminder about why the president of why we're lucky for president trump to be a president ever secretary rubio to be focusing on changing the status quo on this planet and changing the whole old dyf watching new ideas. it is been his hallmark from the start and that is not changed. what we can say it just as reminder there is a deal on the table. hamas must stop acting

recklessly and accepted got a special envoy witkoff instead hamas recent response to the offer was totally unacceptable and only takes us backward. it hasn't been that long. a lot of stuff is happening in a short time but the fact of the matter is is that we've never stopped working for a ceasefire in the gaza strip. we've never stopped wanting that to end to get us out of that repetition of something that is certainly made first victims the people of the gaza strip and then everyone else. it's reflection of what needs to end and what is been the problem. president trump is made clear in this case hamas specifically that they will face consequences if they continue to hold hostages, which they do, including those of already passed the weight of those who are still living. hamas has rejected repeated ceasefire proposals and, therefore, bear sole responsibility for how this is

continuing. if you have a chance at a movie do in your work to pose the same question to hamas. it would be, i hope you might be asking them -- >> i will do it through my direct communication. >> yes, sir. >> thank you very much. president trump has long said that iran should not have nuclear weapons. >> that is correct. >> that is clear. do you think it is important for iran to change its foreign policy because u.s. always says it is the biggest state of terrorism unstable in the region? >> i always can't speak to what's in the mind of the so-called leadership of iran. i do know that the future of the rent is enhanced of the iranian people. and whether or not certain individuals change their approach or believe i think what

has happened the whole world has noted the world has changed and that nothing will be the same. and how that plays out we are very lucky that we have president donald trump, secretary of state marco rubio and a cabinet that is united in the nature of what we try to do for the next three and half years. one more. >> one more. -- statement about peace. you want to comment? >> no. there's again things are happening in moving along so quickly. hobbies and everything in that in the middle east has changed and will have to see where those who are leaving this charge and this change, again the american leadership here with trump, rubio and j. d. vance of course a strong leadership across the border we are very lucky as we seen also with pete hegseth. we're very early in this administration, think about it, we're in the middle of june and we have seen the results now of

men and women who are focused. so we will see for the kurds and others as well. >> to the questions. especially considering the secretaries -- that the secretary feel like european allies had america's back to the extent they should and this iranian operation? i'm not talking militarily but from a general support standpoint beyond just platitudes it's about the arena nuclear program. do you feel like you got backing from europe on this? >> i'm not going to comment or speculate on the feelings or assessments of our partners in any kind of dynamic. that's between them. it's about the leaks of the world. right now what i can tell you is president trump and secretary rubio are right there in the hague at nato for conversations with our partners throughout europe. i think everyone expects it to be very successful. it's going to be a very exciting time, perfect time for those conversations to be had.

and i'm not going to speculate on the nature of any conversations or you can spectrally on the feelings of people either. >> second question. in terms of regime change in iran, the initial message come out of the administration was we're not at a regime change come wrapped whereafters program. then the president remarked today regime change is not a good idea because of the chaos that it would cause. so what is it did administration specifically and state department message here geraniums or suffering under the oppression of the regime? how to the move forward and does america have the back considering the presence of regime change is not a good idea right now? >> i can that's in a prospective certain of the president and what his actions he feels what actions are important what our intentions were. was very clear from the start from the very beginning, for years the president has spoken about the problem of iran another can't have nuclear weapon. this is not a new idea and it certainly a globally held idea.

but we at center at the department repeatedly and a number of different dynamics that the fates that country the long enhanced of the people in those countries. that is the overriding general message of the marco rubio state department. it is the kind of thing when we think about, not just democracy but the nature of the decision of citizens to decide what kind of leadership they want. that is what our position is for certain iran and every other country on this planet. yes, sir. >> have you received any signal or message from iran that they're willing to come back to the table? secondly, are you seeking a proposal -- [inaudible] anniversary of the supreme court's dobbs decision overturning roe v. wade and returning the question of abortion to the people and their

elected representatives. three years on, there is much to celebrate. new protections for unborn americans now exist in many states, and there are babies alive today who would not be here without dobbs. today's also a reminder how much work there is still to be done. other states have enacted aggressively pro-abortion laws and the pro-abortion gutmacher institute reports over a million abortions in the united states in 2024. we still have a lot of work to do to reach a day when every, every american born and unborn enjoys the full protection of the law. madam president, i'm sure my democrat colleagues have plans to commemorate the dobbs anniversary not as a day that opened the door to protections for human rights but as a day that opened the door to restrictions on democrats' most cherished freedom, and that's the freedom to kill unborn human

beings. i have to say, it's a pretty grim indictment of the moral health of a party when one of its signature issues is promoting the right to kill the youngest and most vulnerable americans. as i said, madam president, there's still a lot of work to be done, but i am confident that we can get there. i look forward to the day when the life of every american, born and unborn, is protected, and when being small and vulnerable does not mean that your human rights are any less respected. madam president, we are rapidly approaching floor consideration of our reconciliation bill, and the opportunity to make the historic investment in our nation's security. i think it's difficult to overstate the opportunity that we have here with this bill. with just a single piece of legislation, we have a chance to undo a lot of damage and put our

country on a safer footing goings forward. madam president, i often say that if we don't get national security right, the rest is conversation. everything else we do in government, and our very existence as aflation i might -- as a nation, i might add, depends on getting our security right. the disturbing fact is we've let our readiness slip to a very troubling level in some instances. with china beginning to outpace the united states in key defense capabilities and manufacturing, it is especially critical that we act now to prevent the united states from falling behind on the national security front. enter our reconciliation bill. while it's no substitute for robust yearly defense funding, the legislation takes a major step forward in upgrading and updating our national security posture. it invests in shipbuilding, missile defense, defense manufacturing capacity, critical munitions, drones, and

counterdrone technology, and expanded air force fighter fleet, nuclear modernization, u.s. infrastructure in the pacific, and more. the past few years provided an ample reminder we live in a dangerous world. with this pill, we can -- this bill, we can put our military and national security in a much better place going forward, substantially improving our abilities to deter and defeat threats. the national defense provisions of our bill alone would make a notable and critically important piece of legislation. but our bill doesn't just make a substantial investment in our national defense. it also makes a generational investment in our border security, which is another key part of protecting our nation. criminals, terrorists, and other dangerous individuals can take advantage of unsecured borders to make their way into our country and take up residence on scene. iran's recent warning about terrorist sleeper cells in the

united states is a timely reminder that there are a lot of hostile nations out there that would like to harm the united states. in the absence of the ability to strike the united states mainland via military methods, what better way to harm our country than by smuggling dangerous individuals through our borders to carry out attacks. it's a very real danger, madam president. and so border security is a key part of national security. and our reconciliation bill makes a generational investment in border security. funding for barriers and technology to secure the border. funding for more border patrol agents. funding for more immigration and customs enforcement agents to deport dangerous individuals who have already made their way into the united states. it's all there. and more. as with the national defense commoneys, the border security components of this bill would be an impressive piece of legislation by themselves. but we have an amazing opportunity to do them both.

and they're paired with still another security investment, this one in our energy security. energy security, madam president, doesn't always get the same attention as border security and national defense. but it, too, plays a key role in keep are our nation secure. as european countries discover to their cost after russia invaded ukraine, relying on energy from hostile countries or unstable regions of the world is not a winning proposition. the best way to keep a country and an economy secure is to have a secure, stable and abundant domestic energy supply. the united states is fortunate to have abundant domestic energy resources. but the biden administration set us up for a future of limited domestic production by sharply curtailing access to those resources. our bill will undo a lot of that damage and free up energy resources for responsible domestic production. madam president, we have an incredible opportunity with this

legislation, a seldom seen chance to make a real difference to our national security, from military to border to energy. and i'm grateful to all those who have worked so hard to develop these portions of the bill. and i look forward to passing this legislation in the very near future. madam president, i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the order of june 23, the senate not recess from 4:00 to 5:00 p.m. today. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: thank you, madam president. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question occurs on the zimmerman nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin. mr. banks.

>> good afternoon. everybody having fun yet? [inaudible] >> well, very stimulating. we are making good headway on the reconciliation bill as you all know this is the legislation that we believe implements president's agenda and make sure our country safer, , stronger ad more prosperous. if you look at how it issues those objectives and certainly the tax side of it, it makes it easier for american families to make ends meet by giving them significant tax relief in several ways. it locks in an experiment the lower tax rates that were part of the tax cuts and jobs act. it allows for a permanent

extension of the increased expand the child tax credit and it also makes permanent the increase standard deduction which 90% of the people in this country claim. on top of that number of president trump's initiatives deal with no tax on tips, no tax in overtime, , lower taxes on seniors in this country and interest on no tax and interest on new loans for cars. those are all things the president has included. they are included in our package, included in the house package but we think they are important in terms of -- and that is we won't to allow you to keep more of what you earned so that you can spend it and the decisions that are in the best interest of your family instead of syndicate money to washington, d.c. washington, d.c. couple that with what it does and modernize the military making the country safer, what it is with respect to securing our border andrt making our country more secure that way. these are all important aspects of the reconciliation registry that's in front of us and we

feel very good about that aspr on and getting this across the finish line by the end of the week. so with that i would yield to senator barrasso. >> republicans were elected to provide safety and prosperity for the american people.ga democrats lost the last election because there was a party of high prices and open borders. the sooner we can pass this copperheads of economic plan call the sooner the american people will see the benefits that will come from this legislation. the leader talked about a number of those things. higher wages, lower prices, lower taxes, no tax on tips, no tax in overtime, lower taxes on our seniors. all of these are critically important. the democrats is it they are going to do everything they can to defeat this bill. if that happens the mecca people will see the largest tax increase in history of this country. we cannot allow that to happen. said it before, the democrats also the party of historically high taxes.

we are there to provide safety, security and prosperity for the american people. ready to get america back on track. >> i really do think this would be an historic week because of what's going to happen with the american family. whether it's keeping taxes low as it did in 2017, whether it's the child tax credit making a permanent which will give families a lot of reassurances as a move into paying their taxes. also we also create a savings account for every child born in this country. wei. talk about you know some of our let's say social security the supposedly in 20233, or 233 has some difficulty. a lot of difficulty. what if we start saving we had the savings account be given the day you were born? that's going to be really i think wonderful for families all across the country helps with adoption.

this is a family bill. this is a family bill from beginning to end. small business tax credits that are in here are going to be made permanent. secretary bessent's believes he said this to us today as i believe that this will be the biggest growth portion of of the bill the lead to a lot of capital expenditures or people working at higher wages. one other aspect of the bill of course is the border security bill. this is very important. i was privileged on monday to house secretary kristi noem to come to harpers ferry west virginia will be had defense training center for border patrol agents where we train over 16,000 a year to meet the challenges on our southern and northern borders. and she talked a lot about the progress that the president has made in terms of border security but without this bill that progress would be stopped in its tracks. we need to move forward with border security to make sure that we are safer but also those

agents that we are training and advanced training their receiving in harpers ferry west virginia defense training center makes their job safe and the service the doing for this country much appreciated. thanks. >> leader thune, , you expect te bills that passed at least you up to three members on your side who vote no? [inaudible] >> why? >> well, we've got a lot of very independent thinking senators who have reasons of things they like to have in this bill that would and if you make it stronger. but at the end of the day this is a process whereby not a villain is going to get what they want. we have to get to 51 in the senate. we are moving toward that objective. hopeful at the end that will have the requisite number of votes to pass it. we just had secretary bessent's as you know i know heard from come and speak to us but what is important to get the bill done

and why it's important we get it done in a timely way. and so we're looking forward to progressing on the bill this week and hopefully when push comes to shove and everybody has to say yes or no will get the number of votes we need. >> to as as a member of the f eight you agree -- key nuclear -- completely and totally obliterated? >> well, i don't, i'm not sure i have got you might want to hear from senator cotton who chairs the intelligence committee, an edge on full extent but we know for sure that the nuclear program was set back considerably and that is a victory not only for the region but for our country's national security. >> can you guarantee rural hospitals will not lose any

funding? >> we are working on a solution for rural hospitals. and that's something that's n in the works now for several days. again in response to number of concerns that our colleagues have mentioned about ensuring that the impact on rural hospitals the lesson, be mitigated. i think we're making good headway on that. [inaudible question] a couple colleagues are outspoken. how are you confident you have the votes needed? >> well, i just think when push comes to shove, you know, you're looking at whether not you're going to allow the perfect to become the envy of the good. that's a lot of things in this

bill that modernizes the mr. trump secures a border, brings tax relief for working families. it has the biggest spending reduction in history and it restores energy dominance for our country. there is so much good in this and people sit down and evaluate how they're going to land in the end, you have to recognize this is a process whereby the body doesn't everything you want but i think we produce a bill working with health working with the white house that will get the requisite number of republican senators to vote for us we can pass it, get back to the house, hopefully they can take it up and pass it and put on the president's a desk. the clerk: ms. duckworth, no.

the clerk: mr. reed, aye. mr. moreno, aye. ms. smith, no. >> thank you for coming. appreciate you being here. i'll get mad at fox when they try to come in here late.

all right you guys. of course a few comments are as we begin on this tuesday. the past few days have proven that president trump means what he says. american can be proud we had a president who puts america first and is a peacemaker. as he said on his truth social, both israel and iran wanted to stop the war equally. it was my great honor to destroy all nuclear facilities and capability, and then stop the war. now an update on the state department 24/7 efforts to assist u.s. citizens throughout the middle east the department is provide information and support to over 27,000 people seeking guidance regarding the conflict between israel and iran. iran. the vast majority of people we are in touch with our seeking information which we provide regularly. state department began assisted

departure flights from israel on june 21. flights have supported israel with hundreds of u.s. citizens and lawful permanent residents and their accompanying immediate family members. we are grateful to our partners in the region and around the world will come american citizens. we also extend our deep appreciation for the government of qatari cooperation defense of the airbase as well as our deep appreciation for the american i should say the airbase as well as deep appreciation for the american men and women in uniform who are there and for the vital role they continue to play for u.s. and region security. ..

under president trump driving change at in the united states will participate in the organization where we will engage with regional partners to advance shared goals for safer and stronger, more prosperous nation. candidacy to the american commission addressing 80 and the chinese communist party. and addition, the department for justice program announced a

reward for information leading to the location and a safe return. he was arrested and detained by the director of intelligence and has not been heard from since the we encourage anyone with information to contact plus 120-2702 78 43. for this safe return and that is

for justice.that. excuse me. please. i have more of an announcement here. to conclude, the united states condemns the brutal and cowardly attack on the orthodox church and offers condolences to the families. as it fights against forces to create instability and fear in theirmr country and in the broar

region. >> israel -- iran in both sides, justice department have concerns? and in my announcement for president trump appreciated and americans in the world have watched this and a clear way in the leader of the world and donald trump became clear to keep things moving and in the meantime and met region opening

a couple hours ago. and to stop war and what we should rely on it to that and how it comes together and what does that look like? >> those are all very good questions.

and they are a fast moving environment the cabinet or government and for the process will be in the application in this government. in the her failed -- >> i'm not going to get ahead of the president or try to guess what strategy will be but it will benefit this country and

the difference is sometimes you don't hear ahead of time about a trajectory so i would suggest not to translate or speculate or guess, but to watch. we will find out sooner than later. >> the joint chiefs chairman and how long it might take it conclusive, from the president of the united states at nine more than any of us here the

information the american people are saying the president trump is indicated success the nature of what has occurred leave that they have applied with this? >> early on the state department my colleague is on the nature of the white house, but when we look at how the day has transpired there was some back

and forth and that has stopped so i think we can take that as an indicator so they go back in and what we have looked at his post we have agreed and i believe there are statements that care about right there. >> any of these that were taken for the ongoing efforts?

and this administration in iran and given the embassy. >> i can't speak directly to them but i wasn't there. he was addressing. >> looking at the potential.

>> while i can't speak to the choices president trump will make, what we do know is americans appreciate that about them in the issue of national security and safety and has addressed the issue of relationship with this country and keep others nation that for. and other nations that look at that and his approach to things and his attitude about it. so i think we will see that.

>> how to view the next that for new gear talks in light of the c/? is there anything on the schedule? to try to resume? >> i'm not going to guess or speculate what might happen, but we do know throughout the process the fact that negotiations renew and it's got to this and committed to diplomacy and has displayed that.

they do not engage militarily and foreign policy for the same. >> cabinet members have said the facilities obliterated the programs and because of that you see that as an negotiation supply? hasn't changed? they have tried to mediate, are you receptive to the efforts? >> i do know the president is very confident.

iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and that is a singular there are in the understanding is they are not going to have one. and have to forward the strikes indicated that regarding the over and over again that they will not have a nuclear weapon. and how we move forward is president of the united states. >> the cease-fire and likely to have a spare not gaza, and maybe 400 people israel and iran and

we are lucky for president trump for secretary revealed to focus on changing the status quo and the old dynamics of watching new ideas, that's his mark from the start and that is not change and hamas must stop i think recklessly. the recent offer was totally unacceptable and it hasn't been that long. but we've never stopped working for cease-fire.

at the end to get us out of that of gaza strip of what needs to end. this case, specifically and continue to hold hostages those who have passed away and those who are still living rejected repeatedly and therefore continuing so if you have a chance hamas. >> the direct communication do

not have nuclear weapons and the foreign policy and the u.s. envoy says it is the biggest counterterrorism region. and the so-called leadership of iran. i do know it's in the hands of the iranian people. an individual change their approach in the whole world noticed thema world has changed and we are very lucky. marco rubio and the nature of what we are trying to do for the next three and a half years.

the leadership the statement about peace. >> things are happening in moving along weekly and has changed and we will have to see where they go and the leadership in their in this administration. the end. allies at america's back and we talked about it literarily and

the insertable the iranian nuclear program on this. >> i'm not into college or regulate on assessments for partners. it's about the leaders of the world but what i can tell you is, they are right there with our partners throughout and everyone expects that to be speculate on the ceilings. >> the initial message after regime change, we are after the nuclear weapons program. regime change is not a good idea

because of the chaos. what is the message here to iranian suffering the regime's and it's not a good idea right now. >> what actions are important for from the very beginning for years the president has spoken about that is not a new idea and the globally held idea. in the overriding message. nomi.

under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made, laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of commerce, paul dabbar of new york to be deputy secretary.

assignment ambassador been very clear help syria be a steady and stable government and our commitment through his work is about the stability and they have lifted many of the sanctions and made it possible for the region to assist the government becoming stronger and able and that region with terrorist groups and that is our commitment and that is very

clear and it's a very exciting time. yes or. >> you been in the negotiating process for two months in the iranian minister last friday, said negotiations with the u.s. and the cover for the israeli attack and the u.s. rate on the establishment there, argue able restore the trust iran. >> that's certainly a question i can't answer but those who are doing this for a living they are

making a difference here in the world the president has indicated, he's really open to talking with everyone and he's a peacemaker and that's what he has done. learn from given despite the trump administration and again, the choices that are made, i don't speculate about what other countries should think or do it at the same time president trump first-term a significant outreach -- mr. husted: good afternoon. my name is john husted and i

have the distinct honor of serving the great state of ohio as one of its united states senators. over the past 25 years i have been blessed to serve the people of ohio as a state representative, speaker of the house, secretary of state, and most recently as lieutenant governor. i am constantly reminded of the sacrifices generations of americans and ohioans have made in the hope that they will leave their country in a better place than they found it. and it is this pattern of sacrifice that i've also witnessed throughout my life growing up in the midwest. so, mr. president, i'd like to take a moment to reflect on the sacrifices others have made that have led to this moment in time and our responsibility as americans to our children and to our country. so let me start at the beginning, at least for me. i was born in 1967, which was part of one of the most

turbulent decades in american history. my start in life reflected those turbulent times. my birth mother lost her husband in vietnam, in the vietnam war, and she found herself with multiple children to care for without anyone to share that responsibility. then she learned that there was another baby on the way, and that baby was me. while i can never truly know how the circumstances affected her and why she made the choice that she did, i'd like to believe that out of a loving heart and full of courage and selflessness that she gave me a chance to be adopted. my birth certificate reports that i was born in michigan, but let me reassure you, i was made in ohio. you see, during the fall of 1967, after two months in a foster home, i was blessed to become the first child of two

humble, hardworking people from northwest ohio, jim and juppe did i husted -- and judy husted. even then amid the upheaval happening across the nation my parents were full of optimism as they welcomed a new son into their home. they have always embodied the american tradition that each generation works and sacrifices today so that the next generation can climb higher mountains tomorrow. that's the example my parents set as i grew up on county road jay near montpelier, ohio. life was not easy for them. like many families in small towns in the industrial midwest, we weathered factory closures. several of my own family members lost their jobs when the machine tool factory they worked at shut down. but they'd faced hard times before. tough times make you tough and

resilient, resilient enough to uproot your family, start over and keep sacrificing for your family's well-being, and that's what they all did. my parents worked hard and never wasted a penny. they routinely made choices that were, that made their life harder so that they could make my life and my brother and sister's life a little easier. what i saw growing up in rural ohio was simple but powerful, and it characterized communities across this country too. people worked long hours, forfeiting comfort and leisure so that their families and especially their children could enjoy more security and prosperity than they had. these diligent men and women may not have called their daily responsibilities on the factory floors or in the fields the american dream, but that's what it was. that's what they were striving to achieve. i believe this love for family and nation, this aspirational

hope that we have has driven americans generations to risk their lives and livelihood so we could create the freest, most prosperous country in the world. the early settlers didn't sail across the atlantic high seas for fun and adventure. they came to seek a legacy of opportunity that their homeland had denied them. but nothing guaranteed their future. they earned it through courage, toil, and sacrifice. mr. president, i know this. the noise of the 24-hour news cycle that makes it easy to lose perspective when you're here in washington, i know it does. but if you step into the capitol rotunda and you look up at the storied paintings all around that dome, you'll be reminded of an enduring pattern. americans built this nation through personal sacrifice, often at a steep human cost. in 1620, the settlers at

plymouth faced hunger, disease and death as they launched into a new world where they hoped to establish religious freedom. in 1776 their descendants picked up that torch by risking everything to break free of a monarchy. when the founders signed the declaration of independence, they indeed l pledged their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor, a wager not just for themselves p but on behalf of their children and future generations. at valley forge, liberty nearly froze to death, but those who endured did so to form a more perfect union. they fought not just for freedom but for justice and peace and the blessings of liberty, for their posterity -- that's us. in 1861, americans turned on one another so they could preserve the nation freedom. -- they paid with blood and then

returned to their fields and towns and sought to rebuild a more cohesive nation, one of lasting growth and a new hope. by the early 1900's, americans led a second revolution, this the industrial revolution, a free nation, an economy, workers fought for new industry and fairer working conditions and laid the foundation for prosperity that we enjoy today. immigrants came through ellis and angels islands with the hopes to work hard and america embraced them. in world war ii, young men fought oceans to build tyranny. and when it was all over, they followed their forefathers' faithfulness by coming home and building schools, churches and businesses. in other words, mr. president, a

future. the greatest generation carried that burden for their children and for ours, the men and women who fought and endured daily hardships during the second world war, understood what many americans have forgotten, which is the heavier the load you choose to carry, the higher you can hold your head. and doing what's noble builds confidence. i believe that's true of people and of nations. for nearly two centuries, americans weren't focused on indulgence but on inheritance. to be clear, i'm not talking about the kind of inheritance measured in dollars, but instead the kind measured in duty, making tomorrow better than today. but, mr. president, you may be tempted to correct me here, why would i only credit us with two

centuries of discipline when after all we turn 250 years old next year. let me take a moment to explain. this american ethos endured for most of our history, but i believe something shifted in our culture around the time i was born. our society began to leverage the security that earlier americans won for tomorrow in order to avoid the challenges of the day, courageous people don't do that. even a few -- even a few years before i was born, i believe president kennedy had already begun to detect a shift. in his inaugural address, he implored americans to do one thing, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. a nation that once rallied around sacrifice in war and rebuilding gave way to a new cultural mood.

over time we stopped asking, what can we build and leave for the ones we love and we began to ask, what can we claim for ourselves. we became obsessed with what we as individuals are entitled to and forgot how to plant the seeds and nurture them until the harvest. the century that built generations were eroding, which meant that we earned less and expected more. we initially built a safety net to protect people in need and our most vulnerable citizens, which is a noble idea and one that i support. but over time, that safety net stretched wider and wider until nearly everybody was lying in it. as the cost of our promises about a looned, we -- ballooned, we lacked the will to pay for them or the courage to pay them

back. so what did we do instead, mr. president? we did what previous generations refused to do, we passed the buck by handing the bill off to our children. instead of sacrificing for the next generation, we passed the burden on to them. it was a convenient deception, congress created more programs that it wouldn't pay for, public officials made promises they couldn't keep and they convinced their constituents that americans who come of age after us would take care of tomorrow all by themselves. we also fought wars and engaged in foreign interventations without -- interventions without paying for them. it all adds up. while our national debt kept rising, i'm not just talking about in dollars, america kept experiencing a real character deficit. we weren't just spending money,

we were exploiting time for those who could recognize a better path than the one we had chosen for them. we soothed ourselves by claiming we were being passionate, but we passed on the consequences of our choices to those not yet born. this is not compassion, it's generational theft. in 1968 -- 67 -- 1967, the national debt is more -- it is now more than 100 times greater. we ran a $1.80 trillion deficit, a baby born today inherits a debt. so what happened to american ingenuity, resolve and discipline? how did a nation one defined by

sacrifice for our kids to become -- what was -- what happened to a nation that once -- was defined by sacrifice, think about that, for our kids to become one willing to pilfer their piggy banks. we have some urgent challenges, mr. president. 21st century americans are not to storm normandy beaches. the task upon us may seem less heroic now, but it remains daunting and deeply patriotic. what is that task? to simply stop spending more than we're willing to pay for today. the question isn't just how did america's financial and cultural debt get so deep, it's how can we claw our way out of this cultural and financial hole. it comes down to identifiying what we value and what we

believe is worth the sacrifice. for me that's my family and my country. i love them both and i know many of you share those same sentiments. i believe that we only sacrifice for the things we love. i'll repeat that. i believe we only sacrifice for the things we love. that's why it's crucial and consequential that we remind ourselves and instruct our children to love this country, reminding ourselves that this pattern and promise of american liberty fornld a noble innovation nation that is worth loving -- forged a noble innovation nation that is worth loving and fighting for. why would anybody sacrifice for a country they don't love. america has been self-aware from the beginning. away never -- we never thought we were perfect, but every generation is supposed to put in the sweat and tears to form a

more perfect union. we were the first nation rooted in the confidence that our rights come not from kings or governments, but from god, that we are endowed by our creator with tinail enlable rights. this country is exceptional. there are none like it in the world and we must teach the next generation what our countrymen sacrificed to secure. that's why our nation is worth loving with an active and enduring patriotism. loving america doesn't mean agreeing with every politician, but it does require being confident in the idea of america and being willing to sacrifice for the cause of this nation. not in the abstract but in real ways, by being good stewards of what was handed down to us and honoring those who came before

us by adopting their discipline and by becoming the kind of neighbors who are willing to work a little harder, take a little less, give a little more to preserve what has made this country great. mr. president, i stand here today as the beneficiary of those who sacrificed for me and for all of us. i was blessed to be a don't into a loving -- adopted into a loving home where they taught me that faith, family, freedom and hard work with the most reliable antidotes for poverty and despair. we are still a nation where a newborn can begin life in a foster care, grow up in the midwest and have the honor to serve as a united states senator. as americans, no matter our background, we have inherited

the gift of freedom, passed down from earlier americans many we stand on their shoulders. let's not force the next generation to remember us as the ones who broke the two centuries long chain of self-sacrifice, but rather as the ones who reforged it. to my colleagues and constituents, count me in as one who is willing to do my part to work hard, forego convenience, and reinforce that chain that will sustain our nation for future generations. i will listen to your ideas and i hope you will listen to mine. i will operate from the principle belief that we must elevate liberty and personal responsibility above expedience and entitlement. and that our children should not have to pay the price for our lack of discipline. the america i aspire to serve is defined by courage and a love that refuses to take more than it gives. and as it has so many times in

our history, may these convictions prevail in this chamber and in the classrooms, bothered rooms, break rooms and living rooms of these united states. consider this my prayer for our nation and may god through us to make it so. thank you. i yield, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. moreno: i had the opportunity to meet senator husted when he was a state -- when he was state representative husted maybe 20 years ago. and i was down in columbus meeting a few state representatives down there. i saw this young guy who was really smart. i walked up and introduced myself and it was jon husted. he is a great person, not just a great public servant.

he could have spent his entire adult life making a lot of money. he's a very smart and gifted person. instead, he's dedicated his entire time to actually make this country better. the reason for that is what you just heard. he's somebody who is a person of deep faith, a great husband and great father and a great friend. don't take my word for it. i ask unanimous consent to enter the following statements from support from fellow ohioans into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: so the senator does not know i did this, so i think you owe it to hear. here's just a sampling of what the people in ohio said based on a simple request. tell me what you think of senator husted. so let me start with the first one. jon has excelled in every public office he has held, as a legislator, speaker of the house, secretary of state and

lieutenant governor. i worked with john on -- jon on a daily basis. no one understands ohio better than jon. his work on economic development as lieutenant governor will have a laughing im -- lasting impact for generations. he's had a great career in public service, however, i am quipsed that his service as a united states senator will be the most important and most impactful for ohio and for our country. his knowledge of ohio, his ability to work with others will make him a great united states senator. signed ohio governor and former united states senator mike dewitt. senator husted embodies everything that ohio is like, ohio is better because of his years of service. alex, chairman of the ohio republican party.

next one, jon was a speaker when i started in the house in 2007. i watched and learned from him and today i use that knowledge every day in the ohio legislature. 18 years. pretty impressive. he's a great lead and a great united states senator. current ohio speak of the -- speaker of the house. from his beginnings in rural ohio, to the executive branch of our state he made -- i have no doubt he will do the same for our country. that's from the ohio senate president rob mcculley. senator husted is passionate about his faith, family, state and country. it has been a pleasure watching him grow throughout the years, and without question he will serve his senate family with great pride and integrity. that is from current lieutenant governor and former the ohio state football head coach jim

tressel. the last one, during his service at the state level, jon saw firsthand in great detail the many problems at the federal level, problems he was powerless as a state officer to solve. he brings that detailed knowledge and his passion for the right thing to do to the united states senate, and the country will be better for it, signed attorney general of ohio dave yost. i end with this, mr. president, look at what he's already accom accomplished. i can say a little falls here in this chamber. about eight years ago, i remember standing with senator husted, then lieutenant governor candidate husted, nominee husted, in a little office building in downtown cleveland. he said i have an idea. it's going to be called innovate ohio. i said what's that? we'll put together leaders of the ohio innovation ecosystem and make ohio the most attractive state where you can build and grow a company. we had our first meeting. who was in that meeting?

now senator jon husted, now senator me, bernie moreno, soon to be governor vivek ramaswamy and our third ohio honorary senator, vice president jd vance. all hand selected by senator husted to participate eight years ago in innovation task force. on nights when we go through vote-a-ramas, we're here 24, 30 hours, it is you who i have to blame, senator husted, for encouraging me to seek public service. look, i came to d.c. not knowing what to expect, and having somebody who i consider a friend, somebody who i know we can talk about anything and hash things out, has made this job very, very rewarding. thank you for your service to ohio. i look forward to serving with you mere in the united states senate -- with you here in the united states senate. with that, i yield, mr. president.

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. mcconnell: when iran's proxies launched a full-scale war on israel october 7, 2023, president biden pledged an unwavering commitment to israel's security. that was the right message in the moment, but as i warned publicly at the time israel needed more than just rhetorical solidarity. like ukraine, israel needed precious time, space to maneuver, and materiel support to defeat a shared enemy. and yet, as in ukraine, america's commitment has indeed

wavered. our support has not been ironclad. instead, under the previous administration, american support was delayed, restricted, and pared with attempts to mi micromanage israel's operations and even interfere with israeli pol pol politics, and at every turn progressive left and isolationist right hyperventilated about the specter of so-called forever war. fortunately, israel held its ground. israelis certainly weren't enthused about a ground war in gaza. their leaders knew that war would be difficult, but they knew it was unavoidable so long as hamas terrorists still

refused to release the hostages. they also knew lasting security meant changing iran's calculus. not just responding to attacks from proxies. so, israel decided to turn iran's terrorist assets into liabi liabilities, despite the pearl-clutching here in washington, our allies simultaneously detap tate -- decapitated hezbollah and crippled hamas. their bold operations created a new opportunity for lebanon to claw back its sovereignty from a terrorist state within a state. meanwhile, the collapse of the brutal assad regime in syria

brought down a russian vassell in iran's favorite corridor of weapons in terrorist finance. these are the circumstances president trump inherited. what to do with them has been the subject of quite some debate. some of his advisers and supporters came with obama-biden era talking points, ready to urge him to continue his predecessor's policy of cons constraining israel. some argued publicly america had no vital or existential interest in the middle east, or claimed the region was a distraction. from other priorities. they warned of forever war.

some seemed to bpush for nuclea negotiations with parameters eerily similar to the nuclear deal the president withdrew from his first term. they even proposed iran could keep enriching uranium until the president rightly, correctly quashed that idea. these mixed messages emboldened iran and its proxies. after all, why give up if administration officials saw the middle east as little more than a distraction or if they seem as fearful of restoring deterrence as the previous guys? so, hamas kept holding the hos hostages, the houthis kept targeting israel, and red sea

commerce, and the islamic republican kept marching toward a nuclear weapon. and in response? israel took the next logical step, to restore deterrence. once again, innovative and decisive strikes destroyed iran's air defenses and imposed immediate costs on tehran. and leaders across israel's politics stood united behind the daring operations. ah, but here in america, the same restrainers, anti-israel progr progressives, and self-proclaimed realists warned again of regional conflagration if the president intervened alongside or even supported

israel's strikes. the president's own, his own, director of national intelligence traveled to hiroshima to record a bizarre video, not as a warning against tehran's nuclear ambitions, but presumably against american or israeli operations to blunt them. now, fortunately the president rejected the pleas of appeasers and isolationists. the strikes he ordered dealt a massive blow to iran's nuclear program, bolstered american credibility, and strengthened u.s. and israel leverage to end iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and its support for terrorism for good. thanks to israelis' historic

efforts for more than a year and a half, iran's ability to threaten regional stability is m massively degraded. not since before the islamic revolution has there been such an opportunity for america, israel, and our arab partners to reset regional dynamics on such favorable terms. achieving it has required no large-scale deployment of u.s. ground forces. it required only supporting our friends. israel is a close ally and a strategic asset, not a lia liability, and the strategic return on our investment in assisting israel is

incalculable. standing with our israeli friends offers a powerful lesson about american leadership, the value of alliances and partnerships, and the real nature of peace through strength. and this lesson extends far, far beyond the middle east. if america refuses to apply it else elsewhere, like ukraine, we do so at grave risk to our own interests. but that's exactly what some in washington seem to be doing. congress recently learned that a senior dod official conducted a review of dod security assistance efforts and, listen to this, concluded that the ukraine security assistance init

initiative, among other programs, was wasteful, wasteful. this is a republican administration panning a program created by the republican congress in 2015 to counter, to counter president obama's toothless response to russia's initial invasion of ukraine. i'd like to see the analysis behind the administration's decision to zero out usaid in its fiscal 2026 request. i'd like to hear them try to explain away the massive return on investment of america's security assistance to ukraine and the previous lessons we've learned from our ukrainian partners. secretary of the army has rightly called ukraine, listen

to this, the silicon valley of warfare. through his colleagues at the pentagon -- do his colleagues at the pentagon think this assessment is wrong, or do they just not think access to cutting-edge modern combat is valuable? well, here's the truth, usai and other security assistance efforts have helped us measurably address shortcomings and strategy, capabilities, production capacity that would have gone ignored until it was too late. it's an inconvenient reality for isolationists and restrainers, but for a tiny percent, a tiny percent of our defense budget, we helped a smaller military resist invasion by a vastly larger one, and degrade a major

u.s. adversary. as with israel, ukraine is fighting an adversary of the united states. our support does not entangle us in a far-off foreign conflict. a russia, iran, china, north ko korea, america is the main enemy, the great satan. if these adversaries beat our friends, they'd threaten, the threat to america becomes a thousand times greater. we should be grateful for friends so willing to defend our collective interests against common foes. partnership with ukraine is teaching us what modern warfare could mean for u.s. forces when they do face direct conflict.

it has tested our assumptions about munitions, inventories, expenditure rates, electronic warfare, and the duration of conflict. without ukraine's experience with u.s. weapons, we would have been surprised to find some advanced systems quickly rendered inoperable on future battlefields. the money we invest in usai on weapons for ukraine expands our own production capacity in the process and will improve the quality of our own munitions.

supplemental appropriations on ukraine and israel in turn backfill our own stocks with brand new capabilities, not just 155 millimeter rounds but air defenses and long-range fires with specific investment in solid rocket motors. these investments help us prepare for conflict in the indo-pacific. and production would be slower in the absence of our partnership with ukraine. not doing more to address our growing defense needs isn't a failure of oversight. it's a failure of political will. everyone wants to see an end to russia's war in ukraine, but the

price of peace matters. if we want enduring stability in europe, we can't fall for an illusory piece. we should know enough history mott to dismiss this as merely a quarrel in a far away country. between two people of whom we know nothing. it is a major war of conquest in europe. the most significant since the days of nazi germany. and allies and adversaries half a world away are watching it closely for clues about america's resolve. certainly europe's deepening commitments to collective defense will make real piece more enforceable. the president's persistence has driven much of this progress.

putin's brutality has reinforced it. since 2022, our european nato allies have made historic, historic investments in defense, often buying from us. and many are preparing to make even larger commitments at this week's nato summit. all of that is good news. but we can't expect allies to continue signing up for 3.5% and 5% commitments if america insists on falling further behind. likewise, we can't expect putin to end his aggression if he thinks america is a betterment of ukraine. it's just a matter of time. and we can't expect anyone to take america's threats and commitments seriously if we're content to let our own strength

atrophy. a base budget request that cuts defense spending in real terms doesn't show moscow we're serious, let alone beijing. leading from behind would be bad enough, but this is just plain falling behind. the strongest deterrence is denying an adversary's objectives through military means. israel is restoring the deterrence in the middle east. ukraine is achieving it by holding its own against russia. but it needs help. recently, i've asked administration officials simple questions, like who is the aggressor in the conflict.

the answer is pretty obvious. but a second equally simple question seems to actually trip them up. who do we want to win? who do we want to win? the president made the right call to stand with israel. i hope he'll also decide to stand with ukraine. prevent russian victory and start reversing a dangerous downward trend in our own defense budgets. i hope he'll recognize russia's attempt to tap in along for what it is. putin is getting mixed messages from us. he thinks he has time. he believes the west is weak and divided.

but the president at very low cost can shatter that illusion. it's time to impose sanctions, raise the price of russia's aggression, redouble security assistance to ukraine, and drive the kremlin to seek peace. it's time for deterrence through denial. there's no surer path to a just and enduring peace. no better way to demonstrate that peace through strength actually means something. no clearer sign to allies and adversaries watching closely from the western hemisphere to the indo-pacific that america still has the will to lead.

i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: would the senator withdraw his request. without objection. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. lankford: mr. cassidy: i ask consent the following be granted floor privileges. ava o'neil and alan lamb. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: mr. president, in every single state, there are americans relying upon the national flood insurance program to protect their home.

whatever is shaded and it's shaded in every state, there are people who are making claims on the national flood insurance program. and congress has the responsibility to serve all americans, regardless of age, income, or zip code. since president biden's implementation of risk rating 2.0, seniors and low and middle-income homeowners have been left behind. earlier this month, i led eight of my republican colleagues urging fema to end the biden era risk rating 2.0. i want to work with the president to fix the mess the biden administration had created. and now i want to share with my colleagues the same case we made in that letter for why action is needed now. every year on june 1, the phrase hoping for the best, preparing for the worst comes to mind. for the folks in louisiana, it's a way of life. a hurricane season begins with a higher gulf temperature than usual, meteorologists predict 13

to 19 named storms, six to ten hurricanes and three to five major hurricanes hitting the u.s. before the year's end. that's somewhere in the u.s. not just the gulf coast. i would note the meteorologists always predict a lot. it's easier to be wrong predicting a lot than be wrong predicting very few. but nonesless -- nonetheless, we should hope for the best and prepare for the worst. in my state if there's such a warning, folks know what to do. they put together perishable food items, take care of the window, check on the neighbors and they'll also be bracing themselves financially. folks in my state are still trying to get back on their feet after four years of financial distress under the biden administration. add the cost of recovery if there's a severe weather event and many families just cannot afford it. that's why we have the national flood insurance program, a safety net program for millions across the country, including those in my state for the last

50 years. because of the national flood insurance program, a retired couple in livingston parish who just paid off their mortgage sleeps better knowing that they are covered the next time or if they ever flood. the single working woman in cameron parish rest assured knowing there is help available when it comes time to replace the siding and roof tiles which may have been torn loose by torrential winds. this program, the peace of mind of those who rely upon it is being threatened. since fema under the biden administration implemented risk 2.0, premiums skyrocketed making desperately needed protection unaffordable for millions. over 80% of nfip policyholders in louisiana saw a spike in their premiums after its implementation in 2021. the protection that millions desperately need has become unaffordable. now, when i say unaffordable, i'm not talking about a 100 or $200 increase although that

might be too much for some families. we're talking about an almost $2,000 increase for a homeowner in wagaman, louisiana. about a $4500 increase for a homeowner in gibson. so this is where they started on the white and this is where they went to in the red. and so if you say unaffordable for a family of limited means paying almost $600 to go to $2500, big jump. at $ -- a 334% jump. to go from -- here in belle chasse, la lashes goes from $575 to $8,800 over a 1400% increase. that's unaffordable for a family with limited income, perhaps fixed income to see that kind of jump is -- one more time --

unaffordable. so the question is has fema been trapt about these increases and the answer is no. in fact, some of these folks have never flooded. they're not quite sure why the premiums are rising but because they're rising so much, they have no option but to drop their coverage all together which is of course the worst possible situation because now they're totally vulnerable. it's important to note that congress has not been allowed to weigh in on these increases. under president biden, congress has stonewalled and now with president trump in charge, i trust there will be more trapes into -- transparency into the 2.0 methodology than we've had. the american people and certainly those in louisiana made it clear when they elected president trump that they're ready to end the confusion and high prices of the previous administration.

they're talking about the grocery store, the gas pump, and, yes, also flood insurance. national flood insurance program -- if you add to that homeowners -- is the heart of the cost of living crisis americans struggle with under president biden. now, we have a chance to bring down prices on flood insurance and the same way president trump has brought down all these other prices, gas, eggs, milk, you name it. i wish to work with my senate colleagues, congressional colleagues and with president trump to make life affordable again. as hurricane season wraps up, the clock is ticking. let's act now and with that i yield.

mr. barrasso: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i come to the floor today because for the last

few years i think we can best describe the time in america as a time of record-high prices and wide hispanic open borders. -- and wide-open borders. prices soared bid over 40%. 10 million illegal immigrants flooded across our nation's borders, american families struggled and communities were unsafe. so in november this past year, the american people said, enough. they rejected the chaos and the extremism of the democrat party and the democrat leadership, and they chose republicans in order to get the country back on track. so the bill that we are voting on this week is the republican plan, a plan for a safer and more prosperous america. it's a plan to cut taxes, lower prices, secure the border, and, of course, to strengthen our nation. it is the blueprint to renew, to rebuild, and to restore our

nation. here's how. first, our bill stops a $4 trillion tax increase. now, that would be the biggest tax increase in the history of the country. every senate democrat has vowed to stop the bill. that's because the democrats are the party of record-high taxes. they want people's taxes to go up. -- to a tune of $4 trillion. if the democrats have their way, every working family in america will pay more in taxes. you'll see a higher tax bill next year. so if you make between $30,000 and $80,000 a year, when our bill passes, you're going to get a 15% tax cut. we cut taxes on overtime, on social security, and on tips. if you are a waiter, a police officer, a nurse, you're going to keep more of what you earn. if you're on social security,

you will see more money at the end of each month through a larger deduction. now, this is real relief for the american people who have been suffering through four years of record-high prices. additionally, and as a doctor, i think this is critically important. our bill strengthens medicaid. medicaid exists for the vulnerable, for children, for pregnant women, for the disabled. that's who it was set up and established for. but right now medicaid is failing them, and the problem, of course, is the waste and the fraud and the abuse and the corruption that has been allowed to get into that system as a result of the last four years of liberal leadership in washington. experts tell us that over the past number of years, over $1.1 trillion has been wasted on improper payments alone. and washington was happy to shovel the money out of this city to big states and big

cities. states such as california, money meant for the vulnerable was siphoned off. it was diverted for free health care for illegal immigrants. well, our bill stops all of that. we also believe and add the fact that there needs to be work requirements for able-bodied, working-age people. if people can work, they should work. that's how you move people from poverty 0 a headache. -- from poverty to a paycheck. our bill deports illegal immigrants. our 10 million illegal immigrants have come into the country. we've seen the numbers, the videos, the crime, the chaos allowed by the previous administration, and we've seen how quickly things can change with real leadership in the white house. it's dramatic. it's the improvement that the american people wanted.

our bill invests $160 billion in public safety, hiring 10,000 new immigration and customs agents, hiring 3,000 new border patrol agents, finishing the wall, giving our officers a well-deserved bonus for keeping our communities safe. additionally, the bill unleashes american energy. under joe biden, energy prices rose 41% in hour years. we fixed that by producing more energy right here at home in america. we open up energy production onshore, offshore, and in alaska. that means affordable gas prices, lower energy bills, good-paying american jobs. it powers innovation here at home. america is an energy superpower, and once again we're going to act like it. adurablely, our bill -- additionally, our bill restores american strength. for four years under joe biden, the world saw american weakness.

this bill, as well as our actions last weekend, sent a clear message -- america is strong again. we invest $150 billion in our military. we build 13 new worships and we boost -- warships and we boost ship-building capacities. remember, strength deters. weakness invites aggression. a ready america is a safe and strong america. that's what americans want. that's what they need. and it's what americans voted for in november. lower taxes, safer communities, secure borders, strong economy, leaders who put common sense ahead of chaos. and that's exactly what this bill delivers. this bill keeps the promises that we made to the american people. a vote against the bill -- and that's what the democrats are coming to the floor and they're promising they're going to beat this thing. that would saddle americans with

the largest tax increase ever, with a weaker border, a weaker economy you a weaker country, and that's what they come to the floor and say they are fighting for. american people, whose side do you stand on? what is it that you want for your future and your country? because weigh know what -- because we know what works. in the 1980's, ronald reagan cut taxes and stayed strong. republicans worked with bill clinton to reform welfare. millions moved from poverty to paycheck. we need to do that again. in 2017 we cut taxes, rerolled back red tape, a unleashed american energy and it created the best economy in my lifetime. middle-class incomes rose by nearly $6,000 across the board, and energy was much more affordable. we did it before. with this bill, we will do it again. so today senate republicans

stand united, united to deliver lower prices, higher wages, and more jobs here at home. this bill this we will vote on this week opens the next chapter in our great american comeback story. mr. president, republicans are ready to get america back on track. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

look no further than my good friend. they are busy talking. okay.

i will do it. this is a chart that he gave out in his caucus according to the punch bowl. he handed out this sheet that it says exactly what is in the bill thanks, jeff. louisiana, 20 billion. north carolina 20 billion. ohio a .4. missouri 6.1. and iowa and north carolina $38 billion. that is a lot of money for anybody. and, so in the caucus he is handing this out. republicans are really beginning to learn how bad the big ugly bill is for them. i agree with them. okay. it would be catastrophic for

north carolina with medicaid coverage at risk for over 600,000 people and forfeiting over $38 billion to his home state. he is not the only one. republican senators are airing deep concerns behind closed doors but they are not being honest at home to their constituents. senate republican should listen to senator tillis. he is right about how devastating this could be. republicans may not want to be honest for the american people in public, but democrats sure as hell will be now and throughout the summer and onto next year. senate democrats have been beating the drum. the more we learn about the bill or the offal it is. the harder we fight.

we know just letting them know what is in the bill is very bad for them and shows what we are for. republicans know that their plan is a debt buster but they do not seem to care. they are lining the pockets with their billionaire buddies pretending it will not cost billions by using a budget gimmick. all it is his current policy baseline. they can deceive all they want. everyone knows that you can push the paper around, but they are actually putting the country in debt with these tax cuts. when they cut the taxes plain and simple. they know that. the debt has a real effect on the american people. cost will go up everywhere. the cost to buy a car. the cost to buy a business. the cost to buy a home.

the cost to retain some debt on your credit card bills. americans will be hit hard by the deficit increase alone. paying for it with this emmett called current policy. it is evasive. now, finally, i want to emphasize how utterly outrageous it was for the administration to cancel the briefing that we were supposed to get at 4:00 o'clock today. the last-minute postponement was just a dereliction of their duties. let the congress know to let both parties know in the is going on over there.ing on over so, what is the administration so afraid of that they do not want to brief us. they keepnn delaying us.

lastly, it was scheduled last week before the united states action in my office be granted floor privileges until june 25, 2025 -- parker zito, cole karmush, camille morrison, and curtis laront. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kennedy: mr. president, where is russia? where is president putin? i ask that question in light of -- in light of what's been

happening over the past week in iran. where's russia? where's president putin? you couldn't find either one of them with a search party. dogg the bountyhunter couldn't find president putin. all of a sudden even google can't find russia. i thought iran and russia were peeps. i thought they were best friend. i mean, for decades, iran and russia have had a partnership, where they have attacked everyone in the freedom-loving west.

they're bust buds. now, i -- they're best buds. now, i know iran has a relationship with china, but that's more transactional. china just likes to buy iran's cheap oil. with russia and iran, it was supposed to be a deeper, more meaningful relationship. and this isn't something new. this has been a partnership for decades. i remember when putin invaded ukraine. one of the first allies he turned to was iran, and iran sent russia ammunition, and iran sent russia artillery shells, and iran sent russia drones, and iran has sent russia drones and

ammunition and artillery shells every single day of the war. so where's russia? it hasn't been a good week for iran. where's russia? on monday of this week, iran's top diplomat met with president putin and asked for help. you know what president putin said he would provide? nothing. zero. zilch. nada. some kind of friend. you know, it's not the first time that we've seen president

putin's true colors. it's happened before. you would think that iran would le learn. the month after iran through hamas attacked israel back in october of 2023, iran immediately asked moscow to supply iran with, because iran knew what was coming and so did hamas, they knew retribution was coming from israel. iran asked moscow for jet fighters, for attack helicopters, air defense systems, and training jets. and iran was sure that their buddy, putin, would be there. putin sent them a few jets and said go away, don't bother me. and then not long ago, when

israel took out the better part of iran's air defense system, its golden dome -- wasn't exactly golden. it was more like tin -- but the israelis took it out. iran asked russia, said, look, we have to rearm. we're naked and alone here. we need more air defense missiles to shoot down the israeli planes. president putin said go away. don't bother me. what a friend. president putin has done it to other countries. russia has had alliances not just with iran through the years. i'll give you a couple of examples. armenia. armenia and russia were best

b buds, two peas in a pod. but when armenia got in a war with azerbaijan -- let me say that again -- azerbaijan, once again you couldn't find russia with a search party. iran and russia worked together to prop up al-assad in syria. remember that? when the people of syria were revolting against assad, who had blood under his fingernails. you know who kept him afloat? iran, yes, but especially russia. and then assad got in trouble, and that's when he really needed russia, and he went to mr. putin

and said help me, help me, and mr. putin said no. you're on your own. you can come to my country where they can't get to you, but that's it. too bad. i don't need you anymore. i hope -- a lot's going on with respect to the middle east right now, but i hope the world notices what kind of friend russia is. i hope other countries that russia has alliances with and that russia is assiduously courting to be a, quote, partn partnership, notices how russia reacts to their friends. where's russia? where's putin? all of a sudden you can't find

him. now i'm delighted with that. i'm just delighted. but this was very, very predictable. with friends like russia -- i say this to every country in the world that might be thinking & with friends like russia, who needs enemies? let me change the subject slightly, mr. president. as you know, we're working hard on reconciliation. i suspect we're going to have a bill before us here in a few days. it's very important, it does a lot, and i know reasonable people have disagreed over it. first and foremost, if we pass the bill it will represent the largest tax increase in the history of our country. let me say that again because sometimes we tend to lose sight of the main purpose of the bill, of the forest, as we start battling about the trees.

if we pass this bill, it will be the largest tax cut in the history of america. but the converse is also true. if we don't pass this bill, it will be the largest tax increase on the american people in the history of america. so there are two doors here. door number one, pass it, largest tax cut in the history of america. door number two, don't pass it, largest tax increase, $4.3 trillion. that's how much taxes will go up on ordinary americans. not just the rich. i know they're going to tell you that. it's just the rich. no, it's not. it's ordinary americans. it's every american. if we don't pass this bill, you raise taxes $4.3 trillion on

300-plus million americans and you watch this economy go down like a fat guy on a seesaw. we don't have a choice. but as we're discussing reconciliation, there's another issue that i don't want us to forget about. reconciliation is about cutting and spending, but what we call rescission is about cutting. as you know, mr. president, the united states congress is responsible under our constitution for passing a budget. and when we pass a budget and send it to the president, any president, the president can either veto it or sign it. what he can't do or she can't do is go through it and say i like this, i want to keep it. i don't like that, i'm going to cut it. that's called a line-item veto.

president clinton tried it and the united states supreme court said can't do. the president once we pass a budget has to swallow it whole or has to spit it out. but one of the tools that the president does have, the executive branch has, every president has, is the power of rescission. you're going to hear that word a lot -- rescission. what does rescission mean? it just means the president looks at the budget, and he says, you know, i know i can't change it on my own, unilaterally. but i, the president, can ask congress to change it. i know you just passed this budget, but i think you made a mistake here. i think you shouldn't have spent this money. or i think you spent too much money, we've got to cut back. so the president can send us what's called a rescission bill. and we've got to take it up. we don't have a choice.

and in that rescission bill the president said what i just implied, i don't agree with this spending and i want you, congress, who put it in there, to take it out. we can't afford it, or it's wasteful spending. what i call spending porn. and we have to take up the president's request. we can vote yes or we can vote no, but we cannot dodge it. and it only takes a majority vote to pass the president's request. the president has sent to us a rescission package. it's $9.4 billion, as you know, mr. president. $9.4 billion. the president is asking us to remove spending that congress

appropriated for areas in foreign aid and for public broadcasting. i want to talk about the foreign aid part. we're going to have plenty of time to debate whether we ought to agree with the president. but i want the american people to understand the type of spending porn that president premium is asking to take -- president trump is asking to take out of congress' budget. the honorable jodey c. arrington, who is a congressman, damned good one too, he's chairman of the house budget committee. the congressman put together just a few items in the foreign aid spending provisions that the president is asking us to remove. this list is illustrative.

it's not exhaustive. and i just wanted to point a couple of these programs out. again this is spending the president is asking us to revoke. you be the judge, folks. it's your money. the american people can decide whether we ought to spend their money on this or take it out as the president has requested. here's my chart, but i don't know if you can read it. in fact, it's the wrong chart. put up the other one, nate. i'll just mention a couple of the programs. congress appropriated $4 million for sedentary migrants in colombia. the president wants us to take it out. congress appropriated -- and let me say in many of these cases we didn't appropriate the money for the specific things it was spent on. the bureaucrats did that.

we might have sent the executive branch, let's say, $3 million for foreign aid, and the executive branch, the bureaucrats there decided, under president biden, decided how the money would be spent. i know congress does not blame us -- i know congress is not blameless, bl believe me, but w didn't approve these specific items of expenditures. we approved the amounts. thing bureaucrats did the rest. the bureaucrats decided to spend $3 million for circumcision, vasectomies and condoms in zambia. you decide whether that's a priority. $3 million for sexual reproductive health in venezuela. $2.5 million for teaching young children how to make environmentally friendly

reproductive health decisions. i didn't know there was any such thing as an environmentally unfriendly reproductive health decision. $167,000 the bureaucracy has spent or is proposing to spend on free education and health care to migrants in ecuador and venezuela. $67,000 to provide insect powder to children in madagascar. mr. president, have you ever had insect powder? don't answer that. i don't think i'm even supposed to be asking you under the senate rules. but i haven't had it. in the area of lgbtqia and gender programs. again, you be the judge whether

this is something we ought to be spending your money on when we've got $36 trillion of debt. lgbtqia stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersects and the one i had to look up is intersect, someone who identifies as a man and woman. they want to spend $5 million to strengthen the resilience of lgbtq plus, and the president asked us to take it out. $833,000 for transgender people and sexual networks in nepal.

$643,000 for lgbtqia programs in the western balkans. $567,000 for lgbtqi programs in uganda. $33,000 for being lbgti in the caribbean. in the area of the climate, mr. president, the bureaucrats want to spend and president trump wants us to take it out, $6 million aappropriated for net -- appropriated for net-zero cities in mexico. $2.1 million for climate resilience in southeast asia, latin america and east africa. 416,700 for climate adaptation, including growing coral reefs,

$500,000 for rwanda do buy electric buses. your money. $8,000 to promote veeg ann food in zambia. -- vegan food in zambia. the bureaucracy has ideas about how to spend the money to the executive branch. the bureaucracy wants to spend $1 million on voter i.d. programs in haiti. if you know anything about haiti, it's a mess. they're not about to have elections any time soon. $889,000 for electoral reforms and voter education in kenya. in the area of media arts and culture, the bureaucracy proposes to spend $6 million to support media organization and

civic life in palestinian -- in palestine, and $3 million for iraqi sesame street. this is just a taste, mr. president. this list is illustrative, it's not exhaustive. so when you see us debating whether we should reduce the federal budget by $9.3 billion, which the house has already decided to do and now it's our turn, and i say -- which i have repeatedly said and will continue to say, is all the president is asking us to do is cut the spending porn from the budget. you can make up your own mind. it's your money. if you think we ought to be spending the money on this, encourage us to vote no. but if you think you could spend

this money of yours better and the -- than the bureaucracy could or we could spend on our kids or our roads or our health care, then encourage us to vote yes. thank you, mr. president. i see my colleague senator warner's here, so i will yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: i recognize the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: thank you, mr. president. bombing another country is an act of war, and last week donald trump launched around attack that could spin the united states into another endless war in the middle east. what followed from that decision can only be described as pure madness. trump declared total victory. iran threatened retaliation, americans in the region were forced to shelter in place.

trump's own team then admitted no one knows where the nuclear materials are and what nuclear capacity iran might still have. trump called for regime change and last night just for a moment, we hoped and believe there was a ceasefire only to wake up to frantic posts on social media by the president begging both sides to stop shooting missiles and rockets at each other. today the deputy commander of central command could not describe what kind of contingency plans the defense department was making or whether they did or didn't have plans for the u.s. to put boots on the ground in this middle east conflict. and the classified briefing, scheduled for right now that we should be having so that all the senators can ask questions about what has happened and what is currently happening in iran, has just been scrapped by the

republicans for another 48 hours. there is no grand plan. there is no careful effort to develop a responsible u.s. foreign policy designed to keep us all safe. once again, donald trump serves up chaos, dangerous chaos that threatens the long-term security of the american people. new reporting by cnn and "the new york times" suggest donald trump's bombing of iran failed to destroy its nuclear program. the media reports highlight that the strikes only set back iran's nuclear program by a few months. a few months while risking another war in the middle east. now, we all agree that iran should not and cannot have a nuclear weapon. we are committed to that. but the only successful strategy from iran developing a nuclear

weapon is diplomacy, something that donald trump had been pursuing right up until prime minister netanyahu began bombing iran. that is what we need right now, for all sides to come to the table to build an agreement that is sturdy and that cements lasting peace in place. but trump's reckless action backed by many republicans in congress makes it more likely that this crisis escalates into a deadly cycle of violence. trump's reckless action puts american lives at risk. trump's reckless action risks initiating another endless war that could last months or even decades as it did in iraq and afghanistan. we have the power to put a stop to this madness right now. senator kaine has introduced a

war powers resolution to stop donald trump from turning these iran bombings into another endless war in the middle east. americans don't need another war. americans don't want another war. they need and want good jobs and lower prices, and that is exactly what we should be focused on. now, when donald trump ran for president, he promised over and over and over that he would lower costs on day one. his words, on day one. and after he was elected, he was told that his policies would drive up costs. trump said he, quote, couldn't care less. now we are on day 154, and costs are up, families are paying more for gas, more for housing, more for electricity, prices are be

even going up on baby strollers or as donald trump calls them, the thing you carry babies around in. donald trump, man of the people. logically right now republicans in congress are ramming through trump's big beautiful bill. a bill that is not designed to bring down costs but will rip away health care from over 16 million people and hand that money over to every billionaire ceo who paid to be in the front row at donald trump's inauguration. for anyone who's watching, i'm here today to read into the record ten days that trump's and republicans big beautiful bill will make your life more expensive. one, your utility bills may go up. the republicans' bill will get rid of investments that we made in clean energy. now we need that energy, and the

republicans take our country backwards. it also means that the price of electricity will go up for american families like yours. two, your rent could go up. how? republicans are trying to block state and local governments from fighting schemes that predatory housing companies use to artificially jack up the price of rent. three, if you're a kid from a working-class family and you don't have the money to write one check to pay for college, republicans will make that even more expensive for you. that's right. republicans want to make it more expensive for you to go to college. they are cutting pell grants. four, republicans are making your student loan payments go up. independent experts explain that by changing how student repayment plans work, republicans could raise your

student loan payments by an average of $400 a month. five, republicans are making it more expensive to go to medical school. i cannot believe i have to say this, but rich kids should not be the only ones who can become doctors, but this bill would limit how much you can take out to go to medical school, how much you can get in loans. six, republicans are making the cost of groceries go up with this bill. they are cutting food assistance, or snap, by nearly $200 per person per year. more than seven million people will have less help, including more than four million people who will lose their food assistance all together. seven, republicans are increasing the cost of prescription drugs for millions of americans. by demanding that states require

higher copays for prescription drugs, from $4 to $35, the cost of a prescription will go up nearly 900% for people on medicaid. eight, republicans will send your affordable care act premiums skyrocketing, pushing them up by thousands of dollars and in some cases tens of thousands of dollars every year. nine, republicans will drive up the cost of private health insurance. more than half of all americans get their insurance through their employer. when a portion of the uncompensated care that happens under the republican bill, is shifted to provide insurers, experts estimate that the cost to your family will be increased by hundreds of dollars a year. and ten, republicans are ripping health care away from are rippi

insurance away entirely from 16 million people. those people who will be uninsured, the cost of essential services like x race and blood -- xrays and blood tests will go up, a trip to the emergency, god forbid there is an accident, they could go bankrupt. that is ten ways this bill could raise your costs. that's bad. but what makes this bill worse is the money you lose does not pay down the national debt or help us rebuild our roads and bridges. nope. the money you lose will be handed directly to a handful of giant corporations and billionaires in the form of new tax giveaways. yes, republicans are stealing your health care to pay for jeff

bezos's third yacht. and at the same time that working families are worried about war and are scraping together enough money to put food on the table, jeff bezos is already celebrating by renting out venus, all of venus for his $10 million wedding. wow. with control of the white house, the senate and the house of representatives decided this is what they will do with power. that decided to drive up your costs and rip health care coverage for millions of people. really? just imagine that. the republicans have virtually unlimited power, and they want to use it to kick newborn babies out of the hospital and take wheelchairs away from people with disabilities all so they can give that money to their

billionaire friends and big corporate donors. it is sickening and i am angry. i am angry because i believe it shouldn't be just rich kids who are able to afford a trip to the hospital when they fall down and break break an arm. i am angry because i believe not just babies from wealthy families should be able to go to the pediatrician with an ear infection. i'm anningly because i -- angry because it isn't just parents of wall street bankers who can pay for cancer treatments for their kids. our nation is better than that. my republican colleagues should feel ashamed. experts have run the numbers. 51,000 more people every year will die unnecessarily if this republican bill becomes law. and the republican reaction? senator joni ernst proclaimed,

well, we're all going to die. and as recently as today, mitch mcconnell is telling republicans behind closed doors that their party can take a sledgehammer to medicaid and ignore people's concerns because, quote, they'll get over it. really? seniors in nursing homes who get kicked to the curb won't get over it. little kids who find their mom or dad on the kitchen floor after they couldn't afford insulin won't get over it. parents who rely on medicaid to take care of their kid with a disability won't get over it. because, make no mistake, people won't stop getting sick. they'll just stop getting care. and it doesn't matter if you're in a red state or a blue state, either. and no, if senate republicans cut medicaid, we will not get over it. we will hold you accountable at

the ballot box. but right now, this bill is not law. we still have time to stop it, and that is exactly what we should do. democrats will vote no. we will all vote no. we just need a few courageous republicans, people who care more about working people instead of billionaires, just a few courageous republicans to join us and to stop the big, beautiful betrayal from becoming law. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the leader, the democratic leader. mr. schumer: i'd like to just briefly talk a little bit about the postponement of our hearing that was supposed to be

occurring at this time. this last-minute postponement is outrageous, evasive, derelict. senators deserve full transparency, and the administration has a legal obligation to inform congress precisely about what is happening. what is the administration so afraid of? why won't they engage with congress on the critical details, the results of the recent strike, the scope and trajectory of this conflict, the administration's long-term strategy to prevent iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, and of course, the potential risks facing american citizens and our brave servicemembers? such obstruction undermines the very principles of accountability and oversight that guard our democracy. so mr. president, if the press reporting about the impact of last weekend's strikes in iran

is true, and i cannot confirm them, then that might be the reason why the administration postponed our classified briefing today at the very last minute and deprived senators of their right to know what's happening. so, i ask again, what is the administration hiding? it's time for answers. i yield the floor, and thank my colleague from delaware for her courtesy. ms. blunt rochester: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. ms. blunt rochester: thank you, mr. president. there are moments in our lives when everything changes, when the world shifts underneath you and a new reality forms. these are moments when you remember exactly where you were, what you were doing, and who you were with. june 24, 2022, was one of those

days. three years ago, i marched with my house colleagues to the supreme court. i stood in solidarity with democrats and republicans alike. we felt shock, disbelief, anger, and sadness at the loss of one of our fundamental rights. on that day, roe v. wade was o overturned, and for many their lives were turned upside down. since then, extreme republicans and president trump have said that abortion is a states' rights issue. states' rights. yet, over the last three years, we've watched, quietly and purposefully, they have chipped away at our right. chipped away ot our bod -- at our bodily autonomy. because the goal has always been a national abortion ban. three trump-appointed supreme

court justices and the dobbs decision later, and we are still watching this unfold. anti-abortion extremists have been piecing together a puzzle that, when it's completed, will create a national abortion ban. and they add a new piece each and every day. over the next hour, my colleagues and i will lay out what the republican national abortion ban looks like, what it means for everyday americans, and what we can do about it, because these efforts will hurt all of us, especially young women, women of low income, women in rural areas, and women of color. for me, this is personal. i could have lost my daughter-in-law because she did not get the care she needed, and i remember getting a call on

christmas morning. i was in the kitchen. i was cooking. and i heard my daughter-in-law on the other end of the phone say, mom, my water just broke. it's too soon. she went to the hospital, but again, the hospital we went to could not provide the care that she needed for the miscarriage that she was having, and they sent her home. and i remember thinking about all the committee hearings that i had on the help subcommittee in the health committee in the house, and how the data was clear that we in this country have a maternal mortality crisis, that black women die three times the rate of our white counterparts, and all i could think was, we got to get you somewhere, and we did. fortunately, ebony is here alive today.

fortunately, ebony was able to have my beautiful granddaughter because of ivf, i might add. but stories like these are all too common. it disproportionately affects black and brown women. we face reproductive challenges. we have a higher mortality rate. we have higher rates of reproductive cancers. we have higher rates of preterm births. like i said, this is personal. we're here today to show the american people that we did not forget about the dobbs decision, especially because the majority of americans, democrats, republicans, and independents, believe that we should have legal and safe abortions. we're here today to tell the republican party, you can't have it both ways. you can't claim to be the party of personal freedom while telling us what to do with our

bodies. president trump, you can't claim to be the fertilization president while making it more dangerous for women to give birth. you can't claim to be the party of strong economic growth while cutting medicaid, food assistance, and child care for many women who need it to participate in the workforce. and all to give tax breaks to people who already have all of these resources. we're here today to show extreme republicans across the nation that we see what you're doing, quietly asufshling the pieces -- assembling the pieces of the puzzle. and when it is completed, it will strip americans of their access to abortion care, in red states and blue states. we're here to show just how important it is that we fight

this reconciliation bill. whether you call it a big, bad bill, whether you call it a big, ugly bill, whatever you call it, this is the moment for people to speak up, because it is just another piece of the puzzle. and we're here to shine a light on the ultimate goal of a national abortion ban. i stand here and i think about the young women that i saw as i came to this floor. i think about my niece. i think about my daughter. and i think about my grandd granddaughter, and the fact that they now have less rights than i did, than my mother did, and than my grandmother did. and that today it is important for us to not forget and to make sure that we recognize what this

is all about, and that we want the best for our young people in this country. and so, with that, i'm going to yield the floor to my colleagues. senator wyden? mr. wyden: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: thank you. i want to make sure that the country and this institution knows that the leadership of our new colleague from the state of delaware is making a difference already. she's been doing yeoman work on this for quite some time. in fact, in the other body, as it's called, the house of representatives, she stood for the values that have been expressed here today, and we so appreciate her leadership, and i thank her personally for including me. mr. president, we're on the floor to mark an anniversary of what was essentially the end of women having power over health care decisions. before roe v. wade was

overturned, many of my democratic colleagues and i warned that it would be deadly for women. we were labeled liars and gaslighters and fearmongers. unfortunately for the women of america, you don't have to take our word for it. since the dobbs ruling was handed down three years ago, 22 states have passed restrictive near or total abortion bans, and countless women have died as a direct result of those laws. in georgia, amber nicole thurman died after she developed an infection during pregnancy and was denied lifesaving reproductive care under her state's new abortion law. in texas, portia gomezi a mom of two was expecting her third child when she suddenly developed complications and began miscarrying. she died after going to the e.r. where she was denied the care she needed, and she was left, mr. president, to bleed out, all

because her doctors were too scared to perform the necessary medical care under texas' abortion law. joesly barnaca of texas was pregnant, hoping to gich her daughter another -- to give her daughter another sibling when she developed complication was her pregnancy. she rushed to the hospital, where doctors left her to suffer for 40 hours without giving her the health care she needed. that was because it was illegal under texas law. she died three days aver after developing a -- three days later after developing a preventable infection because she was denied care. despite the need for emergency medical care, states are letting women die anyway. every single one of these deaths was preventable, if republican lawmakers hadn't put abortion bans in place that threatened doctors and hospitals with jail

time and other legal actions if they provide necessary reproductive care. many of the women hurt by these abortion bans are already mothers or women hoping to start a family, but because they're being denied necessary care those that don't die are often left with complications that take away their ability to have kids in the future. in tennessee, brianna cecil had to travel out of state, to chicago, to get an abortion after a complication with her pregnancy. before returning to tennessee, she developed a recurring infection that resulted in invasive surgery that left her infertile. she says her state's strict abortion law took away her fertility. i'm going to end very briefly by fast forwarding to 2025. republicans don't seem to have learned any lessons. they don't seem faptzed by

the -- fazed by the pain and suffering they're causing. they're doubling down on efforts to restrict access to reproductive care for more women. this time, through a backdoor abortion ban in the reconciliation budget bill. this legislation contains a provision that would strip funding from planned parenthood clinics that perform abortion services. mr. president, planned parenthood does not receive a single dime, not a dime of federal funding for abortion care. these clinics do receive funding for std and annual exams. often women of color and women living in low-income communities have access to this care. all of this will be ripped away under the republican big, bad budget bill. alongside the 16 million people they plan on kicking off their health insurance with their medicaid and affordable care

cuts. before roe was overturned i warned repeated will i that the loss of privacy, loss of the right to make your most private decisions free of government intrusion would have a domino effect. unfortunately, that's become the reality. the overturn of roe has not stopped an abortion. since the dobbs ruling republican lawmakers and conservative judges have also taken aim at the use of ivf and contraception. a headline out of ohio less than one week ago reads, republican lawmakers in ohio propose total abortion and ivf ban. the end game for republicans here is a politician in every single exam room and bedroom in america, a politician between you and your doctor, between you and your spouse. the overturn of roe has stripped women in america of the right to make their own health care decisions. it has stripped women of control over their own bodies and stripped women of their basic

constitutional rights. mr. president, ever since i chaired the first ever congressional hearing on access to abortion medication back in 1990, i felt that this was a fundamental right that women were entitled to. and i am just as committed today to battling against these draconian laws as long as it takes to secure women the ability to make their own health care decisions. i see a number of my colleagues on the floor who have been eloquent speakers for women's health care. i want to close by thanking my colleague from delaware again for championing all of us to be here at this time to make sure that we made a difference and spoke out. we very much appreciate your leadership. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin

ms. baldwin: i rise do to mark three years since half of america was stripped of their reproductive freedom. that's three years of women having fewer constitutional rights and freedoms in this country than their mothers and grandmothers. three years of women being forced to travel hours out of state, to access basic care. and three years of americans unable to make their own choices about their own bodies, their own health, their own families, their own future. in wisconsin, women don't have to imagine what the consequences of roe v. wade being overturned would be like. we lived it. for 15 months in my state, women were sent back to live under a law that was passed before the civil war. yes, you heard me correctly.

a law that was passed in 1849, 70 years before women would get the right to vote and only one year after the state of wisconsin became a state. women who wanted to control their bodies had to drive hours. they had to arrange child care, take time off work, and pay for lodging just to access health care. other pregnant women in our state bled in hospital parking lots for hours until they were on the verge of death, before they were legally allowed to receive care. others like megan, one of my constituents, found out that she and her husband were expecting. they found that out in april of

2023. they told me, that day rivalled our wedding day for the happiest we'd ever been. but that joy didn't last. at her 20-week ultrasound, megan discovered that her baby had severe abnormalities and likely would not survive. what's worse, every day that megan remained pregnant, her life was in danger, too. but instead of greefbing their loss in -- grieving their loss in private and at home, megan and her husband were forced to travel to minnesota to end her pregnancy. she wrote to me last year. the government claims that if my life is at risk, they would make exceptions, but how sick does one need to be? do i need to be bleeding out before a doctor can intervene? does someone need to go septic

before a procedure would be performed? the answers to those questions under wisconsin's pre-civil war abortion ban was sadly yes. thankfully, wisconsin has restored access to abortion care in three counties. that still leaves women in 69 counties who face long drives and wait times to see a doctor for care. look, i'll be the first to say that we have some serious work to do to give women the full freedom to control their bodies. but instead of listening to the vast majority of americans and working in good faith to restore roe, my republican colleagues are doing just the opposite. the reaction' big, beautiful betrayal is another step towards

a backdoor national abortion ban. their bill will defund planned parenthood, putting access to abortion care once again in jeopardy for wisconsin women. and for many americans, planned parenthood clinics are the only option they have to affordable health care, from basic reproductive care to lifesaving cancer screenings. this big, beautiful betrayal bill says that the mother of three, the young women trying to make ends meet, the veteran in need of care, and anyone else on medicaid can't use their coverage at planned parenthood for things like annual checkups, cancer screenings, birth control. not abortion. just basic health care that everyone needs and that my republican colleagues, by the way, say they support. but by doing this, it will

defund one of the only abortion providers in many places and take republicans one step closer to their ultimate goal of banning abortion nationwide. it is no secret that this has been their plan. since the day roe was decided, it has become the admission of so many reaction to turn back the clock and take away this constitutional right, this freedom. and it's all -- and it all came to a head when our current president was last in office. our current president's litmus test when nominating supreme court justices was, of course, if they would rule to take away a woman's right to abortion. i don't think i need to tell you what happened next. but overturning roe was not

enough for president trump. in just the past five months, he has worked to undermine a woman's right to lifesaving abortion care under the emergency medical treatment and labor act, otherwise known as emtala. he has worked to freeze title 10 funding for family planning and reproductive services like birth control. he has worked to remove medically sound expert information on reproductive care from government websites. and his work to jeopardize protections for women who are harassed while accessing clinics. while republicans advance their plan that will further restrict a woman's right to choose, democrats are fighting back. today alongside every one of my democratic colleagues, i

introduced the women's health protection act to do what most americans want, restore reproductive freedom for women nationwide. i want to give a shut out to my -- shout out to my colleague, senator blumenthal, with whom i worked so closely on the women's health protection act over so many years. this bill would tell republicans to butt out of women's health care, ensuring that states can't impose medically unnecessary restrictions, like mandatory waiting periods or invasive ultrasounds that infringe upon a woman's right to choose. today we're not just marking three years since roe v. wade was overturned. we're marking three years of my republican colleagues actively blocking any progress to restore the right to choose. we're marking three years of

wome women's lives being endangered because republicans are in exam rooms and lawyers across this country are truly playing doctors. and after three years of swearing abortion is an issue for the states, this president is chipping away even further at this freedom. and my republican colleagues are advancing a plan to further undercut access to affordable reproductive care nationwide. well, we're not giving up. we're with the two-thirds of americans who oppose the dobbs decision and the fundamental rights that it stole from millions of women in this country. and we are going to fight every day until those rights are restored.

the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut mr. blumenthal: thank you, mr. president. i am so honored to follow my colleague from wisconsin who has been such a steadfast and strong partner in this effort to advance the women's health protection act. and i will be honest in this chamber. when we first introduced this measure, almost 15 years ago, the idea that roe v. wade could or would be tossed aside was unimaginable. it was firmly established law for decades, relied on by american women and men. and in a stroke of catastrophic, misguided ruling, the supreme court cast it aside.

ignoring strong precedent, all the doctrines of law that normally would apply. so the women's health protection act now is more necessary than ever before, certainly than in the days when we first offered it. and my own involvement actually in this issue began when i was law clerk to justice blackmun in the year afro v. wade. and there was still controversy about whether roe would survive. but in decision after decision, the united states supreme court reaffirmed it. and in fact as a member of the connecticut state senate, i offered a bill and it passed to codify roe v. wade in our state laws in connecticut. connecticut has led the nation

proudly in protecting reproductive rights, in safeguarding access to clinics where abortion services are provided, and fighting for planned parenthood funding in -- and protecting doctors who provide these critical services to women coming from other states that may actually criminalize that kind of care. but we know now what the challenge is and would we must do. the women's health protect act should be the law of our land, but in the meantime, we have to fight the efforts to handicap and straitjacket women in their effort simply to seek basic health care. we are in the midst of an

assault on women's health care. it's really an attack on women and families. men have a stake in this fight. you cannot escape this issue simply because you are a man. it affects you and your family as much as it does women. the decision? daubs -- the decision in daubs stripped women the freedom to make their own health care decisions. the idea that dobbs would simply return the issue to states was always disingenuous and states across the country have created a full-blown health care crisis in the chaos and confusion that has ensued since . -- he has ensued. more nan 41 million women live in states where abortion is

banned or under the threat of banning it. and the effects of dobbs don't have to be a matter of speculation anymore. i actually commissioned or requested a study from the gao in 2022 about the economic effects of dobbs. that report has just been released three years later and my first reaction was, why did it take so long? but my second reaction was, thank goodness you took that long and you did an honest and accurate appraisal of what the effects are. and here is the bottom line.

dobbs has been a death sentence, literally a death sentence for countless women, and it has been a condemnation to financial disaster for many more. this study shows inextricably the link between denial of health care and the maternal mortality rate for women and their financial distress, even if they survive. the trump administration has aggravated this problem in literally just recent weeks. on june 19, 2025, a trump-appointed federal judge struck down a biden administration rule that strengthened privacy protections for information related to

productive health care, such as abortion and gender-affirming care. on march 5, 2025, trump aunnoed his -- announced his administration would although longer enforce a federal law that requires hospitals to provide women abortion care in an emergency when their lives are threatened. when literally they could die. no longer will emergency rooms be providing that care. the trump administration began withholding tense of millions of dollars for planned parenthood and other organizations in our country that support critical family planning efforts and preventive health care including cancer screenings, pregnancy testing, birth control, treatment of sexually transmitted infections, infertility services, and more. it's not just efforts to prevent

abortion. it's a war on women's health launched by this administration. and, unfortunately, this administration is just getting started. the fact is that unsafe and unintended pregnancies have huge cost in lives and dollars, impacting all of us. and that's why i'm proud to live in connecticut, that has expanded abortion care and assured that women in other states could access compassionate care, if necessary. but the attacks by republicans continue, and they are attacks on reproductive freedom, on women's health care, seeking now to restrict access to abortion medication, refusing to recognize the right to use

contraceptives, working to defund preventive health care through medicaid in clinics like planned parenthood. so i'm proud to continue this fight. it's a fight that we absolutely must win. it may not be in the next days, but we will be fighting in the next days against the provisions of this big, ugly betrayal that so disgraces our nation. if passed. and i am grateful for all of the members on our side who are joining us today on this third anniversary of dobbs to say enough is enough. we need to protect reproductive freedoms from this onslaught against them. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

ms. cortez masto: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. ms. cortez masto: mr. president, right now this administration is causing so much chaos and confusion that it's sometime hard to take stock of the damage being done. but the anniversary of the day -- today for roe v. wade when it was overturned is a reminder that we can't let all that chaos distract us from the work being done to roll back women's reproductive rights under our noses and i have to thank my colleague from delaware, lisa blunt rochester, and all of my colleagues today, for really bringing attention, focus to the important work we do as senators but really highlighting the impact that decisions made by some of our colleagues, including those in the white house, are having a devastating impact across this country on women and women's

health care rights. one of the things that's happening right now is this republican tax bill that they're trying to force through congress right now. this tax bill essentially guts reproductive health care in this country. the republicans' billionaire tax giveaway bill -- you know it -- is a bill that will cut $800 billion in medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the wealth ciest americans. but the legislation that passed the house would also decimate women's health care. not only would it force cuts to critical services in this country, but it also cuts off medicaid funding for planned parenthood. that medicaid funding wouldn't be going towards abortions. planned parenthood providing distribute birth control, conduct wellness exams, test and

treat sti's and other screenings. planned parenthood is the only accessible source of this care for many. defunding it, which is what the republicans want to do in this reconciliation bill, jeopardizes basic health care services that more than one million men and women rely on. it's already outrageous that so many planned parenthood health care centers in antichoice states around the country have been forced to close over the last several years, but if they are prohibited from treating patients with medicaid nationwide, many clinicses, even in states where abortion remains legal -- like my state of nevada -- may be forced to close their doors. so in states like mine where women have access to essential reproductive care, republicans are working to strip that access away. ignoring the will of states,

like nevada, that have chosen to protect these rights. republican legislators in states across the country are also quietly working to gut access to reproductive care. last november voters in seven different states approved ballot measures to protect or expand reproductive rights. but in the months since, extremist politicians in more than half of those states have tried to ignore the will of their voters and push new restrictions on abortion access. and in several other states, antichoice politicians are working to block similar ballot initiatives in the future. they're trying to ignore what people have clearly voted for and then they're trying to make it so people can't actually vote on those issues at all, because let's be clear -- for antichoice politicians, this is about controlling women.

let my give you an example. -- let me give you an example. in arizona voters went to the polls last november and overwhelmingly chose to enshrine abortion protects in their state constitution. but since then republican politicians in their state legislature have been trying to pass bills that would limit the use of medication abortion and ban doctors from even informing women about abortion as a potential treatment option. or how about missouri, where antichoice politicians are trying to get a measure on the ballot that would overturn the abortion rights protections missouri voters just approved last november. these plots to subvert the will of women voters may not be catching everyone's attention right now but it is happening, and we need to shed light on it because it is just as dangerous as some of the harmful policies coming out of this administration. we can't forget that this

administration is also taking steps to take away women's reproductive rights without any input from legislators at all. the food and drug administration has appointed commissioners who want to reexamine the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone and, no surprise, department of health and human services secretary, robert f. kennedy jr. is encouraging it. h he's -- he has already asked the fda to review the latest data on mifepristone. secretary kennedy is raising questions and injecting doubt about this medication that has already been proven to be safe and effective over the years. this is a man who at one time said he believed it was always the woman's right to choose. mifepristone accounts for over 60% of abortions nationwide. any attempts to restrict access

tos this medication would jeopardize the health and autonomy of women in nevada and across the country. this is an overt tactic by the administration to continue to ake way being a -- take away access to the a bortion pill nationwide. the trump administration made it more clear than ever -- they're not concerned about i am with's safety when they eliminated guidance that hospitals have to provide abortions in emergency situations. we have a law in this country that hospitals that receive federal funding are required to provide medical care to stabilize a health emergency, including for pregnant patients. in cases where an abortion is necessary to stabilize a patient, hospitals are obligated to provide that care. it's called the emergency medical treatment and active labor act, or emtala, as many people know it. i want to stress that emtala is the law of the land.

and emergency abortion care is protected under emtala. but the problem is that this administration is telling women they are unwilling to enforce these protections. that is incredibly dangerous, and it ignores the laws. it might not be front-page news every day, but when you take all of these actions together, it is clear that this administration and republicans at every level of government are taking the steps they need to implement a nationwide abortion ban. we have to remain vigilant, demand change when these harmful policies emerge, because we know that antichoice politicians all across the country, including here in washington, will continue to push them and take away women's access to health care. it's happening at the supreme court, too. where the justices who struck down roe v. wade are taking up multiple abortion rights cases.

so, as we mark the anniversary of the decision to overturn roe v. wade, which took the constitutional trite an abortion away from every woman in this country, i want to thank my colleagues who are standing strong and standing with me today and every day in this fight. we will never stop pushing back against this administration's and any other antichoice politicians' attempts to make women second-class citizens in america. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the determine leader. short sale short sale i ask unanimous consent -- mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the following senators being permitted to speak up to iffour minutes each before the vote -- hassan, klobuchar, blunt rochester, and now me. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: thank you. so i want to thank my colleague, senator lisa blunt rochester for holding this floor block to mark a grim, very grim anniversary in

america. three years ago today, as we know, maga justices on the court eliminated the protections of roe in the disastrous, terrible, na nasty dobbs decision. in one fell swoop, hard-right justices overturned decades of precedent appeared ripped away the fundamental right to choose for millions of american women. when the dobbs decision was leaked, i stood here on the floor and said it would be, quote, one of the worst and most damaging opinions the court has handed down in modern history. and unfortunately three years later that much has proved to be true. today 21 states have significantly restricted the right to choose. at least 14 states have passed what are practically total abortion bans. in a state like texas, maternal mortality is spiking.

one in five americans today have to travel great distances, even across state lines, and wait weeks or more to get the care they need. people are dying because of the dobbs decision. and listen to this, state level restrictions on abortion combined with the lack of federal protections are costing the u.s. economy $133 billion nationally. without reproductive health care protections, fewer women are participating in the workforce, stunting our economy. it's utterly regressive. around the capitol today are women telling their stories, and they're amazing and they're heart wrenching. i stood alongside several reproductive rights advocates, including two women who was lives have been upended because of dobbs.

shanette williams and ash lynn ortiz. shanette and ashley's stories are two of the irreparable harm dobbs inflicted. there are countless more. the anti-choice fanatics in the republican party spent decades campaigning to end roe. now that the damage is done, republicans aren't backing down on this issue. as i speak republicans are trying to jam through one of the most extreme radical anti-choice positions in their big ugly betrayal. specifically, they snuck two. one defunding planned parenthood, one eliminating coverage for comprehensive reproductive care. so dobbs may have set us back, but today with senator baldwin as our lead, we will again introduce the women's health

production act to ensure health care providers have the statutory right to provide patients, patients abortion services free from bans and restrictions. the republicans know to their core how deeply unpopular their abortion bans are and that's why many senate republicans tried to run waep from the dobbs decision at first, but unfortunately they're back to their normal ways trying to achieve a total nationwide ban. senate democrats will continue to stand together and fight back against republicans every step of the way. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. has has thank you, mr. president. i rise with my colleagues to stand up for the freedom of american women. ms. hassan: i want to thank senator blunt rochester and my colleagues for leading this effort on the floor this afternoon. in new hampshire, we proudly call ourselves the live free or die state, and today i'd like to

take a moment to reflect on what the dobbs decision, a decision that represents the largest attack on freedom in modern american political history, means not only for the future of american women but even more fundamentally for freedom in our democracy itself. it's difficult to keep up with the trump administration's attacks on freedom, with attacks on our rights to due process, freedom of speech and expression, freedom to vote and more. perhaps the president hopes that with each cascading outrage the american people will forget that he set in motion the events that led to the supreme court taking away freedom from half of our population. the fundamental freedom of a woman to make her own health decisions. but of course we haven't forgotten. we americans have never been inclined to forget attacks on

our liberties. what did the dobbs decision mean? it took away a woman's freedom to make deeply personal health decisions. the freedom to decide when and if to start a family, the freedom to get lifesaving care when a woman's health is imperilled while pregnant. this is more than a freedom to get a specific medical procedure. in practice, we're talking about the freedom to chart one's own future, a freedom which should be enjoyed by all free and equal citizens in a democracy. but with the dobbs decision, for the first time in our country's history, our daughters are now less free than their mothers were at their age. since the dobbs decision, we've become a country where a fundamental freedom can vanish once a woman crosses a state line. we've returned to a kind of sexualism of bygone eras that history should have taught us to

avoid. where women who are pregnant and live in states with draconian laws banning abortion know that in the event of a dire medical emergency they may have to make a long drive to cross state lines or run the risk of being thrown in jail for just trying to get lifesaving care. this isn't hypothetical. already lives have been imperilled and even lost. and experiences that we've heard from georgia, florida, texas, and in states all across the country. indeed, at this very moment members of this body are seeking to pass legislation, the republican budget bill, which would, among other measures, make it impossible for many women to get the care that they need and shut down women's health care clinics all across the country. their legislation is be effectively the final step in establishing a back door national abortion ban. so to my republican colleagues,

please stop singing the same song to us that the women of america are being alarmists, a song that we heard before roe was overturned and that we've continued to hear since. i want to know just when exactly in the process of having one's freedom stripped away are we allowed to become alarmed. are we only allowed to be concerned about losing a fundamental freedom once that freedom has become nothing more than a memory? ultimately behind all of this talk of laws and precedent, of states statute and federal, the anniversary of the supreme court overturning roe begs us to ask a question as simple and fundamental as they come, a question that the opponents of reproductive freedom and the president himself ought to answer. when our declaration of

independence declared that all are created equal, does that promise belong to american women or do we believe that truth is not self-evident after all? when the suffer jets at seneca falls wrote they insist women have immediate admission to the rights and privileges that belong to them as citizens of the united states, do we still believe those words or were the suf suffragettes wrong? do we believe the full blessings of liberty belong to our daughters as well as our sons? can a democracy like ours persist when divided by state lines half its people live half free? in the end that's what this debate is really all about. what is it on this anniversary that america's women ask for?

it's simple. they want what all americans want. their aspiration is to be free. and so long as we wish to call ourselves the world's greatest democracy, the president and this body would do well to remember our country's promise and heed their call. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. ms. klobuchar: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: mr. president, i rise today on the third anniversary of the supreme court's decision to shred nearly five decades of precedent protecting a woman's right to make her own health care decisions. to say that now is the time to protect freedom. and i appreciated the words of senator hassan from the state of new hampshire, a state grounded in freedom, for her focus on freedom. i also thank senator lisa blunt rochester for bringing us together today. in the three years since the

supreme court went against the 70% of americans who believe that health care decisions should be made by a woman, with her family and her doctor, instead of by politicians, women have been at the mercy of a patchwork of state laws that are creating chaos when it comes to accessing reproductive health care. today 20 states partially or fully ban abortion affecting more than 31 million women across the country. i ask why women in minnesota should have different rights, different fundamental rights than women in texas. why a woman in oregon should have different rights than a woman in georgia. women are also being forced away from emergency rooms and left to travel hundreds of miles for health care. and doctors are being threatened with prosecution for just doing their jobs.

in texas a pregnant teenager died after being denied care at three different hospitals. i'll never forget the gut-wrenching testimony i heard from another woman, amanda zowelsky at a senate judiciary committee hearing. she nearly died from sepsis after being forced to carry her still born daughter willow to term due to texas's abortion ban. it was a heartbreaking story. president trump has made clear that he was and is, in his own words, proudly the person who ended roe v. wade. and his administration is continuing its assault on women's reproductive freedom. the trump administration has rolled back policies that protect access to lifesaving abortion care during medical crises. it has announced it will be putting mifepristone under review, despite the fact that the american medical association stated that, quote, there is no

evidence that people are harmed by having access to this safe and effective medication, end quote. that has been on the market, i would add, for more than two decades and is safely used in 90 countries. but the trump administration has decided, well, we know better, we know better than the american medical association, we know better than the women of the country that have been using this medication safely. we know better than 90 other countries. and the president is putting forward nominees to the federal bench, including ones that i have recentently questioned, with a demonstrated hostility to reproductive freedoms. republicans are also seeking to pass a budget that would leave 1.1 million patients who rely on planned parenthood health centers for critical and lifesaving services like cancer screening, sdi tests and treatments and birth control

among other things with nowhere to go. we are at a pivotal moment for women's rights in this country. are we going to continue to move forward? are we going to be sent further back in time? enough is enough. my colleagues have made clear today we refuse to back down, we refuse to give up. we will not settle for a world in which our daughters and our granddaughters have fewer rights than their moms and fewer rights than their grandmas. we need to codify the protections of roe v. wade into law once and for all and guarantee the right to access care. that's why we must pass the women's health protection act. the first step in addressing the devastating reproductive health care crisis that dobbs unleashed, and keep fighting any effort to deprive women of the health care we need and deserve. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president.

the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. ms. blunt rochester: mr. president, as i close out this time, i had written prepared remarks for my closing, but a word keeps ringing over and over in my head, and that is freedom. and as i stand here, why today is so important is because it is again another chip chipping at our freedoms. i stand here as a black woman who has in our history knowledge of what it means for your bodily autonomy to be taken. i stand here today looking at a picture of my granddaughter who i want to have the same rights

that i had growing up. today we -- today we mark a three-year anniversary, but we also have an opportunity to commit to what our future will look like. this very week we potentially will see a bill on this floor that will again chip away -- chip away at health care when we know that 40% of the births in this country are through medicaid. chip away at our rights. and so i thank my colleagues for their powerful words today. i thank all of the advocates who came and spoke to us today, all of the individuals who are still fighting the good fight to make sure that we have the rights that we deserve. i will end with a story of an

individual who i just met food -- i just met today. her name is nancy davis, and she was a patient in louisiana. she said when i was ten weeks pregnant, doctors informed me that my baby had a rare condition that was fatal for my baby and dangerous for me. naturally i was heart broken and scared, but i trusted i would receive the necessary medical treatment so that my family and i could begin healing. unfortunately, i was wrong. just a few weeks before i received my diagnosis, the supreme court issued the decision in the dobbs health care decision, overturning roe v. wade. the fallout from that decision was fast with states across the country starting to have

dangerous abortion bans. my state of louisiana has some of the strictest laws in the country, even though i needed to terminate my baby to protect my own health, i could not go to the hospital in baton rouge. i could not grieve the loss of my pregnancy, i had to get out of louisiana to access abortion care. i found a situation i never thought i would be in, forced to travel 1500 miles to get the care i needed and deserved. i experienced not just the denial of necessary medical care but the denial of compassion and the right to make my own decisions about my own health. i felt dehumanized and stripped of my most fundamental rights. i knew what i needed to do to protect my health and my doctors

agreed, but local lawmakers who will never know me or understand my situation had the final say. the system failed me. and i am just as outraged today as i was then. today let's turn that outrage into action. spread the word about what is coming to this floor. make sure that people stand up. use their voices, use this moment. freedom, that's what this is about. freedom. i yield back. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. barrasso: i ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum call with respect to the dabbar nomination. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the

nomination of paul dabbar, of new york, to be deputy secretary of commerce, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the mandatory quorum call under rule 22 has been waived. is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of paul dabbar, of new york, to be deputy secretary of commerce shall be brought to a close? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule, the clerk will call the roll. vote: rooks. ms. baldwin. mr. banks. mr. barrasso. children katie and we'll are watching from work and college

but i greatly appreciate the support when i was undersecretary. also here today is my former boss former integer secretary and my time is governed in and in the new academy. my nomination is confirmed it'll be the 4th time i will have sworn to support and defend the united states constitution. the first time when i was 17 years old after my appointment by former senator don nichols for induction day at the naval academy but my second time was when i was commissioned and i join the nuclear submarine force and had the honor to serve in many operations including deployment to the arctic with the arctic research laboratory with a team supported by noah had my third time occurred when i was sworn in as undersecretary. since my time in the navy my

career has spanned in technology and i started to technology companies want an energy tech and another a spin-off ofmr caltech. i stayed involved inma public policy and spoke right rear before congress serving as a fellow at columbia university and the contributor of "the wall street journal" the hoover institution and elsewhere. during president trump's first term i was honored to serve and support undersecretary of science at the department of energy managing research and operations at the national laboratories are during my tenure i worked with many members on driving america forward on science and technology. i lead a robust effort to the environmental cleanup efforts from our nuclear weapons program. i was the lead on the competing program would set it for number one computers including the first use in and many of them were completed ahead of schedule

and under budget. i also led the national quantum initiative. everbrook three decades of issues in environmental management stanford and elsewhere and completed large nuclear projects including several ahead of schedule and under budget. it's undersecretary worked extensively with the department congress bureaus including uspto noaa -- know when eps but as a senior executive of jpmorgan leaving several hundred billion dollars in global investment helping her efforts in global commodities trading including energy and critical materials. i'm excited to join the commerce department in my experience will fit me for this position. as an exciting time for the sectors covered by the department coming with commercial competitiveness and trade are clearly at the front and center of many issues. additionally science and

technology efforts including ai, semiconductors, quantum intellectual property and technology security are also at the forefront. my significant experience across the scope of the department will enable me to manage and lead various bureaus from experience and trade to the private-sector. delete technology security efforts dis my science and technology background starting up a quantum communications company just to name few. i have deep experience in managing large government efforts. and finally i have the persistence to get things done. their challenge is that many magnitudes but i completed 846-mile triathlon and i am one of the few people who have been to both the geographic north and south poles but i was honored

and humbled to see support from the senate for my last confirmation including being confirmed by unanimous consent. today i humbly ask for every. member's vote and support for my nomination. thank you and i look forward to answering your questions. nick thank you and just to clarify the record members of this committee will not be required to run an ironman. you are encouraged to run an ironman if you feel so inspired that you will be -- i climbed mount fuji but i was 19. i have my past that behind me and i encourage them to a half ironman when i was a d.o.e. and i got significant h.r. pushback on pressuring them. understandably. i will say on the republican side of the aisle two of our

members markwayne mullin and dave mccormick are both former accomplished wrestlers in more than if you lose it than trying to arrange a cage match because we think would sell a lot of tickets.ey we have been unsuccessful in scheduling that but hope springs eternal. i'm sure she he makes all the difference in perspective. the work at hand your experience at the department of energy your two decade career as financial manager and access the quantum technology make she qualified for this position but tell us why you want to be debbie secretary? as they mentioned senator this is an exciting time for the scope and obviously. as mentioned by you and the ranking members are front and center. i have a significant amount of background in the private-sector and the bureaus that are primarily science and technology.

no patent office, the chipsets. those and others for tia. our science and technology efforts and i have a great background in that i'm very passionate about each and every one of those areas. gets you and i discussed in my office yesterday the president's that this administration has two paths forward. one path that is very positive and one path that is very negative for the positive path president trump has an extraordinary leverage toraordinary leverage negotiate lower tariffs from our trading partners in exchange for lowering their tariffs that we threaten to impose on them critically and a 306090 days from now in a world where we have got markedly lower tariffs across the globe that would be an historic victory for americans, for american jobs for american workers. on the other hand the second half we could go down as the

path that maintains very high tariffs in perpetuity. american tariffs on our trading partners and we can expect retaliatory tariffs from our trading partners. i believe that would be a bad pathway. i believe that would be a path that would hurt texas and would hurt america. what is your view of which path is preferable to the administration to take? >> so the president has been very clear and i support the president potential cup which meant that trade and one of them may be to drive out barriers of tariffs and non-tariff barriers in our trading counterparties for another one is to re-industrialized the u.s. to the loss of jobs especially in the wto and the prc as industrial jobs and national

security yourself and many others here talk about the national security impact of the trade deficits and the last one is potentially revenues. i am not certain of the exact negotiations between the various parties but i can certainly see that some negotiations may be more focused on the accomplishments and some might be others. for example i've testified many times to china national security issues and i certainly think we can talk about the prc national security and reindustrialization is going to be much more focused in the likely outcome of the negotiations. >> i recognized you will not be the ultimate decision-maker when it comes to the president trade policies that you'll be one of the voices in the room and i hope you will be a voice in the room advocating for using, these tariffs as leverage to secure freer and fairer trade because i think that's the right direction

through the administration to go but let me shift to a different topic for the department congress is the allocation and management of spectrum. last year senator blackburn and i introduced a bill to restore the fcc's authority and establishing clear actionablerr spectrum pipeline one that empowers commercial businesses to invest, innovate and create jobs. we now have the opportunity to advance the pipeline through reconciliation which will not only bring in significant funding to the treasury, but will help unleash american prosperity room market investing -- innovation investment could notably the build is not contain the various constraints of the various parties in determining how. it provides instead of framework for success. it also enhances our national security. any agency that becomes more

efficient will receive significant funding. the ntia will play a lead role in the federal government spectrum management agency. do you agree that it's important for federal government to make spectrum available for commercial use and this could be done without compromising national security. >> yes. >> tell this committee with the benefits are of making spectrum available. >> thereto in particular mr. chairman that i would highlight. one if satellite 5g which is at the early stage and one i'm particularly focused on if i'm lucky to be confirmed as satellite, where the u.s. needs to jump forward to the next competitive battlefield of the deer seen the utilization of spectrum to get the 5g and satellite also 60 satellites which hopefully by the end of my

term if i'm selected to be confirmed we will move forward on that and show leadership on that. >> i very much agree it's critical that america when the race for 5g and for 60 and would not fall behind china and we find ourselves in a world where china and huawei in particular has provided the global architecture for telecommunications worldwide and that would do enormous damage to our economic security and our national security and i trust he will work this new role to prevent that from happening. thanking mr. chairman. again appreciate working together with you on moving quantum. do you support the chips and science act. >> yes i've been on the record testifying in support of that. if you believe in honoring the. >> i'm not familiar with actual

agreements under the chips fact that the commerce department but the present -- that. >> be no assigned an agreement with company and allocated resources, barring any major problems? secretary lutnick and the president have been clear about how to take the resources under the chips and science act and how to get the most bang for the buck for the taxpayer. i think the president's made the announcement in secretary lutnick was just arizona on the announcement around tsmc moving from one to $65 billion to three and 165 billion with no additional chips support. i think that's a great example of taking the chips at subsidies and supported how to get the most out of it within agreement. i'm not familiar for example

with all of the agreements. >> i have more questions and i saw the secretary lutnick last night in the identified how much he enjoyed being there but i'll tell you this comes this committee in the last administration got that done. you feel like you get to rearrange some of the chess pieces but the president of united states is not for chips and science and all those having to push back every single day is. this is policy that will make the united states competitive and so i just need to know you're going to be one of these people who will make it harder for us. that's all we want to know. will you commit to maintaining this budget and the other r&d programs that are under the agency? >> yes. >> what about the money for tech column. >> yes as appropriated and authorized i certainly note of

it about the tech hubs but assuming it's funded and authorized. >> what about moving marine fisheries out of noaa to the interior i only know what i read in the newspaper about different potential proposals but i do knew that over time various proposals have been made about noaa including the last congress about separating them so i would review any sort of her postal given the decade son noah. >> i get this may not be one of your areas of expertise but if you could hone up on this for the record. science and no helps us manage our fisheries and right now we are being taken advantage of by the chinese and the russian's. if you don't want to be more just enabled the noah to advocate for fisheries my colleague from alaska whose here

we want to be more empowered to fight and fight the injustices against the united states. we see huge opportunity for the department congress to provide that leadership and we talk about a trade issue and you talk about fisheries and the unfairness of what's happening but we need the science and we need that agency to be perceived on its r&d and what about the research that's being imposed and eliminated? than to address your first senator while i was undersecretary for science we have a smaller than no of that had a number of topics around fish and atmospheric sciences. we had one plane rather than several with a history of that on nuclear weapons and so one but fish as you know senator cantwell we have researched in washington state along the rivers and swim which is another

facility and its oak ridge. >> i have one more question to ask you. i got that you welcome back to me on this one. on the spectrum issues the warfare of the teachers in the skies, correct? to warfare future is in the sky skies correct? >> apsley senator. >> given dod and interference that hurts our work capabilities for the future. is that correct? >> i absolutely need to be careful. i do have a bit of a technical background in us. they are many people working on how you use the spectrum from a technical point of view more efficiently. in addition to just let the spectrum set-aside is but also how to manage it better -- than they did nobly uncompromising dod? >> absolutely not. as the nick thank you.

>> senator sullivan. >> thank you mr. chairman. her dabbar i'm impressed by your background and your extremely qualified and i plan on supporting you. you mentioned your father helped get lng from alaska sold to japan. is that correct? he worked for philips 66 in the late 60s selling lng to tokyo gas. that's great. that. >> i saw the secretary lutnick or he mentioned to me and i agree with senator cruz we have enormous leverage with the huge tariffs. one thing we are trying to do is get our allies to commit. we purchased alaskan lng from a large scale lng project that we

are now working on. the secretary of the land board without any mentioned to me last night. so is the president of the u.s. trade rep are going to get your commitment to work with them on the opportunity we have in this huge strategic opportunity for our country. >> yes, senator. american energy superpower status we are in a better position than ever before on energy for positive trade. and speaking of superpower like to refer to alaska's superpower seafood. two-thirds of all seafood harvested for commercial sport assistance in all the fish are reduced harvests in america only two-thirds comes from alaska. >> we are multibillion-dollar industry multibillion-dollar exporter so secretary lutnick during his confirmation said he wanted to the quote the godfather of the american

fisherman. i don't know if there's another phrase i can use like constabulary or something like that but can you commit to making this a high priority, then the questions during his confirmation hearing can i get your commitment on that? >> yes sir. >> we are off to a good start and then fisheries we are unleashing alaska's extraordinary potential and an executive order from president trump on day one includes fisheries lng and all kinds of great things in alaska. a couple of days ago restoring america's seafood competitiveness so we are off to good start and i want to commend the president and secretary lutnick on their team but i am concerned to senator cantwell point and this is a big issue. that we don't have the staffing to do two things occur mers have -- commerce up to do for

fisheries. unlike chips and science accorded the trillion dollar subsidies my guys don't get subsidized at all for the federal government has to do two things or they need to do robust surveys to perform accurate stock assessments and need to do timely regulations open fisheries and that's it. when the federal government doesn't do that use grew the hard-working fishermen of alaska and america's catch. they have to compete with russia and china and to be honest right now it's not starting to look good and i'm starting to get really upset. biden was on the service. he threw a ton of money at noah and the guy did climate change and all that they didn't do the blocking and tackling of noah which is stock assessment service. when you guys came in and said he met where going to be like. i'm getting really worried you guys are doing it either. when you don't do stock

assessment service might fishermen can't fish. they don't go to in the 40 billion in subsidies but all they need is a survey. it's not happening. at the whole list i'm going to mention them here andrn i hope someone from commerce is watching. you aren't doing surveys. that's the basic stuff you're supposed to do it noaa. so mike i can't fish. they want subsidies and they just want the fish. can i get your commitment that i hope someone from noah's watching it. i have a whole list that i looks like you aren't going to complete. if commerce is watching this right now get out with a survey. can i get your commitment? you seem to that route -- rattled about this. >> i read your proposed bill the latest one and also

understanding research for examples, and in alaska were some things are going strong and some things are weaker and i'll certainly commit on that also. we just need your commitment to get the money to the survey. and if we are feeling on this it's not good. let me ask one final question. we are trying to get the secretary to sign it contract for noah. that home reporting kodiak alaska coming up for contract and needs to be signed this week to idaho commerce people are watching. sign the contract we can do the survey from the dice and noah survey. that's not signed in the next couple of days they won't feel the due survey so again taking care of our fishermen which is in the presence deo but we have to fail to support them.

can i get your commitment on that and maybe find the contract like today-that i will follow up and their people listening to you. >> it's really, really important. >> i recognize senator klobuchar >> thank you mr. chair. i am watching the timberwolves beat the l.a. lakers for the record. we are very excited. so i appreciate your background very much in your commitment to science and economic opportunity. i'm from a state that 15 fortune 500 companies mayo clinic a big medical device presence. we are literally on the cusp of

economic expansion and with everything from mapping of the human genome to the work that's been done on ai and i'm going to ask about this. but i am concerned to my colleagues have asked you about the tariff setting us backwards. not everyone liked him cook and get into the white house that my company with a high chair stuff busy babies can't get in there. she can't get investment doesn't know which tariffs they will change in what's going to happen so i hope you will be a voice on that front. the first question i have national foundation grants administration has cut off hundreds of these including at the university of minnesota. this is scientific research going on which is very exciting. we commit to funding it and commit to restoring funding or

the nsf grants? >> so commerce doesn't fund nsf. i'm familiar with this i was undersecretary and we do work with nsf there and elsewhere. certainly it's a very important aspect of the funding research but i don't have that scope. the will you be an advocate for this a better word. think i will certainly support s&p investment and i think as you know senator when the sequester was lifted last night the president signed the quantum built the ai bill and so on. that was certainly part of the supporting that in executing that. >> speaking of ai he knows how a lot of bipartisan work over here senator do not deny the base gopher non-defense applications of ai. talk about your priorities and what they would be for ai and if we can put in place any

guardrails. >> it's a long topic. i will try senator. .. currently i will be residing if i'm selected to be confirmed but using a.i. for utility operations, power plants and storms you could use this there is a long list. i want to try to facilitate all the different opportunities including within the scope of commerce. >> can ask and it ran for several of the vote in place. because even the companies what this we can talk about it more

back-and-forth are made about it. rural exports. senator hoeven and i passed legislation on this. foreign commercial service but in a lot of areas a big company might have full-time trade expert on a certain part of the world. rural export center and fargo is the world small businesses to access international markets. you may not be familiar with the details but we do commit to supporting the work of the commerce department with real exports. >> yes senator. >> okay, thank you. we talked about chips in science broadband program had confirmation come to this committee on them. we, as you know allocated a lot of money and not cannot quite get what we do not want to get back into that whole history. but we do need to get it out of you committed to getting that funding out to the states and to work?

alexia senator. >> thank you very much. thank you for being here and thank you for serving your country for the fourth time. appreciate it look forward to having you confirm. worked on what innovations in the near and dear to my heart. i recently introduced a very bipartisan bill you are committed to implementing that properly when it gets passed. by both chambers. for the evolution of technology. growth of a regular bill certainly support an american leadership and block chain. now that in the background look forward to have you run, help

secretary run commerce. the government and the private sector. just more money always equal better results? >> note senator. sometimes the opposite, right? that is something most people would not run organizations would feel that's an odd paradigm. typically more people, more money the problem throw money at it throw people out of canute's talk about what you've seen in your experience why that's a fallacy? >> a lot of times money can be spent are things that are not needed is a good way of putting it. so i'll give you an example when as undersecretary for science we were just winning the nobel prize in chemistry. but the department was still spending money on lithium ion

battery discovery science not scaling, not manufacturing but discovery science. we're spending something we won the nobel prize on that was a declaration of that was not a really great place to keep on spending money on something that victory on so we refocused the money on the future. i think that is an example the right way to think about where the taxpayer money should be looking at. >> we talk about cuts and assessments of different programs at something essential to see where is the money most efficient and is setting up better processes, better systems and taking advantage of technology is a much better way to go than randomly throwing a bunch of money at a problem.

>> absolutely i'll be at mildly dangerous and bring up there is a lot of money spent for a very long period of time. a lot of different directions almost paraphrasing for many years ago heading in a lot of directions when the senator looked at me eight years ago and said can you say were going to focus on the things that work rather than things that are not working not pivot back-and-forth and get things done one of the proudest things i think the two of us and others addition was the last couple of days of the previous administration was to call up the senator and say we completed construction. >> shifting gears again. twenty-five years ago we are our 25th year anniversary of what i think is the most toxic's most outrageous bill in the history denizens of america which is the u.s./china normalization active gdp of china at that point in time 25 years ago 1.2 trillion

dollars. it's projected to be 20 million next year who won and who lost? >> the a session of china to wto in the normalization was very, very import to the u.s. economy and in particular to the manufacturing workers of 5 million people lost their jobs. given the velocity of money and you can multiply that by five or six. we lost about 25 -- 30 million jobs talk certainly manufacturing jobs for the 5 million or you could live, provide for family, retired dignity? dignity and middle-class jobs is what was lost because of that. >> the crux of what happened in your mind if we just ignored it?

we said look we can make cheap goods and some other country and bring them into the united states where we would be in 10 years? >> the trends we're seeing around the fentanyl, the transgressing in small town america that really accelerate over the last 20 years because of that collapse of manufacturing and related jobs. i think you will see that continue. what would like to recognize senator baldwin the. >> thank you. congratulations on your nomination. and to pick up on a point our ranking member made in her opening comments. when congress passed the bipartisan infrastructure law, we included bipartisan amendment in this committee that put the

minority business agency into statute. our intention was to invest in entrepreneurs and small businesses by expanding the reach of business centers to provide high quality technical assistance in assisting to access with capital in contrast in supporting job creation that recent bipartisan accomplishment led by many members of this committee on a bipartisan basis has been dismissed by this administration that set on a limited the agency and close the business centers and our states. president trump and dismantling the minority business develop an agency issued an executive order that requires a report. that report needs to explain which function and agency are statutorily required route which is what we did in this committee

will be included our amendment. my call for that report have gone unanswered. so, if confirmed i will be following up with you to get that report and the answers on the minority business development agency. can i count on you to be responsive? >> i will certainly make certain we respond to your letter. the majority whip. mr. barrasso: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: mr. president, i have four requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and the minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. barrasso: i ask unanimous consent that the senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions which are at the desk. s. res. 298, 299, and s. res. 300. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will

proceed en bloc. mr. barrasso: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table all en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stands in recess until 3:30 p.m. on wednesday, june 25, that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of calendar number 140, paul dabbar and the senate vote on confirmation at 4:5. and following disposition of the dabbar nomination, the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on calendar number 93, kenneth kies and if cloture is invoked on the kies nomination, the senate vote on confirmation at the time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the democrat leader on thursday, june 26.

finally, if any nominations are confirmed during wednesday's session of the senate, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: mr. president, if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand in recess until the previous order following the remarks of senator merkley. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

mr. merkley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from from oregon. mr. merkley: i ask consent to -- vin since for june 24, 20e 25, and emma singleton for july 24, 2025. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you, mr. president. i've come to the floor to talk about debt. and more precisely how the republican party has been driving massive increases in debt over the last couple decades. both in two ways. the first way is by particular legislative acts primarily tax bills that have created enormous debt. and the second is by steadily eroding the framework for budgeting and controlling our difference between our revenues and our expenditures that was created in 1974. if we want to think about the big factors that have been

driving up deficits and therefore debt, the big factors in recent history, war in afghanistan, massive. war in iraq, massive. the bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. the trump tax cuts of 2017. these were huge factors in vastly reducing revenue primarily by giving enorous giveaways -- enormous giveaways to the very richest americans. well, that's not all the republican party has been up to in terms of driving massive increases in deficit and debt. they've also been hard at work destroying the infrastructure that all hundred senators agreed to back in 1974 to get a handle on debt. let's return to the deficits of

1971, 1972, 1973. those deficits on average were $20 billion. $20 billion compared to $2 trillion now. and yet that $20 billion in deficit, average deficit over those three years was enough to have the members of the senate and the members of the house say we have to get this under control. if we don't get this under control, we're going to undermine the ability of our work to provide a good foundation for families to thrive in the future. through good, strong programs for housing and health care and education. good, strong programs to create good-paying jobs. we're going to undermine all of that, the future, for the next generation if we run up these deficits. so they created a 1974 act. that 1974 act had a couple

different visions. one was a regular budgeting process. that regular budgeting process was laid out. this is the way that you can at the front end of the fiscal year, you can lay how the a provision for how much you're going to spend and how much revenue you're going to create and those expenditures will be laid out committee by committee and then we'll hold people by it and we can basically do what a family does -- have control over our income and our outgo. our revenue and our expenditures. and, therefore, control over deficits. that was the vision. now, that bill also created something completely separate from that, and that was called reconciliation. and reconciliation is a special

fast-track, filibuster-free path for one reason it was created. all 100 senators agree to reduce the deficit. you can think of senator robert byrd, who was the fiercest defender of the filibuster -- that is the 60 votes required to close debate -- yet even he said yes, i'm fine setting aside that power that gives strength and leverage to the minority for the purpose of reducing the deficit, that one purpose. well, that was in 1974. now let's go fast-forward 22 years later. you have a republican house and a republican senate. it's the back end of the gingrich revolution. the election that occurred in 1994, with people sesqui from 9195 -- people serving from 1995

to 1997s. let's give the president a line-item visa total of so that programs can be struck down by the president of the united states. and the supreme court said, not so fast. the constitution is very clear. it gives the power of the purse to congress, not to the president of the united states. if you want to give the power to decide what's spent to the president, well, then you have to do a constitutional amendment. well, that was the end of the line-item veto. and then the next thing was turned to, well, delete a balanced budget amendment. well, a balanced budget amendment requires two-thirds of each chamber of those duly elected to say yes to the bill. then it has to be sent out, because a constitutional amendment to be confirmed by three-quarters of the state, that's a big undertaking. in the senate, it was one vote

short of having the 67 votes it needed to be passed. well, that was a very frustrating situation to be in, one vote short, and then the leaders of the house and senate, the republican leaders of the house and senate, said well, you know, we have this other objective. we want to do a tax bill that will give vast sums of the u.s. treasury to the very richest americans, and we know democrats won't stand for that, so we can't do it through regular order. let's take that special reconciliation bill, that reconciliation process created in 1974 only for deficit reduction, and let's repurpose it to do deficit increases. but there's a problem there. the whole history was quite clear, and you had 22 years of precedent to back up the plain

language. so what's to be done? well, the leader of the senate, robert dole, brought in a new parliamentarian, robert dove, who then created a ruling saying, despite the bill, what it says, and despite the 22 years of precedence, this fast-track can be used to do tax breaks and increase the deficit. well, that was a core pillar of the 1974 bill, a fast-track only for deficit reduction. a filibuster-free path only for deficit reduction. and my republican colleagues tore it down. they didn't use it immediately because president clinton, a democrat, was in the oval office, and as it turned out, a

deal was worked out on other issues, so though didn't do that tax bill until bush came in in 2001 and then they used that power created in 1996. the reason i'm going through this is to convey that my colleagues, who have talked about fiscal responsibility, have been misleading america. because while they talked about fiscal responsibility, in practice they've been running up massive deficits and debt for the people of this country. through the war in afghanistan, through the war in iraq, through the 2001 tax bill that bush put forward, through his 2003 tax bill, through the trump 2017 tax bill, and they've been destroying the discipline for the special reconciliation process that was designed only for deficit reduction. but that nuclear event of 1996

in which black became white and white became black, the total betrayal of those senators who voted, 100 of them, for a special filibuster-free process only for deficit reduction, a total betrayal of them. but two things survived -- one was that there would be no ability to use reconciliation for deficit creation, increases, outside of the ten-year window. and the third was continuing to use honest numbers. the joint committee on taxation for revenue, the congressional budget office for expenditures. in fact, cbo was created by a 1974 bill. so nonpartisan entities that would give us honest numbers, so we would quit lying to ourselves

about what a tax change provision would mean. we'd be honest with our severs. it's like a family. a family doing their budget, if they say, well, we're only going to go out to dinner once a month to save money, but the reality is they know that they're going to go out to dinner ten times a month, they're just deceiving themselves. so they're putting something in their did you thinking -- in their budget that isn't real. so the idea was integrity. integrity with ourselves, integrity with the american people. so this brings us to this moment. those two pillars of fiscal responsibility that survived the 1996 nuclear action by my colleagues, the two pillars that survived -- one, no deficits after ten years, no increase in deficit after ten years; and,

second, using honest numbers -- those are under complete assault right now. and it's through something that is called, by my republican colleagues, a current policy baseline. well, let me explain what this means. normally you have a bill and there's a provision in the bill, and that provision says, do this. and it goes to the joint committee of taxation, and they say it's a revenue measure. here's how much money it will raise as compared to not having that provision in the bill. not having that provision in the bill as current law, putting the provision in the bill, is the vision that's being costed out for honest decision-making. so here is the provision. how much will it cost? here is a change in a program. how much will that cost? that's the normal process. and that's the normal process of integrity in any utahing abouting process. we're -- in any budgeting

process. we're going to make a change in what we're doing. how much will it cost? but along comes the decision by my colleague, who i work with so well on so many things, but on this i profoundly disagree with him, the chair of the budget committee, and says let's stop doing that process where there is a provision in the bill that changes the law, and, therefore, we will estimate how much it costs. instead, he says, we will simply pretend that a provision in the bill that ended a tax break and now the provision continues that tax break and, therefore, it costs money, we'll pretend that all along weigh knew that it would -- we knew that it would go on forever, and, therefore, costs nothing. well, this is a type of smoke and mirrors that the entire 1974

act was designed to stop. let's stop pretending. let's stop trying to camouflage what things cost when we make decisions, when we pass laws here. let's be honest with ourselves. let's be honest with the american people. so this strategy, how is this to be accomplished? well, my colleague, the chair of the budget committee, looks to a provision, section 312, in the law. so let's talk about section 312. section 312 is a provision not in section 313, which is for reconciliation. section 312 is completely separate, and it has never been used in reconciliation, and it was designed to resolve small technical changes. so let's look at the record of 312. again, this provision says the

chair -- actually, it says the budget committee, not the chair, but the budget committee has authority to resolve some technical problems that occur in the process of normal budget bills. not reconciliation, normal budget bills. so here are the times it's been used, this provision from 312. it has always been used in a bipartisan way, always with consultation, support from democrats and republicans, to resolve a technical issue. for the first time my colleague, the chair, of the budget committee is saying, we're going to use it in a partisan fashion, where there's no agreement worked out on how to solve a technical issue. we're going to do something that's pure partisan because we want to hide the cost of this reconciliation bill. a second point is that section

312 has never been used in a broad fashion. it's always been about a narrow provision. again, not in a reconciliation bill. it's been used to routinely enforce spending allocations by committee, it's been used for the crime victims fund, it's been used for the power marketing administrations, it's been used to prevent double count of adair -- of a dairy program. it made some adjustments to the fiscal responsibility act, all of these done in a bipartisan way on a very narrow issue. and then there's now, where it is no longer a narrow issue. it's about the entire cost of the bill. 312 has been used to resolve ambiguities. again, each and every time, resolve ambiguity in a bipartisan way on narrow issue,

except now it's not about resolving ambiguity. it's about lying to the american people about what the bill costs. and has it ever been used in reconciliation before? no, because it's not part of the two sections that control the reconciliation process, 310 and 313s it's not part -- 310 and 313. it's not part of that at all. not once, not ever, because it is not part of the law that guides reconciliation. and finally, i want to emphasize that because it's been done about narrow issues, the amount of money involved has been related to those more narrow provisions. yes, they sound large when they're in the millions, even once on the adjustments to the fiscal responsibility act, about $3 billion, $2.8 billion.

but now we are talking not about a couple billions, we are talking about more than three dozen trillion dollars. wow! that's something. in every possible way, 312 power, giving the committee the power to solve small technical issues outside of reconciliation doesn't fit with using it now to create a magical baseline to, well, off physical skate what -- off is indicate what things cost. the provisions in the bill, as compared to not having the provisions in the bill is a cost of $3 trillion over ten years

and i think the most recent estimate, $37 trillion, and, yet, here is the, and that's over 30 years, here we have the effort to tell the world that, no, no, no don't worry, only a couple of billion dollars it costs. i was struck this morning by the estimate came from the joint committee on taxation which laid out the revenue portion of this bill will now reduce revenue over a 10-year period by over $4 trillion while my colleagues are telling the world, no, no, it will only reduce it by less than a trillion dollars. let's stop that type of destruction in the budgeting process. it's not just -- not just that we are lying to ourselves and to the american people about the

cost of this bill. we are also destroying that boundary which said that survived in 1996, that said there would be no deficits in any single title in any single year after the budget window, which is ten years. i read through section 313, and it lays out, no deficit creation in any title in any year after the budget window. so i'm coming to the floor to say to my colleagues -- do not corrupt the very instruments we created in a bipartisan fashion to control the deficit. do not use a fake baseline to lie to the american public about the cost of the provisions in this bill. do not breach the boundary in which you're now going to create

deficits beyond a ten-year period. the reason we had the estimate of $37 trillion over 30 years is because now the measures in the bill continue on that create deficits as far as the eye can see and cbo said we can only estimate it out 30 years. so that's the number. roughly $3 trillion over ten years but $37 trillion over 30 years. and the nonpartisan keeper of integrity in budget discussions said if our estimate of the interest rate is 1% off, it will cost about another $24 trillion on top of this. so what are we talking about then? we're talking about over

$60 trillion over 30 years. how does that compare to what we have now? well, we are actually in the mid-30's right now in terms of our federal debt. we are now over 100% of debt to gdp. i had thought as i had got into this discussion that we were at the 100% mark, and that is -- and that is the amount of our national debt reached the amount for our gross domestic product. but no, we're over it. we're beyond it. how are we going to be responsible architects of our national journey if we're going to keep pretending that things don't cost in the bills that we

pass, if we don't use honest numbers, if we destroy the numbers created in 74? that is not right course. and we will keep raising, we, the democratic side of the aisle, will keep raising this issue because this bill should never go through this body on false premise on a fake cost estimate. and why is that so important to reconciliation? because the budget resolution lays out how much revenue change can be tolerated and how much spending can be done by the various committees. so if you don't have honest numbers, you have a completely phony process. so let's come together and rebuild the bipartisan consensus

that we are going to have a stronger framework, a stronger budgeting framework for the national enterprise. as we build up this massive additional part of debt through wars and through tax bills that deliver the national treasury to the richest americans, as we do that, we are undermining the future of our country. please, to my republican colleagues, do not come to this floor and talk about fiscal responsibility. if you can't walk the walk, don't talk the talk. it's that important. it's that important. well, i'm going to conclude by noting that even without this

breaching of the boundaries regarding deficits that run as far as the eye can see, even without the process of lying to ourselves about what this costs, even without that, this is a terrible bill. this bill is families lose and billionaires win. it's as simple as that. cutting nutrition programs an estimated 4 million children go hungry for tax breaks for billionaires. 16 million people losing health care, why? to fund tax breaks for billionaires. that's just wrong. there's a better plan. it should be a bipartisan plan where we seek to have families thrive and billionaires pay their fair share. that's a vision we should all be able to get behind. so let's take this terrible

bill, this bill that creates debt as far as the eye can see, this bill that creates an estimated $37 trillion in additional debt or even more than $60 trillion if the interest rate predictions are off by 1% over 30 years. let's take this bill and put a stake through its heart and start over and instead have that vision of a bill crafted along the lines of families thrive and billionaires pay their fair share. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senate stands in recess until 3:3 p.m. tomorrow.

c-span is making it easy for you. contact and information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. the congressional directory costs $32.95, plus shipping and handling.

scan the code on the right or go to cspanshop.org to order your copy today. >> c-span, democracy unfiltered. we're funded by these television companies and more, including media com. >> we're on a mission to make small town america bigger than anyone ever dreamed. that's why we're always pushing the limit, increasing speeds, improving reliability. and we'll do whatever it takes to make it happen. >> media com supports c-span as a public service, ang with these other television providers. getting you a front row seat to democracy. >> tonight, voters head to the polls to decide the democratic nominee running to be the next mayor of new york city. former governor andrew cuomo and democratic socialist -- are leading the