[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.
____________________