[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 176 (Thursday, October 23, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7705-S7720]
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. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, on behalf of the majority leader of the
Senate, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
The senior assistant executive 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.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Department of Health and Human Services
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, first of all, I want to compliment the
Chaplain on each one of his prayers this week. He has made very
important in his prayers the importance of opening up the government
and ending the Schumer shutdown.
I come to the floor today to speak about the Department of Health and
Human Services inspectors general routinely issuing recommendations to
improve the operation of healthcare programs and to produce savings for
the taxpayers.
Until this year, two very important and top HHS inspectors general
recommendations were unaddressed, and they should have been addressed
because these are egregious wastes of taxpayers' moneys. No. 1, the
report says we should stop duplicative enrollment on two or more State
Medicaid Programs of individuals and, second, stopping Medicaid
payments for enrollees who have passed away.
The tax bill signed by President Trump July 4 puts an end to this
fraud, waste, and abuse in the Medicaid Program. That legislation
establishes solutions to stop duplicative enrollments and sending
payments out for deceased enrollees and providers. Once implemented, I
hope that these recommendations of the inspectors general are
satisfied.
Let me give some examples of reasons why these reforms are necessary.
In July, the Centers For Medicare and Medicaid Services found 2.8
million Americans were enrolled in two or more Medicaid or Federal
marketplace plans.
It is quite obvious that any enrollee only needs one insurance plan
for Medicaid--not both--to satisfy their healthcare options.
Is this duplicative enrollment a new discovery? No. Previously, the
HHS inspector general has found that nearly all States have paid
managed care insurance companies for enrollees who were enrolled in two
different State Medicaid Programs.
In another example, in August, a Louisiana Medicaid Program audit
[[Page S7706]]
found that $9.6 million were paid out for deceased enrollees in that
Medicaid Program.
In other words, showing how stupid it is to pay for healthcare for
people who have died. Now, do you happen to think that Louisiana is an
isolated incident? It is not an isolated incident. In the past decade,
the HHS inspector general has uncovered similar fraudulent payments
paid out for deceased enrollees in at least 17 States.
In addition, State Medicaid Programs have been uncovering fraud but,
at the same time, failing to return the correct refund to the Federal
Government.
Last year, four States were fined by the HHS inspector general for
failing to report and return Federal Medicaid overpayments. Using the
resources established in the 2025 tax bill, we will put a stop to this
and save taxpayers over $24 billion over 10 years.
While this action might seem like common sense, you have heard me say
so often that Washington, DC, is an island surrounded by reality. But
now duplicative enrollment payments for deceased enrollees and failing
to return Federal money correctly is a stiff to the taxpayers every
time it happens.
With these savings, we can protect Medicaid resources for the reason
that Medicaid was set up, to help vulnerable Americans like the
disabled, like the elderly, like pregnant women, like children, and
many more groups of people you can name.
So common sense will now prevail as a result of the changes that the
Congress has made in that 2025 tax bill that Congress passed and the
President signed on July 4.
I yield the floor.
Recognition of the Majority Leader
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
Government Funding
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, there was a time when Democrats opposed
government shutdowns. And not just opposed, Democrats were critical of
holding government funding hostage to political demands.
Our Democratic colleague from Michigan said that funding the
government is ``Congress' most basic responsibility.''
The senior Senator from Massachusetts, a leading Democrat, said:
The least we can do--the bare minimum that we can do--would
be to pass a ``continuing resolution'' to keep the doors open
and the lights on.
And the Democrat leader, just last year, described the ``chaos and
pain and needless heartache'' that a shutdown brings to American
families.
So what has changed? Why are Democrats, in 2025, suddenly comfortable
shutting down the government, subjecting Americans to all that chaos,
pain, and heartache that the Democrat leader described? Why did
Democrats instigate the longest full government shutdown in history?
Well, they would like you to believe it is about healthcare. It is
not. Republicans have been perfectly clear that we are willing to have
a discussion about healthcare, just not while government funding is
being held hostage--and all the Federal employees that come with that.
So if this were really about healthcare, Democrats would be voting in
favor of the clean CR as the quickest way to open the government and
start the discussions.
But that is not where we are, and that is because what is really
driving Democrats isn't healthcare. It is not a desire for
negotiations. It is politics and far-left activists who demanded a
showdown with President Trump.
The real reason we are now in the longest full government shutdown in
history is because Democrats are afraid of backlash from the far left
if they stand down. One Democrat Senator was quoted this week saying:
``People are going to get hammered'' if they vote for the
House-passed bill to reopen the government and keep it funded
through Nov. 21.
``People are going to get hammered'' if they vote for the clean
continuing resolution. That is from a Democrat Senator--hammered by
outside groups, hammered by leftwing political activists.
Or take it from one of the organizers of Saturday's No Kings rally,
who said:
I'm telling every elected I talk to:--
That is every elected official that I talked to--
millions will be out cheering you on, or they'll be calling
for new leadership.
Democrats are keeping the government shut down because they are
scared--scared of a primary from the left, scared of losing fundraising
dollars, scared that the far left will punish them if they don't appear
to be fighting President Trump hard enough.
Unfortunately, Democrats' political games are having real
consequences. Airport tower staffing shortages have caused thousands--
thousands--of flight delays nationwide. Medicare patients and people in
rural areas are dealing with the elimination of telehealth services.
Military families have turned to food banks in ``unprecedented''
numbers.
And things are about to get worse. The nutrition assistance programs
that millions of Americans depend on to feed their families are in
jeopardy.
And, tomorrow, Federal workers will miss a full paycheck because of
the Democrat shutdown. That is right. Tomorrow, Federal workers will
miss a full paycheck, thanks to Senate Democrats.
Republicans want to do something about this. We would love to pass
the clean, continuing, nonpartisan resolution, which would pay
everyone. It passed the House a long time ago. We have voted on it 12
times here now. They continue, with three exceptions, to block-vote
against it. Twelve times now, Democrats have blocked just paying our
Federal employees.
It is Federal employees all throughout the Federal workforce, which
literally is millions of Americans. But it is people right here. People
in this Chamber, people in this building had to stay here the night
before last, all night--all night--to listen to some Democrats drone
on. One Democrat Senator read the same poem four times.
They were here all night, not getting paid. Three hundred thirty-
five, exactly, Federal employees, in this building, had to stay here
all night, work through the night and into the next day, so they could
make some campaign political speech or point, in the middle of the
night, that nobody is listening to, obviously--which is why, I guess,
you read the same poem four times--four different times--reading from
books, while the people sitting here, doing the work, aren't getting
paid.
And so, today, we are going to have a vote on Senator Ron Johnson's
bill that would guarantee pay for Federal employees who are working
through the shutdown. The 335 people who had to be here, the night
before last, to listen to that--they would finally get paid. It is also
people like air traffic controllers, TSA agents, park rangers, Federal
law enforcement, ICE, Border Patrol--people putting their lives at risk
to keep Americans safe.
So we will see what Democrats do. Do they think people that are
working ought to get paid?
Well, to date, Democrats have rejected every opportunity they have
been given to put the American people ahead of their far-left base.
As I said, they have rejected a clean CR now 12 times--a CR,
continuing resolution--that would fund the government until November 21
to give us time to finish the appropriations process, a clean CR, a CR
that has no partisan riders, no policy gimmicks that came over from the
House, just clean, fund the government straight up. It is sitting right
here at the desk of the U.S. Senate.
Five Democrats could help us pass it today. We could send it to the
President; he would sign it into law; the government opens up; and all
the people here and across our Federal Government would get paid.
Last week, Democrats blocked the bipartisan Defense appropriations
bill that would have paid our troops. It came out of the Senate
Appropriations Committee by a vote of 26 to 3, very bipartisan on the
floor. It should have been. It usually is. It usually gets 80-plus
votes on the floor of the Senate, but they blocked it. It would have
paid our troops, the Defense appropriations bill.
So today, we are going to have another opportunity to show whether
they stand on the side of hard-working Americans or remain beholden to
their far-left base. We heard Democrats this week criticize Senator
Johnson's bill because it would provide pay only to
[[Page S7707]]
workers who continue to work through the shutdown. They say they want
everybody to get paid.
I have great news for them. The clean continuing resolution sitting
at the desk would pay everybody--everybody. We just need five more
Democrats to support it. Five more gets us to 60. It takes a
supermajority in the Senate. Democrats are the only thing standing in
the way of the outcome that they say they want, which is for everybody
to get paid.
The clean, nonpartisan continuing resolution sits right there at the
desk. President Trump is ready to sign it. The shutdown could be over
in a matter of hours if just five Democrats would agree.
But, unfortunately, the shadow of the Democrats' far-left base
continues to stand in the way. You don't have to take it from me. As
one source familiar with Democrats' thinking told The Hill this week,
``We would have enough votes to reopen the government if people were
not terrified of getting the guillotine.''
``We would have enough votes to reopen the government if Democrats
were not terrified of getting the guillotine.''
We just need five more Democrats to show some courage. This was a
statement made yesterday by a Democrat House Member. Sometimes people
around here say the quiet part out loud--sometimes it is just
subconsciously--and this is what she said. She is a Member of the
Democratic leadership in the House of Representatives:
Of course there will be families that are going to suffer .
. . but it is one of the few leverage times we have.
Boy, just take that in. Take that in:
Of course there will be families that are going to suffer.
But we don't want to give up our leverage. Leverage for what?
Leverage for what?
We need five Democrats to show a little courage. Reopen the
government, and let's get to work.
I yield the floor.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, we are staring into the abyss of the
healthcare crisis here in America. And what is Donald Trump doing as we
stare into the abyss of the healthcare crisis? He is flying off, yet
again, to another corner of the world while people's premiums are set
to skyrocket here at home. He shut down the government, Trump has, for
23 days, the second longest shutdown ever by refusing to negotiate with
Democrats. He is bulldozing the East Wing of the White House to make
way for his own ballroom. His own Justice Department is getting ready
to cut him a personal check--a personal check--to Donald Trump for $230
million out of taxpayer money when people are suffering in terms of
their healthcare premiums. And then he was caught trying to push a
nominee with proud Nazi and racist views.
And, again, we are in the middle of a healthcare crisis that will
decimate tens of millions of Americans. But Donald Trump doesn't seem
to want to touch this topic, touch the topic with a 10-foot pole, and
has decided to fly off to another country, yet again, without
negotiating with Democrats.
Leader Jeffries and I asked him to sit down and talk with us. We said
we need to talk. He refused. Donald Trump would literally rather fly to
another country than meet with Democrats to negotiate on healthcare
because he knows the American people are on one side of the issue and
his base--his rightwing MAGA base--is on the other. He is afraid to
touch the issue so he does his version of Johnson's shutting down the
House. He flies away.
It is hard to fathom someone more out of touch and oblivious to our
Nation's struggles than the current President.
Let's take the ballroom, for instance. This is the image Donald Trump
doesn't want America to see. This is the picture Donald Trump told his
people to hide from the American people. Do you know what the picture
represents? It is not just the desecration of the White House. It shows
that Donald Trump is not focused on fixing healthcare but rather on
vanity projects like this one that don't do anything to benefit the
American people. They only benefit Trump and his ego.
Donald Trump is telling the American people: No Medicaid for you; the
ballroom for me. Americans are appalled at these images. A YouGov poll
this week found 50 percent of the Americans oppose this ballroom
project, only 33 percent in support.
To Americans, the image of Donald Trump adding a wrecking ball to the
White House is a symbol for what he is doing to the whole country. Yes,
this is the image Americans are seeing, and they don't like it. They
don't like it.
I ask my Republican colleagues: Where are you? Frankly, the East Wing
teardown is not the only thing Donald Trump is focused on instead of
fixing healthcare. He is also using the Presidency to enrich himself.
This week, we learned that Trump is pushing his own DOJ to write him a
$230 million check because his feelings got hurt after being
investigated for criminal wrongdoing. While Americans are agonizing
over their healthcare, Donald Trump is using the Presidency to reach
into the taxpayers' till and put money in his own pocket. Imagine the
gall of this President who tells the American people: No healthcare for
you, but you pay me an additional $230 million.
Again, I ask my Republican colleagues: Where are you? And again, I
don't expect Republicans to oppose Donald Trump very often, but they
should be outraged--outraged--by the way he is pillaging the DOJ to
enrich himself.
And, finally, Americans are getting awfully fed up with the Trump
administration's incompetence, corruption, and chaos. The data shows
it. A few days ago, a Gallup poll showed movement you rarely see among
the electorate in a short amount of time. Democrats' party ID is now 7
points higher since the start of the year--7 points higher. It was even
with Republicans--``Are you a Democrat or Republican?''--when Trump
took office. It is now plus-up 7, Democrats. You rarely see that kind
of movement for that kind of number so quickly. It should be an
immediate red-light warning to my Republican colleagues.
To quote the pollster Harry Enten, who works for CNN:
I was shocked to see how [Democrats] have gained on Party
ID per Gallup. [Democrats] lead by 7 pts vs. a tie at the
start of the year. Looks a lot more like the 2018 cycle than
2022.
Indeed, Democrats have gained House seats in all midterms
since 1990 when party id looks like what Gallup has.
That is Harry Enten, not me. You don't need to be a political genius
to understand why these numbers are moving. People see that Donald
Trump is making their lives worse on costs and healthcare and on their
financial security.
We spend so much time here in Washington focused on the day-to-day
back-and-forth. But people back home don't care about the back-and-
forth here in Washington. They care about how much they are paying for
groceries. They care about their rising electricity bills. They care
about the dramatic increase so many will pay in their healthcare
premiums very soon.
What has Donald Trump done while all this is happening, while people
are just sitting down at the dinner table on Friday nights and
wondering, How the heck am I going to pay the bills? He has enacted the
biggest healthcare cuts in American history. He is closing rural
hospitals. Americans can see with their own eyes what Trump is doing.
So I say to my Republican colleagues: Beware, this Gallup poll is a
warning that Americans are fed up with the high costs that go up each
week and the Trump administration's incompetence, corruption, and
chaos. It is only going to get worse the more Donald Trump doubles down
on this shutdown and on his failed policies.
Shutdown Fairness Act
Mr. President, on the Johnson bill--that is Ron Johnson, Senator
Johnson--right now, on day 23 of the longest total government shutdown
in American history, millions of American families are wondering how
they will make rent, pay their bills, or put food on the table. What is
the Republican response? To hand Donald Trump and his right-hand man
Russ Vought, the originator of the evil, awful Project 2025--to hand
Russell Vought more power to decide who gets paid and who gets
punished.
Let me make one point very clear: The shutdown is on Donald Trump's
[[Page S7708]]
back, and the American people know it. They know that Republicans have
the Presidency, the House, and the Senate and the shutdown is on them.
So Senator Ron Johnson and Republicans are feeling the heat and have
come up with this proposal. Johnson and Republicans know because they
are feeling the heat that the American people know exactly who is in
charge: Donald Trump and Republicans. When workers are laid off, when
they are furloughed, they miss a paycheck, America knows who is to
blame. It is on Donald Trump's back.
That is why Donald Trump and his allies are pushing this bill. The
bill would not reopen the government, which is the only permanent
solution to this crisis. Democrats want to reopen the government as
quickly as we can. We want to sit down with Thune, with Johnson, with
Trump and negotiate a way to address this horrible healthcare
crisis. We also want to make sure that every last Federal worker who
has suffered during the Trump shutdown is taken care of.
So that is why Democrats are offering two solutions that actually
include all of our Federal employees, not just the ones the President
picks and chooses:
Oh, I will lay you off.
I will furlough you.
I won't do you.
I like you.
I don't like you.
That is not the way you govern, but that is how Trump seems to
govern.
Our bill is an antidote to that awful way that Trump uses when he
picks and chooses winners and losers whom he likes and hates.
The bill--the Republican bill--is a ruse. It is nothing more than
another tool for Trump to hurt Federal workers and American families
and to keep this shutdown going for as long as he wants.
We will not give Donald Trump a license to play politics with
people's livelihoods. That is why we oppose this Johnson bill, because
it doesn't end the pain of the shutdown; it extends it.
The only way--the only way--to pay every Federal worker is for
Republicans to get serious and sit down with Democrats to avert their
healthcare crisis and reopen the government.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican whip.
Waiving Quorum Calls
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the
mandatory quorum calls with respect to cloture on the motion to proceed
to Calendar No. 191, S. 3012, and the Taibleson nomination.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
H.R. 5371
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today is day 23 of the Schumer shutdown
of the government, and we just heard the minority leader--right here on
the floor--continue to practice the politics of pain, and it is pain
felt by the American people.
Remember, Senator Schumer is the one who said to the press:
Every day gets better for us.
I don't know who ``us'' is. It is not the American people, not the
people who come to work all across the country and the Wyoming National
Guard, the people all around America, the people in the Presiding
Officer's State and mine, the people who aren't going to get paid.
Senator Schumer said: Can't we do anything about it?
Yes. You could vote to open the government.
Yesterday, they decided, once again, to vote to keep the government
shut.
Tomorrow, hundreds of thousands of Federal workers are going to miss
their paychecks because Chuck Schumer and the Democrats will not vote
to open the government. They won't do it. They haven't done it for 23
days. Democrats have now set the record for the longest full-time
government shutdown in American history.
In previous shutdowns, some of the Agencies stayed open--not now.
This is the longest shutdown in the history of the entire U.S.
Government because, this time, no one is getting paid, not the Capitol
Police officers who had to come in during the so-called filibuster by
the Senator from Oregon, Senator Merkley; none of the people at the
desk; none of the people who were working around the Capitol; none of
the Democrats' staff or the Republicans' staff who were here as Senator
Merkley droned on and on and on through the night, reading the same
poem four times, to no avail. It was rubbish--all of it.
The Democrats have shut down this government, and they are punishing
the American people as a result. They are more concerned about playing
politics than they are about protecting working families. It is a big
game that they are playing as American families suffer. And they don't
seem to care that families are suffering. They are actually bragging
about the fact that families are suffering.
This is the Democrat whip in the House of Representatives. What did
she say this week? It wasn't just some slip of the tongue. She was in
an interview. There is a video of her on television--I saw it early
this morning--saying, of course, there are going to be families who are
going to suffer. Of course, she says, there is going to be suffering--
almost gleefully--because it is one of the few leverage times we have.
That is the Democrat whip of the House of Representatives. The
Presiding Officer may have served with her when he served in the House
before coming to the Senate. He knows this individual.
This is the politics of pain, practiced by the Democrats, and,
apparently, they don't believe that withholding paychecks or stamps or
funding to feed women and infants and children is a problem. They think
it is leverage. They think it is a big game. Leverage for what--to give
taxpayer-funded healthcare to illegal immigrants? That is one of the
demands that we got from Chuck Schumer in the letter of demand to open
the government.
Lay it all out there. What do they want? Lots of things, including
healthcare--free, paid for by taxpayers--for illegal immigrants. They
want $1.5 trillion in permanent new spending added to the debt because
whom are they trying to impress? The radical wing of the Democrat
Party, their radical leftwing.
That is what the Democrats are trying to do. That is what Chuck
Schumer is trying to do. He doesn't care. He is standing here, talking.
He is only talking to one group. It is the radical wing of the party--
the people in New York who have nominated Mamdani to be the mayor of
that city. The Democrats are willing to cause the American people to
suffer because they want to continue to pass liberal policies that
Americans don't want and never voted for but that are being demanded by
that radical wing of the Democrat Party.
So what have we done as Republicans?
We have proposed a clean, bipartisan continuing resolution to reopen
the government and that pays the workers who have been working for
weeks without pay so they don't miss their paychecks.
Democrats have rejected it and have continued to reject it not once,
not twice--12 times. It is a cycle of obstruction.
Democrats have voted for clean continuing resolutions, as I have
heard the Presiding Officer say, a number of times. I have heard him
say it on television. The Democrats voted for it 13 different times
when Joe Biden was President. Now they oppose it. Why? Because
President Trump is in the White House, and they don't even like the
White House. They just had a picture of some of the improvements that
the President is doing at the White House. They don't like that either.
They don't like the fact that he is in the White House. They don't like
the fact that he is improving the White House. They don't like the fact
that he is going to continue to be in the White House.
Speaking of the President, just days ago, he told the Democrats that
he was happy to meet. I agree, and we were there when he said it. He
said he was happy to meet once they reopened the government, but since
the Democrats continue to refuse to reopen the government, the Senate
is going to try to do the next best thing. Today, this body is going to
move to begin debate on Senator Johnson's Shutdown Fairness Act. So
let's talk about it.
There is not a single good argument that I have heard against passing
it immediately because this bill ensures that the men and women who
keep our Nation safe receive their pay during this Schumer, Democrat-
caused shutdown as they play politics. We have got
[[Page S7709]]
to pay the people who are keeping our Nation safe. It pays our troops
who are protecting our Nation at home and abroad. It pays the Coast
Guard as they continue to patrol our waters. It pays the Border Patrol.
They defend our southern border. It pays members of the Immigration and
Customs Enforcement as they round up and deport illegal immigrant
criminals. It pays the air traffic controllers who guide flights safely
to their destinations. It pays the TSA agents who screen the passengers
at every airport in America. It pays the Capitol Police officers who
have worked for weeks here without pay.
It applies back to the very first day of the Schumer shutdown, and
that means employees will get their full pay. It applies to this
shutdown, and it applies to future shutdowns. I think that is very
important as we cannot allow the Democrats to continue to painfully
treat the people and use the American people as what the Democrat whip
calls, in the House, ``leverage,'' hurting the American people for
leverage. No. So it is not just for this shutdown but for future
shutdowns to provide stability and predictability to those who keep us
safe.
Would I prefer a clean continuing resolution that fully reopens the
government today? Immediately? Absolutely, but Democrats have blocked a
clean, bipartisan continuing resolution every single time we have
offered them.
It has been reported that Democrats are going to filibuster this
bill, today, too. So, when Democrats stand up here today and criticize
the bill, remember this: The Democrats have a choice to pay the
essential workers who are working right now and are working here
without a paycheck or to send them into the weekend with empty bank
accounts and bills they cannot pay. If Democrats vote no, it won't be
about fairness. It is all going to be about politics. It is a dangerous
game of politics they are playing.
Remember what the House Democrat whip told the press. She said: Of
course families are going to suffer.
This is a Democrat.
Of course, she says, families are going to suffer, and this is one of
the few times--the few leverage times--we have.
That is not about helping the American people. It is about taking
advantage and using the American people maliciously, terribly,
disgustingly, disgracefully. If the Democrats vote no, it is all going
to be about leverage rather than paying the American people.
It is time to reopen the government. It truly is.
Border Wall Football Game
Mr. President, on a separate matter, on Saturday, the annual Border
Wall football game comes to Laramie, WY.
For the 117th time, the Wyoming Cowboys will play Colorado State
University. The winner of the game gets something called the Bronze
Boot. This year, the Pokes are going to play in special Cowboy and Coal
jerseys, and uniformed coal miners from all around Wyoming will lead
the Cowboys onto the field. This is a fantastic way to celebrate
Wyoming's proud history and heritage.
National Coal Week
Mr. President, in Wyoming, we have world-class coal. Wyoming's Powder
River Basin provides nearly half of all the coal produced in America.
It is clean coal. It is low-sulfur coal. We have enough coal to power
America for at least the next 100 years.
Here in the Senate, Republicans are also celebrating this vital
industry.
Senate Republicans introduced a resolution earlier this week to
designate this week as National Coal Week.
I want to thank and congratulate Senator Cynthia Lummis for leading
this important effort.
No one knows better than our home State of Wyoming how important coal
is to keeping the lights on. Coal is the most affordable, available,
reliable source of energy on the planet. National security, of course,
starts with energy security. Coal means freedom. That is why coal is
such an important part of the Republicans' agenda to unleash American
energy. We are cutting redtape. We are opening up 13 million acres of
Federal land for mining. Coal production is up more than 6 percent
since last year.
The coal renaissance that we are seeing today is part of the broader
American energy revival. It was even reported this week that the price
of gasoline has fallen to below $3 for the first time in 4 years. You
didn't see this when Joe Biden was in the White House, and they were
fighting American energy and making us desperate for energy. Oh, no. We
are now heading into an energy-dominant time for America.
Across the country, families are feeling the financial relief that
comes from returning to commonsense energy policies. Republicans know
you can protect the environment without punishing the economy.
Democrats never understood that. And, in Wyoming, we know better than
anyone else. America is an energy superpower. Wyoming is America's
energy breadbasket. We have the resources; we have the workers; and now
we are acting like it.
So, as we mark National Coal Week, I want to thank the great men and
women of our coal industry in Wyoming and across the Nation for helping
make America energy dominant once again.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The Democratic whip.
H.R. 5371
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am sure that those who are following the
opening remarks of the Senate today can sense the frustration,
bordering on anger, with the current situation, the current status quo.
It is shared on both sides of the aisle.
I have had the good fortune of serving in the House of
Representatives and the Senate, representing parts of Illinois and then
the entire State, for a big part of my life. I have watched these
institutions, the House and the Senate, face frustrating,
disappointing, challenging situations. I have found that the rule of
thumb is, basically, if reasonable people will sit down to the table
and put the items on the table and say, ``Let's see if we can find
common ground,'' it usually works. It could work here too. We could
reopen this government by the end of the day. I believe it. It is going
to be even more difficult because the House of Representatives is not
in session. I believe it has now been 3 weeks--maybe even 4 weeks--that
they have been out of session. They need to be here, doing their job,
helping to work to find a solution to this frustrating situation.
What exactly is behind the shutdown of this Federal Government?
Let me tell you. It is a serious issue that affects virtually every
American.
Do you have health insurance?
I do. Most of us do.
Is it expensive? Yes.
Do you still need it? God, yes.
Without it, it would be even worse. With one automobile accident, one
broken bone, one serious diagnosis, you could wipe out the savings of
most American families. That is the reality. So health insurance is
critical. People need it.
Do you know what is going to happen soon? I am sorry to say we are
going to see a dramatic increase in health insurance premiums.
There was a debate here several months ago on what the President
called his big, beautiful budget. The big, beautiful budget did many
things, but in addition to some spending decisions, it made the
decision that we were going to give a tax break to the wealthiest
people in America, people like Elon Musk. His tax break, if I remember
correctly--I don't have it written down here--was $230,000 a year. I
would say that is a lot of money for most Americans. Mr. Musk, though,
is so rich--a multibillionaire--he probably wouldn't even notice it.
But the $230,000 tax break for the wealthiest Americans meant that
other programs needed to be cut. One of the programs that President
Trump and the Republicans in Congress decided to cut--one was Medicaid.
Medicaid is a pretty universal program that affects millions of
Americans and the services that they receive from clinics, from
hospitals, even living in nursing homes. Medicaid is an important part.
The Republicans, in order to provide the money for tax cuts for
people like Elon Musk, needed to cut $1 trillion out of Medicaid over
the next 10 years.
What does it mean in my State? Well, we worry. Will rural hospitals
or inner-city hospitals survive if Medicaid is cut? Will the nursing
home people be able to stay in the nursing homes? Those are important
and critical questions.
[[Page S7710]]
The second part of the decision by the Republicans in the big,
beautiful budget to provide a tax break for the wealthy was basically
to eliminate the tax subsidy that is available for middle-income
families under the Affordable Care Act.
What does that mean? Well, for some people, they are going to see the
results in the mail in just a matter of days. The target date in
Illinois, which I represent, is October 27. Watch for the mail then
because on October 27, you will receive a notice about what is going to
happen to your health insurance premiums January 1. They are going to
go up an average of 114 percent. So take a look at what you are now
paying for health insurance and anticipate that it is going to go up.
How much? I am not sure, but it could easily double.
For a lot of families who are struggling to survive, that is going to
become a difficult challenge. How are we going to pay this premium?
These are the same families who come back from the grocery store every
Saturday and Sunday and say: I can't believe what has happened to the
price of beef. I can't believe what has happened to the price of
produce.
Across the board, people see the cost of living going up. And now an
essential service--health insurance premiums--we are going to see this
dramatic increase.
It is this increase that is going to affect millions of Americans--
over 20 million Americans--that is at the heart of this decision about
whether this government is going to reopen.
We have said to the Republicans that we believe the American families
need a helping hand and need it now--not something we talk about later
but now--so that we can do something to stop these premiums from going
up dramatically.
You know what is going to happen. When the premiums go up, some
families will say: No problem. Making plenty of money. Hate it, but we
can pay it.
Other families are going to say: How in the world are we going to do
this? We are going to have to get a health insurance policy which has
more copays and deductibles that are paid by us for virtually
everything. So we are going to pay through the course of next year for
this increase in premiums anyway.
Some will walk away and say: I just can't afford it. Can't make ends
meet. Can't pay utility bills. Electric bills are going up and other
things that we face, and this health insurance premium too. We are just
going to have to drop the insurance and hope for the best.
I am sorry for those people because it not only means that they are
facing risks in life without the protection of health insurance--we
know statistically that when you don't have health insurance or any
basic health insurance, that you forgo treatment and examinations. That
is not good, it is not healthy, and it doesn't lead to a good result.
Is that an important issue for your family? I bet it is. It is an
important issue for every single family.
That is what is at the heart of this government shutdown--the need
for Republicans and Democrats to sit at the table and say: How can we
spare American families from this premium increase that they are going
to face inevitably--millions are going to face--with bad consequences?
Can we do it? Of course, we can. People of good will can reach a
conclusion that they are going to find a way to compromise and see this
issue come to an end. We need to do it now--not next week, not the week
following, but now. There is too much hardship going on with this
government shutdown, and it should not continue.
So my appeal is to the President: Delay your trip overseas.
My appeal to the Republicans in the House: Come back home--I
shouldn't say ``home''--come back to Washington. Leave your home, come
back to Washington, and go to work with us on a bipartisan basis.
Is that what America wants? You bet it is. To address this issue of
health insurance premiums--do it on a bipartisan basis, and end this
government shutdown. We can do it today.
There is a lot of furniture in this Capitol--I have seen it over the
years--and there are a lot of tables. There are many tables big enough
for the leaders in Congress and the President to sit down and reach an
agreement. That sitdown ought to happen sooner rather than later.
Illinois
Mr. President, on another issue unrelated, last Friday, the Trump
administration asked the Supreme Court to green-light the deployment of
National Guard troops in my home State of Illinois after the lower
courts had temporarily blocked the deployment. In her decision,
District Court Judge April Perry said the Trump administration has
produced ``no credible evidence that there is a danger of rebellion''
in Illinois. Rather, Judge Perry found that ``the unnecessary
deployment of military troops, untrained for local policing, will
escalate tensions and undermine the ordinary law enforcement activities
of state and local entities.''
Three judges on the Seventh Circuit Appeals Court, including one
appointed by President Bush and another appointed by President Trump,
considered that decision by the lower court and agreed with Judge
Perry. They found that ``the facts do not justify the President's
actions in Illinois. . . . Political opposition is not rebellion.''
That panel is right.
Last Saturday, I was part of the No Kings demonstration. We estimate
there were 100,000 people in Grant Park at the Petrillo band shell. It
was nonviolent. It was orderly. Oh, they were loud once in a while, but
no one was involved in any sort of rebellion. They were exercising
their constitutional right to express their opinion about the policies
of this government.
I have been honored to represent the great State of Illinois for over
40 years in the Senate and the House. And, yes, like every State,
Illinois has its challenges, such as addressing crime. But for the last
two decades, the murder rate in Illinois has been lower than murder
rates in Republican-led States like Missouri, Louisiana, and Alabama.
Violent crime is down dramatically in the city of Chicago.
We should work together to build on this success and reduce the crime
rate even more. But the President's actions in sending in National
Guard troops even from the State of Texas to Illinois is not about
public safety; it is about politics. His unjustified and unlawful
attempts to deploy troops to Chicago and other American cities are a
threat to our basic democratic institutions.
The Supreme Court should reject the President's petition to use these
troops in America. There is no emergency that justifies bypassing the
regular appeals process and resolving this issue on the Court's shadow
docket without the full public scrutiny this issue deserves.
Just last week, I received a heartbreaking message from one of my
constituents, PO2 Jessica Wendlandt--a hard-working provider at Lake
County Health Department in Waukegan, IL. In her letter, Officer
Wendlandt mentioned that some of her patients have stopped showing up
for their appointments because ICE officers are camping out in front of
the facility.
Picture it, if you will: People, families, taking their children in
for a doctor's appointment--afraid to go, leave their car, and walk the
short distance to the clinic because ICE officials, in their combat
uniforms and masks, in unmarked vehicles, were lurking outside the
clinic.
She said in what she wrote to me:
My patients have not been able to come to their medical
appointments out of fear of being taken.
These raids are impacting the ability of medical providers to provide
basic family treatment.
Jessica also mentioned that she was treating a mother at the health
center when the mother ``received several phone calls and messages that
ICE [agents] had raided the apartment buildings right behind the
facility.'' The patient was so distraught and in tears that treatment
could not be completed that day because she needed to rush home to her
other children.
Imagine for a moment the fear that a mother must have felt receiving
a call from her kids, scared and screaming that masked men are trying
to break into their home. Is this America? Can you imagine the
confusion and fear those children must have felt seeing those men at
their door, wondering who they were and if they were there to help them
or hurt them.
It is not just at health centers in Illinois; ICE is camping out in
front of city halls, schools, churches, regularly
[[Page S7711]]
outside of Home Depot, where they detained a father who was the sole
provider for his two children, including a daughter with stage IV
cancer.
Do you remember what led us into this situation? You heard it over
and over at President Trump's rallies. Rapists, terrorists, murderers,
the criminally insane, sexual predators were coming across our border.
Let me tell you, I will sign up with the President. We don't want
those people coming into this country. And if they commit a crime while
they are here, they should be gone, period.
Now let's talk about the others, the 11 million who have been in
America working jobs, raising families, going to church, paying their
taxes. They are the ones they are targeting. Seventy percent of the
people who have been stopped by ICE in the State of Illinois--70
percent of them have no criminal record whatsoever. They are not
rapists and murderers and terrorists. They are people who overstayed a
visa. And they may be American citizens. The ICE officers obviously
don't distinguish any difference there.
When will my colleagues on the other side of the aisle decide that
the cruelty and fear tactics of this administration must stop? This is
America. When will they choose to put an end to the racial profiling
which is going on and the detention of even American citizens,
including veterans of children?
This is all supposed to be about violent crime? It is not. Enough. If
this was actually about reducing crime, President Trump would not be
slashing programs that actually help local law enforcement. This
cruelty is all for show.
While Americans continue to pay inflated prices at the grocery store
and face the prospect of skyrocketing healthcare premiums, this is what
the President is focused on: tearing families apart and separating kids
from their parents.
Our country is better than this. It is better than this cruelty and
lawlessness. Now is the time for us to stand up for the rule of law and
our Constitution.
President Trump's claims of ``invasions,'' ``rebellions,'' or
``emergencies'' to justify calling the military into American cities
are shameless attempts to bypass our constitutional checks and
balances.
It was the Republican Governor of Oklahoma who said last week that if
Governor Pritzker of Illinois tried to send his National Guard troops
to Oklahoma, the people of Oklahoma and that Governor, a Republican
Governor, would resist it. But that is exactly what is happening in my
home State of Illinois. This President, without invitation, is sending
National Guard troops in from Texas.
The Supreme Court should stand up to this administration's attempt to
cut both Congress and the courts out of decisions squarely given to
them by the Constitution.
Political opposition, peaceful protests, and nonviolent civil
disobedience are not rebellion; they are the bedrock of our democracy.
Local law enforcement officials have proven they are capable, in
Illinois and most places, of handling any unlawful or unruly behavior.
Illinois State Attorney General Kwame Raoul explained to the court:
No protest activity in Illinois has rendered the president
unable to execute federal law.
If the Supreme Court enables President Trump to deploy troops to
American cities over the objection of State officials before the courts
rule on the legality of the actions, I fear it is going to cause
lasting harm to America.
I ask my Republican colleagues: Are you really prepared in your home
State for the next President after President Trump to send in troops to
your State without permission, without the consent of your government?
Are you ready for masked soldiers to grab your constituents from their
homes?
My constituents elected me to represent them in this fight. I implore
you to do right by your constituents and push back against the
President's illegal power grab before your State is the next victim.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Government Funding
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, I would love to introduce the Senate to
a couple that I know: husband, wife. Both work for the Federal
Government--young couple, expecting their first child. This week, they
will miss a paycheck--both of them.
You tell me how many people, in their early days of marriage, both
spouses could miss a paycheck while they are preparing for their first
child. But that is the reality that is being faced by that couple and,
I am sure, a lot of other folks that stepped up to serve their Nation,
serving in a Federal Agency, but because of a government shutdown, they
are not going to get paid.
I would love to introduce this body to a single mom that just, a
couple of weeks ago, got the invitation to go to the FAA Academy and to
become an air traffic controller--very difficult to get into that
school--but has been accepted, is in the process, has quit her job, has
canceled her lease and, as a single mom, is taking the risk to be able
to step out in a new, great career. But right in the process of
stepping out to do that new, great career, there is a government
shutdown, and now she has no idea what is about to happen. She has quit
her job already. She has canceled her lease already. She was preparing
to move to get to the academy. Now what does she do?
For all the folks out there that say this government shutdown is no
big deal--or, as my Democratic colleagues in the House have said, some
families are going to have to suffer to give us leverage--here are the
families that are actually suffering to give my Democratic colleagues
leverage so they can discuss healthcare.
But let me not just talk about the healthcare they want to discuss.
Their focus seems to be on a COVID-era subsidy that they created for
the Affordable Care Act to try to make it more affordable--because here
is the problem in my State. In my State--in Oklahoma--the Affordable
Care Act, the cost for it has increased 200 percent in 6 years, while
commercial insurance has increased 29 percent in those same 6 years. So
the ``Affordable'' Care Act is only affordable if there is just one
subsidy on top of another, on top of another, on top of another,
because the structure of the Affordable Care Act is not affordable. It
is only affordable if there is more and more and more tax dollars sent
to insurance companies to try to cover more and more and more.
My Democratic colleagues say: We are going to keep the government
closed until we even get more money on that, and we don't want to
discuss anything.
Well, here is the problem. We have a 200-percent increase for one
area, a 29-percent increase in the other, and they say just keep
dumping more money into it. We actually know, and my Democratic
colleagues have told me privately: We know there is a lot of fraud,
that there is money being sent to insurance companies that they are
then covering people that actually don't even know they have coverage,
just because it is cheap for the insurance company.
Everybody knows that exists in it, but they don't want to discuss
that; they just want to add more money into it.
We have people making a quarter million dollars a year that are
getting subsidies with these additional subsidies they created several
years ago. And we have said: ``What in the world'' that people making a
quarter million dollars a year are getting these subsidies.
We also know, the way that my Democratic colleagues created these
subsidies, that it went around the Hyde Amendment, which has been very
clear: Federal tax dollars do not go to pay for abortions. But they
created this very creative system of tax credits so that they could
send money to insurance companies to pay for elective abortions. They
are asking every Republican now to jump on board and to be able to vote
for that.
Listen, there are big issues with this. My Democratic colleagues say:
Well, just fund more healthcare; just take care of it. We know there is
fraud. We know there are people making half a million. We know there is
abortion funding going. We know all these aspects.
So, no, we are not just going to dump more money into it.
We have said something pretty straightforward: Let's keep the
government open, at its current status quo,
[[Page S7712]]
and let's keep debating all these issues. But why should next week's
SNAP recipients no longer get SNAP benefits because there is a fight
over all these healthcare issues on this that we have very strong
actual policy issues with? Why are they cutting off SNAP benefits? Why
are they telling this young couple with an infant child on the way: No,
neither of you are going to get paid. Why is that happening?
So here is what we have done. I have proposed a bill that I put out
last session. It was very straightforward. This bill just says we will
never have another government shutdown--never. Every time we get to
another moment like this, automatic funding kicks in. But here is the
kicker: Members of Congress are in session 7 days a week, and we can't
do anything but appropriations. We have to do appropriations, and we
have to be here 7 days a week, House and Senate, until we actually get
this solved.
Now, that seems like a pretty reasonable thing.
My Democratic colleagues have been bemoaning the House is not in
session. If you would have voted for my bill last session, we would all
be here right now negotiating this out. I had 57 votes on that last
session--57. We were three votes short of never ever having a
government shutdown again--never.
So I am going to bring it again and to say: Let's end the potential
of government shutdowns ever, and let's actually stay here and debate
the issues and to be able to work things out like grownups.
In the meantime, until we can get that done and until we can get my
Democratic colleagues to agree, my colleague Ron Johnson has brought
forward a very simple proposal: Let's pay the people who are working,
like this young couple that I mentioned. They are still working, both
of them. Let's pay them while they are working, while we continue to be
able to negotiate this out.
If you won't, at least, open the government--as we have the last 13
times when we got to this moment--and just have a continuing
resolution, at least, pay the people who are working. This is a baby
step and an offer to our Democratic colleagues to say: Let's at least
do the minimum on this to not punish those folks.
There are folks, today, that are on the road, working for the Federal
Government, that are in critical positions, that they are not being
paid and they are actually putting their expenses on their credit card,
not knowing if they are going to get the chance to pay that off. It is
not right.
So let's take the steps. My recommendation is, long-term, let's never
have a shutdown ever again. Let's fix the process. We were three votes
short last session. Let's actually fix that permanently. Let's get us
back open again. But at a minimum, let's at least, while we are
arguing, pay Federal workers that are still at the task. That should be
the easiest threshold to be able to step over.
Me and my colleagues are on the floor today because we want to get a
chance to be able to offer this to our Democratic colleagues and say:
We are going to reach an olive branch out to you; let's get started on
some things.
I yield the floor to my colleagues.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
Mrs. MOODY. Mr. President, we are in day 23 of this shutdown--a
shutdown that is sowing more uncertainty across our country by the day.
It is one that is leaving our Nation vulnerable to adversaries abroad
and seeing our servicemembers left wondering if their next paycheck
will go through, as they seek not only to protect us but to support
their families--a shutdown that my colleagues and I on the Republican
side of the aisle voted against over a dozen times.
We are trying to end the shutdown. Yet we are blocked at every point.
Along with a few--very few--courageous Democrats, we voted for a
bipartisan continuing resolution to fund the government. The opposing
Democrats do so while knowing they are voting against paying our troops
for our security, against paying law enforcement for safety, and
against paying so many other people that are necessary for critical
functions. They vote no.
Republicans have voted to eliminate future shutdowns, to pay our
servicemembers and other essential Federal workers, and for a full year
of funding for our military. And yet, each time, these same colleagues
blocked the efforts. They have now resorted to outright obstruction.
I am the newest U.S. Senator from Florida, one of the newest U.S.
Senators for our country. I have been here 9 months, and I am disgusted
that we have colleagues coming in here, voting against continuing
funding, reciting poetry. They are putting poetry over paying our
troops.
Since my arrival in Washington, I have watched every single effort by
the Democrats to oppose the will of the American people, to undo the
outcome of the election, attempting to paralyze not only the
administration but our policy goals to get this country back on the
right track.
Now, these tactics have evolved into obstructing government itself,
to hold the pay of Federal law enforcement and our military hostage--
let alone the thousands of other Federal employees who continue to show
up and fulfill their duties without pay. Shockingly, even Senators with
States that have large Federal workforces have set aside the interests
of those families, beholden to some radical agenda.
I implore my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to remember
that the effects of this shutdown go well past the boundaries of DC. In
my home state of Florida, we are seeing crisis centers which serve
veterans, law enforcement officers, first responders, some of our most
vulnerable that encounter hardships, all because colleagues have
refused to open the government. In fact, I have committed to donating
my salary every day the government is shut down to a crisis center in
Florida because they are suffering as this continues to go on.
The choice is simple for my colleagues at this point: Either you
stand for this country, for our servicemembers, and for actually
governing this Nation, or you stand against that.
And, finally, I want to take a moment to thank every single Federal
employee continuing to work without pay: our servicemembers, Federal
law enforcement officers, Coast Guard members, air traffic controllers,
so many others--including our own staff, including the staff on the
Senate floor that show up and stay up all night as the Democrats recite
poetry. Thank you for showing up without pay. Thank you for your
patriotism, your work ethic, your embrace of duty and commitment to
this Nation.
Throughout history, it is the selfless work of patriots that helped
build and sustain this incredible country of ours, and I look forward
to the day when our colleagues on the other side of the aisle cease
with their partisan games and that they put governing for the people
back as their No. 1 priority, that they remember it is an incredible
responsibility they undertook when they took the oath to become a
Senator. I hope they remember that they were trusted to do this in good
faith, on behalf of the people, and I hope that they join us in
reopening the government and they join us in our bipartisan, clean
continuing resolution to reopen the government. That is the only way
forward, and it is the sole path available to continue our work on
behalf of the American people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. President, good morning. Good morning to all my
colleagues here today.
Now, as all the Senators know, as all America knows, my friends
across the aisle have kidnapped the Federal Government. In fact, they
have now voted a dozen times not to reopen the government. And even
surprising to most of us, twice they voted against funding the military
during these challenging times. I think it is obvious to all America
that this is a political shutdown; that this is show biz to them; that
this is an opportunity for their left, lazy media to shout and scream
at President Trump and to kowtow to their far-left, Marxist base.
Now, when you kidnap somebody or an entity, you have to have a
ransom. Now, the opening ransom from the Democrats was an additional
$1.5 trillion added to our national debt, borrowed from my
grandchildren--$1.5 trillion. It was just this week that the Federal
Government passed a $38 trillion level for our national debt. We are
[[Page S7713]]
spending a trillion dollars a year on interest alone. So that was the
opening ransom.
And now they seem to be locked in on throwing more money at a very
broken ACA, the 24 million people on the ACA.
But it is interesting to me how, when they want to talk about
healthcare, they hide behind rural hospitals, that they think, ``Oh, we
are going to help those,'' when 97 percent of rural America voted for
President Trump. And under President Trump's leadership, in our Big
Beautiful Bill we have $50 billion of a health transformation fund for
rural America. But the first thing the Democrats want to do is to take
that away.
It has been maybe one of the most hypocritical statements I have ever
heard. They want to help rural America, help rural hospitals, but they
want to take away this $50 billion transformation fund.
Instead, they want to put all their eggs in one basket on Medicaid.
Look, a hospital loses money every time they see a Medicaid patient.
Every time a Medicaid patient walks into the emergency room, that
hospital is losing money on that patient as well. Despite that, the
Republicans, in our Big Beautiful Bill, increased spending on Medicaid
to the tune of $200 billion a year.
We need to work on getting people off of Medicaid. Let's get them
back to work and help them get good health insurance as well.
Now, their latest idea is that they want to throw more money at the
ACA. They want to throw more money for the 24 million people on the
ACA. Look, Democrats own healthcare, right? The ACA has been the law of
the land for 15 years. If any hospital fails today, tomorrow, next
week, next year, the year after, if anybody's health premiums are going
up--and they are--then it is on the backs of Democrats.
The first thing you need to realize is that when you are in a hole,
stop digging. When do they think we can stop throwing good money after
bad money? Look, I want to fix healthcare. I want to drive down the
cost of healthcare.
Now, as my colleague from Oklahoma pointed out, the premiums for the
ACA are up 200 percent, is what he mentioned--I think that is a pretty
good number--over the last 6 years. But beyond that, the average
deductible for the ACA now is $5,000. Can you imagine you are a family
of four--an average salary back in Kansas is $60,000 a year. And the
Democrats think throwing more money at the ACA, which gives you a
$5,000 deductible, is going to solve the problem. Well, of course, it
is not.
So we need to address the affordability of the ACA, and we need to
address the premiums. Then, beyond that, we need to address the fraud.
Look, this program has grown from a $50 billion-a-year projection by
the famous Congressional Budget Office--they said it would be $50
billion. We are spending $150 billion a year now on the ACA, and we
think there is $25 to $50 billion of fraud in that.
I think that if you polled Americans and said ``Look, there is a
Federal program which is paying subsidies for people's premiums, but
there is $50 billion of fraud in that,'' I think Americans would say
``Hey, we sent you to Congress, to the Senate, to fix the darn
problem.'' And we know how to do that. This is a simple fix.
Not one time have you heard a Democrat say: We want to fix what is
broken in the ACA. No. All they want to do is throw more money at it.
It would be so easy to fix the fraud, and we know how to do it.
How do we address the cost of healthcare? Well, it starts with adding
pricetags, right? Can you imagine walking into a restaurant and trying
to decide if you want the two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce,
cheese, onions on a sesame seed bun versus the two quarter-pounders and
didn't know the price difference? Of course not. But that is what we
are asking Americans to do when they have a procedure done. They have
no idea what it is going to cost; they have no idea what outcomes are.
Americans need to realize that you could have a surgery done in one
facility for--let's say it is a hip replacement. Maybe one hospital
gets $10,000, but another one, they are reimbursing at $50,000. I am
not making those numbers up. I ran a hospital. Those were the exact
numbers just 6 or 7 years ago. By the way, the hospital that was
getting reimbursed the lower amount had better outcomes, less
infections, and less blood clots.
Look, the Democrats own healthcare right now. These are their
policies. When they are ready to do something more than just throw
money at one of the most broken systems in the history of America, then
we are here to talk to you. But first of all, we need to open the
Federal Government.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues today.
Today marks the 23rd day of the government shutdown--the 23rd day--
now the second longest in our Nation's history. Yet, despite the
mounting consequences, our colleagues across the aisle continue to
block a clean, nonpartisan continuing resolution--one that would simply
keep the government open and allow us to continue our work on the
appropriations process.
To be clear, there are no Republican priorities included in the CR.
Let me repeat again: There are no Republican priorities included in the
CR. It simply keeps the government funded. It is the same kind of CR
that Democrats passed 13 times under President Biden. Yet now they
refuse to vote for it.
Let's just take a minute to review. Here are the 13 clean CRs that
were passed during the Biden administration. Thirteen of them. You can
count them.
Oh, gee, how did the Democrats vote? I don't know. Let's check.
Well, here is the percentage of Democrats that voted for each of
those 13 clean CRs during the Biden administration.
Now, Mr. President, from sitting way back there--I know your eyes are
pretty good; former Navy SEAL. They might be diminished a little bit by
now, so I am going to help you out here.
On the first one, 100 percent of the Democrats voted for it. On the
second one, 100 percent of the Democrats voted for it. On the third
one, 100 percent of the--same kind of clean CR we are looking at right
now, but it was under Biden. That is the difference. Third one, 100
percent of the Democrats. Fourth one, 100 percent of the Democrats
voted for the clean CR. On the fifth one, 100 percent of the Democrats
voted for the clean CR. On the sixth one, 100 percent of the Democrats
voted for a clean CR--the same kind that none of them will vote for
now. Well, I guess we have three, but we have to get enough to get 60
votes.
I lost count. One, two, three, four, five, six. I think I am at
seven--100 percent of the Democrats voted for it. The eighth one, 100
percent of the Democrats voted for it.
Now, on the ninth one, I don't know what happened. Maybe one of them
was gone. Who knows? But, gee-whiz, we only got 98 percent of the
Democrats on that. Ninety-eight percent voted for that one. But the
good news is that they were right back on the next one--100 percent. I
think that is No. 10, 100 percent. No. 11, 100 percent. It was 100
percent on No. 12. And, gee-whiz, they finished with only 98 percent of
Democrats on the 13th one.
You kind of get the point, right? Come on. What in the world is going
on here? And then to have the gall to go out there and say oh, well,
you know, they are not shutting down the government. It is ridiculous.
I don't know how there could be any doubt about it.
For anybody that thinks this shutdown should be stopped right now,
they better call their favorite Democrat on the phone and say: Hey, it
is time. It is way, way, way past time.
But right now, instead, our colleagues across the aisle have chosen a
different path. They have taken our government hostage, demanding more
than $1 trillion in new spending just to keep the lights on--$1
trillion just to keep the lights on and to pay people--Federal
employees, military, everybody else that is working. That is not
compromise. That is called coercion. That is not compromise. That is
coercion. That is holding our government hostage.
While this political stalemate drags on, American families are paying
the price. Vital programs that hard-working families rely on--programs
they
[[Page S7714]]
have paid into and depend on--have been shuttered or are dangerously
close to running out of money.
Several States are now warning that they will be forced to shut down
SNAP--the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program--benefits as soon
as November 1 if the shutdown continues. That means millions of
Americans could lose access to the assistance that helps them put food
on the table.
Meanwhile, our economy is losing $15 billion in GDP each week as long
as this shutdown persists.
Many Federal employees, including critical air traffic controllers--
our air traffic controllers are working; they are not getting paid. How
about our Border Patrol agents? Pretty dangerous job. They are not
getting paid. They are working; they are not getting paid.
How about this group? Our troops. Mr. President, you were a Navy
SEAL. You were in harm's way. We have people in harm's way, and they
are not getting paid because the Democrats want to say that somehow
this clean CR shouldn't be voted for and that somehow they are
cooperating--they are trying to collaborate when instead they are
holding our government hostage.
Rural America--our farmers, ranchers get left behind. Many are out in
the field right now, harvesting, working on bringing in their crops,
getting ready for next year. Program services they depend on--the
USDA--they can't access. That means more uncertainty at a time when
they can least afford it.
Look, the list goes on and on--goes on and on and on--but the bottom
line is this: We need to get government--we have offered over and over
again, as my colleagues said, to work on any and all issues, but you do
it once you get the government open.
This has gone on--I would say long enough but actually way too long.
I don't know at what point Democrats are going to decide to come back
and start doing their job, which is governing, but we are eagerly
awaiting it.
For the American people--the American people are the ones that pay
the price when the Democrats take our government hostage. And, as I
have made very clear here, there is no doubt but that is exactly what
they are doing.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I do want to thank my friend from North
Dakota. We see things slightly different, but one thing I think we
could probably agree on: Do you know who is getting paid? The House of
Representatives, who have been on vacation since the middle of
September. And, gosh, wouldn't it be great if they were actually on the
floor debating this issue as well, as opposed to getting a taxpayer-
paid vacation for over a month?
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 3039
Mr. President, I think one of the things we could all kind of agree
on is that our Nation's public servants are not political pawns.
I say with respect to my friend from Wisconsin, you know, the so-
called Shutdown Fairness Act, in my view, is anything but fair.
Frankly, this entire year has been anything but fair for all of our
Federal employees who show up every single day to serve the American
people. Because remember, before Russ Vought even set foot in the
Office of Management and Budget, he bragged that he wanted Federal
workers--his words, not mine--to increasingly be ``viewed as . . .
villains'' and ``put them in trauma.'' Think about that. This wasn't
some political misstatement or slip of the tongue; it is, frankly, a
mission statement.
Unfortunately, that is exactly what we have seen from Mr. Vought,
from President Trump, and from those enabling them. In just 9 months,
they have forced out or driven into early retirement more than 148,000
Federal employees. That is not efficiency or reform; it is an assault
on the very people who work every day for the American people. And God
knows we could improve but also make government perform.
Now, let's be clear. It is not this side of the aisle--Democrats who
have cherry-picked a few favorite programs to protect. We have been
consistent in calling out this administration's totally reckless regard
for the vital services the American people rely on to keep them safe
and secure and standing up for those folks who deliver those services.
So forgive me when I say I don't think this Shutdown Fairness Act has
anything to do with fairness. Once again, Federal employees are being
treated not as partners serving the American people but as punching
bags for Vought and the President's political agenda.
Right now, the President is trying to RIF another 4,000 Federal
employees--not just, I believe, unfairly, but actually illegally, based
upon a court's recent decision. Thank goodness the courts have stepped
in.
As a matter a fact, many of us were at the OMB headquarters next to
the White House just last week, meeting with Federal employees,
demanding that Mr. Vought and his team listen not to us--you don't have
to listen to us; we are on politically different sides--but listen to
the Federal workers and make sure that we get the government reopen,
not try to leverage this for some kind of political win.
We are talking about special education programs that support kids
with disabilities. We are talking about the CDC, whose experts track
outbreaks and try to keep us safe. We are talking about a program
called the CDFI Fund at Treasury--a program with broad bipartisan
support that helps invest in access to capital in rural communities and
in urban communities.
Again, on this one, I have to thank Mike Crapo and a whole lot of my
Republican colleagues for being willing to push back.
Let's be crystal clear. These actions are not some accident. This is
a deliberate choice, a deliberate effort to hold Federal workers
hostage in order to jam through an agenda. At the end of the day, it is
going drive up healthcare costs for millions of Americans.
Instead of sitting down with us and working to keep premiums
affordable, they are using the very Federal workers--I have a ton of
them in Virginia--as political pawns. It is wrong, it is cruel, and it
is not going to work.
That is why I am proud to join both Ranking Member Peters, who will
be here, I believe, shortly, and my good friend from Maryland Senator
Van Hollen on legislation to ensure that not the Trump administration
picks and chooses who we ought to go ahead and pay but legislation to
ensure that all Federal workers--and, by the way, the contractors who
work side by side with them--get paid during this shutdown.
I mean, at the end of the day, this is a moment for every Senator to
decide: Are you going to stand with the Federal workers who keep the
government running or are you going to stand with those who want to
traumatize them and make them all be viewed as villains?
This is an actual chance. In a few minutes, we are going to have to
make sure that those workers can feed their families, pay their
mortgages, while this Republican shutdown drags on.
There is a lot of language on this floor about who wants to support
Federal workers. Well, you are going to shortly have a chance--every
Senator will have a chance--to prove whether you are on the side of not
selectively paying Federal workers but paying all Federal workers, as
we try to bring this shutdown to an end. I urge my colleagues to do the
right thing. Let's get it done. And I thank Senator Van Hollen for his
leadership on this issue.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from
Virginia, Senator Warner, and other colleagues who are joining together
to support the proposal that we are putting forward today.
But I think we should all say that the best way to make sure that
Federal employees--all Federal employees--get paid and that the
American people get the benefit of their services is to reopen the
Federal Government and do it now, which is why I and my Democratic
colleagues have voted seven times now--seven times now--to reopen the
government without giving Donald Trump a blank check and while making
sure that we prevent a healthcare crisis in this country when people's
healthcare premiums and costs go through the roof, because when
Republicans passed their so-called Big Beautiful Bill, they extended
the tax
[[Page S7715]]
breaks for billionaires and very wealthy people. The one tax cut they
did not extend was the one that allows middle-class families to afford
health insurance. And so they left in place a ticking timebomb that is
going off now.
We would like to defuse that timebomb. Instead of negotiating on
that, the President has been AWOL. He has been engaged in discussions
overseas regarding the Middle East. He has been on the phone a lot with
Vladimir Putin. That is all good, but you would think the President of
the United States could carve out just a little time to help reopen the
government, to have a negotiation on reopening the Federal Government.
Instead, he is bringing down Republican Members of the House and
Senate to the White House and wining and dining them and patting them
on the back and saying: Good job for keeping this government shut down
and not entering into a negotiation to bring it to a close.
And, of course, with our House colleagues, the Speaker of the House,
Speaker Johnson, has essentially got the House on a 5-week--I don't
know if we are on 6 weeks--paid vacation. I mean, they are AWOL here in
the middle of this shutdown.
What is the President focused on? He is asking the Justice Department
to pay him $230 million for legal bills, right directly into his
pocket. He is talking about giving his buddy in Argentina a $20 billion
taxpayer bailout, while farmers across the country are getting hit hard
because they can't sell their soybeans to China. And he is demolishing
the East Wing of the White House, which is a metaphor for what he is
doing to the country and people who worked for him to get him elected.
He is betraying the very people he said he was going to stand up for
when he said he was going to focus on prices and costs, and yet, when
it comes to trying to just prevent this huge spike in healthcare costs
that people are experiencing, the President doesn't want to talk about
it.
So we should not be punishing Federal employees for something they
had nothing to do with. They are not responsible. They are innocent
bystanders. They all want to get back on the job and provide services
to the American people. And I will be putting forth a proposal to say
that they should not be punished and they should be paid.
Now, we will hear later today that we are going to be taking up here
in the Senate a piece of legislation from Senator Johnson, and that
proposal would pay Federal employees who are currently working right
now. Our proposal doesn't discriminate among Federal employees.
And here is the really dangerous part, I would argue, about Senator
Johnson's proposal. We have a President, President Trump, who, along
with Russ Vought, who is his, you know, guy in the cockpit at OMB--this
is the guy who said publicly that he wanted to inflict ``trauma''--that
is his word not mine--inflict ``trauma'' on the Federal workforce.
If you allow them to decide who they are going to keep on the job in
the Federal Government and who they are going to pay, you are giving
them also a blank check as to who they are going to send home and who
they are going to punish by not paying them.
That is what they have been doing. Much of what they have been doing
is illegal, in fact, and we have a Federal court in California that has
already said that their layoffs of some of the Federal employees at
some of the Agencies are illegal.
But if you just let them decide who is going to get paid and who is
not, you weaponize that illegality; you weaponize the Federal
Government. And, by the way, I think we all know this: If President
Trump gets to keep the folks he wants on the job and pay the folks that
he wants who are on the job and nobody else, he will have even less
incentive to end the government shutdown. He will have the government
he wants, not the one that has been supported on a bipartisan basis by
the U.S. Congress.
So giving the President a blank check to decide which Federal
employees to punish and which ones not to punish is a very dangerous
thing at this moment. That is why the proposal I am putting forward--
and Senator Peters will have an even narrower version that he will be
putting forward, if our Republican colleagues don't support the one
that I am advancing, along with Senator Warner, Senator Kaine, Senator
Alsobrooks, and others--these proposals say that Federal employees
should not be punished.
Now, we have already made that decision. We have already made that
decision as a Congress in the past. During the first Trump shutdown--
that was the 35-day Trump shutdown. During that shutdown, Senator
Cardin and myself and others, we passed a piece of legislation that was
signed by the President that says: At the end of a shutdown, Federal
employees get fully paid. They are held harmless.
Why did we decide to do that? Because we collectively made the right
decision that Federal employees who have nothing to do with the
government shutdown should not be the ones punished for something they
were not culpable in. That was the right decision.
What my proposal and our proposal will do is based on that idea that
no Federal employees should be punished for something they had nothing
to do with. And not only should they get repaid at the end of this, but
why would we say to them that you can't have enough pay to make your
electric bills or pay your water bills or provide for your family? Why
should Federal employees be the ones who are punished for the
government shutdown? Why should they be the ones that have to overdraft
their bank accounts and penalized for that? That is not fair.
So the proposals that we are putting forward say that in this
government shutdown, Federal employees and, yes, certain Federal
contractors who have nothing to do with this political situation that
we face, they should not be the ones to bear the burden, and we
certainly shouldn't set up a system where the President of the United
States gets to decide what Agencies to shut down, what can stay open,
who to pay and who not to pay, who to punish, who not to punish. That
just gives him a blank check to put in place political cronies and pay
them and send home hard-working civil servants who perform important
functions. So that is what our proposal will do.
And for any of our colleagues, regardless of the side of the aisle,
who agree that Federal employees should not be the ones who are
punished for something they have nothing to do with, I hope we will all
agree to support this measure.
Now, I don't know if Senator Peters wants to talk at all on this
particular proposal. He is going to be talking on the next proposal.
I know that some of my colleagues are on the way to the floor, as we
speak--Senator Kaine and others--and when they arrive, I will return
the floor to them to have them say their piece.
But, at this time, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to
the immediate consideration of S. 3039, introduced earlier today; that
the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the
motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I have
come here today on the floor in good faith. I have come here not to
argue. I have come here trying to find agreement. And I have listened
to the Senator from Virginia, now the Senator from Maryland, and I have
to say, I don't know exactly what percentage, but probably 95, 98
percent of what they have said, I agree with.
I do have to point out, and this would be the most--I would say this
is a partisan comment. We have voted now 12 times on a measure that
would open up the government. It is what the House passed as a clean
CR, similar, if not identical, to what happened 13 times during the
Biden administration--just a clean CR to open up the government at
President Biden's levels, funding levels that Democrats voted for.
By the way, you know, House Republicans could have come to the table
with a CR with $1.5 trillion of spending reductions to match the $1.5
trillion of spending increase the Democrats wanted, and now there would
be areas of compromise.
But the House Republicans basically said here is the deal: Let's not
shut
[[Page S7716]]
down the government. Let's not make Federal Government workers pay for
our dysfunction. So pass a clean CR at President Biden's funding
levels.
So, again, that has been voted down 12 times, regrettably. But let me
set that aside.
I found out about the Senator from Maryland's proposal last May. I
got the language this morning. I have got the bill here. And, you know,
first of all, I kind of chuckled because the name of the bill is--I
have actually got the true Warren Buffet tax, and we ought to talk
about that later on. You might find that interesting. So he has taken
my bill, the Shutdown Fairness Act, and now this is his bill, the True
Shutdown Fairness Act.
And, again, I haven't done a word comparison, but it is probably like
95 percent of the Shutdown Fairness Act. That is a good thing. That
shows there are a lot of areas of agreement.
I come from the private sector. You don't get a whole lot
accomplished arguing all the time. It is all about finding areas of
agreement. I have got a product; you want to buy it. Now, we will
haggle over the price.
I have got a product; you want to buy it. Now, we need to haggle over
the price.
Now, the three areas of--the differences in these bills--I think I
have got this right. I would ask the Senator from Maryland to confirm
that. Your bill is only for this fiscal year. My bill would just end
this punishing Federal workers for our dysfunction forever. I mean, I
think we should make it permanent.
The Senator from Maryland's bill includes furloughed employees. Now,
the fact of the matter is, when all this is said and done, when we
finally end this dysfunction, we fund the government through an
appropriation, and because of the 2019 Government Fair Treatment Act,
they will get paid anyway.
So my bill is obviously targeted to the people we are forcing to
work, but I am not necessarily opposed to paying furloughed workers as
well. That is something we can talk about.
The last difference is, it limits reduction in force. And I come from
the private sector. Nobody likes to terminate employees--nobody.
But in the private sector when a business is facing bankruptcy,
sometimes business owners are forced do that to preserve the other
jobs.
The Federal Government is $38 trillion in debt. I don't think we
should limit the President's ability, the Chief Executive's ability, to
properly manage the Federal Government and make the tough decisions,
sometimes, to reduce the workforce, cut out some government functions.
Again, that is something we can talk about.
So, again, I think, in fairness to the more than 2 million Federal
employees that are now being forced to work because--the term is
``excepted,'' but that means they are essential--they are protecting
our Nation; they are protecting our safety and security; they are
writing Social Security checks. We need to see that they get their
paycheck so they don't have to work Door Dash, so they don't have to go
to food banks, so they are not under that stress.
I am asking in good faith, let's figure out how to get that done.
Now, I mean, I could propose--I will change the name of mine, by the
way, if you want to call it ``true'' because I think it is the True
Shutdown Fairness Act.
Today, right now, I would be willing to add furloughed workers
because we are going to pay them anyway.
I am just asking: Would you substitute your bill; take my bill,
substitute it in? I have actually got my staff to write the language to
do this. It is probably not ready for prime time. You really need to
get through leg counsel and that kind of stuff. But you would take my
bill, add furloughed workers, and say it is a done deal? Is that
something you would accept here today?
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. If you are yielding the floor?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, yes.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. The short answer is, we do want to pay all Federal
employees because none of them should be punished, but we also don't
want them to be fired and RIF'd during this period of time. You said,
in the private sector, people don't like to fire employees.
I know, Senator, you have read the remarks of Russ Vought, the head
of OMB. He wants to visit ``trauma'' on Federal employees, and he wants
to fire a lot of them. He has said so.
Mr. JOHNSON. Again, I--
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. But that is an important piece here, right, because--
Mr. JOHNSON. Again, I am trying to keep this--let's not argue. OK?
Let's focus on areas of agreement.
So reduction in force, again, I think we probably have a
philosophical disagreement there. I am not associating myself with
anybody else's remarks. That is something that I think reasonable
people can disagree with, and I think reasonable people can come to an
accommodation.
Again, we are talking about making sure that 2.8--I think is about
the number, 2.8--million Federal employees aren't worried about getting
their next paycheck. That so overwhelms, quite honestly, the smaller
differences about the length of the bill or what reduction in force.
Again, I am willing to come a long way in terms of--
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Let me speak.
Mr. JOHNSON. I am willing to come a long way in terms of including
furloughed workers. So, again, what I am suggesting is the way to do
it--by the way, this could be a wonderful example for this body,
working on a piece of legislation that, again, you bring it to the
floor. We filed it--it got rule XIV'd, but we are doing it the right
way. We are going to ask for a cloture vote on it, get it on the floor,
open it up to amendments--perfect it. See what the body of the Senate
wants to do with this piece of legislation that, again, we probably
agree on 95 percent of it or higher.
The way to do it is, when I offer my bill and we vote on cloture,
vote for cloture. Let's get on the bill. Let's start discussing today.
I mean, maybe if we are so successful, we find the differences are so
slight, we can pass it by UC later in the day.
But we do need to take this back to our conferences. We do need to go
to the leg staff. We do need to perfect this. It will probably take it
more time.
Passing it by unanimous consent is not the way to do it. I appreciate
the attempt. I appreciate the dialogue.
That is not what I am asking. In all sincerity, for the benefit of
those 2.8 million workers--our military, our law enforcement--let's
take that burden off them today. Let's give them some hope to know this
body is going to finally do something in a nonpartisan--I call it
nonpartisan--way that we all agree on. We are going to iron out our
differences the way you would generally do it, the way it used to be
done: By getting onto a bill, voting for cloture, having the will to
work its way, and then hopefully pass it early next week. That would be
my suggestion.
I would be willing to do it today. I don't think we could probably
handle that. There are things to discuss. That is all I am asking.
Would you like to respond?
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Thank you. Look, it would be great to work this out
because there seems to be some agreement that Federal employees should
not be the ones to bear the burden of a decision they had nothing to do
with.
I see the Republican leader is here with us on the floor.
I think the best way to proceed would be to delay moving forward on
the cloture vote on the motion to proceed on your bill and let's sit
down and let's talk about whether or not we can find that common
ground. We may not be that far apart.
I will just say to the Senator. I will say to the Senator that if you
give the President the authority, as your proposal currently does, to
decide who to send home and furlough and punish--but it sounds like you
are willing to change that--but here is the scenario I am worried
about.
If you listen to Russ Vought and the President, they would just fire
those people during the shutdown. That is what they are doing. In fact,
they are illegally firing people during the shutdown.
Mr. JOHNSON. Like I said, I really didn't want to come and argue.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. OK. Why don't we sit down together.
Mr. JOHNSON. I have to dispute that because even the National Active
and Retired Federal Employees Association, which has endorsed my bill,
says
[[Page S7717]]
that the bill does not single out favored political functions over its
favored ones.
You understand, under the Antideficiency Act, opinions from the
Office of Legal Counsel, ``excepted employees,'' it is pretty well
standard. There may be some tweaks back and forth, which is what you
give latitude to the executive branch.
Again, I am willing to sit down. I am sure the Republican conference
is willing to sit down and say: OK. What should we do?
I think Congress has given way too much authority to the executive
branch. I don't mind dialing that back a little bit. But, again, the
way to approach that is let's get on the bill; let's talk about it;
let's offer amendments--amendments that pass by voice vote--and let's
get it done.
There is a lot of pressure on all of us. We all want to get this
done.
But, again, passing by unanimous consent is not the way to get it
done. The way to get it done is the way the process should work. I
mean, wouldn't it be wonderful to actually see the process work in the
Senate?
You know, again, I realize you don't like--
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I would love to see that.
Mr. JOHNSON. Let's get on the bill. And then let's sit down in good
faith. Let's hammer out amendments, and let's get the thing passed next
week. Let's do that. That is all I am asking.
I honestly hate to object to this. I don't want to. OK? But, again,
this is not the way to pass it.
So, again, I will speak to my bill. I know we have got to get to
votes and that kind of stuff. But again, truthfully, in as good of
faith as I possibly can be, we have to get this done, and the way to do
that is vote to get on the bill. Let's sit down and talk in good faith,
and let's hammer out--it might be pretty minor differences when all is
all said and done.
With that, Mr. President--
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Let me just say, Mr. President, just to say to
Senator Johnson: I am more than happy to sit down with you. I think we
should do that maybe later today, get our teams together and see if we
can resolve some of these points because if we have the shared view
that, No. 1, no Federal employee should be punished for something they
had nothing to do with--and then, at least for the period of the
shutdown, the President should not be able to fire additional people,
which is, I think you well know--and this was partly considered by the
Federal court already--the President actually has less authority to do
it in a shutdown than when the government is open.
But I don't want to debate these issues on the floor right now.
Mr. JOHNSON. Sure.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I am more than happy to sit down with your team and
try to resolve this.
Mr. JOHNSON. Let me address that. I think this brinkmanship has got
to end. I have been here 15 years. We should have passed 180
appropriations bills before the end of the fiscal year. We passed six.
A lot of people worked in good faith to do that. OK.
It is obviously broken. We have got to start working on
appropriations and budget reform. We have to start working on that
together. OK?
But my guess is, part of what has happened with the reduction in
force is that brinkmanship, trying to get you folks to just agree to
what you have done 13 times. Just open up the government, and then we
will talk. OK? We are more than open to talk.
But anyway, again, I am literally begging you, please, when we vote
on cloture, vote to get on the bill, and then let's go through the
amendment process, and let's get it done quickly.
Again, there is not that big of difference. We can get this done.
Again, I hate to do this, but with that, I will object and just,
again, beg you.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hagerty). Objection is heard.
Mr. JOHNSON. Let's get on the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. As I said to the Senator from Wisconsin, I am happy
to sit down with him and his team to see if we can put together a
proposal based on the principle that no Federal employee should have to
bear the burden and the pain of a decision they had nothing to do with
as well as many of these Federal contractors who are also involved. So
I welcome the chance to sit down with the Senator from Wisconsin.
I also hope that the President of the United States will sit down
with Democrats to resolve the overall issue and open the government.
That way we wouldn't even have to go through this exercise right now.
With that, I want to yield the floor to my colleague from Maryland
Senator Alsobrooks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Ms. ALSOBROOKS. Mr. President, thank you, first of all, to my
colleague Senator Chris Van Hollen for yielding, and I also want to
thank the senior Senator from Maryland for his work on this
legislation, the True Shutdown Fairness Act.
Senator Van Hollen is a tremendous partner on this critical issue and
an advocate for the thousands of Federal workers in our great State.
Maryland is home for 494,000 Federal workers and Federal contractors
and 34,000 uniformed military personnel. Many of these Marylanders have
spent their lives serving their fellow Americans, fighting to defend
our country, ensuring our food and water are safe, making sure our
parents and grandparents get their Social Security checks, and
researching cures to cancer.
That they have been characterized by this administration as an enemy
worthy of trauma is repugnant. If you live in Maryland, you know a
Federal worker. They are your friend. They are your neighbors. They are
the people like my grandmother Sarah Daisy.
You see, Sarah Daisy worked as a housekeeper in Washington, DC, but
dreamed her entire life of working for the Federal Government. Back
then--and many will recall--she had to pass a civil servants exam,
which included a typing test, in order to work for the Federal
Government, but she couldn't afford a typewriter and didn't know how to
type. So she taped a white piece of paper on her refrigerator. She drew
a keyboard on that piece of paper and stood in front of her
refrigerator in her one-bedroom apartment every night and taught
herself the key strokes.
Well, Sarah Daisy passed the exam and got herself a job working in
the Federal Government. It was her dream.
She worked in the Hoffman Building. She would always tell me about
it. I can vividly remember her saying that she was so proud that she
walked past this general and that general in the hallway. She was very,
very proud. And I am honored to be her legacy and to be fighting for
the countless Marylanders, just like Sarah Daisy, who are being so
cruelly targeted by this administration.
Now, thanks to Republicans in this body who have chosen to follow
this President's order and shut down the government, many of our
Federal workers are working without pay still in service to our
country. The rest have been furloughed through no fault of their own.
Our ask today is simple: Pay them for the jobs that they were hired
to do.
We are now in day 23 of this Republican shutdown, and let us not
mince words. Republicans hold the keys to the kingdom. They have
control over the White House. They have majorities in this Chamber and
in the House. And what have they done with that power? Has the cost of
your groceries gone down? No. Has the cost of housing gone down? No.
Has our economy gotten stronger? Absolutely not.
What have they done? Shut down the government. That is it.
This shutdown is on them. We know it; they know it; and the American
people know it. It has been 23 days of this administration refusing to
come to the table in good faith and negotiate a plan to keep the
government open and make sure that healthcare is affordable and
accessible for millions of Americans. It has been 23 days of this
administration using the shutdown as an excuse to further target
Federal workers who are my constituents.
My State is home to 494,000 Federal workers and contractors. All of
them are feeling the pain from this President's refusal to do what he
supposedly loves to do best, make a deal.
Right before the shutdown began, the very sinister Office of
Management and Budget Director Russell Vought instructed Agencies to
use a shutdown as
[[Page S7718]]
an opportunity to issue permanent government layoffs. Vought then began
circulating a memo that would seem to challenge the legality of
furloughed workers receiving backpay.
By the way, Congress passed a bipartisan law ensuring their backpay
during the last Trump administration.
Yet this administration continues to disregard the rule of law. Just
last week, Vought ominously tweeted: ``The RIFs have begun.'' He then
directed Federal Agencies to begin illegally terminating thousands of
Federal employees.
This is a man who is outwardly, in a very sinister way, taking
pleasure in harming Federal workers.
Hours later, President Trump and Secretary Kennedy fired more than
1,700 more people from the Department of Health and Human Services,
including staffers that work to prevent measles outbreaks, before
admitting they had sent nearly half of the notices to employees at the
CDC in error.
Imagine that, with a family to support, you get a notice that you are
fired before getting another email, hours later, telling you that your
RIF has been rescinded. The chaos and the cruelty are unconscionable.
Thousands of dedicated civil servants have been shown the door by an
administration that, in the words the Office of Management and Budget
Director Russell Vought, has said that it is his intention--he said he
hopes that Federal workers will no longer want to come to work because
they will be in so much ``trauma.'' He also said that he hoped they
would feel like villains.
So there has been a systemic dismantling of our Federal Government, a
witch hunt targeting patriotic people across this country who raised
their hand to serve the American people.
All of this chaos is needless. It is a manufactured crisis. So many
Marylanders would like to show up to work today and serve the American
people, but they have been left behind by this administration. Hundreds
of thousands of civil servants have been either furloughed or forced to
work without pay, all because this President decided to shut down the
government instead of lowering healthcare costs for Americans.
We need to ensure our workers are paid. The truth of the matter is we
are now just 9 days away from open enrollment beginning, when Americans
will begin to sign up for their healthcare plans for next year, and
they are already facing sticker shock.
Even with the State stepping in, a 60-year-old couple living in
Salisbury, MD, making $90,000 a year, will pay $1,100 more per month--
per month--for healthcare. They will have to pay $1,100 more per month
next year. For a family of four in Maryland, making around $128,000 a
year--and for context, that is the combined salary of a firefighter and
a teacher--they will be paying $1,427 per month next year versus $916
this year.
If the President and our colleagues on the other side of the aisle
get their wish and allow the tax credits to expire, nearly 90,000
Marylanders could be priced out of their health insurance all together.
So we will keep fighting for healthcare because it is what Americans
deserve.
But this chaos is unsustainable, and we must have faith that, soon,
this season will be over.
I know, soon, there will be a morning not like the morning we have
awakened to today. Today's morning brings about chaos and fear and
confusion and division. But I know soon there will be another morning
where Americans will wake up across our country and not fear that they
will not be able to afford rent, groceries, and healthcare.
Right now, it is our duty as Members of the U.S. Senate to pay our
Federal workers. Our government will cease to function if we do not.
And the damage, I fear, is irreparable.
Yet, just like Russ Vought, my colleagues today are picking winners
and losers, putting forth legislation that made sure only excepted
workers are paid, instead of the entirety of the Federal and military
workforce that has been held hostage by this Republican shutdown.
We cannot cherry-pick who gets paid during a shutdown based on our
perception of the political affiliations of our patriotic civil
servants. We must pass legislation that ensures our Federal workers
receive the paychecks that they have earned.
Around 750,000 Federal employees have been furloughed this month at
no fault of their own. Hundreds of thousands of these employees live in
our region--in Maryland, Virginia, and the District. Senator Johnson's
bill would ignore these dedicated workers, leaving them to continue to
go without a paycheck while President Trump refuses to get back to the
bargaining table.
They cannot afford to wait for the President to tire of throwing
celebratory picnics or tearing down the White House for a gilded
ballroom. They cannot afford to wait for Speaker Johnson and House
Republicans to actually show back up to work.
In case some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have
forgotten, Federal workers don't just serve Democrats. They serve every
American citizen who needs their help. Researching cures for cancer
isn't just for people who live in blue States. Making sure that people
get their Social Security checks isn't some leftwing conspiracy.
I would assume that everyone in this body agrees that Americans
should get paid for their labor. Well, if you believe that, you will
support our bill.
It took courage and dedication for my grandmother, Sarah Daisy, to
learn a new skill in order to serve her country. Each day, our armed
servicemembers and civil servants show courage and dedication to serve
and protect our country from harm, to make it a better place. Let's
show courage today, work together, and pay all Federal workers because
we all know Federal workers are Republicans, Democrats, and
Independents. They are not political pawns. They are patriots.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have myself and
Senator Johnson be permitted to complete our remarks prior to the
scheduled rollcall vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 3043
Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise, today, to request unanimous
consent to pass my Military and Federal Employee Protection Act.
I understand my colleague from Wisconsin objected to Senator Van
Hollen's proposal. While I support my colleague from Maryland's
legislation, I am going to offer an alternative, an alternative that is
very, very straightforward.
It seems to me that we all agree in this Chamber that we want to pay
our Federal workers. My bill will do just that and nothing else.
The Military and Federal Employee Protection Act provides pay for
members of the military, Federal employees, and Federal contractors who
have been denied paychecks during the government shutdown.
Let's be honest on why we are all here. The shutdown is not an
accident. Republicans, right now, are refusing to negotiate with
Democrats on a bipartisan solution to help address the healthcare
crisis. As a result of that, Federal workers are paying a price. My
bill ensures that no worker is left behind during this difficult
period.
Congress has already guaranteed that all employees receive their
paycheck when a shutdown ends. In 2019, Congress voted overwhelmingly
for a bill to provide all employees backpay once a shutdown ends, and,
actually, President Trump signed that bill into law. So the government
is already required to pay all of its workers.
What my bill does, very simply, is it just ensures that these workers
can actually, now, pay their bills that are coming due this month.
Those bills aren't going to be postponed. They need to be paid this
month.
While I appreciate my colleague's interest to ensure all workers are
paid--I appreciated the comments that Senator Johnson made--my
legislation will provide pay for all servicemembers, Federal employees,
and contractors that have missed paychecks due to the shutdown. But it
doesn't do other stuff that his bill does, which gives President Trump
an unlimited blank check to pick winners and losers. We are just
focused on what I think all of us agree on.
This legislation that I am offering is the absolute simplest path
forward to pay our workers. We all say we agree on this. So let's just
pass this bill now and get workers their paycheck.
[[Page S7719]]
I am going to continue to work to end the shutdown and address the
healthcare crisis. But in the meantime, let's protect our
servicemembers and our Federal employees, not put other stuff in the
bill, just pay them so they can meet their bills as they arise.
I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate
consideration of S. 3043, introduced earlier today; that the bill be
considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, again, I
will condense my remarks because so much of what I want to say I
already said to the Senator from Maryland.
I think it is interesting that the Senator from Michigan supports the
Senator from Maryland's bill, which is a more comprehensive bill, I
think. I only saw this now and hope I get it right. But I think yours
is just limited to the time period from the shutdown until the bill is
passed, and then we are in the same situation: The shutdown continues.
Hopefully, it won't. You know there is a way of doing it. Just vote
for the clean CR.
But, again, I really don't want to object to these bills, but in this
case, I understand the way to pass this into law--as I was speaking to
the Senator from Maryland today, as he exited the Chamber: Wouldn't
this be a wonderful demonstration for the Senate, the Congress, for
America of how you pass a piece of legislation? If you take the bill--I
realize you don't 100-percent agree with my Shutdown Fairness Act.
Fine. I think we are 90-plus percent in agreement on it.
You vote for cloture to get on the bill. Then you work in good faith
on the areas of disagreement. Let the Senate work its will through the
Member process.
This is a small piece of legislation. It is an incredibly important
piece of legislation. It is incredibly important because we all agree
that we don't want to make Federal employees pay for the dysfunction of
this body.
Let's first demonstrate that this body can actually function the way
it is intended to function, which is to write a bill, get it filed,
have the leader file cloture on it, and have the body vote to proceed
to the bill with 60 votes.
We don't need all of you. We need about seven of you, eight of you.
OK? Have eight of you agree to get on the bill. Then we will work in
good faith and make sure that we don't make Federal employees pay for
our dysfunction.
Again, I do have to object. But, again, I am urging--I am begging--
colleagues from the other side of the aisle to vote for cloture, and
let's iron out these differences and make the Federal employees whole.
I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I appreciate the comments of my colleague
from Wisconsin. We have worked on a lot of bills together. We have come
together to find common ground on some, at times, contentious issues.
I agree about the 90 percent comment that Senator Johnson mentioned.
What I am actually proposing right now is that 90 percent. It is really
simple. This is as simple a bill as you can get.
We can show the American people that we come together on a bill that
is really straightforward--no gotchas, no language that might trip
people up. Pay folks. Make sure they are made whole, if this passes, so
they can pay their bills, and we can continue to deal with the other
issues of the day.
I think this would be an example of bipartisan, coming together
unanimously to say that here is a bill that will pay servicemembers and
Federal employees and contractors, make them whole so they can make
their bills.
We don't need to have a protracted process. This is a simple issue if
we focus on the 90 percent we agree on, and that is what this bill is.
It is the 90 percent.
I would hope we can pass it today and put the minds at ease of
hundreds of thousands of folks all across the country.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. So now we will proceed to the cloture vote on the
Shutdown Fairness Act.
In response to this, quickly. It is unrealistic to expect almost any
piece of legislation to pass by unanimous consent, a bill that has just
been introduced that exact morning. No matter how simple it is, there
are going to be people who are going to object. So that is why the
process is to file a bill, to file for cloture, and to proceed to get
on the bill, to have the amendment process, and to go through the
process. It can go very quickly, but doing this by unanimous consent is
just unreasonable. So that is unfortunate. Again, the solution here is
to vote for cloture to get on the bill, the Shutdown Fairness Act.
Now, I will try and keep my remarks reasonably short. I was allotted
20 minutes, but I know people are already here on the floor to vote, so
I am mindful of that, but this is just a quick, little history of my
experience since I got here in 2011.
This is our fourth shutdown now, and we are on the 23rd day. We have
had 55 continuing resolutions. Again, I didn't vote for all of them,
but I voted for many of them. You know, other colleagues on both sides
have voted for those. I mean, generally, the fight is over. Let's just
have a clean CR; let's not junk it up with policies. That is the
loggerhead here. One side refuses to just do a clean CR. We have had 12
either increases or suspensions of the debt ceiling, and we have just
surpassed $38 trillion in debt.
I realize people work in good faith on the budget process. I am on
the Budget Committee and have been on the Appropriations Committee. I
see the former chair and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee
on the floor here. The sad fact is, since I have been here, we should
have passed 180 appropriations bills prior to the end of the fiscal
year that we are going to fund, but we have only passed 6. That is a
96.7-percent failure rate. It is clearly broken. The budget and
appropriations process is broken.
Rather than spending weeks arguing over how do you get the government
back open, I would much rather sit down in a nonpartisan way and go,
How can we fix this? Can we go to 2-year appropriations cycles? I mean,
what can we do to the budget process? I mean, I would much rather talk
about that.
I understand that there is a lot of bipartisan agreement on
proposals, but we will never get to that if we are literally mired
down. Last year, it took us 6 months to finally fund the government
with a continuing resolution. This is beyond ridiculous. So, again,
this is a bipartisan problem here. I am not placing blame anywhere. It
is just a bipartisan problem.
Unfortunately, we haven't passed any appropriations. I have pointed
out before that the Democrats voted 13 times during the Biden
administration for a clean CR at Biden's spending levels. Now they are
saying, no, they won't.
Of course, their leader, in doing that on January 16, 2024, said:
Passing a clean CR this week is important for two main
reasons: First, passing the CR will avert a harmful and
unnecessary government shutdown. No reasonable Member of
either side, Democrat or Republican, wants a government
shutdown.
That was not Leader Thune saying that. That was then-Leader Schumer
saying that, and now he has, obviously, completely changed his tune.
I did point this out, and this is important to understand because the
other side is saying: Look, why don't you sit down and negotiate and
compromise?
The House could have passed a CR with $1.5 trillion in spending cuts
to match the CR proposed by the Democrats of $1.5 trillion in new
spending. OK. There you go. Now you have got something to compromise
on. That is not what the House did. The House said: Well, let's do what
we did 13 times under the Biden administration. Let's just pass a clean
CR at Biden's level and really beg the Democrats to say yes, but they
haven't been willing to do that.
Again, I know people are waiting to vote, and I am not going to talk
about the issue: you know, the fact that ObamaCare is causing premiums
to skyrocket and what they are demanding, in terms of extending the
enhanced
[[Page S7720]]
subsidies that were supposed to be temporary. They set the expiration
date. It is ObamaCare that is causing premiums to be unaffordable, and
they want those enhanced premiums to mask the failure of ObamaCare, but
I won't get into detail on that.
I will talk about--this is day 23. We are forcing about 2.8 million
Federal workers to work--military, law enforcement, people who write
Social Security checks, and air traffic controllers who are keeping our
skies safe--but we are not paying them. That is absurd. What is even
more absurd is they will get paid. Whether they are working or
furloughed, they will get paid because of the Government Employee Fair
Treatment Act of 2019. Once this ends--I am assuming it will end with
an appropriation--they will get paid.
With the Shutdown Fairness Act, all it asks--all it does--is to
recognize that reality. It shouldn't cost a dime. The CBO has an
alternate universe score on this. There is a zero score. This doesn't
cost the Federal Government a dime. It just pays the workers who are
being forced to work. Pay them now and not later. It makes incredible
common sense.
I will end with a surprising support letter I got from the National
Active and Retired Federal Employees Association that pretty well
battens down all the arguments against this bill. It doesn't change the
government's obligation to pay furloughed employees. They will get
paid. It does not single out favored political functions over
disfavored ones. Again, President Trump is, by and large, honoring the
past opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel's Antideficiency Act.
They say that they don't believe that it is empowering the
administration to pick and choose what activities it carries out. It
includes to say that the American public relies on the full scope of
Federal Agency missions that are funded via appropriations, and
political pressures that exist to advance appropriations bills will
remain to encourage resolution.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Vote?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, we are not there yet. I am sorry. I will conclude
quickly.
The bottom line is, as I talk to the Senator from Maryland, the way
to pass this law--the way to protect Federal workers--isn't with the
unanimous consent request of a bill nobody has ever seen; it is to vote
for cloture on the Shutdown Fairness Act. Let's work out the
differences. We agree on 95 percent of it. Let's work out those
differences and vote for cloture. We can get this passed, I think,
early next week. With that, I will conclude my remarks on that.
Nomination of Rebecca L. Taibleson
Mr. President, I should be speaking for about 5 minutes on the
wonderful nomination of Rebecca Taibleson, but I know everybody wants
to vote.
She did a wonderful job in Judiciary. She is a highly qualified
lawyer. She will make a wonderful judge for the Seventh Circuit. I urge
all of my colleagues to vote for cloture on her nomination.
With that, I yield the floor.
____________________