[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 173 (Monday, October 20, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7162-S7166]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS AND EXTENSIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to Proceed
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R.
5371.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371, making
continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year
2026, and for other purposes.
Government Funding
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, you have to give the Democrats credit for
one thing, and that is a healthy dose of gall. Both the House and
Senate Democrat leaders were out last week and claiming that they can't
fund the government until--get this--we solve the ``Republican
healthcare crisis.''
That is right--``the Republican healthcare crisis.'' It is truly
amazing how a program Democrats created and tax credits that they chose
to sunset have now become the Republicans' crisis. Republicans, in
fact, never had anything to do with it. Democrats created Obamacare--
alone. They implemented the enhanced tax credits--alone. And they chose
a sunset date for those tax credits--alone.
Democrats are solely, solely responsible for the Obamacare tax credit
cliff, and yet they are trying to pin this disaster on Republicans,
while at the very same time, they are asking Republicans to bail them
out. It is really kind of ironic. Democrats may not win a lot of points
for truthfulness, but you have to give them credit for gall.
While Democrats may have created this healthcare situation, I have
made it clear, from the beginning, that Republicans are willing to have
a discussion about how to address it. In fact, I am perfectly willing
to guarantee Democrats a vote. But none of that is going to happen
until Democrats reopen the government.
We are not going to negotiate on anything until Democrats stop
holding government funding hostage. And if they really want to address
their Obamacare mess, they should stop running out the clock on a deal.
All they are doing by that action is keeping the government shut down
and enhancing--enhancing, believe it or not--the chances this situation
doesn't get fixed because the clock is running.
Before I leave the subject of healthcare, I do have to mention the
irony that, while Democrats claim they are defending Americans'
healthcare, their shutdown has actually suspended valuable healthcare
services for a lot of Americans. Medicare and rural patients are
currently dealing with the elimination of telehealth services, thanks
to the government shutdown.
Telehealth, of course, increases the accessibility of care and lets
those who live far from medical treatment, or who otherwise struggle to
travel, to conduct prescription refill appointments or other visits
from the comfort of their home. But that assistance is currently being
denied to them thanks to the Democrats' shutdown.
But I am not sure why I am talking about shutdown costs. Democrats
have made it very clear that they don't care about the costs of the
shutdown--to anyone.
Democrats used to care, of course, or so they claimed. In fact, I
could fill a book with Democrat quotes on how shutdowns harm hard-
working Americans.
But over the past 3 weeks, it has become clear that Democrats'
previous concerns had more to do with politics than with principle.
Democrats were against shutdowns when it served their purposes, and now
that it serves their purposes--or so they think--to keep the government
closed, they are all for shutdowns, no matter how many Americans have
to suffer in the process.
I have talked about healthcare today, and Democrats would definitely
like Americans to think that that is what this shutdown is about. But,
of course, the biggest driver of this shutdown is not healthcare or any
other issue. It is the Democrats' far-left base.
Leftwing activists demanded a showdown with President Trump, and
Democrats fell in line. That is why you see the Democrat leader, who
actually voted to fund the government in the spring, leading the
shutdown brigade this time around.
Far-left groups were rallying this weekend, and the Democrat leader
and other Democrat Senators were out paying homage. And if these same
leftwing groups have their way, Democrats will be keeping up the
shutdown for a long time to come. They don't really care about a
solution. This is about politics.
For the sake of the American people, let's hope that there are some
Democrat Senators who will eventually put the needs of their
constituents over the demands of their far-left base and work with
Republicans to pass the clean, nonpartisan funding measure that is
sitting right here in front of us today. And when passed, it will be
sent to the President and signed into law, and this government will
open up again.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The Democratic leader is recognized.
Government Funding
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, we enter another week of Donald Trump's
government shutdown, and Republicans seem happy not to work, happy not
to negotiate, happy to let healthcare premiums spike for over 20
million working and middle-class Americans.
Our country is staring down the barrel of a healthcare catastrophe,
and Republicans will spend this week either vacationing or holding pep
rallies at the White House. It has been over a month since the House of
Representatives even took a single rollcall vote. That is shameful.
That is derelict. Government workers must work without getting paid;
House Republicans get paid without working.
What about the Democrats? Our position remains the same: We want to
end the shutdown as soon as we can and fix the ACA premium crisis that
looms over 20 million hard-working Americans and many tens of millions
more whose premiums will also go up.
Look, the ACA premium crisis is not a fix-it-later issue like
Republicans keep pretending it is. It is a fix-it-now issue because,
very soon, Americans are going to have to make some really difficult
choices about which healthcare plan they choose for next year. When
they see the increase in the number of dollars that these premiums will
cost them because the tax credits expired--$500 a month; $600 a month;
$1,000 a month; for older couples, over $20,000 a year--they are going
to have to make an awful choice: Do I cut out healthcare altogether and
be left alone or do I cut back on everything else to afford a
healthcare plan? Do I have to look for a new plan with different
doctors, different hospitals, higher copays, higher premiums?
Every American, just about every American--so many Americans, tens of
millions--are going to have to start making that choice in the next
month.
Health insurance prices under the ACA are now available in about a
dozen States, and Americans in those States are already seeing with
their own eyes the horrifying truth, what we have been warning about
for months; that multiple millions of people are going to pay tens of
thousands of dollars more for healthcare so vital to Americans.
When you are in a family and you know you can't provide healthcare
for them or a much reduced healthcare and you look at your spouse, you
look at your kids, and you say: What am I going to do if they get sick,
what a frightening experience for people that Republicans are putting
America through, all because they want to cut all of this healthcare,
cut Medicaid, cut so much else in healthcare to pay for tax cuts for
the wealthy.
It is just perverse. It is inside out. It is upside down.
And let's be clear about who will get hurt if these tax credits
expire. Republicans have been lying about that too. If the ACA premium
tax credits expire, the majority of people who will pay more out of
pocket are working and middle-class families. In fact, the majority of
people who benefit from the expiring tax credits live in Republican
districts.
[[Page S7163]]
The State of Louisiana, home of Speaker Johnson, is one of the States
about to suffer most.
I read an article last week from CNBC that said:
ACA enhanced subsidy lapse could hit early retirees
hardest.
Middle-class couples in their fifties and early sixties who are too
young to qualify for Medicare face the largest dollar increase in
premium payments. One Idaho couple interviewed by CNBC will see their
premiums spike not by 50 percent, not by 100 percent, but 300 percent--
$15,000 more a year just to have health insurance. That is what
financial ruin looks like.
In fact, if these tax credits expire, older Americans could end up
spending 30 percent of their income just on healthcare premiums. Can
you imagine? What kind of country do we live in? What kind of party is
this Republican Party that is unwilling to solve this problem which is
staring Americans in the face, frightening Americans from one end of
the country to the other? Yet what are Republicans doing about it?
Nothing. They are on vacation. It is unacceptable and morally
repugnant.
Democrats are demanding nothing more or less than what the
overwhelming majority of Americans already want. Even a majority of
MAGA voters want it. Fifty-eight percent of those who voted for Trump
say renew the tax credits into next year.
Americans want to keep their healthcare costs low and avoid financial
ruin. Americans want to see the government reopen as soon as possible.
Democrats agree. We are at the ready. We want to get past this crisis.
But Republicans need to wake up from whatever dream they are in because
fixing the ACA will require them to take action.
Economy
Mr. President, on the economy, Republicans like to talk about
eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. Well, they can start by looking at
Secretary Kristi Noem's expense report. This weekend, the New York
Times reported that the Department of Homeland Security has purchased
not one but two private jets--luxury jets--for Kristi Noem to the tune
of $172 million in taxpayer dollars. The administration says these are
G700 aircraft. That is one of the biggest private planes there is. And
they say they were purchased for safety reasons. Kristi Noem and the
administration say these G700 aircraft were purchased for safety
reasons. That is like saying they bought a Rolls Royce to get good
seatbelts. This just shows you how much contempt this administration
has for people struggling to make ends meet.
Let's be very clear. At a time when Americans are paying more for
groceries, falling behind on car payments, seeing their electricity
rates go up and up and up, Secretary Noem thinks it is a good use of
taxpayer dollars to buy two jets known for having ``the most spacious
cabin in the industry.'' What ever happened to the Kristi Noem who said
that any expense at DHS over $100,000 needed her personal approval?
Apparently, she wanted more legroom for flying.
This would all be perhaps a little more amusing if it wasn't so
insulting to the American people, because while Donald Trump's Cabinet
Secretaries get their private jets, the American people are getting
higher healthcare premiums, higher grocery costs, and a worsening job
market.
Let me just show this chart with a list of awful headlines about the
economy just from the last week or so.
From NBC:
U.S. consumers bearing more than half the cost of tariffs
so far, Goldman Sachs says.
In the Wall Street Journal:
Grocery Prices Keep Rising. Frustrated Consumers are Trying
to Adapt.
MarketWatch:
High inflation and lack of jobs leave Americans frustrated
with the economy.
Those are headlines from last week.
Let me get this straight. Americans pay 90 percent of the cost of
Donald Trump's tariffs for more groceries, they see fewer jobs, and now
the American people have to pay for two top-tier, private, luxury jets
for Kristi Noem.
If you want to know how much contempt Donald Trump has and how much
contempt his MAGA administration has for working people, look no
further than Noem's luxury jets.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Chicago
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, last Friday, I went back to the city of
Chicago, which I am honored to represent, and over the weekend, I had
two experiences I want to share with you. There was a real contrast,
but there was a recurring theme in both.
The first was at a church in the city of Chicago on Friday, the
Christ Lutheran Church. It is on Wilson Avenue in a section of Chicago
known as Albany Park. The church was built in 1911. You look around at
the houses outside of the church, and you think: This neighborhood has
seen a lot of change, a lot of different people who have come through
with waves of immigration. Today, it is predominantly Hispanic, but I
would imagine that the march of history would take you through many
other groups who have lived in the Albany Park neighborhood.
The pastor there is named Tom Terrell. I was meeting him for the
first time. We had a press conference inside his little church, and he
told us a story of what had happened at his church, Christ Lutheran
Church, on the previous Sunday. There aren't as many people in his
church as there were just a few months ago because a lot of them are
too afraid. They are Hispanic families. They are afraid, if they go to
their church, they might be detained or arrested or that something else
terrible might happen, but some brave souls made it to the Christ
Lutheran Church on that Sunday.
Pastor Terrell told us this story: At the end of the ceremony, at 12
noon, the people were leaving, heading home, walking away from church,
when an unmarked van pulled up, and ICE agents came out of it and
started to ask questions of the people who had just come out of church.
It was noticed in the neighborhood, what is now becoming more common in
Chicago. The neighbors started coming out with whistles. They were
standing on their front porches and blowing whistles because the ICE
agents were intimidating these people who were just leaving church.
Eventually, enough people started blowing whistles that the ICE
agents decided to tear gas the people coming out of church. They threw
the tear gas canisters and got in their van and left. Going to church
on Sunday, in Albany Park, in the city of Chicago, was an opportunity
for an ICE raid. That is what is happening in the city of Chicago. It
is not confined to that neighborhood. It is happening there and in the
surrounding suburbs.
Are the people afraid? You bet they are. They are afraid of what is
going to happen to them and their families. The stories come pouring in
one after the other.
Remember how we got started in this conversation? Remember when the
President said at his rallies, over and over again, that we are going
after rapists, terrorists, murderers, those who are criminally insane,
and those who are predators of children? They came into this country
illegally, and they are not going to stay.
Well, Christ Lutheran Church was not the place to visit if you were
looking for those categories. Those people there were not guilty of any
crime other than going to church. If that is a crime in the eyes of
some, it certainly isn't in my eyes. That is the reality, as 70 percent
of the people who are being detained and arrested in the city of
Chicago have no criminal record--no criminal record. Yet they are being
intimidated. The restaurants in many parts of the city are not what
they used to be. People are not going shopping. They are afraid to go
outside at all. That is the reality.
My second experience this week in Chicago is on the same theme.
On Saturday, an estimated 7 million Americans across this country
took to the streets, peacefully, with a singular message to President
Trump and his enablers: We have no Kings in the United States. That
included 100,000
[[Page S7164]]
people in Chicago, and I was proud to be one of them. That is the
frontline, as we know, of the President's assault on our democracy, our
civil liberties, and our rule of law. Now, I have been in Congress for
four decades, so believe me when I say that the turnout at this march
was the largest that I have ever seen at any political gathering. It
was amazing.
The President is trying to tell the world that it is unsafe to be in
the city of Chicago. Well, the weekend before this, we had our 53,000
runners in the Chicago Marathon, with tens of thousands of supporters
and families cheering them on. They weren't afraid to be in Chicago,
and neither was I.
On this last Saturday, this gathering of people in the city of
Chicago--without violence, expressing themselves as Americans,
disagreeing with our government, which is part of democracy--was a
peaceful gathering by and large. I joined the march in the city of
Chicago and carried the sign that read ``Hands off Chicago,'' and I
meant it.
Chicago is a great city. It faces challenges, but all cities face
challenges. These challenges must be addressed with solutions that are
consistent with our American values. This President is abusing his
power by fueling this cruel immigration raid policy in unleashing the
military, bringing in National Guard men and women from the State of
Texas against immigrants and citizens alike.
Don't believe me? I will show you.
The President claims his actions are meant to round up ``the worst of
the worst,'' but that has been anything but the case. A few weeks ago,
Chicago and the Nation watched in horror as women and children--
immigrants and U.S. citizens alike--were dragged from their homes in
the South Shore of Chicago and detained with the use of zip ties.
Imagine your child being rousted out of bed in the middle of the night
when the front door of your apartment is crashed down and that child is
taken downstairs, separated from his mother and father, with a zip tie
holding his hands together. When one witness complained that these
children were being mistreated, I am sorry to tell you that the person
from ICE said: ``F--- them kids.''
Then, just last week, ProPublica reported that, in the first 9 months
of the Trump administration, ICE held over 170 American citizens across
the country--kicking, dragging, beating, and detaining some of them for
days. Let me repeat: They were American citizens.
Take Maria Greeley, a Chicagoan and U.S. citizen detained by Federal
agents earlier this month in Chicago. She showed them her passport, but
they zip-tied her and held her for hours because she ``didn't look like
someone named Greeley.''
Let me give you another example. On October 3, Juan Munoz, a trustee
for the township of Oak Park in Illinois, stood with protesters outside
of the ICE Broadview processing facility along with other elected
officials. Federal agents picked him out of the crowd, shoved him to
the ground, and arrested him, while they left his colleagues alone.
They held him for 8 hours. Why did they hold Juan Munoz for that long
and not his colleagues? He was a person of color.
Does this sound like the work of an administration set on reducing
violent crime? I think not. This cruelty is all for show.
While Americans continue to pay inflated prices at the checkout aisle
and face the prospect of skyrocketing healthcare premium costs, this is
what our President is focusing on.
We the people stood up this weekend to the President's abuses of
power. I hope the Supreme Court, when the time comes, will do the same.
The Founders of this Nation designed the Constitution to protect
generations of Americans from the very abuses we are watching unfold
before our eyes today. They understood the dangers of a military turned
against its own people and limited its role in civilian affairs.
President Trump's claims of so-called invasions, rebellions, or
emergencies to justify calling the military into American cities like
Chicago are baseless. They are simply attempts to bypass laws and the
checks and balances of the Constitution.
Judges in Portland, OR, and Chicago, IL, appointed by Presidents of
both political parties, have agreed.
In upholding a ruling temporarily barring the deployment of troops in
Chicago, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals concluded:
[T]he facts do not justify the President's actions in
Illinois. . . . Political opposition is not rebellion.
In fact, the court noted that the Department of Homeland Security
itself claims that the protests have not slowed down their operations
and that ICE has increased its deportations and arrests.
Political opposition, peaceful protests, and even nonviolent civil
disobedience are not rebellion; they are the bedrocks of our democracy.
If there are legitimate concerns with maintaining law and order,
protecting public safety, and controlling crime, the Constitution
preserves the power to address that for the States, not the Federal
Government.
Whether in Chicago, Portland, Los Angeles, Memphis, or the District
of Columbia, it is civilian authorities--State and local law
enforcement--that have the primary responsibility for enforcing the
law.
I am glad to see Federal judges, including judges appointed by
President Trump himself, upholding their constitutional responsibility
to interpret the law and apply it to the facts.
It is no surprise that President Trump is now asking the Supreme
Court's conservative supermajority to green light his abusive power and
allow him to deploy troops regardless of statutory limits or the actual
facts on the ground.
The Supreme Court should reject the President's petition. There is no
emergency that would justify bypassing the regular appeals process and
resolving this case on the Court's shadow docket, without the full
public scrutiny that it deserves.
My warning to my Republican colleagues is this: Durbin of Illinois is
standing on the floor of the Senate today telling you what is happening
to the State and people I love to represent. If the President is
allowed to send the military against his own citizens in Chicago
without regard to the laws enacted by Congress, what guardrails are
left to prevent him from doing it to you in your home State, to the
people that you are proud to represent here in the Senate?
We cannot sit idly by while a person who wants to be King takes us
down a path to authoritarianism.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Britt). The Senator from Texas.
Government Funding
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, today is the 20th day of the Schumer
shutdown, and people around the country are beginning to feel the
effects of the shutdown. For example, here, nearly all Federal
employees from government Agencies to those working here in the Senate
Chamber will have missed their first paycheck.
One out of every six Americans lives from paycheck to paycheck. It is
not uncommon. This means that this shutdown is preventing those
individuals from paying their basic expenses: food, shelter, clothing,
utilities.
Normally, Americans who aren't able to put food on the table for
themselves and their families can fall back on government programs,
should they qualify. However, the U.S. Department of Agriculture
recently sent a letter to the States, including Texas, announcing they
will not be able to continue funding the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program, or SNAP, due to the lapse in congressional
appropriations.
According to Federal law, food programs like SNAP and WIC--the Women,
Infants, and Children Program--may continue to operate even during the
shutdown, as long as funds are available. But once those funds are
dried up, it is simply not possible for them to continue providing
benefits.
The guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture directs States
to pause those payments for the program. This means that Texans who
rely upon SNAP as a safety net to buy their groceries and feed their
children will not have those benefits until this deranged shutdown
comes to an end.
During the negotiations on the One Big Beautiful Bill--the working
families tax cut act--I was happy to champion certain reforms to ensure
that those benefits were targeted on the
[[Page S7165]]
truly poor and vulnerable. Chief among those reforms were enhanced
eligibility verification and work requirements for able-bodied adults,
ensuring that those who can work do work in order to continue to
receive benefits.
Throughout those negotiations, Democrats accused Republicans of
taking food from the mouths of the poor and needy. But, of course, this
is not what we did with the One Big Beautiful Bill at all. The reforms
we implemented in the One Big Beautiful Bill ensured that these
programs were financially secure for the long haul so we can continue
to provide those benefits for those who truly need them.
But, now, Senate Democrats have voted nine times against a House-
passed, short-term funding bill that would immediately reopen the
government, and, now, they are preventing these programs from operating
at all. So what Democrats falsely accused Republicans of just a few
weeks back, they themselves are doing by forcing these programs to end
or to pause.
Senate Democrats are literally taking food from the mouths of hungry
children. These programs are designed to ensure that those who have
come across hard times are able to get the food they need for
themselves and their children, and, now, Senate Democrats are the
reason why Texans, particularly those in need, are unable to do so now.
But that is not all. This shutdown is creating a particularly severe
consequence for rural health clinics across America, many of which are
unable to continue their full telehealth services to patients during
the shutdown.
One of my constituents wrote in to say:
Not being able to offer telehealth has put us at a huge
disadvantage with patients. There are many who will seek care
elsewhere and some who won't seek care at all.
One of the only good things that come out of COVID-19 is the
expansion of access to telehealth, and, now, because of the shutdown,
Democrats are denying patients that need that access--denying them that
access altogether.
This constituent that I mentioned a moment ago, which I quoted,
described immunocompromised Texans who were discharged from the
hospital who require followup appointments, but the risk of infection
from other patients in the waiting room makes it actually too risky for
them to appear in the hospital in person. Telehealth appointments are a
good solution for such patients, but due to the shutdown, they are
simply not available.
For other patients who live in rural areas or who are homebound from
severe illnesses, telehealth could be the difference between receiving
care and receiving no care.
My office recently heard a devastating story about one such patient
in a Texas hospital who has stage IV cancer and who has missed his last
two appointments. This individual lives 45 minutes from care--in the
Panhandle, in North Texas--and is a model patient for telehealth. But
thanks to Senate Democrats, that is no longer an option for him.
Imagine the devastation of having a loved one suffer from late-stage
cancer and knowing that this person is missing out on access to
healthcare because of the Schumer shutdown. It is simply indefensible.
And these are real people, real patients, and real Texans.
Now, this government shutdown may not affect the Democratic leader or
some Members of Congress who are independently well off, but for those
people who depend on these services and live paycheck to paycheck, it
has real-world consequences. This government shutdown is, in other
words, not a game, and yet Senate Democrats refuse to treat this matter
with the seriousness that it deserves.
It has been quoted many times now, but the minority leader has said
to the news media:
Every day gets better for us.
Well, clearly, he is not talking about the individuals I have been
referring to. I would like to see the minority leader, the Senator from
New York, say those words to the cancer patient who is unable to get
access to treatment or to telehealth services, or to the family who
relies on food stamps who is unable to put groceries on the table to
feed their family, or to the Capitol Police officers who provide
security in this very building who are not receiving a paycheck.
I can guarantee the Democratic leader that those people will not say
to him that every day is getting better. The people who we work for,
our constituents, the folks who sent us here, are growing more
apprehensive by the day, not knowing when this will end. And while many
people simply don't feel the effects of a government shutdown, very
real people, like the ones I mentioned, definitely feel this shutdown.
And it doesn't have to be this way. All we have to do, as we have
said time and time again, is pass the short-term funding bill that will
only take us to November 21. It has already passed the House of
Representatives.
Three Democrats in the Senate have joined Republicans in voting to
reopen the government. Are there not five more Democrats willing to
buck the heartless display of the minority leader and put the American
people first, rather than their political party and their political
aspirations?
Well, I hope that the cries of those children who are without food
and homebound cancer patients without access to healthcare will carry
more weight with Senate Democrats than the ruthless partisanship coming
from the Democratic leader.
This is called the Schumer shutdown for a reason, because there is,
in fact, one person ultimately responsible in this Chamber.
The House has passed the bill. All Republicans are willing to support
it, and we just need a few more Senate Democrats to put an end to this
foolishness.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. PAUL. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call
be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Waiving Quorum Call
Mr. PAUL. I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum call
with respect to the cloture motion on the motion to proceed to Calendar
No. 168, H.R. 5371.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Order of Procedure
Mr. PAUL. I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, at
2:20 p.m. tomorrow, the Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on
the Moe nomination and if cloture is invoked on the Moe nomination, all
postcloture time be expired and the Senate vote on the motion to invoke
cloture on the Mercer nomination; further, that if cloture is invoked
on the Mercer nomination, all postcloture time be expired and the
Senate vote on confirmation of the Moe nomination at 5:30 p.m. tomorrow
and the Senate vote on confirmation of the Mercer nomination at a time
to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the
Democratic leader, no earlier than Wednesday, October 22; further, that
if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid
upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the
Senate's actions; finally, that the remaining clotures filed on October
16 ripen at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in
consultation with the Democratic leader, on Wednesday, October 22.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. PAUL. I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled rollcall begin
immediately.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371, a bill making
continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year
2026, and for other purposes.
John Thune, John R. Curtis, Tom Cotton, Chuck Grassley,
Bernie Moreno, Marsha Blackburn, Mike Rounds, Eric
Schmitt, Tommy Tuberville, Todd Young, James Lankford,
Roger F. Wicker, Rick Scott of Florida, Jim Justice,
John Barrasso, Mike Crapo, Cindy Hyde-Smith.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
[[Page S7166]]
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to H.R. 5371, a bill making continuing appropriations
and extensions for fiscal year 2026, and for other purposes, shall be
brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Utah (Mr. Curtis), the Senator from Alaska (Ms.
Murkowski), and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).
Further, if present and voting: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr.
Tillis) would have voted ``Yea''.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Illinois (Ms.
Duckworth), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fetterman), the Senator
from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Welch)
are necessarily absent.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 50, nays 43, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 576 Leg.]
YEAS--50
Banks
Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Husted
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Justice
Kennedy
King
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
McCormick
Moody
Moran
Moreno
Mullin
Ricketts
Risch
Rounds
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sheehy
Sullivan
Tuberville
Wicker
Young
NAYS--43
Alsobrooks
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt Rochester
Booker
Cantwell
Coons
Durbin
Gallego
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
Kim
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Paul
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Schatz
Schiff
Schumer
Shaheen
Slotkin
Smith
Thune
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--7
Curtis
Duckworth
Fetterman
Murkowski
Sanders
Tillis
Welch
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 50, and the nays
are 43.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted
in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.
The motion was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Motion to Reconsider
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I enter a motion to reconsider.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion is entered.
Cloture Motion
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371, a bill making
continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year
2026, and for other purposes.
John Thune, James E. Risch, Tim Sheehy, John Cornyn, Mike
Rounds, John R. Curtis, Jim Justice, Katie Boyd Britt,
Todd Young, David McCormick, Bill Hagerty, Marsha
Blackburn, Rick Scott of Florida, John Barrasso, Kevin
Cramer, Cindy Hyde-Smith, Lindsey Graham.
____________________