    [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 33 (Wednesday, February 19, 2025)]
    [Senate]
    [Pages S1053-S1060]
    From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                             BUDGET RECONCILIATION

      Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to our Republican
    colleagues' budget proposal. This plan is all about giving tax cuts to
    billionaires and then finding the money to pay for it. Let's make that
    really clear.
      This week, they are moving forward in both the House and the Senate
    with their plans. While the plans are different, the destination is the
    same. The results of this--when you look at the details of the House
    bill, of the Senate bill; when you look at the undermining of the
    Affordable Care Act, which has given healthcare to so many people, and
    you look at the undermining in the House proposal of the prescription
    drug negotiations for Medicare, which is so key; when you look at what
    would happen to rural hospitals, what would happen with nutrition for
    kids and veterans; infrastructure projects, our subject right now--all
    to find this over $2 trillion for tax cuts for the wealthy.
      It is no wonder that two-thirds of Americans--and this is in a number
    of public polls--think the President isn't focused enough on lowering
    costs, and no wonder they believe by a 13-point margin that these
    policies will actually increase inflation.
      Costs are high. Americans are struggling to make ends meet. They
    actually thought that this administration would come in and do
    something about it. And my concern, which you will hear from me and
    from many of my colleagues, is that this budget proposal will only make
    things worse.
      Over the last few years, our workers and businesses have created
    millions of good-paying jobs. Just a few years ago, we came together to
    pass the bipartisan infrastructure law, which has made historic
    investments in our roads, ports, bridges, high-speed internet, and
    more. I remember how proud we were, those of us who worked on this
    legislation, that we had such strong bipartisan support for this bill.
      But, unfortunately, these proposals from the Senate and the House
    would undo this progress, particularly when it comes to broadband. In
    2025, we can't talk about infrastructure without talking about
    broadband. High-speed internet is necessary for everything from
    education to healthcare, to finding jobs, not to mention keeping in
    touch with family members.
      I have a number of small businesses that, when they don't have high-
    speed broadband, they actually have to go into town to a McDonald's
    parking lot to contact their customers because, in this modern day, you
    cannot do business even in the smallest of towns without having high-
    speed internet. Right now, more than 20 million Americans are left out
    because they still don't have a reliable internet connection at home.
      As cochair of the bipartisan Senate Broadband Caucus and the author
    of the original bill that got included in the bipartisan infrastructure
    law, I have always believed that if they can have high-speed internet
    in a country like Iceland, a country with active volcanoes that are
    spewing lava, maybe--just maybe--we can get it in every corner in our
    own country.
      That is why we fought to make sure the bipartisan infrastructure law
    included historic funding to deliver high-speed internet. That funding
    is there. It is going out. It has been going out. It will go out in the
    future. I would love if it had just all happened in 1 year, but that
    funding is going out. But that progress is going to be ground to a halt
    if this money instead goes to tax cuts for the wealthy.
      Slashing funding for infrastructure and high-speed internet is only
    the beginning. The budget also threatens healthcare for over 8 million
    seniors and more than 31 million kids. On top of that, it would force
    rural hospitals to shut their doors, and it would threaten the future
    of Medicare drug price negotiations, which I noted earlier.
      Even the first 10 drugs under our bill, the first 10 drugs alone--and
    no one has disputed this--because of the 60-percent decrease after the
    negotiations

    [[Page S1054]]

    with the pharma companies, 70-percent decrease, on those 10 drugs would
    save seniors, in out-of-pocket, $1.5 billion in just 10 years. Pharma
    got a sweetheart deal 20-some years ago. I wasn't here when that
    happened, but it is time to change it. We did. The first 10 drugs came
    out. Now this administration has been handed the torch to handle the 15
    drugs that need to be next negotiated. After that, they pick 15 more,
    and hopefully these are all blockbuster drugs.
      But if this is undermined, as happened in the House bill, in a sop to
    pharmaceutical companies--if this is undermined, so much money will be
    left on the table and go to the rich people instead of the consumers
    who need those less expensive drugs.
      We should not be paying twice as much as other industrialized nations
    for pharmaceuticals in this country where so much taxpayer money
    already went into research and development.
      Unfortunately, under our budget that we are getting proposed here by
    Republicans in the Senate and the House, seniors won't be the only ones
    forced to rely on food banks. Republicans are planning to make sweeping
    cuts to programs that millions of Americans rely on for nutritious
    food.
      Addressing hunger shouldn't be a red issue or a blue issue; it should
    be an American issue. In fact, this body has often worked across the
    aisle to improve nutrition programs. While grocery prices continue to
    increase, seniors, children, and veterans should not be left hungry to
    pay for tax cuts for billionaires. This is making it harder and harder
    for Americans to put dinner on the table.
      In fact, we found out that due to Elon Musk's activities, I guess,
    several avian flu experts--people working on the frontline--were
    accidentally fired. While the prices of eggs have been going up sky-
    high, these people were removed from their jobs. They are now fast-
    tracking a rehiring of these employees, saying that it was an
    accidental mistake.
      We really can't afford accidental mistakes for watching the nuclear
    stockpile or trying to solve this problem of avian flu anymore. We have
    to actually help people instead of increasing their costs or their risk
    when it comes to safety.
      The budget slashes funding that Americans across the country rely on
    to pay their mortgages and makes it harder--the House bill--for them to
    afford flood insurance. This will make life harder, not to mention more
    expensive, for the Minnesotans whose homes were flooded over the
    summer, for people in Kentucky who are facing deadly flooding as we
    speak, and countless other Americans.
      These proposals--cuts to housing, healthcare, infrastructure--have
    one important thing in common: None of it is going to lower the costs
    for the American people. It is going to increase their costs--all to
    give trillions of dollars of tax cuts to the wealthy.
      I have no problem bringing the costs down for people making under
    $400,000 a year, which is the vast majority of my constituents. I have
    no problem with keeping those tax cuts in place. But that is not what
    we are talking about when we look at this major, major overreach and
    expansion.
      I don't remember Republicans campaigning on higher costs and higher
    debt, but that is exactly what is going to happen if these budgets
    pass.
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
      Ms. SLOTKIN. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the budget
    resolution we have been discussing here tonight.
      I am a new Senator from the great State of Michigan. I am a former
    CIA officer and Pentagon official. I did three tours in Iraq alongside
    the military, and I have worked very proudly for both Democratic and
    Republican administrations. So I come to this job thinking about
    security quite a bit.
      I really understand my job as one where I am meant to protect the
    physical security of my constituents and the economic security of my
    constituents. What I mean by that, when I think about that, is, first
    on physical security, you can't do anything if you are not safe--in
    your home, in your neighborhoods, in your country. Then your economic
    security, No. 2, is being able to live the American dream that all of
    us grew up on that you could work 40 hours a week, one job with good
    benefits, and you could do well, and your kids could do better. But I
    rise today to defend that security because I think it is under threat.
      We know that the majority is crawling all over the Federal Government
    looking for $6 trillion in cuts, right. They have been open about that.
    That is not a hidden thing. They are looking for $6 trillion in every
    couch cushion they can find because they are preparing a major tax bill
    with all kinds of tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans. In that
    process, they have put us on a dangerous path with this budget
    resolution. It adds billions to our national debt. So let's dispense
    with the idea that the Republicans are deeply concerned about our
    national debt. You cannot say that and in the same breath, support this
    proposal.
      Then, in addition, it guts programs that we all rely on--again, for
    our physical and economic security--with no regard for those two
    things.
      Of course, this does nothing to get at the things that President
    Trump said he was running on, right. He ran very loudly on lowering
    costs for the average Americans, making things easier to manage. There
    is no connection between the search for $6 trillion and lower prices
    for the average person.
      Now, there are a lot of things that are at risk of being cut that are
    deeply connected to Michiganders' well-being.
      Let me start off by saying thanks--very sort of parochial--to the
    Great Lakes, and that is the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative,
    something called the GLRI.
      Michiganders understand that our national heritage, our State
    heritage, is our Great Lakes, our waters, and our water. The GLRI is
    the big fund that both Democrats and Republicans have supported year
    after year, championed by the woman I am replacing, Senator Debbie
    Stabenow, to keep our water clean, our water safe, and support, again,
    Michigan's economy, our tourism, our economic security.
      Three out of the 4 years that Donald Trump was in the White House
    previously, he cut the entirety of the GLRI--so all the money for
    invasive species, all the money to keep out our algae blooms, all the
    money to keep our drinking water safe, to help deal with transportation
    in the Soo Locks in Michigan--and every year, we pushed that back.
      You better believe that in their search and hunt for that $6
    trillion, they are going to again target the very thing that keeps our
    Great Lakes safe and secure.
      The Gordie Howe Bridge. We are about to open up the largest
    commercial border bridge in the history of our country. It is named
    after Gordie Howe, who was a Canadian hockey player who played for the
    Red Wings. The Canadians have paid for this bridge. It is set to open
    in September because our current bridges and tunnels cannot handle the
    sheer volume of traffic going across the bridges and tunnels every day.
      How are we going to staff that if we are sending Federal workers
    home? How are we going to support that bridge, which will allow you to
    drive from Montreal to Miami without stopping for a single
    streetlight, if we can't support hiring of new Federal workers and we
    are sending our Federal workers home? Border security is obviously a
    priority, especially for a border State, but how do we do that without
    throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

      Then we have things that have been affecting Michigan now for the
    past year-plus. Bird flu, right? Avian flu. We have got geese now
    showing up dead all over the State of Michigan. We see the bird flu
    transiting between species. That is never a good sign. That means it is
    mutating; it is changing; it is getting stronger. Egg prices, as a
    consequence, are the highest ever in American history. But instead of
    dealing with that problem head-on, as a responsible administration
    would, they are cutting people who are working on avian flu,
    monitoring, who are helping to understand how we prevent the spread of
    yet another biohazard. The people who are doing that are getting pink
    slips.
      The administration has now terminated people just, again, to rehire
    them. Can you imagine the morale of our Federal workers who are
    supposed to be keeping us safe right now?

    [[Page S1055]]

      Then we have our primary industry in Michigan, which is the auto
    industry. The automotive industry is our heritage as well. It is
    fundamental to our State economy, and my priority, my job as a Senator
    in this State, is to make sure that the auto industry, the tier 1 and
    tier 2 suppliers, that that continues to be the basis for a strong
    middle class, the foundation for a strong middle class in Michigan.
      What deeply worries me right now is we have got unelected
    billionaires who are monkeying around with our industry, our principal
    industry in the State of Michigan. Mr. Musk, it has to be said, runs a
    competitor to the Michigan-based auto industry, and he is right now
    actively welcoming and championing Chinese interests into our supply
    chains. Just recently, he has made clear that he is deeply interested
    in moving all his operations, all the things he has got going on in
    Shanghai, to Mexico. He wants to create an easier backdoor for those
    Chinese companies to supply him, to supply other autos, to build those
    cheap vehicles, and then use NAFTA to bring them into the United States
    easily.
      His interests and the interests of everyone who works for an American
    auto company do not align. He is interested in enriching himself and
    strengthening his own supply chain. He does not care about the threat
    to our national security, and he certainly doesn't care about a threat
    to economic security in the State of Michigan.
      I think this is an important thing to highlight as we think about
    this budget resolution that has been presented to us. This budget
    resolution is an attempt to get President Trump what he wants so that
    he can do, unfettered and hidden away from the American people,
    whatever he wants with our physical security and our economic security.
    And it is something that I think many of us feel is being jammed
    through.
      Now, it is hard to understand what is happening. There is chaos among
    the Republicans. The President says he wants one bill. The House says
    they want one bill. The Republicans here say they want two bills. It is
    unclear exactly what is happening. They are trying to figure it out.
    But in the meantime, all we can do here is defend our economic and
    physical security. That is our job.
      My fear is that past is prologue: The administration's approach is
    going to be reflected in this budget, and American citizens are going
    to find out months later about the cuts to programs they care about, to
    things that Michiganders depend on, and I believe that is the wrong
    approach.
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
      Mr. KELLY. Mr. President, the folks in my State are working hard but
    finding it tough to get ahead.
      Now, let's just look at the price of eggs. The Hickman's Family Farms
    is one of the top egg producers in the country, and they are the
    biggest in our State. They have millions of birds producing millions
    and millions of eggs that feed the State of Arizona and the country.
    Like so many of the other egg producers, they are getting decimated by
    bird flu. They have had to put down a lot of their hens--more than a
    million--because of this disease. The story is the same with egg
    producers across the country, and this is having a serious impact on
    family budgets.
      The Safeway down the road from my house in Tucson is now charging
    $9.49 a dozen for eggs, and I can't remember ever seeing it this high.
    Some grocery stores are rationing eggs, only allowing customers to buy
    one or two cartons at a time. If you go to the Waffle House, you are
    paying a surcharge for each egg that you buy. Now, who has ever heard
    of such a thing?
      Now, what I want to know is, where are Donald Trump and Elon Musk?
    Well, a few days ago, they accidentally fired a bunch of people at the
    Department of Agriculture whose job it is to stop this outbreak. The
    next question you may ask is: Why? Why would they do this? Why are Elon
    Musk and Donald Trump slashing and cutting so recklessly that they
    would fire the people working to stop bird flu?
      Well, Mr. President, it is because of what is in front of us here in
    the Senate this week. They want to take the next steps toward a big tax
    giveaway for rich people, but they have to find some ways to pay for
    it. It is wrapped up in all this budget bureaucracy stuff, but here is
    the crux of it: making health coverage and food more expensive for
    working families--that is what is going to happen. Slashing essential
    government functions and services that keep Americans safe, cutting
    investments in high-speed internet and energy manufacturing that
    creates jobs, and at the same time, exploding our national debt--all of
    this is so that the richest people and corporations in America can pay
    less taxes.
      Now, I am all for finding efficiencies in our budget and cutting
    bureaucracy. That is a smart thing to do. We need to get rid of the
    waste. We need to call out abuse. We need to root out fraud. We need a
    tax system that is fair and that makes sense, one that gives hard-
    working people a chance to get ahead, that spurs innovation. But that
    is not what this is. This is a handout for rich people paid for by you,
    the American taxpayer--paid for by your families and your children.
      The richest of the rich billionaires, Elon Musk, is gutting the
    everyday programs that he doesn't agree with, and he is keeping the
    ones that cut checks to his businesses through big government
    contracts--all of this to pay for the tax cuts for him, for his
    companies, and for his billionaire friends.
      We know this because we have seen this before. Last time around, in
    2017, President Trump signed a similar tax giveaway. He made the
    corporate tax rate so low that it is now lower than the rate for a
    married couple making about $100,000 a year. Does that seem fair? It
    doesn't to me. And that is before you count the tax loopholes that
    corporations get and that your families do not.
      Did those corporate CEOs pass those savings along to their workers?
    Of course, they didn't. They used it to enrich themselves and their
    shareholders, and it was all to benefit the richest people, people who
    didn't actually need any help.
      But, Mr. President, don't take my word for this. Here is the Center
    on Budget and Policy Priorities. This is a quote:

           As this debate unfolds, policymakers and the public should
         understand that the 2017 Trump tax law was skewed to the
         rich.

      I go on:

           Households with incomes in the top 1 percent will receive
         an average tax cut of more than $60,000 in 2025, compared to
         an average tax cut of less than $500 for households in the
         bottom 60 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center.
           As a share of after-tax income, tax cuts at the top--for
         both households in the top 1 percent and the top 5 percent--
         are more than triple--

      Three times--three times--

         the total value of the tax cuts received for people with
         incomes in the bottom 60 percent.
           Trump administration officials claimed their centerpiece
         corporate tax rate cut would ``very conservatively'' lead to
         a $4,000 boost in household income. [However,] new research
         shows that workers who earned less than $114,000 on average
         in 2016 saw ``no change in earnings'' from the corporate tax
         rate cut, while top executive salaries increased sharply.

      What this means, Mr. President, is that the rich got richer, and
    everybody else, they got left behind. That is just wrong. It also made
    it even tougher for hard-working families to get ahead.
      Now, President Trump wants to do this all over again. Here is what an
    analyst from the same center, the Center on Budget and Policy
    Priorities, testified to Congress about his new plan:

           Permanently extending the tax cuts would benefit households
         in the top 1 percent more than twice as much as those in the
         bottom 60 percent as a share of their incomes--providing a
         roughly $41,000 annual tax cut for the top 1 percent compared
         to $500 for households in the bottom 60 percent, on average--
         at a cost of around $300 billion per year.

      Again, if you are in the top 1 percent, you are going to get $4,000,
    and all those people in the bottom 60 percent, what are they going to
    get? 500 bucks. That is it. Extend tax cuts for rich people and create
    new loopholes, and do it all by going after the kind of things that
    create great-paying jobs, that help working families, and that move our
    economy into the future.
      We all understand that our economy is changing fast. We need the
    industries of the future to be based here in the United States,
    creating great-paying jobs that you can actually raise a family on,
    reducing our reliance on

    [[Page S1056]]

    supply chains that cross an ocean. We have seen the benefit of that in
    Arizona, where we are a hub for everything from microchips to
    batteries.
      I have spoken to workers who were stuck, who didn't know how to jump-
    start their career, who didn't know how to find that next job. They
    found opportunities, in some cases to enter an apprenticeship or skills
    program and get a good-paying job, the kind of job that you could
    actually raise a family on that does not require a 4-year degree.
      Mr. President, I know in West Virginia there are so many folks that
    are looking for these opportunities. They are in my State. I know they
    are in yours. These are the folks that make things like solar panels
    and batteries and microchips that power our country, that power our
    economy. And these folks that get these jobs, they have pride that they
    are building these things here in the United States of America.
      I will never forget about speaking to one woman whom I met on a Zoom
    call about jobs and about opportunity. She had trouble finding a job
    for over a year. She had three kids. She was having so much trouble
    supporting her kids, and then she found an email in her spam folder, of
    all places, and it encouraged her to apply for this thing called the
    Quick Start program at Estrella Mountain Community College. And in this
    program, she was going to learn how to be a microchip, semiconductor
    manufacturing technician.
      Now, it was in her spam folder. So she was a little hesitant. But she
    called the phone number. She took a chance. She applied to this
    program, and she got in.
      It was a 2-week program, and, at the end of it, she had a guarantee
    that she would get an interview with a semiconductor manufacturer.
      Well, she did that interview. She got the job at Intel, and this job
    has changed not only her life but the life of her kids.
      Now, Mr. President, that is a story that is being repeated over and
    over again in my State, in the semiconductor industry, and I am sure in
    West Virginia, where people are benefiting from these opportunities
    that we have created, not just in one industry but in multiple
    industries.
      Mr. President, this could all come to a screeching halt if Elon Musk
    and Donald Trump use it to pay for their tax cuts for rich people. Just
    today, President Trump slashed staff that are making the CHIPS programs
    a success, and that is going to slow us down, and it is going to give
    China a chance to catch up.
      We don't want that to happen. This is a national security issue for
    this country. We want to see the next generation of microchips
    developed, tested, and produced here in America, not in China.
      Trump and Musk's actions make that harder. And they have set their
    sights on the very incentives that are making this happen, especially
    when it comes to clean energy manufacturing.
      And what is that going to do, Mr. President? Well, here is what it is
    going to do. It is going to ship these jobs back overseas to other
    countries.
      China and other countries are more than happy to fill this vacuum,
    and they will flood the market with cheap solar panels and cheap
    batteries.
      Mr. President, who does that hurt? It hurts working Americans who
    depend on these jobs to support their families. And that is not just in
    Arizona or in blue States or blue cities. This will hurt communities in
    every corner of our country.
      For example, listen to this. This is about Oklahoma. This is an
    article from this morning, and it is about something the Governor--
    Governor Stitt--said about his State. In the article it says:

           [Governor Stitt] has spearheaded a clean energy
         manufacturing boom in his State that has complimented
         Oklahoma's large oil and gas industry and a growing wind
         power sector that provides 40 percent of its electricity. But
         some of Trump's moves could undermine that progress,
         including his halt on leasing, permitting and approvals of
         wind projects, along with his effort to claw back funds from
         the Inflation Reduction Act and the bipartisan infrastructure
         [bill].
           [Governor] Stitt also said he doesn't--

      He does not--

           support Trump's call to repeal IRA clean energy tax credits
         that have drawn investments to GOP-led States like Oklahoma
         since companies have based their investments on these
         incentives. He said he plans to discuss Trump's wind and IRA
         policies in conversations this week with Interior Secretary
         Doug Burgum, who is expected to attend the Republican
         governors meeting.

      This article went on. It continued and it said:

           That was a deal that was cut.

      This is what Stitt said. Governor Stitt said that of the IRA tax
    credits.
      He said:

           Congress has got to opine on this, but a deal is a deal,
         and you can't back out of some of those things.

      So here you have a Republican Governor in the State of Oklahoma who
    is worried about clean energy jobs in his State being slashed--all of
    this so that President Trump can pay for tax cuts for rich people. It
    is that simple, and it is not going to end here. We are talking about
    trillions of dollars in tax cuts--trillions.
      We have seen, over the past few weeks, that Elon Musk and Donald
    Trump are ready to put a halt to infrastructure projects. Here is how
    that has played out on the Hopi Nation in Arizona. This is reporting
    from just last week:

           Timothy Nuvangyaoma, [he is] the chair of the Hopi Tribe in
         Arizona. [They] had applied for and received some $90 million
         in Federal funding for solar power projects, battery
         installations and microgrids, [that he] hoped [would] support
         . . . finally bringing power to the 30 percent of homes on
         the Hopi Nation that are not served by a local utility.

      This is from the article:

           He predicted on-site clean power would end blackouts in
         some areas that led to food spoiling and medical equipment
         blinking offline.
           Now, President Donald Trump's broad funding freeze covering
         some of the Biden administration's clean energy spending has
         thrown tribal projects into limbo. As of Thursday morning,
         funding for the Hopi Tribe that had been approved remains
         suspended. Two awards--$4 million for a solar powered
         microgrid to run wells and pump water and $4 million for a
         battery project--had not been finalized before Trump's
         inauguration, meaning it's possible that they could be
         rescinded.

      Also from this article, Mr. President, it says:

           ``We have real lives at stake. The funding freeze is truly
         having an impact on living, breathing individuals,'' [the
         Chairman] said in an interview.

      And he said--and this is a quote:

           I can't even think of a strong enough word, this is so
         important for us. We had part of a solution come our way, and
         now it's [been] taken away.

      The chairman said--he went on, and he said, ``We have real lives at
    stake,'' but to Elon Musk and President Trump, that pales in comparison
    to cutting taxes for rich people.
      Mr. President, we have always had highway projects in Arizona face
    uncertainty. But this week, they fired a tenth of the Forest Service
    workforce and froze hiring just ahead of what might be another
    devastating fire season. Firefighters--wildfire firefighters--got laid
    off.
      And there are Colorado River water conservation projects that have
    had their funding frozen right now. And this is no small thing.
      The Colorado River is a crucial water source for the American
    Southwest, supporting millions of people, vast agricultural lands, and
    industries across seven States.
      But the impact is even broader than that. If you eat lettuce in the
    winter, chances are it came from Yuma, AZ, from a farm that uses water
    from the Colorado River.
      We have been facing a severe long-term drought that has drained
    reservoirs along the river, with Lake Mead and Lake Powell falling to
    dangerously low levels. So there has been a series of agreements to
    keep more water in the reservoirs; that is going to buy us some time.
      And during that time, Tribes, cities, farmers can invest in
    infrastructure that makes them more water efficient. But after Elon
    Musk and Donald Trump froze these programs, there is incredible
    uncertainty.
      This is a system that depends on trust, and they just pulled the rug
    out from Arizona farmers, from Arizona businesses, from Arizona Tribes,
    from Arizona communities. It is a rug pull, and that puts the entire
    river system at risk. And for what? To pay for tax giveaways for rich
    people.
      What else will they set their sights on? Well, Elon Musk and
    President Trump also froze funding for high-speed internet expansion.
    This is a bipartisan investment to bring internet

    [[Page S1057]]

    access to every corner of our country. An internet connection is
    essential to nearly everything today from taking a class to booking a
    doctor's appointment to staying in touch with the news or your family.
    And you shouldn't need to live in a big city or in a suburb to have
    reliable internet, and expanding broadband creates great-paying local
    jobs.
      Gutting American manufacturing and infrastructure to pay for tax
    giveaways for rich people and big corporations, it does not make our
    country better off. It just helps rich people get richer. It is pretty
    simple math. But it also kills jobs for hard-working Americans in the
    industries of the future, like clean energy.
      And it also invites China to take those jobs back, take jobs from
    Americans who are just trying to get by. It doesn't help American
    families pay their grocery bills.
      What the President is doing, what Elon Musk is doing, it is just
    wrong. We should be focused on the things that matter, lowering prices
    for people and solving real problems. Helping rich people get richer,
    that is not a real problem.
      When I am at home in Arizona, you know what folks want us to be
    working on here? Cost of groceries, cost of healthcare, better-paying
    jobs, safer communities, better schools.
      What you did not hear on that list was making sure rich people have
    more money in their pockets. I doubt a single person in my State would
    tell me that cutting taxes for the wealthy and big corporations should
    be at the top of the list. It should not be on the top of the Senate's
    list either.
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
      Ms. BALDWIN. I rise today to speak about the importance of Medicaid
    for families in Wisconsin and across the Nation. I will be joined by my
    colleagues tonight to shine a light on what Republicans in the House
    and the Senate are up to. They are moving forward with their plans to
    literally rip away healthcare from millions of Americans in order to
    pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest and large corporations.
      I am going to start with some facts: Medicaid provides healthcare to
    over 70 million Americans, including over 30 million children and 8
    million seniors. Medicaid provides essential care for about 10 million
    adults with disabilities.
      Medicaid helps almost two-thirds of all nursing home residents have a
    safe roof over their heads. Medicaid is a lifeline that helps rural
    hospitals keep their doors open. It is also the single largest payer
    for treatment of opioid and other substance-use disorders, and it
    covers care for other serious mental illnesses.
      Now, in my home State of Wisconsin, more than 1.2 million people are
    enrolled in Medicaid. One out of three children get their healthcare
    through Medicaid, as well as one in three people with disabilities.
      Four in seven nursing home residents rely on Medicaid, and more than
    one-third of all births that happen in Wisconsin are covered by
    Medicaid. But at the end of the day, this is about the people behind
    those numbers. It is about the grandmother living in a nursing home. It
    is about the pregnant woman planning to give birth at a rural hospital.
      It is about the child who grows up in a low-income home who otherwise
    would not have access to healthcare. It is about a hard-working mother
    trying to keep herself and her kids healthy. It is people like Lynn
    from Northeast Wisconsin. She is a mom to a 23-year-old son named
    Henry. Henry has cerebral palsy and autism. Lynn wrote to me a couple
    weeks ago after learning about the Republican budget.
      Lynn wrote:

           Henry's needs are significant, and he requires full
         assistance in all aspects of his life. While we have private
         insurance through my husband's job, Medicaid has funded a
         great deal of care throughout Henry's life, from private and
         school-based therapies, to medications, to orthopedic
         surgery, to incontinence products, to transportation to and
         from school, to the day program he is currently in. I am not
         sure what his life looks like without Medicaid.

      Renee, a 60-year-old cancer patient from Milwaukee also wrote to me.
    Renee has stage 4 metastatic breast cancer. It is incurable, and she
    relies on Medicaid for the treatment that is keeping her alive. Renee
    shared with me:

           Without Medicaid, I would be forced to ration or forego
         cancer treatment, hastening my death, or send me and my
         husband into bankruptcy trying to keep me alive.

      That would be an impossible choice. I can tell you after hearing from
    my constituents who are learning about these Republican plans to gut
    Medicaid, people are scared. They are scared about what their lives are
    going to look like without healthcare. I am hearing from doctors; I am
    hearing from nursing homes, clinics; I am hearing from hospitals; I am
    hearing from Native American Tribes and Tribal organizations. They will
    all have impossible choices to make that impact the healthcare of
    millions of Americans if Republicans are successful in pushing through
    their cuts to Medicaid.
      This isn't a red or a blue State issue. Cuts to Medicaid hurt people
    in all States, and when people find that their healthcare is ripped
    away, Republicans are going to have to explain why they decided to give
    their billionaire friends a tax cut and pay for it by taking away
    healthcare from seniors and children.
      To them, that is the whole ball game: to fight every which way to
    make room in their budget to give big corporations and the wealthiest a
    tax break.
      You will hear this evening from several of my colleagues about why
    Medicaid is so vitally important, and I am sure they are going to tell
    you stories from their home States.
      Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle need to understand the
    consequences of their proposals and make a decision: Are billionaires
    really more important to you than the seniors and children and people
    with disabilities that you represent?
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
      Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues, and
    particularly Senator Baldwin, in expressing my strong opposition to the
    Republican budget resolution and deep concern over the future of the
    Medicaid program.
      This resolution has one main priority: gutting programs like Medicaid
    and food stamps to pay for a $4.5 trillion--that is right--trillion-
    dollar tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.
      Donald Trump calls this ``one big, beautiful bill,'' but it is a bill
    that average Americans and the most vulnerable will be paying for years
    to come.
      Among the most egregious and cynical cuts are the proposed cuts to
    Medicaid. These are expected to be at least $880 billion under the
    budget that President Trump favors. Cuts of this magnitude would be
    devastating to the 80 million Americans who rely on Medicaid and the
    related Children's Health Insurance Program, CHIP. We are talking about
    essential healthcare coverage for children, seniors in nursing homes,
    people with disabilities, among other vulnerable populations.
      In my home State of Rhode Island, Medicaid provides crucial
    healthcare and peace of mind for over 300,000 of my constituents, about
    one-third of the State. If you think Medicaid is some program far
    removed from your life, I can tell you, you are wrong.
      So many of our friends, families, and neighbors are served by the
    Medicaid program. It is not a program for poor people alone. It is a
    program that is accessed by many different people, and it will touch
    every family one way or the other in Rhode Island if it is defunded as
    proposed in this resolution.
      Nationally, about half of all children will get healthcare through
    Medicaid--half of all children. Roughly 40 percent of all births are
    paid for by the Medicaid program. Medicaid also provides essential
    coverage for pregnant women. If we are concerned about supporting
    families and making sure kids get a healthy start in life, Medicaid is
    crucial to this effort. So who will suffer? Children. Who will benefit
    from this resolution? The wealthiest corporations and the wealthiest
    Americans.
      Medicaid is also critical for seniors getting nursing home care. They
    make up a small percentage of the Medicaid population but account for
    roughly half of Medicaid spending. In Rhode Island, roughly 22 percent
    of the Medicaid population are seniors and people with disabilities,
    but that accounts for half of Rhode Island's Medicaid spending. And
    many, many, many of these seniors come from working families.

    [[Page S1058]]

    They have spent their whole life trying to improve themselves, give
    their children a better chance in life, support their community, serve
    their Nation--all of these things. And now at a time of great medical
    need, we have to be there for them. And this proposal shuts the door
    effectively on it.

      To put a finer point on it, with respect to nursing home patients, 60
    percent of these residents get their healthcare through Medicaid, and
    this proposal will not only harm the recipients, it will effectively
    put most nursing homes out of business. So where will these people go,
    these seniors go?
      And it will also put so much pressure on our other healthcare
    systems--like emergency rooms and hospitals--that they, too, will start
    to falter and fail. The second- and third-order consequences of these
    cuts are just as bad as the initial cuts to Medicaid.
      And if you cut this access to nursing homes, it will reverberate
    throughout our entire healthcare system. And if there is no Medicaid,
    then the burden falls on the families. So families in America will be
    facing another great obstacle.
      They are looking at inflation today, which is going up, not coming
    down. They are looking at an affordable housing crisis, which is
    raising their rents. And now they will be looking at the need to care
    for their elderly parents, elderly relatives, and that will be crushing
    to many families.
      Now, many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have talked
    about adding work requirements to the Medicaid Program in particular.
    They claim that enabling the most vulnerable people to get access to
    healthcare discourages them from working. But after hearing about those
    who are served by the Medicaid Program, I am not sure whom it is they
    are looking to go back to work. The millions of children who are
    covered by Medicaid, should they be forced to work? We can repeal the
    child labor laws. Or the seniors in nursing homes? Well, put them out.
    They are seniors that worked all their lives and put them back to work.
      And even when you drill down to the working population, the
    nondisabled Medicaid population, 92 percent are working full or part
    time or are unable to work due to caregiving responsibilities, illness,
    or school attendance--92 percent. These people work hard, and they
    deserve access to healthcare.
      The so-called able-bodied adults who are not working because they get
    free healthcare through Medicaid is more a myth than anything else. In
    fact, access to healthcare keeps people healthy and able to work.
    Taking away healthcare keeps people sick and unable to work. That is
    something that I hope we all realize.
      Now, I would also like to talk for a minute about the unique
    structure of the Medicaid Program. It is a State-Federal partnership.
    By and large, States design their programs so they can best serve the
    needs of their State. This is the ultimate example of giving power back
    to States to determine what is best for their residents. States put up
    money and then the Federal Government puts in their share to help the
    States provide such healthcare.
      Medicaid is also flexible and able to contract and expand as needed.
    For example, during the economic downturns and recessions, if more
    people are unemployed and lose health coverage with their job, Medicaid
    is able to step in and provide coverage. That is especially important
    in making sure that kids don't lose coverage when a parent is laid off.
      In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, when so many people lost work
    through no fault of their own, Medicaid was a critical lifeline in
    providing care. Can you imagine how terrifying it would have been to
    have suddenly lost your job and your health insurance in the middle of
    a pandemic? It was a new disease that we knew so little about, sending
    otherwise healthy people to the hospital unable to breathe. The last
    thing you want to be thinking about in that circumstance is whether or
    not you can afford to go to the hospital because you just lost your
    health insurance. Medicaid stepped forward and eased that fear.
      Now, certainly, we always should be open to have discussions about
    how we can make improvements to Federal programs to better serve our
    constituents and be more cost-effective, but what my colleagues on the
    other side of the aisle are engaging in this week is not a substantive
    debate about the Medicaid Program. There has been no cost-benefit
    analysis done on Medicaid because I would argue that the benefits far
    outweigh the costs: healthy children that can learn, mature, and go on
    to be effective members of our economy and our society, seniors who
    have worked their whole lives and deserve a respectful and effective
    care when they are ill.
      In fact, we haven't really been talking about Medicaid at all. Again,
    without any analysis, this is just to find money for tax cuts. So what
    they have been looking at is not cost and benefits, just costs. Give me
    money, and I will give it away and not to those who are in the working
    class but those who are very, very wealthy.
      Last night, President Trump said:

           Medicare, Medicaid--none of that stuff is going to be
         touched.

      I will say it again. Last night, President Trump promised the
    American people:

           Medicare, Medicaid--none of that stuff is going to be
         touched.

      Well, of course, like he frequently does, he has changed his position
    in less than 24 hours. He is endorsing a House bill that would severely
    cut Medicaid.
      I would hope that my Republican colleagues will join myself and
    others in voting for our amendments to protect these vital programs.
    You will have that choice, and I hope you do it for the people you
    represent.
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
      Mr. WELCH. Mr. President, really delighted to be here with my
    colleagues: the Senator from Wisconsin, the Senator from Rhode Island,
    and the Senator from New Hampshire.
      There are a couple things that just need to be faced directly. One is
    that the President of the United States is not leveling with us, and he
    is not leveling with the American people. You can't say that you love
    Medicaid, and it is not going to be touched and in the next breath say
    you endorse the House bill that cuts a trillion dollars from Medicaid.
    And it is a responsibility that each of us has to assess the
    credibility of the President's assertion here.
      And we can pretend that we don't know the House bill that is about a
    tax cut requires a trillion dollars out of the Medicaid budget or we
    can face the truth and then have a debate about whether we should or
    should not cut Medicaid.
      But the President won't level with the American people or with
    Congress. And it is tougher on the Republican side of the aisle because
    he is a Republican President, but the truth here is inescapable. The
    only way the House bill can get passed and the tax cut that is a goal
    of many on the Republican side of the aisle can be passed and paid for
    is to take away healthcare, and Medicaid is the big target.
      And my colleagues have talked about the importance of Medicaid, and
    that is true, so true. In Vermont, in every single State, it is
    healthcare. And it is healthcare for kids. It is healthcare for
    seniors. Two out of the three nursing home beds in Vermont are covered
    by Medicaid. We have these cuts; those people get kicked out of the
    nursing homes. We cut Medicaid; kids who are totally dependent on
    Medicaid for access to the healthcare they need lose their care.
      It is really, really a problem everywhere. But I think in rural
    communities, it is even more severe because we have got rural hospitals
    and we have got rural community health centers that play a major role
    in rural life. They are all on thin ice financially. They have
    overworked staff but who are committed to the people in that community.
    And the only reimbursement they get is through Medicaid. And as we all
    know, the Medicaid reimbursement is much lower than Medicare and
    certainly way lower than private insurance. But they pull it together
    and somehow keep the lights on, keep the doors open, and provide the
    healthcare that the folks in that community need.
      You know, another point I want to make--and, Mr. President, I know
    you served as Governor of West Virginia, and we have got the former
    Governor of New Hampshire here. You had to deal with really tough
    budgets. You have got to balance your budget. And I know in West
    Virginia, West Virginia

    [[Page S1059]]

    expanded Medicaid when that became an option. And God bless West
    Virginia. I mean, God bless ``West by God Virginia.'' But I have been
    there, went down into the coal mine. Those are wonderful people. They
    work so hard. But in order to be eligible for Medicaid in West
    Virginia, your income as an adult can't be a dollar over $20,782. That
    is 10 bucks an hour, $10.39 an hour.
      And, you know, when I met West Virginians and went in the coal mines,
    it so reminded me of the hard-working Vermont farmers. That is tough
    work to do and people show up and they do it. It is like our farmers in
    Vermont. It is really hard work. They show up, and they do it. But a
    lot of folks making $20,782--there is no way--no way--they can afford
    healthcare. There is no way.
      And that is another absolute requirement that each of us level with
    one another. Let's not pretend that there is some fictional healthcare
    out there that a person who is working 40 hours a week making 10.39 an
    hour can pay for healthcare. It doesn't exist. And the major
    responsibility that we have is to make certain that we have a
    healthcare system where people who work hard, who love their kids, who
    have an elderly parent, can have some security that the healthcare they
    need, they will get.
      So the President says he is not going to touch the big beautiful
    healthcare bill and Medicaid, when his action is he is taking a
    sledgehammer to it. And he is taking a sledgehammer that is cutting off
    folks in West Virginia, folks in Vermont who are working hard, who
    struggle every week to pay their bills, and who could get some peace of
    mind that the child that they love, that the grandparent that they are
    caring for, can have decency and access to healthcare or a nursing
    home. It is an absolute disgrace that there is any discussion--that
    there is any discussion--that we would be taking that away.
      Shame on Trump. Shame on Trump.
      The other thing I want to talk about is this question of waste,
    fraud, and abuse. Who of the 100 U.S. Senators is in favor of waste,
    fraud, and abuse? Not a single one of us. But that is not what is going
    on here. That is not what is going on here.
      You as a Governor, Senator Hassan, former Governor--you are on that.
    If there are some rip-offs going on in the Medicaid Program in your
    State, you are on it. You want those people prosecuted and put in jail.
      Waste, fraud, and abuse is just being used as a curtain to conceal
    what the real agenda is, and that is saving money on Medicaid by
    dumping people off of Medicaid. The savings program here is about
    taking away the access to healthcare that people have, folks--like in
    West Virginia--who make $21,000 or so a year.
      If we want to talk about the rip-offs, if we want to talk about
    taking the waste out of the healthcare system--and by the way, I do--
    let's go after these pharmacy benefit manufacturers adding billions of
    dollars to the cost of healthcare, driving out of business our
    community pharmacies that know the people in their communities and want
    to take care of them.
      By the way, we had a bipartisan bill to get rid of the pharmacy
    benefit manager rip-offs, and do you know who blocked it? A guy named
    Elon Musk--the guy who wants to ``save big beautiful Medicaid.'' Rip-
    off. And he is accomplice No. 1 in allowing the pharmacy benefit
    managers to continue to stick it to our pharmacists, to our taxpayers.
      If we wanted to go after where the rip-off is in healthcare, what
    about what United Healthcare did with the Medicare Advantage Program,
    where they literally paid doctors to overdiagnose so they could boost
    what they charged, and then when people on Medicare Advantage in their
    program got sick, they dumped them. And we tolerate that. We tolerate
    that. Billions--hundreds of billions of dollars.
      So, yes, the biggest threat to access to healthcare for the people
    you represent and that I represent is the rip-off in the healthcare
    industry, with higher than anywhere else in the world prescription drug
    prices, with rip-offs systemically used in the Medicare Advantage
    Program, with the gaming of pharmaceuticals by the pharmacy benefit
    managers.
      I want to save money, but I want to save money by stopping the rip-
    offs. I don't want to save money by dumping people who make $21,000 a
    year off of the healthcare they absolutely need. And that is what Musk
    is doing. That is what Trump is doing. That is wrong, and we have to
    stop it.
      We have to stand up for the hard-working people of West Virginia, the
    hard-working people of New Hampshire, the hard-working people of
    Wisconsin, and the hard-working people of Vermont.
      We have to say no and acknowledge the rip-offs that Donald Trump is
    trying to inflict on hard-working people in our States so that he can
    pay for the tax cuts for his billionaire friends.
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
      Ms. HASSAN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Vermont
    for his eloquent words just now, for his passion for his constituents
    and for all Americans and his understanding of the importance of
    healthcare to the people we all represent.
      I rise to join my colleagues in opposing the attempts by the
    President and congressional Republicans to pay for more tax breaks for
    billionaires by ending Medicaid as we know it, cutting healthcare for
    children, seniors in nursing homes, adults with developmental
    disabilities, and hard-working families.
      At a time when American families are struggling to keep up with high
    costs, I can imagine few ideas more ill-advised, more
    counterproductive, more outrageous, and more devastating than to make
    lifesaving healthcare unaffordable for millions of our fellow
    Americans.
      Millions of people depend on Medicaid every day. For families who are
    struggling to make ends meet, Medicaid gives them the ability to get
    care, whether that means routine checkups, preventive care, or
    treatment for serious illnesses or disease.
      Medicaid also provides long-term care to many seniors and to people
    with disabilities, including children with autism, Down syndrome, or
    cerebral palsy. They all depend on Medicaid for medical care and
    support services.
      Congress created and expanded and strengthened Medicaid for two main
    reasons--first, because we understood that in a country as great as
    ours, we can't turn our backs on our neighbors. There is nothing
    American about leaving seniors or families with children with
    disabilities to fend for themselves. A great country treats its people
    with great dignity.
      But we also passed Medicaid because we know that it is in all of our
    economic interests to have more healthy people. When more people are
    healthy and able to work, they can get ahead and stay ahead, provide a
    better life for their family, join the workforce, contribute their
    talents, and in so doing, make our economy stronger.
      Our country is not better off or made more prosperous when more of
    our fellow citizens fall ill to preventable diseases or are held back
    by chronic illnesses or when people with disabilities can't get the
    support they need to get jobs or participate in our communities.
      But even as families try to keep up with high costs, the Trump
    administration and congressional Republicans decided that now is the
    time to raise healthcare costs and make healthcare more unaffordable
    for tens of millions of Americans. The proposed Republican budget will
    require major cuts to Medicaid, slashing hundreds of billions of
    dollars from this critical health program simply to pay for more tax
    breaks for billionaires.
      Now, some of my colleagues defending the President may point out that
    during an interview last night, the President insisted that he had no
    plans to cut Medicaid. However, as the Sun rose this morning, the
    President came out in full support of the Republican budget proposal--a
    budget that would eviscerate Medicaid. Look, if the President doesn't
    want to cut Medicaid, then he shouldn't endorse a budget that ends
    Medicaid as we know it.

      Let's take a moment and discuss what slashing Medicaid by hundreds of
    billions of dollars will actually do because we can't forget that in
    the Senate, when we are debating dollars, we are really talking about
    people. We are talking about our constituents.
      We are talking about Michelle, a Granite Stater from Manchester who

    [[Page S1060]]

    was diagnosed with a rare cancer and was only able to get treatment and
    get healthy enough so she could go back to work because of Medicaid.
      We are talking about Jim, a Granite Stater who was born with cerebral
    palsy but was able to go to college, get a job, get married, and raise
    a daughter because he got the care and support he needed--yes, through
    Medicaid.
      We are talking about Ashley, a Granite Stater who struggled with
    addiction to opioids and lost her husband to an overdose. Ashley was
    able to get her life back on track and now works to help others recover
    from addiction just like she did because of treatments she received
    through Medicaid.
      These are just a few of the people that my office has heard from who
    benefit from Medicaid. And it is not just them. In New Hampshire, there
    are 180,000 people on Medicaid--that is over 10 percent of our State's
    population--including more than 90,000 children, more than 1,500
    pregnant women, more than 15,000 people with disabilities, nearly
    10,000 seniors, nearly 10,000 Granite Staters who are struggling with
    addiction who depend on Medicaid for medication-assisted treatment, the
    gold standard of addiction care. So make no mistake, when the President
    and his allies in Congress talk about decimating Medicaid, these are
    the people whose lives they are playing with.
      So before the President and some of my colleagues proceed, the
    American people deserve some answers. Would our country be better off
    if any of the people whose experiences I discussed didn't receive care?
    Would our country be better off if we left people like Michelle,
    Christine, Jim, and Ashley to fend for themselves? Is America--our
    economy, our workforce--better off with more people sick?
      Who do these cuts serve? The millions of Americans who would lose
    their care--what wrong did they commit? What did they do to deserve
    losing their healthcare? If the President and his allies in Congress
    end Medicaid as we know it, I don't know what any of the millions of
    people on Medicaid, the Granite Staters I have heard from--I don't know
    what they are going to do, and to be blunt, neither does the President
    or my Republican colleagues. But they are apparently all in on taking
    away Medicaid without any plan to help my constituents or theirs
    preserve access to high-quality healthcare and the peace of mind that
    comes with it.
      Of course, what is remarkable about the President's attempt to gut
    Medicaid is how painfully out of step he is with the country. And I
    think he knows it. The American people are clamoring for prices to come
    down. They want us to work together to bring down costs. You can search
    all across our country, from New Hampshire to the Pacific Northwest, to
    a thousand towns in between, and you will not find anyone who is asking
    for their healthcare to become even less affordable. No, the only
    people who think that are Washington Republicans.
      It doesn't have to be this way. In New Hampshire, when I was
    Governor, we expanded Medicaid and balanced the budget, and we did both
    on a bipartisan basis.
      Now, there is wasteful spending that we need to cut, to be sure, but
    if the President and my colleagues listen to the American people, if
    they talked to families in New Hampshire, they would know that only in
    Washington, DC, is money used to help a child with autism go to school
    and reach their full potential regarded as a waste.
      So before my colleagues try to pass this budget, the American people
    deserve to know why support for a child with asthma or treatment for
    someone struggling with addiction should be sacrificed to pay for
    another tax break for a billionaire. The American people deserve to
    know at what point the President decided that the health of their
    families was expendable. The American people deserve to know why the
    President is not interested in lowering costs but has instead decided
    to weaken our economy, hamper our workforce, and make life less
    affordable for more Americans.
      I urge my colleagues to reverse course and work across the aisle on a
    bipartisan basis to protect Medicaid and lower costs for our families.
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
      Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, tonight, you have heard from me and my
    colleagues about the importance of Medicaid and what this critical
    program means for our constituents, those we represent here in the
    Senate. You have heard about parents concerned about what their child's
    life would look like without Medicaid. You have heard about people
    concerned for their elderly parents. You have heard about cancer
    patients who would face bankruptcy or an early death if they lost
    Medicaid.
      The stories that have been told tonight are just a few examples of
    the monumental impact that Medicaid has had on communities across this
    great country. Medicaid is a lifeline for children, for seniors, for
    rural communities. It helps keep hospitals and community health centers
    and nursing homes open. Cutting Medicaid is, quite simply, an attack on
    the health and well-being of families. It is an attack on children and
    seniors. It is an attack on our neighbors, our friends, and our
    families. It is an attack on our most vulnerable.
      These cuts will be falsely framed. They will be falsely framed as
    reforms or minor alterations to a program in the guise of saving money.
    These cuts will falsely be framed as tackling waste, fraud, and abuse.
    But make no mistake, stripping away healthcare from a low-income kid or
    nursing home funding for our parents and grandparents is not a reform
    for getting rid of fraud.
      If my colleagues really wanted to go after waste in Medicaid, they
    would support and empower the inspector general, whose very job it is
    to root out waste, to root out fraud, to root out abuse, not sit idly
    by while Trump fires her. Yes, that is right--President Trump fired
    her. And the money that would be so-called saved will just be going to
    line billionaires' pockets even further, not to lower costs like
    Republicans have promised or to help hard-working Americans. These cuts
    go against the wishes of 70 percent of the American public, who want to
    see Medicaid protected.
      My colleagues and I have made it clear that cuts to Medicaid are
    damaging to the entire country, and I hope that my colleagues on the
    other side of the aisle will take that to heart when they are thinking
    about taking Medicaid away from our constituents.
      I know you have heard a lot of stories tonight, but I want to close
    with just one more.
      Taylor from Appleton, WI, wrote to me about her son Oliver. Oliver is
    almost 2 years old, and Oliver has a rare disease that impacts his
    kidneys, his eyes, and other organs. Oliver relies on Medicaid for
    lifesaving medications, therapies, and treatments. Without Medicaid,
    the cost of medication that slows the progression of the disease and
    his specialized care would be absolutely unaffordable.
      Taylor said:

           Medicaid is not just a program--it is a lifeline for
         children like Oliver. Without it, families would be forced to
         go without life-saving care or face crippling medical debt.
         The burden of his treatments, therapies, and future kidney
         transplants would be impossible to bear without Medicaid's
         support. I urge you to protect Medicaid funding and ensure
         that children like Oliver have access to the care they need
         to survive and thrive. The future of children with complex
         medical needs [absolutely] depends [upon] it.

      Listen to people like Taylor, and think about children like Oliver.
    Stripping away healthcare from Americans--all to pay for tax breaks for
    big corporations and billionaires--is not what the American people
    want. It is not what the American people need.
      I yield the floor.

                              ____________________