[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 179 (Tuesday, October 28, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7757-S7764]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

 CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS AND EXTENSIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to Proceed

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 
5371.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371, a bill 
     making continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal 
     year 2026, and for other purposes.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, this is a quote:

       The path forward for Congress is clear: Reopen the 
     government immediately under a clean continuing resolution 
     that allows continued debate on larger issues.

  That is from the president of the American Federation of Government 
Employees--a labor union, I would add, most often aligned with 
Democrats. But this is what AFGE's president says:

       It's time to pass a clean continuing resolution and end 
     this shutdown today.

  I couldn't have said it better myself, and actually I have been 
saying that for about a month now.

[[Page S7758]]

  The far-left activists wanted a showdown with President Trump, and so 
Democrats have shut down the government and have forced hard-working 
Americans to live in uncertainty for 4 weeks--4 weeks and counting.
  Even as nutrition programs are running out of money and Federal 
workers are lining up at food banks, Democrats continue--continue--to 
reject every opportunity to end the shutdown or mitigate its pain. They 
now blocked a clean, nonpartisan continuing resolution 12 times--12 
times. A clean resolution is sitting right there to open up the 
government, get everybody paid, get Federal employees back to work. 
That thing sitting at the desk that funds the government doesn't have a 
single new Republican policy in it. It doesn't have a single partisan 
policy rider. It simply extends current government funding.

  But Democrats have said no to that now 12 times. We offered them a 
chance to continue the bipartisan appropriations process starting with 
the Defense appropriations bill, a bill that passed out of the 
committee by a big bipartisan vote of 26 to 3. But Democrats said no to 
that too. They didn't want to lose leverage in a shutdown. Then, last 
week, we offered up a bill to pay any Federal employee who is working 
during the shutdown, including everybody here. Once again, Democrats 
said no.
  I don't know what Democrats are holding out for. Do Democrats think 
that we are suddenly going to vote for their partisan CR, which, by the 
way, would spend an additional $1.5 trillion to keep the government 
open until the end of this week. That is their alternative--$1.5 
trillion to keep the government open until Friday. That is their 
alternative. It wouldn't pass here; it can't pass in the House; and it 
wouldn't be signed into law by the President.
  Our bill, on the other hand, passed the House a month ago. It has 
been sitting here for an entire month and would be signed by the 
President immediately to reopen the government.
  I have to say, this wasn't my plan for the month of October. A 
government shutdown may have been what Democrats had in mind to show 
the far left that they are fighting President Trump and get some cheers 
at the No Kings rally. That wasn't my plan. My plan was to get the 
government funded with as little drama as possible. That is why 
Republicans put forward a clean continuing resolution, no partisan 
policies, nothing new. Who could possibly have a problem with that? It 
would give us more time to continue progress on full-year 
appropriations bills, the way we are supposed to fund the government.
  I realize that would be out of the ordinary, given the past few years 
under the Democratic majority and Leader Schumer. But I was clear from 
the day I took office, I want to do things differently around here. My 
goal was to have an open process conducted through regular order, 
something that I think is in the best interest of this institution and 
of all Senators, both sides of the aisle. I know I was not alone in 
wanting an open process.
  Until Democrats derailed everything, we had actually made a lot of 
progress on restoring regular order this year. We passed three 
bipartisan appropriations bills before the August recess, the first 
time the Senate had done that since 2018. Now we are trying to go to 
conference on those three bills to reach a final agreement with the 
House, and the Democrats are blocking that. That includes the 
Agriculture bill that funds farm programs and nutritional assistance, 
the Military Construction and VA bill that funds programs that veterans 
rely on.
  As I said, we tried to bring up the Defense appropriations bill this 
month in hopes that if Democrats wouldn't agree to fund the entire 
government, we could, at least, make some progress on this critical 
aspect of it.
  I told my Democrat colleagues at the time, if we got on that bill, we 
would work to add other bipartisan bills, the same way we did it just a 
few months ago. But once again, Democrats said no--no to funding 
programs they claim they support, no to an open process, no to 
bipartisanship. Time and again, we heard the Democratic leader lecture 
about bipartisanship. So why is his caucus blocking progress on 
bipartisan appropriations bills? Why are Democrats blocking bills that 
they helped write in the Appropriations Committee where these bills are 
passing with overwhelming bipartisan margins, as I said, 26 to 3? Why 
are they upending a bipartisan process that benefits all Senators on 
both sides of the aisle?
  The senior Senator from Hawaii said recently:

       We still have hope for the appropriations process. There's 
     a bipartisan desire to get something done and avoid a full-
     year continuing resolution.

  All I can say in response is if Democrats still have hope for the 
appropriations process, they need to start acting like it. We are 
running out of time. Every day Democrats say no to reopening the 
government is another day lost.
  We have given Democrats a lot of opportunities to work in the best 
interest of the American people. But Democrats seem more interested in 
getting the upper hand in their partisan games. The No. 2 Democrat in 
the House said last week:

       I mean, shutdowns are terrible and, of course, there will 
     be, you know, families that are going to suffer . . . but it 
     is one of the few leverage times we have.

  ``Of course there will be families that are going to suffer . . . but 
it is one of the few leverage times we have.'' That from the second 
ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives. I think it describes 
where we are at. Sure, people are suffering, but Democrats need their 
leverage.
  Are they serious?
  Mr. President, I end as I began, quoting the president of a major 
labor union and a Democrat ally:

       The path forward for Congress is clear: Reopen the 
     government immediately under a clean continuing resolution 
     that allows continued debate on larger issues.

  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The Democratic leader is recognized.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, open enrollment is now 4 days away, and 
Republicans do not even want to talk about fixing healthcare.
  Americans are on the brink of a healthcare crisis unlike we have seen 
in our lifetimes. Never before have we been in a situation where more 
than 20 million Americans can see their insurance premiums more than 
double, on average, in the blink of an eye. That is just the average 
because for many people it is worse.
  Yesterday, the State of New Jersey also announced the average New 
Jersey family would see premium hikes of 175 percent--175 percent. In 
Upstate New York, the average family with a plan costing $280 a month 
today is about to pay $1,700 a month for the same plan next year, a 
500-percent hike, and that starts this Saturday with open enrollment.
  This crisis will be felt in every community and by nearly every 
single household, red, blue, purple, and everything in between. So 
tonight, Senate Democrats will come to the floor and warn our 
Republican colleagues and the Nation of the devastation Republicans are 
causing by doing nothing--nothing--on healthcare. We will highlight the 
impacts of surging premiums on families. We will share the stories we 
are hearing right now from people scared of premium hikes. I thank my 
colleagues for coming to the floor and speaking on this urgent--
urgent--issue.
  We are in a healthcare crisis, and Republicans don't even want to 
talk about how to fix it. The President isn't even in town as Americans 
are about to be devastated by the bills they will receive on 
healthcare. The President is on the other side of the world instead of 
being here in Washington working with Congress to lower healthcare 
premiums. When the President is in town, what is he focused on? Instead 
of being focused on fixing healthcare, Donald Trump is sending $40 
billion to Argentina, spending $300 million on his ballroom, and giving 
Kristi Noem $170 million for two big private luxury jets.
  Meanwhile, millions of hungry kids and working families are about to 
lose SNAP benefits to buy food because Donald Trump has ordered the 
Department of Agriculture to rip up its own

[[Page S7759]]

contingency plan. Isn't that a disgrace, using hungry kids, hungry 
parents, hungry veterans as hostages? It is cruel.
  Let's be clear about the facts. There is somewhere around $5 billion 
in emergency funds that could be used right now to ensure parents and 
kids don't go hungry when SNAP runs out this Saturday. The USDA said 
weeks ago that contingency funds were ``available to fund participant 
benefits.'' That is the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Trump's own 
Cabinet position. But now, they reversed course and literally wiped 
their plan from their own website because Donald Trump has ordered them 
not to use this funding. Donald Trump should reverse course immediately 
and allow these emergency funds to go through to spare working families 
from hunger and needless suffering.

  What the administration is doing in ordering the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture not to use emergency funds to keep SNAP afloat is an act of 
cruelty--cruelty. The same administration that gifted Argentina a $40 
billion bailout and cut taxes for billionaires by $1 trillion is now 
telling hungry kids: You are on your own.
  And what about Republicans in Congress? Today, Leader Thune will 
force yet another vote on a Republican CR that has zero bipartisan 
input. It is a partisan bill, and most importantly, it does nothing to 
solve the ACA crisis.
  Just now, here on the floor, the Republican leader seemed perplexed 
about what precisely it is that Democrats are pushing for. He knows 
damned well what Democrats want. It is the very same thing that a vast 
majority of Americans want, including nearly 60 percent of MAGA voters. 
We want lower healthcare costs now. We want to solve the ACA premium 
crisis now. Open enrollment is just days away. We want lower costs, 
better healthcare, and to reopen the government.
  Let me repeat again what Democrats want so that the Republican leader 
can hear it. We want lower healthcare costs, to fix the ACA premium 
crisis, and to reopen the government.
  We Democrats have been calling on Republican leaders to sit down with 
us and negotiate and address this crisis since the summer, but even 
now, Leader Thune insists we should fix ACA premiums later, not right 
away. This is not good enough for the American people because Americans 
know that when it comes to healthcare, when Republicans say ``later,'' 
they mean ``never.''
  Meanwhile, the House of Representatives has become a ghost town. It 
has been 39 days since Members of Congress have shown up for work. We 
all know what is going on here: Speaker Johnson is simply afraid to 
bring the House back because the minute he does, a good number of House 
Republicans will start saying exactly what many of us are calling for--
that we need to address the ACA premium crisis as soon as we can. The 
Speaker is so afraid of exposing divisions within his own conference 
that he has unilaterally shut down one half of the legislative branch 
of government.
  To sum it all up, we are just days away from a healthcare crisis 
unlike any we have ever seen, and Republicans from the Senate, to the 
House, to the White House are dithering about. Republicans are the 
party in charge. They hold the White House and both Chambers in 
Congress. Americans know that. They know the onus is on the majority 
party to govern and to work with the other side to get things done. But 
today, Americans look at this Republican Party and see a majority 
refusing to do its job. It is no surprise that Americans primarily hold 
the Republicans responsible for this disastrous shutdown.
  So I will say it once again: Republicans need to get serious about 
ending this shutdown and ending the ACA crisis that has now become a 
reality for millions of people. They need to get serious. If Donald 
Trump continues to ignore the ticking time bomb that is ACA premiums, 
the American people will hold him responsible when disaster strikes.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                          Waiving Quorum Calls

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the 
mandatory quorum calls with respect to cloture on the Pratt and LaCour, 
Jr., nominations.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today marks day 28 of the Schumer 
shutdown of the U.S. Government. Democrats continue to block a clean 
continuing resolution that would reopen the government. For them, it is 
a big game, and for the American people, they continue to suffer.
  So listen to his own words. Listen to what Senator Schumer said, what 
he gloated to the press. He said:

       Every day gets better for us.

  I have got to wonder who the ``us'' is because it is not the American 
people.
  Then, just last week, the Democrat whip in the House of 
Representatives said to the press, in an interview that was broadcast 
on television--proudly proclaimed, it looked like:

       Of course, there will be families that are going to suffer. 
     . . . But it is one of the few leverage times we have.

  Leverage?
  The Democrats are playing the politics of pain, and the American 
people are the ones who are suffering. It is wrong. It is heartless. It 
is mean.
  Leverage for what--taxpayer giveaways of healthcare, funded by the 
taxpayers, to illegal immigrants who stormed into this country in the 
last administration? Is that why they are shutting down the government?
  Leverage for that? Leverage for $1.5 trillion in new spending?
  Leverage so they can eliminate the one thing that we passed this 
summer to help our rural hospitals--$50 billion for rural hospitals, 
remote hospitals like those that we have all across the country? They 
want to get rid of that? Leverage for that?
  Leverage so they can continue to suck up to the far-left, radical 
wing of their party they are trying to impress? That is not good for 
our country. It is not good for healthcare. It is not good for 
anything.
  I am a doctor. I have practiced medicine in Wyoming for 24 years. I 
want Americans to have high-quality, affordable healthcare. That is 
what we want for American citizens, but right now, that is impossible 
because American healthcare is broken. The Democrats broke it. They 
broke it when they passed ObamaCare. The day they passed ObamaCare, 
they broke healthcare in America.
  The headline in the Sunday New York Times proves the point in its 
first three words: ``ObamaCare is pricey.''
  That is what they have done.
  They said: Oh, we want to lower the cost of care.
  They didn't. They misnamed it and put the word ``affordable'' in it, 
but there is nothing affordable about it. ObamaCare has been pricey 
from the beginning, and it is getting worse.
  The Washington Post's editorial page agrees. They wrote recently:

       The real problem is that the Affordable Care Act was never 
     actually affordable.

  That is the Washington Post. They are right.
  ObamaCare is a failed program. It has failed financially. The 
Democrats created it, and they continue to defend the failure today.
  The Democrats tried to prop up ObamaCare with very juicy subsidies to 
try to hold down out-of-pocket costs. Then, when Joe Biden became 
President, the Democrats added Biden COVID bonus payments on top of all 
of the subsidies. These payments are an admission that ObamaCare's 
flaws have only gotten worse.
  Democrats voted twice to make these Biden COVID bonus payments 
temporary. The first was scheduled to end in 2022, but they noted that 
ObamaCare was still failing miserably, so they extended the payments 
again. They extended them to the end of this year. Democrats set the 
expiration date. Democrats created the cliff. Democrats created what 
they are now referring to as a ``crisis.''
  Remember, Democrats created ObamaCare, and they created these Biden 
COVID bonus payments, and they did it without a single Republican 
vote--not in the House, not in the Senate--not a single one.

[[Page S7760]]

  These payments were always intended to be temporary--or so they 
claimed. Democrats' own report that they wrote back then when they 
passed it said they were to be applied ``during the public health 
emergency.''
  Today, Democrats are now demanding $350 billion in permanent, new 
spending. Why? Because they need to prop up ObamaCare once again 
because it has failed. When the Democrats say ``Fix it now,'' what they 
are really saying is ``Prop up ObamaCare forever.'' It is wrong. COVID 
is over. Democrats probably didn't see the memo. Maybe they don't 
realize it is over. They are still trying to go after money for COVID.
  Look, even after the Biden COVID bonus payments expire, the Federal 
Government is still going to pay for 80 percent of the average 
ObamaCare enrollee's premium because ObamaCare is pricey. That is what 
the New York Times tells us. What is expiring now is this added cash 
that Democrats paid insurers during the pandemic. Money didn't go to 
private individuals. It didn't go to the citizens. It went to the 
insurance companies. They won't tell you that either.
  These Biden COVID bonus payments are riddled with waste, fraud, 
abuse, and actual corruption. Democrats removed every income limit on 
the subsidies, with no means testing whatsoever.
  You hear Bernie Sanders come out to the floor and say: Oh, we can't 
do this for millionaires and billionaires.
  They did it for millionaires and billionaires. They removed the upper 
limit. It is for anybody. The sky is the limit. No matter how much 
money you make, no matter what is going on in your life, you get these 
bonus payments for COVID through the Democrats, and they want to make 
it permanent. It is absolutely wrong. It is ridiculous.
  In 2024, 12 million people whom they enrolled in this program got 
insurance that they never used. Since the subsidies flowed directly to 
the insurance companies from the government, the insurers pocketed tens 
of billions of dollars even though the enrollees did not make a single 
claim. How does that happen?
  Let me talk about some of the waste and some of the actual fraud and 
manipulation that is going on, because in 29 States of our 50, more 
people are claiming full benefits than are eligible for those benefits 
in the State.
  How did the Democrats allow that for the last 4 years? That is what 
we are trying to take a look at and are saying: Mr. President, this is 
wrong.
  There were 6.4 million people under the Biden administration who were 
improperly enrolled that year, and $27 billion was paid by hard-working 
taxpayers for all of these people who were improperly enrolled. At 
least 1.6 million people were doubly enrolled--enrolled in both 
Medicaid and in ObamaCare--which, of course, is not allowed. It is 
illegal. You can't do it. Democrats allowed it to happen anyway because 
they don't care.
  They have never shown they care. It is all a political game for them. 
You heard it. You heard the whip in the House say: Oh, no; this gives 
us leverage. You heard the minority leader here, Chuck Schumer, say 
that every day gets better for them. Well, it doesn't get better for 
the American people.
  This isn't about making healthcare more affordable; this is a direct 
theft of taxpayer money, and it is all to prop up a program that they 
named after President Obama--ObamaCare--and it is a program that never 
worked. Healthcare costs continue to go up, and ObamaCare has failed to 
address that. As even the New York Times said on Sunday, ObamaCare is 
pricey.
  So what caused those prices to go up? Well, Democrats did, of course. 
When the government pays any price, insurers can charge any price. It 
is exactly what is happening today, and now it is the American families 
who are paying their taxes who are paying the price.
  Republicans will not allow Democrats to paper over the inadequacies 
of ObamaCare. We want to get to the root cause of the cost of medical 
care.
  Democrats are protecting waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption. At the 
same time, Federal workers are going unpaid. Enough is enough.
  Even liberal labor unions are fed up with the Democrats' politics of 
pain, and we have seen it. Finally, yesterday, the American Federation 
of Government Employees urged Democrats to join Republicans and reopen 
the government.
  What exactly did they say?
  They said:

       Both political parties have made their point.

  And then they went on to say:

       It's time to pass a clean continuing resolution and end 
     this shutdown today. No half measures, and no gamesmanship.

  That is from the union that has, for years and years and years, 
supported Democrat candidates across the board. They are saying: Do 
what Republicans have been saying from the beginning. Pass a clean 
continuing resolution.
  Remember, they did it 13 times when Joe Biden was President, and now 
they voted against it 13 times with Donald Trump in the White House.
  It is a big political game for the Democrats. It is a dangerous game, 
and the American people are suffering.
  So are the Democrats going to listen to the union that represented 
and worked with the Democrats to get them elected in the first place?
  Well, we are going to find out.
  Let me echo what Leader Thune said: Republicans are happy to address 
ObamaCare's many failures, but, first, we need to reopen the 
government.
  There are not going to be negotiations while the government is 
closed. We are not going to negotiate with hostage takers. We need to 
reopen the government and then talk about all the things that people 
want to talk about, because, right now, our troops and women, infants, 
and children in the Women, Infants, and Children Program--they 
shouldn't be used as leverage for Democrats to try to save their failed 
programs.
  Air traffic controllers, TSA agents, whom I talked to yesterday 
coming from Wyoming to come back to Washington--they don't want to be 
used as pawns. They don't want to be thought of as chips on the table 
in a political game of leverage.
  Chuck Schumer saying ``Every day gets better for us''--that is wrong. 
The American people deserve better.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WELCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                          Trump Administration

  Mr. WELCH. Mr. President, the President of the United States says 
that the United States is at war. In the past 7 weeks, President Trump 
has ordered U.S. forces to take military action to destroy 10 boats in 
international waters. That has resulted in the death of more than 40 
possible drug couriers.
  President Trump has also told Congress he is determined that the 
United States is at war with what he calls ``narcoterrorists.'' He has 
also said that he is taking steps to escalate military action against 
Venezuela and Colombia. And, of course, he is sending U.S. warships, 
fighter planes, and special forces to their coasts. And he is also 
openly tossing around threats of airstrikes against targets in the sea 
and on land.
  The questions before us, as the U.S. Senate, are clear, and they are 
urgent: Are the President's actions steering the American people into 
yet another undeclared war, and would it be legal for the President to 
expand this war to the sovereign territories of countries in South 
America, as he is now threatening to do?
  The clear answer is no, that this President--no President--has the 
legal authority, without congressional authorization, to take America 
into military conflict.
  There have been no credible legal experts who have defended the 
President's actions, with one exception, and, of course, that is the 
Attorney General, who has provided an opinion to the President--we are 
told, but we have not seen--that what he is doing is legal.
  That is without precedent. It is without precedent for the top legal 
official in this country to give an opinion that it is legal to go to 
war without congressional authorization. But it is

[[Page S7761]]

clearly the legal advice the President wanted and won't even share with 
the Members of the U.S. Senate.
  The President, of course, seems to be basing the legality of these 
actions on the declaration that drug traffickers are terrorists. We all 
hate what the drug traffickers do, but it is also based on that legal 
opinion, the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department, that we 
are told gives legal cover for the President to do what is clearly 
beyond the authority of the Chief Executive. We know nothing about that 
opinion in this body, and all who have called for it to be released are 
doing the right thing.
  We know that under the U.S. Constitution, the President does not have 
authority to start a war without congressional authorization. It is an 
article I responsibility of the Congress of the United States, and 
there is a reason for that, that is so very important.
  If we are going to ask--with the authority of Congress and the 
Executive--men and women to go to war on behalf of defending our 
country, that profoundly important decision that is being made by 
Congress but is putting in harm's way the men and women who serve in 
the military, there should be a debate, and there should be a vote; 
there should be responsibility, and there should be accountability.
  And simply determination by the President that he is attacking a 
group of what he calls terrorists--``narco-terrorists''--does not, by 
itself, make it legal under the Constitution.
  You know, some people may say: What is the big deal? These are bad 
folks. Drugs are terrible.
  We all agree with that, but it is not up to the President to 
determine whether we go to war. It is up to Congress: Should we be 
going to war with Venezuela?
  All of us are on board, Republicans and Democrats, with the fight 
against narcotics, illegal drugs, fentanyl, in particular, which mostly 
enter the United States through Mexico and on the Pacific Ocean, and 
are wreaking havoc on our communities.
  It has happened in Vermont as well as West Virginia, Idaho, Florida, 
Montana, and every other State. Our sons and daughters, mothers and 
fathers are struggling with addiction and dying from overdose.
  So yes, this is a very serious problem, and we should be doing far 
more to deal with treating addiction in our own country, bolstering our 
local police forces, our mental health resources, and working with 
source countries to stop the production and transshipment of these 
dangerous drugs.
  This has not been a partisan issue. In fact, it was an issue where, 
when I served in the House, there was a Republican and Democratic 
collective action to provide treatment that is providing real-world 
help in realtime to folks in your State and in mine.
  But laws matter, and the Constitution matters. If the President does 
want to start a war, if he wants to put America's troops in harm's way, 
he needs to seek authorization from Congress.
  As my colleagues and I know too well, the United States has a very 
unfortunate history of wars--forever wars--started by Presidents who 
misrepresented the facts; from the USS Maine incident used to justify 
the war against Spain to the Gulf of Tonkin resolution incident to 
justify the Vietnam war--60,000 young Americans killed--to President 
Bush's stretching of the facts about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass 
destruction to launch a disastrous forever war.
  In each of these cases, majorities of our predecessors on this very 
Senate floor abdicated their responsibility to question the President's 
intentions and justifications for war.
  That is why I hope that each of my colleagues--each of us here--will 
join me in questioning the President's legal basis to carry out these 
killings and to potentially launch attacks against one or more South 
American countries. We should demand that Congress assert its 
constitutional obligation to determine where and why the United States 
goes to war.
  You know, as I mentioned, we all hate the scourge of drugs. But why 
are we spending billions of dollars in this effort in Venezuela while 
at the same time taking funding away for treatment programs here at 
home that actually have been proven effective to help the most 
vulnerable Americans that are actually struggling with addiction to 
fentanyl and other drugs?
  The Department of Justice has also diverted thousands of Drug 
Enforcement Administration funds and other law enforcement personnel 
from their critical missions to carry out the President's immigration 
agenda. Yet the Department has inexplicably shut down the Organized 
Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force, which has been effective in 
dismantling thousands of criminal organizations, and, unilaterally, the 
administration has terminated hundreds of grants that do provide 
critical funding to State and local law enforcement, folks on the 
ground in the community helping folks who are struggling with addiction 
and helping law enforcement get to the sellers of those terrible drugs.
  In fact, the administration's fiscal year 2026 budget would slash the 
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program by more than a third from 
$298 million to $196 million. And under the direction of Attorney 
General Bondi, Federal drug prosecutions--I have no idea how this 
happened--but Federal drug prosecutions have dropped to the lowest 
level in decades, a fact I find shocking.
  So when the President claims his new war is about protecting America 
from drugs, it is a fair question: Why are we doing so little? Why are 
we taking money away from treatment? Why are we taking money away from 
high intensity drug enforcement? Why are we not prosecuting more, 
instead prosecuting so much less?
  It is up to the Senate to do its job. We have seen from history that 
our failure to assert our constitutional responsibility to decide 
whether to send our military to war has resulted in grievous suffering 
for the American people and a weakening of our national security.
  In asserting our responsibility, at the bare minimum, this U.S. 
Senate should demand--should demand--to see Attorney General Bondi's 
legal analysis that the President has used to justify his use of the 
U.S. military to engage in these attacks.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The Senator from Alabama.


                               Sharia Law

  Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk 
about two bills I recently introduced to shut down Sharia law in this 
country. I ruffled some feathers a few weeks ago when I came to the 
Senate floor to talk about what I believe is the greatest national 
security threat facing the United States of America: radical Islam and 
Sharia law.
  The Democrats and the mainstream media, they have been coming after 
me ever since I started talking about this subject. But after spending 
40 years coaching, I don't really care what people think about me. I 
love this country, and I want to save this country for our kids and our 
grandkids.
  I was back in Alabama, and I heard from countless Alabamans who told 
me they are 100 percent behind what I am talking about. At the end of 
the day, I work for the great people of Alabama and the great people of 
this country, not the pearl-clutching media that is out there hammering 
me every day.
  Speaking of Alabama, I am proud that the Yellowhammer State banned 
Sharia law a long time ago. For too long, people have been afraid to 
call out radical Islam for what it is because if you dare--if you dare 
to speak out--the left will come after you, your family, your 
reputation, and your job. They will try to ruin your life just because 
they disagree with you. That is how they play the game.
  One of the radical left's go-to tactics is to accuse anyone--anyone--
who disagrees with them of being a racist, a bigot, or intolerant. They 
tried that with me, calling me an Islamophobe for calling out the evils 
of Islam. But there is only one problem with that strategy--one. 
Radical Islam isn't a race; it is an ideology. It is a choice, and I 
would argue it is a cult.
  So, no, I am not an Islamophobe. If you want to peacefully practice 
your religion, that is fine with me. That is what our Constitution 
gives you the right to do. Our Constitution gives you that right, and 
that is why we have millions--millions--of Christians, Jews, Mormons, 
Hindus, Buddhists, and peaceful Muslims, who worship freely

[[Page S7762]]

in this great country of ours called the United States of America.
  But if you come here, you are expected to assimilate into our country 
and our values.
  I recently saw a stat that absolutely shocked me. We have 42 million 
people in this country that are on food stamps--42 million. You would 
think these people are just Americans who have fallen on hard times, 
which is whom the program is for. But a disproportionate amount of 
these 42 million people are immigrants; 45 percent of Afghanistan 
immigrants are on food stamps; 42 of the Somalian immigrants are on 
food stamps; and 59 percent of all illegal aliens are collecting food 
stamps--59 percent.
  So, clearly, these people are not coming here and assimilating into 
our American way of life by working hard and taking care of your 
family--what an idea. They are coming here to mooch off the American 
taxpayer. It is wrong, and we need to call it out.
  But beyond the taxpayer concerns, this religion is also fundamentally 
incompatible with our Western values, so wake up America.
  The Quran instructs Islamists to fight Jews and Christians, along 
with anyone else who doesn't believe in Allah. Simply put, radical 
Islam teaches that it is righteous to kill Christians. It is righteous. 
There is no peaceful coexistence with this type of people, none.
  Just look at the Middle East and North Africa, where Christians and 
Jews are being slaughtered by the thousands.
  Where is our media? Where are they at?
  More than 7,000 Christians have been slaughtered by radical Muslims 
in Nigeria so far this year--7,000. That is 35 people that have been 
killed every day this year.
  Where is the mainstream media? How come they are not talking about 
that?
  Radical Islam demands complete obedience--complete, 100 percent--and 
will kill you if you dare to speak out against their beliefs and 
ideologies.
  This isn't anything new. Muslims have been fighting to wipe out 
Christians and Jews for centuries. But now the problem isn't just 
confined to the faraway Middle East. It is happening right here in our 
backyard, in the 50 States.
  We are already seeing cities in Michigan and Minnesota being taken 
over by Sharia law. In Dearborn, MI, a Christian pastor recently 
protested after a street was named after a radical Islamic terrorist. 
The pastor just complained about it. In response, the Muslim mayor of 
Dearborn told the pastor that he is no longer welcome in the town and 
will celebrate the day he leaves.
  Think about that. A Christian pastor is being silenced here in 
America for objecting to a taxpayer-funded road being named after a 
terrorist.
  We are losing.
  Or take what has been happening in Minneapolis, MN, which has seen a 
massive influx of Somalians moving into their neighborhoods.
  I recently saw a story that absolutely shocked me. More than 75 
Somalians have been arrested in a massive scheme where they stole $300 
million from an American taxpayer-funded child nutrition program--$300 
million.
  So these Somalian criminals came to Minneapolis, they took advantage 
of our free schools and our free healthcare, and then they stole $300 
million from American taxpayers, right under our noses. Where is the 
media? Where is the outrage?
  And where did this money go? Where do you think it went? You guessed 
it: It went back to Somalia.
  It is disgusting, and these people should be deported, if not jailed 
for life.
  In case you are still unclear about the dangers we are facing, here 
are a few reasons why Sharia law does not work in a Western society 
like the United States. In America, we value free speech. The U.S. 
Constitution gives us that right. The First Amendment is what makes 
this country, America, great. You are allowed to express your opinions 
publicly, without fear of the government arresting you or killing you.
  But under Sharia law--under Sharia law--any criticism that goes 
against what Muhammad or the Quran says can be punishable by death.
  Further, under the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment, equal 
rights for people of all faiths are protected. Western culture treats 
everyone equal, regardless of their religious beliefs.
  Under Sharia Law, if you are not a Muslim, you are treated as the 
enemy. Radical Islam says you can discriminate against and even be 
violent toward non-Muslims. We see that happening now in Europe, where 
non-Muslims are being violently attacked every day, all over Europe. It 
is because Sharia law not only accepts but encourages this type of 
disgusting behavior.
  Another major difference between Islam and our Western culture is the 
way we treat women. In the United States, marriage happens when a man 
and woman mutually decide that they want to get married and be with 
each other. But under Sharia law, older men are allowed to marry 6-
year-old girls, which is unbelievable. Six years old--that is not 
marriage. In America, we call that pedophilia.
  But that is just scraping the surface.
  In Sharia Law, women are sold, raped, trafficked. It is no problem to 
them. That is their way of life.
  Women are not allowed to get an education or have a job. They aren't 
even allowed to leave home without a man escorting them. And women are 
forced to wear burqas, which cover basically everything but their eyes.
  Meanwhile, men are allowed to have multiple wives, marry children, 
and do not have to cover their heads.
  It makes your blood boil, not to mention the horrible way that 
minorities are treated in countries that follow Sharia law. There is no 
tolerance in these countries. If you live in a country that practices 
Sharia law and are not Muslim, you are lucky if you aren't thrown in 
jail or killed. That is because Islam and Sharia law teach that you 
must hate non-Muslims and should wage jihad, which literally means holy 
war, against people who do not believe.
  One thing I find particularly ironic is how the left turns a blind 
eye to the horrible ways LGBT people are treated in countries that 
follow Sharia law. In countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, gay 
people are often given the death penalty.
  Does that sound like a peaceful, tolerant religion to you? Not me.
  Unfortunately, this religion, which I think is closer to a cult, is 
rapidly growing in this country. Wake up, America.
  Look no further than New York, where radical Islamist Zohran Mamdani 
is the frontrunner to become the next mayor. Mamdani has tried 
everything he can do to hide his radical Islamic beliefs, ever since he 
started campaigning. But he was recently seen in a photo with a 
coconspirator of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
  Think about that. And they are getting ready to elect him mayor. The 
leading candidate for mayor of New York City is cozying up with an 
openly jihadist terrorist sympathizer. Where are we going?
  If New Yorkers are stupid enough to elect a radical Islamist as their 
mayor, then they deserve what they get next. And it is coming.
  I truly believe we are at a crossroads in this country. The time for 
political correctness is over, that is why I have introduced two bills 
in the Senate to end Sharia law in this country--end it.
  The first one is the No Sharia Act, which makes it illegal to 
practice Sharia law when it conflicts with our constitution.
  As I have repeatedly said, the radical Islam cult is the opposite of 
everything--I mean everything--that we stand for in America.
  The second bill I introduced, the Preserving a Sharia Free America 
Act, prevents all foreign nationals who advocate for Sharia law from 
entering this country--no more. If you want to practice that, stay 
where you are at or go to one of the other 50 countries that practices 
this.
  The Trump administration banned people from nearly 50 Muslim 
countries during the first administration. And thanks to Joe Biden's 4 
years of open borders, we now have thousands--I mean thousands--of 
terrorists and their sympathizers who entered our country unchecked--
how stupid was that.
  We have to shut off the spigot before it is too late. This is a major 
national security threat. Radical Islamists have proven, over and over 
again, that they

[[Page S7763]]

are willing to do whatever it takes to kill just one American citizen. 
And it isn't just happening overseas. It has been allowed to fester and 
is alive and well in our very own country, just waiting for the right 
opportunity to attack.
  So now is the time to act, because if we don't, we are going to lose 
this country as we know it. Open your eyes, America. The values this 
country was built on cannot coexist with radical Islam. It doesn't 
work.
  It is one, our Constitution, or the other. You can't mix it. This 
isn't a Republican or Democrat issue. This is an American issue. Just 
look at Europe. We are headed down the same dark path as what Europe is 
going through now if we don't wake up.
  We need to permanently shut down Sharia law in this country before it 
is too late. Wake up, America.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.


                 Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 470

  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. President, Nevadans work hard for their money--really 
hard--especially right now, when they are being squeezed by rising 
costs as a result of Trump's chaos and his reckless economic policies.
  Nevadans pay taxes with the expectation that the Federal Government 
is going to work for them and provide critical services when they need 
it--services that are shamefully being disrupted by the Republican 
government shutdown. Instead, their taxpayer dollars are being wasted 
on gold-plated dinners at the White House, two--count them, two--
private jets for Kristi Noem, and, unbelievably, a potentially 
multimillion-dollar illegal payment to Donald Trump.
  So you heard that right. In the middle of a government shutdown that 
he caused because he refuses to take action to prevent a spike in your 
healthcare costs, Donald Trump is seeking $230 million in payment from 
the Department of Justice. For whom? Well, for himself.
  He is going to use your money to pad his own pockets, instead of 
working with Democrats to take action to make sure that you and your 
family can go to the doctor without breaking the bank.
  Trump has even acknowledged that ``it's awfully strange to make a 
decision where I'm paying myself.''
  And I want to go one step further. It is not just ``strange.'' It is 
outrageous.
  Mr. President, $230 million--all while families are worried about 
paying their bills, putting food on the table, and wondering if they 
will be able to afford their health insurance for next year.
  Instead of paying himself, why doesn't Trump put that money toward 
SNAP benefits, since his administration has decided to renege on its 
promise to provide the funding to prevent Americans from going hungry? 
The President has the power to do this.
  So, today, I am introducing a resolution condemning Donald Trump's 
decision to pay and enrich himself with your tax dollars. You got that 
right. He is going to pay to enrich himself nearly a quarter of a 
million dollars--from Donald Trump to Donald Trump--off the backs of 
the American taxpayer.
  And if my Republican colleagues--who like to stand up here and talk 
all about cutting costs, cutting wasteful spending--if they want to 
practice what they preach, they will support my resolution. They will 
stand up to Donald Trump and say, finally--finally--with the gold-
plated dinners and the ballrooms, et cetera, that enough is enough, and 
it is time to put the American people first.
  So let's show the American people that at least this Chamber still 
knows the difference between serving the public and serving yourself.
  So let's pass my resolution right now, today. We can do it.
  So I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
consideration of S. Res. 470, which is at the desk. Further, I ask 
unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be 
agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and 
laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, 
today is day 28 of the Democrat shutdown--a shutdown caused by the 
Democrats' complete blind hatred--complete hatred--of Donald Trump. 
They are spending more time attacking President Trump than fighting for 
the American people, who are harmed by their shutdown.
  Democrats have voted for weeks to deprive our men and women in the 
military of getting their paychecks. They are stopping Capitol Police, 
Federal law enforcement, air traffic controllers, and essential Federal 
employees from getting paid.
  In just a few days, 42 million people receiving SNAP benefits may not 
get the benefits they rely on because the Democrats will not support 
the continuing resolution that most of us don't like.
  It is the Biden funding.
  Further, my Democrat colleagues are willing to do anything they can 
to attack President Trump instead of voting to reopen the government 
and stop this recklessness.
  The American people are sick of the political games at their expense, 
and so am I; therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Nevada.
  Ms. ROSEN. This is extremely disappointing. By blocking my 
resolution, Washington Republicans are saying that they approve of 
Donald Trump paying himself a multimillion-dollar settlement using 
taxpayer dollars.
  Millions of Americans are missing their paychecks, worrying about 
paying their bills, losing their SNAP benefits, and wondering if they 
are going to be able to afford their health insurance next year.
  My Republican colleagues have lost their way and should be ashamed of 
themselves for standing up and allowing this lawlessness to happen. 
Like I said, my Republican colleagues like to stand up here and talk 
about cutting wasteful spending. This $230 million, I would argue, is 
exactly that. So if they wanted to practice what they preach, they 
would actually support my resolution, stand up to this wasteful 
spending of the President, again, approving himself to pay himself 
nearly a quarter of a million dollars, and we can show the American 
people that all of us know the difference between serving the public 
and serving just one individual--President Trump.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. If my Democrat colleagues want to make sure 
people are not being harmed by losing SNAP benefits or going without 
paychecks while they show up to work day after day, then they would 
vote to reopen government. Unfortunately, they have elected to not do 
that.
  So I hope my Democrat colleagues will come to their senses and vote 
this week to reopen the government.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Ms. ROSEN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


       Motion to Proceed to the Motion to Reconsider Cloture Vote

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to the motion to 
reconsider the cloture vote on October 14 to the motion to proceed to 
H.R. 5371.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.


                          Motion to Reconsider

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the cloture vote on 
the motion to proceed to H.R. 5371.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371, a bill making 
     continuing appropriations

[[Page S7764]]

     and extensions for fiscal year 2026, and for other purposes.
         John Thune, James E. Risch, Tim Sheehy, John Cornyn, Mike 
           Rounds, John R. Curtis, Jim Justice, Katie Boyd Britt, 
           Todd Young, David McCormick, Bill Hagerty, Marsha 
           Blackburn, Rick Scott of Florida, John Barrasso, Kevin 
           Cramer, Cindy Hyde-Smith, Lindsey Graham.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
motion to proceed to H.R. 5371, a bill making continuing appropriations 
and extensions for fiscal year 2026, and for other purposes, shall be 
brought to a close, upon reconsideration?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the 
Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Justice).
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 54, nays 45, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 590 Leg.]

                                YEAS--54

     Banks
     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Britt
     Budd
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Curtis
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Husted
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     McConnell
     McCormick
     Moody
     Moran
     Moreno
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Rounds
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sheehy
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--45

     Alsobrooks
     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt Rochester
     Booker
     Cantwell
     Coons
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Gallego
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     Kim
     Klobuchar
     Lujan
     Markey
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Paul
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schiff
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Slotkin
     Smith
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Justice
       
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Curtis). On this vote, the yeas are 54, 
the nays are 45.
  Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted 
in the affirmative, the motion, upon reconsideration, is rejected.
  The motion was rejected.

                          ____________________