[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 162 (Thursday, October 2, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6909-S6916]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Government Funding

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, we are into the second day of a government 
shutdown after Democrats, once again, rejected a clean, nonpartisan 
funding bill to keep the government open while we continue bipartisan 
appropriations work. We are not going to be voting today, as we have 
Jewish colleagues who are currently observing Yom Kippur, but we will 
be voting tomorrow. And we are going to give my Democratic colleagues 
another opportunity to reopen the government by passing the clean, 
nonpartisan funding extension before us.
  I realize that my Democrat colleagues are facing pressure from 
Members of their far-left base, but they are playing a losing game 
here. A robust majority of American voters are against a government 
shutdown. Even some Democrat Members are raising concerns, with a 
Democrat House Member noting yesterday:

       This government shutdown is the result of hardball politics 
     driven by the demands far-left groups are making for 
     Democratic Party leaders to put on a show of their opposition 
     to President Trump. The shutdown is hurting Americans and our 
     economy . . . normal

[[Page S6910]]

     policy disagreements are no reason to subject our 
     constituents to the continued harm of this shutdown.

  That, from a Democrat House Member.
  Organizations ranging from the National Fraternal Order of Police to 
the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the Teamsters have spoken out against 
shutting down the government. The Teamsters president said Tuesday:

       A shutdown will hurt working people. Period. Senators 
     should . . . pass the House-passed clean, short-term funding 
     bill.
       Senators should . . . pass the House-passed clean, short-
     term funding bill.

  That, again, from the president of the Teamsters. ``Clean'' is what 
he said.
  My Democrat colleagues have little to work with in this debate, with 
their own previous statements working against them, and so they have 
tried to portray the clean, nonpartisan funding bill before us as 
something other than what it is.
  But the Teamsters president reminds us of the facts. We are not 
asking Democrats to swallow a list of new Republican policies or 
partisan demands--not in there. We are asking Democrats to do nothing 
more than pass a clean, nonpartisan bill to fund the government for a 
few more weeks so that we can get back to bipartisan appropriations 
work.
  And I said ``bipartisan appropriations work''--the kind of bipartisan 
work that has seen the Senate pass three appropriations bills so far by 
robust bipartisan margins, the kind of work that we want to continue 
once Democrats have stopped holding government funding hostage to a 
long list of partisan demands.
  So far, three of our Democrat colleagues have joined Republicans to 
attempt to reopen the government. If we can just find a few more 
Democrats to join us, we can end this shutdown and get back to 
bipartisan appropriations work and the business of the American people.
  Democrats voted for clean CRs like the one before us 13 times--13 
times--during the Biden administration. I hope they will join us to 
pass this clean CR and reopen the government for hard-working 
Americans.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. President, here we are, day No. 2 of the Schumer 
shutdown, or should we call this the AOC shutdown? After all, when the 
puppet master gets outmaneuvered by his own radical Squad, who is 
really calling the shots? Shouldn't we give the Squad some credit here 
for this shutdown?
  Now, let me say that a different way. This Democrat shutdown is 
nothing but a cynical political shutdown, with Senator Schumer 
kowtowing to his radical, leftwing extremists. He is desperately 
recoiling, fighting to stave off a primary and to save his party from 
the piranhas in their own midst. Look, I am sure he feels like he has 
been steamrolled by President Trump and the overwhelming ``America 
First'' mandate that 78 million American patriots who voted for real 
change.
  Everything else--all other excuses--is just a pathetic smokescreen to 
hide their failures. But let's take a closer look at some of these 
Democrat excuses. Again, they are decoys; they are camouflage and why 
this is indeed a Schumer shutdown.
  First of all, there is no substance to their arguments. They want to 
talk about healthcare. Boy, do Republicans want to fix healthcare, but 
the real problem is the cost of healthcare. Healthcare has gone up 400 
percent in the last couple of decades. It is the cost of healthcare. 
All my Democratic friends want to do is just keep throwing more and 
more money, more and more subsidies, making big healthcare systems 
rich.
  Premiums are going to go up 20 percent this year--20 percent. Again, 
healthcare is what is leading inflation. If it wasn't for healthcare 
inflation, we would probably be down closer to 2 percent. So regardless 
of what happens here in Congress in the next 3 to 4 months, your 
healthcare premium is going to go up 20 percent on average.
  This shutdown is keeping us from working on the real problem, and 
that is the cost of healthcare. Think about Republican solutions that 
we have out there right now.
  We have legislation that we call the Price Tags bill that we hope to 
debate, work up, and mark up in our healthcare committee this fall. 
What that bill does is it forces every hospital, surgery center, 
imaging center to put a pricetag on the procedures you are going to 
have done.
  Can you imagine walking into a restaurant and not knowing the price 
of a good Kansas steak versus some cheap-grade steak from another 
country? You couldn't imagine that. So when you are sitting there, 
deciding whether to have your hip replaced at a hospital like in my 
hometown of Great Bend, America, versus having it done at another 
facility, you will see that you can have the same procedure done for 
maybe a fifth of what it costs at other facilities. By the way, we have 
better outcomes, and we have better customer service as well. Patients 
deserve pricetags.
  You know, other solutions out there are expanding healthcare savings 
accounts where you can use pretax dollars for different opportunities 
as well.
  If you really want me to solve the riddle of the cost of healthcare, 
we need to make America healthier again. That is why Republicans, under 
President Trump and Secretary Kennedy, were trying to pass policies 
which would lead to a healthier America.
  Think about it--70 percent of Americans have a chronic disease. You 
think about heart disease and hypertension, obesity, diabetes, 
Alzheimer's, cancer, and mental health issues. Ninety percent of the 
healthcare dollars being spent in this country are spent on those 
chronic diseases.
  Think about our youth. Twenty percent of our youth are on a 
prescription drug, 30 percent are obese, and 40 percent of our youth 
have a chronic disease. We have a mental health epidemic in our youth 
as well.
  So if you want to drive down the cost of healthcare, we need to make 
a healthier America, we need more transparency, we need to promote 
innovation, and we need to turn patients into consumers again.
  Then lastly and most importantly, we need to make America healthy 
again--and for all the right reasons. The benefit of driving down the 
cost of healthcare is just one of them. Think about this: America is 
spending 18 percent of its GDP on healthcare right now. Singapore is 
spending 4 percent. Most advanced countries are going to spend half of 
what we do on healthcare.
  People ask, well, why are our outcomes worse? It is because we are 
sick. We have sicker people. The incidence of diabetes, hypertension--
all those things are going through the roof. That is why our outcomes 
aren't as good as other countries' are.
  Rural healthcare. Let's talk about rural healthcare for a second. My 
goodness, do I care about rural healthcare. I was born in a rural 
hospital. I had an OB practice for 25 years in rural America. I was on 
call every day, every other day for 25 years. You can call my wife and 
ask her--we didn't sleep through the night for 25 years. We delivered a 
baby almost every day. Then I was blessed to lead a group of doctors 
and run that rural hospital for over a decade as well. I oversaw three 
health departments. If anybody understands the importance of rural 
healthcare, I think it would be me. That is why I have spent a lifetime 
trying to fix all of these riddles that we have right now.
  Now, my friends across the aisle say that they are worried that rural 
hospitals are closing all of a sudden--all of a sudden--and that they 
want to try to fix this issue. Well, they have actually contributed to 
the problem.
  But here is one of the most hypocritical things I have ever heard 
since being up here. So the Democrats say that they are closing the 
government because they want to save rural hospitals, but the first 
thing they are going to do is take $50 billion away from our rural 
health transformation funding--$50 billion from rural health 
transformation funding--something I have been working on with this 
administration since the New Year, what that would look like if we had 
the money. But no. What my friends across the aisle want to do is they 
want to control healthcare; they want to keep throwing good money after 
bad money. They think that Medicaid is going to save the day.
  Let me tell you something about Medicaid. Only 5 percent of Medicaid 
funding goes to rural America. Five percent of Medicaid funding goes to

[[Page S6911]]

rural America. Hospitals and doctors lose money on every Medicaid 
patient we see. Now, it doesn't mean we shouldn't take care of them. We 
took care of everybody in our hospital regardless of their ability to 
pay, regardless if they were a citizen or not. We didn't know, and we 
didn't care. We went in and took care of these patients. But certainly, 
running a private OB practice and running a hospital, I realized that 
we lose money on every Medicaid patient we see.
  Having Medicaid is not the same as access to healthcare. Who in the 
world even thinks that could be the case? Talk to any doctor, talk to 
any patient that has Medicaid. Ask them--let's say they have a 
herniated disc in their back. Ask them how long it is going to take to 
get in to see a neurosurgeon. It is going to take 6 months; it is going 
to take a year.
  So, in reality, probably less than half of the doctors, in a true 
measure, participate in Medicaid. It has to be the most failed system, 
the biggest waste of money I have ever seen. There are better solutions 
out there than Medicaid.
  I am so excited about, again, solutions. Republicans have solutions. 
I am so excited about this transformation fund and the opportunity that 
does that.
  Here is what is really rich--here is what is rich. So there are 
hospitals closing and pharmacies closing today, tomorrow, last year, 
but that is a result of the Democrats' failed policies. Our legislation 
that we passed this year--signature legislation that is going to change 
the course of America--none of that is going to really kick in for 2 or 
3 years.
  It is just beyond me for the leader of the Democratic Party to sit up 
here and cry about hospitals closing in rural America today and blaming 
Republicans. If there is any hospital closing today, tomorrow, next 
year, the Democrats own it. They own the failed policy, and America 
gets that. My gosh, I have never heard something so ridiculous in my 
life.
  But, again, Republicans have solutions, and we want to fix it. One of 
the ways to fix the failure of why these hospitals are failing is the 
economy that hospitals--rural hospitals are a reflection of the local 
economy. As agriculture goes, so goes rural America, so goes these 
hospitals.

  By the way, 97 percent of these rural counties voted for President 
Trump. He is never going to turn his back on them. We as Republicans 
are not going to turn our backs on them. I wake up every morning trying 
to figure out, how do we save rural hospitals and rural America? how do 
we recruit doctors to rural America? how do we recruit nurses to rural 
America? And all of a sudden, the Democrats have got salvation here, 
and they care about it? No. They are hiding behind that issue. They are 
hiding behind it because they don't have any substance to stand on.
  Again, the ACA has been the rule of the land for 15 years now. If 
there are any hospitals failing today, and there are, it is because of 
the overregulation of the ACA. Just like banks consolidating, hospitals 
consolidating, healthcare consolidating--all these different entities 
are consolidating because of overregulation created by Democrats. Our 
rural transformation funding is going to set those rural counties free 
to do what they think is best with the money.
  All right. Let's go to the next Democrat argument. Let's talk about 
these COVID-era subsidies for the ACA plans. What a joke. I just 
absolutely cannot believe they are going to hide behind this one.
  So think back to the original ACA. The ACA sets up funding to help 
supplement insurance premiums for a group of people based upon their 
ability to pay. That is probably 70, 80 percent of the premium right 
now, on average, is the way it was set up to be. In some cases, it was 
95 percent.
  But then COVID comes along, and the Democrats boost those subsidies, 
so that now many Americans aren't contributing anything to those 
particular funds. And what this has led to is mass fraud, OK? So these 
COVID-era subsidies have led to mass fraud.
  Let me put some dollars and cents on this. When the ACA was first 
written, they thought we would be spending maybe $25, $50 billion a 
year on those subsidies. Well, we are spending $150 billion a year on 
these subsidies. We think that probably a third of that is waste, 
fraud, and abuse, and I could spend the next half hour talking about 
why we think there is waste, fraud, and abuse within it. But the way it 
was created allows for waste, fraud, and abuse. I can't fix that today. 
I can't fix it tomorrow. We need to fund the government and get back to 
work on this issue, and we know how to do it.
  But for Republicans to agree to these subsidies being continued, the 
first thing we have to do is to address the fraud. I bet that is a 90-
10 issue. I bet that 90 percent of Americans would like for us to fix 
the fraud in that issue and make sure the people who need it the most 
are getting the help.
  So that is one issue on the COVID-era subsidies. The next big issue--
I want to go back to premiums, OK. That is the real issue. These 
premiums are going to go up 20 percent this year. So regardless of what 
we do here, the premiums are going to go up 20 percent.
  That is where the sting is coming from, is how much these premiums 
are going up, and my friends across the aisle just want to keep 
throwing money at it. They want this corporate welfare where these 
subsidies are basically enriching big insurance companies. That is 
exactly what is happening. These subsidies are basically going to this 
consolidated insurance business out there.
  Most States, like mine, only have two or three insurance carriers 
left standing. When these subsidies go up for the people with an ACA 
plan, guess what? They are going to use that as an excuse to increase 
your plan that you are getting through that hard-working job of yours 
as well.
  So to have a meaningful discussion about these COVID-era subsidies, 
we need to--No. 1 is to address the fraud, and No. 2 is we need to 
address the rate of increase of these premiums as well.
  And listen to this: Even if this COVID subsidy went away, the Federal 
Government on average would be paying 80 percent of the premium. So we 
would be paying 80 percent rather than 90 percent of the premium. But 
if the premium has gone up 20 percent, just think about the difference 
on 80 percent versus 90 percent. That is where the sting is truly 
coming from.
  When do Democrats want to have a serious conversation about this, the 
real conversation about the cost of healthcare?
  My friends across the aisle want to bring these two issues together. 
They want to, you know, take a hostage. In order to keep the government 
open, they are saying: You have to give us these COVID-era subsidies, 
to prolong them. They are supposed to expire December 31 of this year. 
The Democrats passed this. It was supposed to be for COVID, and, like 
all the other COVID subsidies that drove us into massive debt, there 
was a sunset on it. They wrote the law. If they didn't want it to 
sunset, why didn't they continue the program for infinity just like 
they did with the original subsidies?
  So this, to me, is two different issues. We have the issue here of 
keeping the government open, and we have the issue here of healthcare. 
I want to take care of both of them, but it is going to take weeks, 
probably months, for us to come up with a solution for these COVID 
subsidies. So I don't think it is fair to keep the government closed 
down because they weren't willing to talk about this.
  It is interesting that we didn't hear a thing about this--at least I 
didn't--from the minority leader, that he was concerned about this, 
until just a couple days ago. Again, it makes me think he wanted the 
shutdown. He wanted the shutdown to appease his liberal left base.
  Here is another argument the Democrats are making. You know, there is 
a fight about healthcare for illegal aliens. I don't think anyone can 
argue that before our working-families tax-cut bill--our signature bill 
that is going to grow the economy--that before that legislation, that 
illegal aliens were getting healthcare. Even the CBO--and I hate to 
pick and choose when I use the CBO numbers--but the CBO said that 2 
million illegal aliens were getting healthcare subsidies or free 
healthcare because of the loose, just unfettered process that States 
were using to verify who was eligible for Medicare.
  That is not me; that is not a Republican; the CBO said 2 million 
illegal

[[Page S6912]]

aliens were getting care each year on the backs of American taxpayers. 
I don't know if that number is perfectly accurate, but if it is 1 
million, 2 million, or 3 million, certainly illegal aliens were getting 
free healthcare on the backs of American taxpayers.
  So when the Democrats want to go in there and gut that bill and end 
the fixes, the loopholes we closed, I don't know how they can look 
America in the eye and say that is not the case.
  But regardless, I think that is a small issue. I think that is a red 
herring. That is not really what the issue is. It is just one more 
thing they can argue about to get America's eyes off the true challenge 
within their own party.
  The minority leader says we are not negotiating. I just think that is 
such an untruth, that we are not negotiating--my gosh. The 
Appropriations Committee--the Republican-led Appropriations Committee--
has been negotiating since President Trump was--actually, since we 
were--sworn in, in January.
  And we have just nothing but compliments to Senator Susan Collins and 
her team and the Democrats on the Appropriations team. They are doing 
their job, but Leader Schumer--Minority Leader Schumer--wants to do 
this negotiation in the back doors. He wants to continue the status quo 
where, for the government funding, they go back behind a door in a 
closed office. The cameras are off, and they want to cut a deal.
  You can talk about the four corners up here: the Speaker of the 
House, minority leader of the House, minority leader in the Senate, and 
then the majority leader, the head of the Senate here, of course, John 
Thune.
  So Senator Schumer thinks they can go behind closed doors--and there 
are two New Yorkers in that room--and build all their bridges to 
nowhere. But Republicans want to fund the government in open daylight, 
through the Appropriations Committee, with the lights on and the 
cameras on.
  The Appropriations Committee passes legislation. There are 12 buckets 
of funding to fund this discretionary spending that Senate Republicans 
are trying to lead here--12 buckets of funding. Again, under their 
great leadership, they have passed 8 of these 12 buckets out of 
committee. It is almost 90 percent of funding for the Federal 
Government--discretionary spending, again, of course--that they have 
already finished the job on.
  Senator Susan Collins has done an incredible job getting it through 
committee--bipartisan. You look at the votes on these bills, and it is 
25 to 0, 23 to 2, 24 to 1--huge bipartisan victories done in the light 
of day. And then those should come here to the floor, and let America 
see exactly what is in them.
  And if there is a bridge to nowhere in there, let me stand up here 
and offer an amendment to strike that funding, and then let that 
Senator defend why his or her State should have this bridge to nowhere.
  That is what is supposed to happen in the light of day, but Senator 
Schumer wants to go back to the Dark Ages, where he can go in a back 
room--a back, New York room--and then cut a deal for all of his bridges 
to nowhere.
  The House, I believe, has passed all 12 of their funding bills out of 
committee.
  Now, we have got three of those across the floor. There are five more 
sitting there, but Senator Schumer refuses to release anybody on his 
side to vote for them, even though they voted for them in committee. 
Why? It is part of the political theater. He wants this shutdown.
  So I think America sees this, that we wanted to negotiate in good 
faith, but Schumer's idea--Senator Schumer's idea--of negotiating is 
now to go behind closed doors, where he is one of four people in the 
room, and then go tell the President, who was elected by 28 million 
people, and he wants to tell him what to do.
  So I asked, you know, as we go through this process--I asked myself 
this morning: So what are AOC and the Squad, who are empowered by the 
liberal legacy media, asking Senator Schumer to do or really telling 
him what to do? What are AOC, the Squad, the liberal media--what are 
they demanding from Senator Schumer?
  Well, they told him to take a hostage, right? So he did. He took a 
hostage. He took these COVID-era subsidies as hostage and the $1.5 
trillion of added funding as hostage, and now they are asking him to 
shoot the hostage.
  So the Squad and Senator Schumer, they took the bait. They took the 
bait--hook, line, and sinker--like jumping into Brer Rabbit's briar 
patch. And guess what. They are about to get mowed down like dry 
cornstalks in a Kansas tornado. They took the bait. They took the bait, 
empowering the White House to finally shrink this Federal Government, 
this monster of a beast that we have here now.
  You know, when Joe Biden was sworn in, in 2021, there were about 2.8 
million Federal employees. So President Biden started with 2.8 million. 
By the time he finished, we had over 3 million Federal employees.
  Now, President Trump is going to split the difference there. So we 
are still not back to pre-COVID, pre-Biden levels of Federal 
employment.
  Look, I am grateful for every Federal employee, and many of them do 
incredible work. But I think it is no secret that we could all be a 
little more efficient, that we all could work a little harder. And if 
we had a few less regulations, I think we would need a few less Federal 
employees as well.
  I don't want to sound callous or not caring. I am grateful for every 
job an American has. But my goal would be to help move some of these 
people with some of these Federal jobs and move them into the real 
world and adding to GDP rather than subtracting from GDP. That would be 
my goal.
  There is a reasonable number of people we need to do the work of the 
Federal Government, but I just think going from 2.8 million pre-COVID 
to over 3 million just seems to be too much.
  So, like I said, the Squad has led the Democrat Party into Brer 
Rabbit's briar patch, and they are about to get mowed down like 
cornstalks in a Kansas twister.
  I think the last thing I want to go back to here is that the 
Democrats were saying that they really want to add $1.5 trillion to our 
debt. Again, we have $37 trillion in national debt now as a nation. We 
are spending almost $3 billion a day on interest. That is right, 
America--$3 billion a day on interest alone, a trillion dollars a year. 
And they want to add $1.5 trillion to our national debt.
  But get this: In November of this last year, America rejected that 
plan, OK. That is why the voters gave Republicans the White House, the 
House, and the Senate. They didn't want us to borrow another $1.5 
trillion.
  So what is motivating the Squad? What is motivating Senator Schumer 
to do this, to shut down the government? What is motivating their lust 
for power and their control of the American people?
  You know, I think the socialists have always thought, if you 
controlled healthcare, that is the first step in controlling the 
people, right? So what is motivating them?
  I think No. 1 is--let's just be frank here: It is Trump derangement 
syndrome. I think that is their No. 1 motivation to shut the government 
down. It is Trump derangement syndrome. They have a hatred for 
President Trump that I have never seen anything like this before in my 
life.
  I think the second reason is the liberal left has not realized they 
lost the election. You know, you go through these stages of grief and 
denial. That is the first one. The liberals have still not realized 
they lost the election. Seventy-eight million people voted for 
Republicans to control the House, the Senate, and the White House. They 
are rejecting the Democrats' lust for power to control Americans, to 
borrow from our grandchildren. So that is their motivation.

  Look, if they want to change these policies, then go win the 
election. If you want to change the policies, go win the election. You 
know, I think back to 2020, and the Democrats had a sweep, right? The 
Democrats swept the elections in 2020, and they added $2 trillion a 
year in debt. So they grew the budget from about $5 trillion to $7 
trillion overnight. But when it came to keeping the government open, 
the Republicans didn't go back to them and say: Hey, we are going to 
keep the government open if you decrease your spending by $2 trillion a 
year.
  We didn't take that hostage. We could have. We could have. Does that

[[Page S6913]]

make sense, comparing the 2020 election to this election? The Democrats 
swept in 2020. They came in and added $2 trillion of spending. But over 
a dozen times, Republicans walked the plank and said: We will keep the 
government open.
  I wasn't happy about it then. I am not happy about it now. I am not 
happy about the spending levels that we are fighting for right now. I 
think that they are way too much.
  If you want to continue your liberal, socialist policies, Democrats, 
go win an election. Go win an election. We came through with a bill for 
America to cut taxes, to grow jobs, to make the government more 
efficient, and look at what is happening. The gas prices are down. 
Grocery prices are down. The border is secure. All of those types of 
things are happening under Republican leadership.
  We want to address the cost of healthcare. We truly, truly do. I want 
to point out that we are just not going to negotiate borrowing another 
$1.5 trillion for continued throwing money at healthcare issues in 
order to keep the government open.
  Again, these are apples and oranges. We need to open the government 
back. We need to fund the government for a couple of months--a clean 
CR. Let Senator Collins and her team, working with Democrats, get that 
other 10 percent of funding across the finish line. In 2 months' time, 
we can bring those bills to the floor in front of the American public, 
debate them, offer amendments, make Senators defend their bridges to 
nowhere, as I call them, and then continue to work on healthcare.
  And it is not going to be easy. It is going to be painful. When $5 
trillion is being spent on healthcare in this country every year, and 
all these big corporations are grabbing that money as it goes by their 
front desk, it is not going to be easy to drive down the cost of 
healthcare, but we have to do it.
  To me, this is common sense. We are asking the Democrats to vote for 
a clean CR, based upon levels of spending that every Senate Democrat in 
here that was in office voted for just 7 months ago. Seven months ago, 
every Democrat in here voted for these spending limits.
  Again, a dozen times under Joe Biden, Republicans walked that plank 
and kept the government open. I pledge to you; I pledge to every 
Democrat: No one is going to work harder than I will to help solve this 
riddle for healthcare, focused on driving the cost of healthcare down.
  But at the end of the day, the shutdown keeps us from doing the real 
work of the people, from having real debates about the cost of 
healthcare, our national debt, our spending, and all those things. 
During a shutdown, things freeze up here, and we can't do the work that 
we need to do in our communities to address these different problems.
  One of our Presidents once said this, and I am going to quote him:

       I know that it is said that one of the easiest things in 
     the world is to give away somebody else's money. But 
     government does not have money except the money it takes from 
     the people. And so every time we talk about spending money on 
     this or that program--

  On healthcare or COVID subsidies--

     let us remember that the government has no money except what 
     it takes from the people. And the people know that.

  And they are feeling it. They are feeling the pain of the government 
taking so much money. That is my quote.
  I go back to the President's quote here:

       And the people are tired of big government taking all the 
     money they earn.

  Boy, if you are a Senator up here and you are listening to anybody 
back home, I think you understand folks back home are tired of Big 
Government taking all the money they can earn.
  So I ask my friends across the aisle--and they truly are friends. 
There is not an enemy. There is not a Democrat I would call an enemy. 
President Reagan said he had no political enemy, only political 
opponents. There is no difference than when we see gladiators on Sunday 
playing these football games, and at the end of the game, they are 
shaking each other's hands. Both parties should fight for what they 
think is right. But if we stay fixed on the goals--the common goals--
working toward a balanced budget, keeping the government open, driving 
down the cost of healthcare, and all of these things, I bet most of us 
agree on those goals.
  But in the meantime, we need to keep the government open. We need to 
pass a clean CR.
  Again, let's let the Appropriations Committee continue their 
negotiation to do their job, as we all work together up here.
  So as long as we stay on those same goals--those same goals, like I 
said--we want to keep the government open. We want to work toward a 
balanced budget. I want to fix healthcare. I want to fix the cost of 
healthcare.
  To anyone up here who agrees on those same goals, I will reach out my 
hand across the aisle, and I will pledge that we will listen and work 
together in good faith. But for today, let's pass a clean CR.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rounds). The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. RICKETTS. The government is shut down today, and the 
responsibility lies squarely on the minority leader and the Democrats. 
In fact, you can call it his shutdown.
  Republicans have offered a clean continuing resolution that would 
keep government open to allow us to continue working on the 
appropriations process, and my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle have called foul. Somehow this is unfair that we ought to have a 
negotiation. In fact, they are demanding more than a trillion dollars 
in new spending to be able to keep the government open for just 7 
weeks.
  They want money for illegal immigrants to get healthcare. They want 
more subsidies for the pandemic-era insurance. They want to end the 
rural healthcare fund that Republicans put in place for our rural 
hospitals. They demand all of this, saying the clean continuing 
resolution that we have offered is not sufficient.
  Hypocrisy. This is hypocrisy.
  Thirteen times in the Biden administration Democrats voted for a 
continuing resolution. Four times they have voted for this exact level 
of spending; this budget, four times in the last 18 months.
  In fact, I have got a chart here that shows the percentage of 
Democrat Senators who supported these continuing resolutions, and you 
can see the numbers are almost 100 percent all the way across. And when 
it is not 100 percent, it is 98 percent. The minority leader himself 
voted for this very continuing resolution four times in a row before 
this case. Hypocrisy.
  They are putting these unreasonable, radical-left demands in front of 
us instead of keeping government open.
  Let me share with you a quote from our minority leader. In 2013, he 
said:

       What if I persuaded my caucus to say, I'm not going to pay 
     our bills unless I get my way? It is a politics of idiocy, of 
     confrontation, of paralysis.

  Further, the minority leader said on January 24, 2024:

       Passing the CR, of course, will prevent a harmful and 
     unnecessary government shutdown. No reasonable Member on 
     either side--Democrat or Republican--wants a government 
     shutdown.

  Both sides recognize that a government shutdown would mean crushing 
delays to veterans programs; delays to nutrition programs for women, 
infants, and children; delayed benefits for our military; and so much 
more.
  Now, as I mentioned, the Democrats have said this is about 
healthcare, but let me read you a quote from the junior Senator from 
Connecticut. He said, when talking about healthcare, that ``there is a 
time and a place to debate healthcare . . . but not when the funding of 
the Federal Government, and all the lives that are impacted by it, hang 
in the balance.''
  The hypocrisy of the minority leader of the Democrats is 
breathtaking. It is stunning.
  During the Biden administration, they were happy to pass continuing 
resolutions--happy to. And, in fact, when given the very same 
continuing resolution, they voted yes on it four times in a row. Now 
they say no for partisan political reasons, driven by their radical 
leftwing.
  And, again, they say they want to make this about healthcare. How 
disingenuous. First of all, let's examine the COVID subsidies that they 
want. First of all, they are the COVID subsidies. These are pandemic 
subsidies meant for a pandemic.
  Folks, news flash: The pandemic has been over for 4 years. The 
Democrats

[[Page S6914]]

were the ones who set the expiration date on it. And the Democrats, if 
they were so concerned about this, had all of last year to bring it up 
and address it and extend it, once again, if they had chosen to. They 
chose not to.
  All of a sudden, crying about these subsidies now, just smacks of 
hypocrisy.
  And as I just read you, the junior Senator from Connecticut's remark, 
when it suited them before, they didn't want to talk about healthcare 
when they were talking about continuing resolutions and government 
shutdowns.
  Folks, this shutdown does mean that folks in my home State of 
Nebraska could see services diminish. It could mean that, for example, 
Social Security offices may be understaffed--Social Security checks are 
going to go out, but services may be diminished. Women and children 
will not be able to enroll in the WIC Program. The person who is 
supposed to help with IRS questions is not available. National parks 
may be closed. All these services may be degraded and all because the 
Democrats are holding the American public and Nebraskans in my State 
hostage for their radical-left demands.
  The Democrats should do what they have done 13 times in the Biden 
administration, vote for a continuing resolution. Help us continue our 
work on appropriations because that is the way the system is supposed 
to work.
  We have already passed three bipartisan appropriations bills. The 
Appropriations Committee has more bipartisan bills ready to work on.
  This can all be over if the Democrats will simply vote for a 
continuing resolution that they have already voted yes on four times 
over the last 18 months and 13 times during the Biden administration.
  If the American public is looking for answers, they have to look no 
further than the Democrats to find out who is responsible for this. 
Republicans have offered this continuing resolution and have voted for 
it. And, in fact, three Democrats have voted for the continuing 
resolution, including an Independent who caucuses with the Democrats.
  So we will continue to do our part by voting for this continuing 
resolution and by continuing to put it up to give the Democrats a 
chance to get government back open so we can continue the people's 
business and work on these appropriations bills, which is what we are 
supposed to be doing.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today as millions of Americans 
stand on the edge of a healthcare cliff. I join my Democratic 
colleagues in continuing to fight to reopen the government and to 
prevent Americans' healthcare costs from skyrocketing.
  A critical part of governing is finding common ground. You don't 
always pick your neighbors, as the Presiding Officer knows--we have 
worked together for many, many years--but you find a way to live next 
to your neighbors, as we do, and to work with them.
  Making healthcare more affordable should be a bipartisan issue. And 
some of my Republican colleagues know we need to act and we need to get 
something done and the overwhelming majority of Americans agree. I 
worked that way in the Senate. For a number of years, I was ranked No. 
1 for bipartisan bills and No. 3 for passing bills into law because 
when we sit down together to work things out, we can get things done.
  Courage is about willing to stand next to someone you don't always 
agree with for the betterment of this country. That means finding some 
common ground. It doesn't mean saying: My way or the highway. It 
doesn't mean, when you are the President of the United States, 
canceling meetings, doing one at the last minute, and then, with the 
Democratic leaders of our country, putting up a deepfake video that was 
incredibly offensive, poking at them instead of taking this issue 
seriously. They came to him in good faith and still do.
  Unfortunately, right now, our Republican colleagues are not working 
with us to find a bipartisan agreement to prevent the government 
shutdown and address the healthcare crisis. We know that even when they 
float ideas--which we surely do appreciate--in the end, the President 
appears to make the call. He made the call on tariffs, even though so 
many of our Republican colleagues disagree with him on that. He made 
the call on certain nominees like R.F.K., Jr. He made the call when it 
came to certain provisions in the ``Big Beautiful Betrayal'' bill, 
which many of our colleagues didn't like, including the nutrition 
program decision at the end to reward the 10 States with the highest 
error rate when it comes to SNAP. I know none of them are in the 
Midwest.
  That is why my Democratic colleagues and I want to reach an 
agreement, not only with the Republicans in this Chamber, but we also 
need the President at the table. He prides himself for the ``Art of the 
Deal,'' and it is time for him to make a deal. We are working so hard 
to make sure that more than 20 million Americans who rely on the 
Affordable Care Act--it is called different things in different States; 
in my State, it is called MNsure--have access to affordable health 
coverage. It tends to be a lot of individual buyers in the market. It 
tends to be a lot of small businesses. And over a quarter of the 
farmers in this country rely on it.
  Again, it is called different things in different States, but it is a 
plan to allow people who maybe aren't at a big corporation to be able 
to have healthcare. A while back, maybe they didn't want to leave a big 
company or if they left without being in a big company or in the 
government or something like that, they couldn't even get healthcare at 
all. That is why the Affordable Care Act was passed.
  I would make a lot of improvements to it, and we do have some 
opportunities to do that. But right now, we need to make sure we don't 
push them off a healthcare insurance premium cliff. This is on top of 
the draconian Medicaid cuts that are going to push 15 million people 
off their healthcare that were in the One Big Beautiful Bill and also 
the Medicare cuts, which no one intended to have $500 billion in 
Medicare cuts, I guess, of our colleagues on the other side. But the 
debt accumulated from the bill of $4 trillion was so big, it triggered 
automatic Medicare cuts, which are hitting and going to hit rural 
hospitals, which they are now putting into their bottom line.
  While they are staring that down and the Medicaid cuts, they are also 
looking at the fact that so many of their patients and people who visit 
rural clinics--those who often tend to be in the hospitals are on the 
Affordable Care Act because rural areas--and I am focused on rural 
areas because I went on a 13-county tour in my State--rural areas tend 
to have more people that are small business owners percentagewise and 
also that are farmers and ranchers.
  So this is not a December thing; this is not a January thing; this is 
a now thing because those premiums are hitting November 1 when that 
market opens up. Right now, millions of Americans are staring down the 
reality that their healthcare premiums could double. For many families, 
that will mean making impossible choices to make ends meet or losing 
coverage altogether.
  This is preventable, but we have to act now. Over 20 million 
Americans are enrolled in an Affordable Care Act health insurance plan. 
If we don't act, they are going to be forced to make impossible 
decisions. And that doubling number that says the premiums are going to 
double came out of a study just this week by the Kaiser Family 
Foundation. If Congress doesn't come together in a bipartisan way to 
extend these credits, these families, farmers, ranchers, small business 
owners, entrepreneurs, seniors, people living in rural communities will 
have to pay an average of double every month, hundreds of dollars more 
every month--not every year, every month--to keep their health 
insurance.
  In Minnesota, nearly 90,000 people will see their premiums increase 
by double digits. You can say: Well, I am not on that kind of 
healthcare. I work at such and such company. You don't know the day, 
especially with these tariffs, when people are starting to get laid off 
at manufacturing companies like John Deere or that a farmer's business 
goes bankrupt--his farm goes bankrupt because bankruptcies for small 
farms are at an alltime high in the last 5 years--you don't know when

[[Page S6915]]

it is going to be you. It is like a lottery, especially right now, with 
the crazy things going on in this economy. So even for people who 
aren't on the Affordable Care Act, this affects them.

  For many, this will put healthcare coverage out of reach. This is not 
political theater, I say to the President, after he posted that 
offensive video. This is not a joke. These are real Americans who are 
facing these challenges.
  The loss of this tax credit will raise premiums for everyone. 
Minnesotans have already started to receive notice that their costs 
will increase. One constituent is bracing for more than a 27-percent 
increase in their premium next year. Another whose husband's job was 
just eliminated called the 19-percent increase in health insurance 
costs their family is facing incomprehensible with the loss of income 
that they already face. And this is before adding in the extra costs 
people will be forced to take on if the tax credits are not extended.
  So, if you noticed, I used those numbers 19 and 20, and you are 
thinking: Well, she just said they doubled. This is before that 
happens. This is what is happening in the market right now because of a 
number of factors going on that the President should be dealing with.
  People are going to be socked with this, smacked with this, right 
while the price of groceries has been going up. I think the President 
promised he was going to bring costs down on day 1, and we are on 
something like day 255, and the opposite is happening. Anyone who goes 
into a grocery store and walks out and looks at their receipt knows 
exactly what I am talking about. As to the people who are in the 
grocery aisle and see the cost of beef, they know what I am talking 
about. As to the people who get their electricity bills, they know what 
I am talking about. Those aren't deepfakes. Those aren't fake videos 
that the President puts up on Truth Social. Those are real bills.
  So, especially as this is going on because of these tariffs--and 
could I just add, since I have the floor here, as to the latest on 
tariffs on sofas and cabinets and lumber? It is already too expensive 
for Americans to buy a house or to rent a house or to rent an 
apartment, and now we are going to see major increases to home 
furnishings--and while we are in the middle of a housing crisis. It is 
literally one of the worst things he could do right now, but he did it.
  So all that is not nothing. All of that kind of sets the stage for 
why the healthcare cost, which is one of the most expensive for people 
just on a yearly basis, is so devastating.
  One of my constituents shared that while they planned for higher 
premiums, they didn't expect a more than $2,000 increase for the same 
coverage next year. Like so many others, they were concerned that even 
if they switched to a cheaper plan--and you know how that is. You are 
betting, and you are trying to guess and estimate what is going to go 
wrong in your family. Is your kid going to have some kind of surgery or 
break a leg? Is your husband going to have to have some kind of 
healthcare checkup that will be expensive? You have to always calculate 
those things. Like so many others, again, they were thinking ``Well, 
should I switch to a cheaper plan to save money and then hope I don't 
get sick?'' and then they would be more exposed to higher costs. Those 
are the kinds of things people are doing right now.
  It is like the woman who Jeanne Shaheen had at a spotlight forum, 
which we did this last week, who had M.S. She had actually talked to 
her doctor about whether she could ration--kind of like people used to 
do with insulin for diabetes before we put those caps on insulin--could 
she ration her medication for M.S. The doctor said: No. That is not how 
this works. It will just grow the pressure in your brain and make your 
symptoms worse.
  Another Minnesotan wrote to me that without the tax credits, their 
family of four would have to downgrade their health plan and spend 
significantly more on their health insurance than they do on their 
mortgage.
  Another said that he expected his family would have to pay an 
additional $16,000 per year for their health coverage if they had no 
healthcare tax credits.
  One Minnesotan shared:

       I cannot absorb additional costs and will be forced into a 
     catastrophic plan if these reported double digit increases go 
     into effect.

  Just because someone can't afford to stay insured doesn't mean they 
need healthcare less.
  One of the things that I learned that maybe I hadn't thought through 
when I went to these rural hospitals was the fact that because there is 
a high percentage of these farmers and people in small towns on these 
plans--ours is called MNsure, like I said--they are already hit by the 
Medicaid cuts--the hospitals--by the Medicare cuts because it is an 
older population, but they actually cared a lot about this--the 
doctors, the nurses, the people running the hospitals--because they 
know that the people won't be able to afford this if these premiums 
double. They will choose not to get healthcare insurance. Then what 
will happen is they will end up in their emergency rooms in hospitals 
that are already strapped thin, and they won't be able to afford--they 
will treat them, but they won't be able to afford it for a long period 
of time. So they, time and time again, mention to me that these 
affordable tax credits expiring or not being maintained will create a 
major problem.
  Already, approximately one-third of Americans report not taking 
medications as prescribed due to the costs.
  Jason, from Pennsylvania, was able to get lifesaving coverage when he 
was diagnosed with thyroid cancer, through the Affordable Care Act 
marketplace.
  He said:

       It's only because of the premium tax credits that I've been 
     able to afford that coverage.

  Now faced with the expiration of these credits, he understands the 
consequences for people like him.
  He said:

       If you're faced with a choice of bankruptcy or debt or 
     saving your life, you're probably going to choose your life, 
     but the consequences of that, of having an immense amount of 
     debt--the rest of your life could be ruined because of that.

  Another cancer survivor who has always made health insurance a 
priority also fears what unaffordable health insurance could mean for 
patients like her.
  She said:

       It means that I don't have to wait around . . . to find out 
     about a disease that could have been cured if it had been 
     detected soon enough. [The insurance] means I don't have to 
     forgo my entire life savings and my home because of medical 
     bills. I don't have to forgo lifesaving treatment because I 
     can't afford it, and that's all about to change. Without the 
     tax credit, I don't know if I'm gonna be able to afford 
     health care--the kind of health care that's going to save my 
     life.

  Already, as I noted, because of Medicaid cuts that were passed in the 
big, beautiful betrayal of a bill, more than 300 rural hospitals, 200 
health centers, and 500 nursing homes are likely to close. This means 
less accessible care for rural communities, longer drives to access 
care, fewer places to seek care in an emergency, and more hours taken 
away from work for more caregiving or other responsibilities. Fewer 
patients will go to that doctor's visit or get that lifesaving 
screening. They will not get the surgeries they need. Many will get 
sicker. Ultimately, as I noted, more patients are going to end up in 
emergency rooms, and these hospitals are going to have to take on the 
additional burden of more uncompensated care.
  None of this happens in a vacuum. As I noted, these Medicaid cuts--
and Medicaid provides healthcare for at least one in five rural 
Minnesotans, more than 31 percent of children in our State, and more 
than half of all nursing home residents across our State. So this is 
about seniors, people with disabilities, and kids, and that is why 
Medicaid is so important.
  For me, my dad, in his later years, got late-onset Alzheimer's. He 
was in one place, and then we moved him to another place. But I knew 
the exact date as to when his savings were going to go away, and we 
were going into those savings. Sadly, we lost him. But I knew that 
exact date because I was going to have to move him to another nursing 
home--another assisted living--that took Medicaid, and I made plans 
with them. I knew that date.
  So many people in this country know that date. Even if they are not a 
senior who is relying on Medicaid, their kids, their spouses, their 
grandkids kind of know when those savings--if they had

[[Page S6916]]

any savings to begin with--are going to run out.
  So Medicaid goes way beyond the individuals who have no savings at 
all. It actually helps people who do have some savings. It helps people 
who have worked their lives through, like my dad. Medicaid is there as 
a safety net for people.
  Over the last few months, I have heard from thousands of 
constituents, including seniors in Minnesota, from Sunrise Village in 
Milaca that I visited, to Senior Living at Watkins in Winona, to the 
Pillars of Prospect Park and Episcopal Homes in the metro. They are 
worried about their healthcare.
  I heard from one constituent from Inver Grove Heights, who told me 
that Medicaid helps her to afford the cost of her father's memory care.
  I think about what a constituent who works with adults with 
disabilities told me. She is a mental health therapist for a woman who 
had a tracheotomy and is wheelchair-bound and requires nursing care. 
She is also the aunt of a man with Down syndrome, with many needs, who 
is in a residential home.
  She said: I am concerned about the possible Medicaid service cuts to 
the people who most need it.
  I have also heard from a constituent named Lola, whose daughter was 
diagnosed with leukemia. A social worker advised Lola that her 
employer-based insurance may not cover the cancer treatments her 
daughter needed, and she connected her with Medicaid. She said that 
``Medicaid helped completely'' with the surgeries and the T-cell 
therapy. Lola said, ``Using my own insurance would have caused a lot of 
delays, because it would not have covered'' what she needed.
  I heard from Robby, who, after years in an adult foster care 
facility, now lives independently with a roommate because of Medicaid's 
disability waiver and community-based services.
  I have gotten to meet some of these incredible Minnesotans while 
visiting care providers who help people with disabilities.
  I think about the progress we have made so people can either live in 
their homes or they can live in a group home, and they can have jobs. 
We just can't go backwards.
  People will feel the impacts of these cuts, and we know it.
  I will close with this: After learning that her insurance cost is set 
to skyrocket next year, a woman asked:

       What can you and the Senate do to make sure I don't have to 
     stop getting my insurance?

  We can do something, and it is something that so many of my 
colleagues agree with, especially after the cuts that were made, 
especially after the bludgeoning tariffs and what they are doing to the 
cost of things for people. It is not going to fix everything, that is 
for sure, but it is going to save a lot of lives, and it is going to 
help people contain costs so they don't go over that cliff.
  As Minnesota's former Senator--I have his desk--Hubert Humphrey once 
said: The moral test of government isn't just how it treats the young 
and the healthy; it is also how it treats the sick, the elderly, and 
people with disabilities. That is definitely true for us right now, and 
I believe this is a moral test for all Americans.
  At a time when so many families are struggling just to make ends 
meet, we can't sit back here and just play a blame game and look at the 
polls and da, da, da. We can do something. It is really pretty simple: 
We must work to protect Americans' access to healthcare. We must 
protect our rural hospitals. We must address our healthcare crisis.
  As I know, it is not a December or a January problem, it is a now 
problem, and it is completely within our grasp to do this, and it is 
certainly within the President's grasp to bring his party with him.
  So stop, Mr. President, posting those fake, offensive videos, and 
start helping Americans with their healthcare.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Curtis). The majority leader.

                          ____________________