[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 187 (Friday, November 7, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7977-S7996]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS AND EXTENSIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to Proceed
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Unanimous Consent Requests
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago, I came to the floor in
support of a bill that we were going to vote on, a motion to proceed
called the Shutdown Fairness Act. It is a pretty simple bill. The name
pretty well describes exactly what it is. It is trying to be fair
during these dysfunctional shutdowns. Any of the Federal workers who
are forced to work because they are in our military, they are in
Federal law enforcement, they are TSA, or they are air traffic
controllers--they are keeping this Nation and Americans safe--if we are
going to force them to work, at a minimum, let's make sure we pay them
and pay them on time.
I came down in as nonpartisan a manner as I possibly could and
literally begged the other side to just join us, vote to proceed to the
bill.
They had some objections to it, things that I was willing to address.
For example, my bill only addressed workers that were forced to work.
They wanted to include furloughed workers. I said on the floor: I am
happy to add that as an amendment. I think, working with my conference,
I can get the conference to support it as well.
It wasn't quite that easy, but in the end, we overcame objections
within our conference to adding furloughed workers.
So we have completely amended the bill now. We have added furloughed
workers.
In the meantime, surprising to me, we had Federal employee worker
unions reach out to us, asking what they could do to help pass this
bill. They are sick and tired of being used as pawns in this political
dysfunction here. They are tired of it.
One of the things that definitely appealed to them once I added the
furloughed workers was that my bill makes it permanent. My bill says:
We will never use you again as a pawn in the political gamesmanship
that is being played out right now.
I am happy to report that the Shutdown Fairness Act, as I now amended
it by adding furloughed workers, is supported by the American
Federation of Government Employees, the Federal Managers Association,
the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the National Air
Traffic Controllers Association.
We tragically had a plane go down early in the week. I am not saying
it is because of air traffic control, but we understand the danger. We
have to understand the risks we are taking in not paying air traffic
controllers so we can fully man our air towers and keep our airspace
safe.
The International Association of Fire Fighters supports my bill. The
Association of Flight Attendants does.
Again, one of the main reasons they support my bill is, in addition
to the fact that we added furloughed workers, my bill makes this
permanent.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to
the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 191, S. 3012. I further ask
that the Johnson substitute amendment at the desk be considered and
agreed to; that the bill, as amended, 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 Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I just
want to first start off and say that I deeply appreciate that Senator
Johnson has updated his proposal to pay all Federal employees during
the shutdown, to include furloughed workers as well as DC employees. I
appreciate all his efforts.
I have worked on a number of bills with the Senator from Wisconsin.
We would like to continue to work on this bill as well as we go
forward. But, unfortunately, I still have some concerns about the way
that the bill has been drafted so far. Those are things that I think we
can work out and want to work out. We have been going back and forth
with our staff.
I am concerned that Senator Johnson's bill still leaves too much
discretion up to President Trump. There is too much wiggle room for the
administration to basically pick and choose which Federal employees are
paid and when.
I am also deeply concerned that this would allow the administration
to actually transfer this money to other purposes that are unintended
by Congress, which, unfortunately, we have seen happen repeatedly in
this administration.
I believe there are ways that we can put in guardrails. There are
ways we can get to that, but we are just not there yet. I certainly ask
indulgence from my colleague from Wisconsin. We sent another proposal
over to his staff. We can work on this quickly and try to figure out
how we get there.
In the meantime, I have also introduced a bill that would pay Federal
employees just for this shutdown, without the additional powers sent to
the administration. It is basically a clean bill--no additional
language, no complications, no wondering, what does this actually mean?
It is very straightforward.
My Military and Federal Employee Protection Act would ensure that all
Federal employees receive the pay they certainly deserve, allowing them
to pay their bills on time this month.
I have asked Senator Johnson to support my very simple proposal,
which I think accomplishes most everything he wants to do, with the
exception of things about giving the administration more power. I think
we can agree on that. We can pay our troops and our Federal employees,
period. That would be my goal.
I will continue to work to this end and to work to end this
government shutdown and address the healthcare crisis, but in the
meantime, we must protect our hard-working Federal employees.
My bill is very straightforward. We could agree to that right now,
and it is done. Federal employees are going to get paid without all the
other extraneous language in the Senator's bill.
Therefore, I ask that the Senator modify his request so that,
instead, the Appropriations Committee be discharged from further
consideration of S. 3043 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate
consideration; 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. Does the Senator from Wisconsin so modify his
request?
Mr. JOHNSON. Reserving the right to object, it is important that the
American public understand what is going on here.
Again, I came down here 2 weeks ago. I modified my bill quite
dramatically. We entered talks immediately with the
[[Page S7978]]
Senator from Delaware and the Senator from Michigan. Within those
talks--again, 2 weeks ago--they were accusing my bill of giving the
President all this additional authority. In discussions staff to staff,
they admitted there is no additional authority I am giving to the
President in this bill whatsoever.
This bill is completely silent on Presidential authority in terms of
who he can furlough. As a matter of fact, everybody is included, every
employee is now included. There is no discretion whatsoever in terms of
who is furloughed, who gets brought back to work, who gets paid. They
all get paid. The Senator from Michigan is well aware of this.
Those discussions, I would say, petered out within a few days. I
don't know if they are emboldened; just digging their heels in they are
going to continue this shutdown; don't feel they are getting blamed for
it; don't have much pressure on them.
Here we are 2 weeks later, and they want to redline the bill. Well,
in that 2 weeks, we have had our bill examined exhaustively by our
leadership, by OMB, by the unions. Our bill is in a really good place
right now. We tried to think of everything. No Federal employee would
be excluded from this.
The Senator from Michigan says my bill allows the President to pick
and choose. That is total hogwash. Again, every Federal employee,
including contractors, gets paid. There is no picking and choosing.
That is completely false. Money transfers? What is he talking about?
More power? There is no power. It is completely silent in terms of
Presidential authority. These are false arguments.
This is further evidence of the gamesmanship the Democrats are
playing with people's lives. They are the party of Big Government. They
have, in effect, taken a family member hostage.
I see our leader on the floor here. He has been doing everything he
possibly can to help Democrats release their own hostage, open up the
government.
Once you do that, we are more than happy to talk to you about how do
we repair the damage done by ObamaCare and transition to a system that
works.
But they are playing politics. They are using Federal employees and,
quite honestly, the American public right now, whose flights are being
delayed, whose skies are less safe--they are using public employees and
the American public as pawns in this grotesque display of partisanship.
My bill is very simple. It is backed by the public sector unions,
which generally don't support things I am putting forward.
If the Senator insists on objecting to this, preventing these people,
these workers, these people who keep us safe, from getting paid in this
round, my guess is that we will take a vote on this to proceed to the
bill. The problem with that is it will take much more time.
If we can pass this by unanimous consent right now, we could send it
over to the House. The Speaker has already indicated that if we pass
the Shutdown Fairness Act, he will bring his people back. They are on
48-hour call. We could have this passed by Monday. Our skies would be
safer again. Federal employees would be treated fairly. They would be
paid. And they will never ever be used as pawns in this kind of
grotesque partisan gamesmanship.
So I will not modify my request.
Mr. THUNE. Will the Senator from Wisconsin yield?
Mr. JOHNSON. Absolutely.
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I am trying to understand what is going
on here. Perhaps the Senator from Michigan can clarify.
So every public sector employees' union is supporting the Senator
from Wisconsin's bill, but you are objecting because you think it
grants too much power to the President. Now, if that is--I don't know
how every public sector employees' union would be in support of this
bill.
My understanding is that the modification proposed by the Senator
from Michigan would essentially cover backpay but wouldn't do anything
to address it going forward. In other words, we are going to keep
Federal employees hostage. So they might get paid for backpay, but
starting tomorrow, they are not going to get paid again, and that means
that in the future, they will continue to be pawns, they will continue
to be held hostage.
This is a straightforward approach that addresses that issue and
everybody in this Chamber who isn't getting paid.
I can't believe people come down here and look these people in the
eye when he is saying right here: We will pay them not only for today
but for tomorrow and for the entire year, and we won't allow them to be
held hostage and be pawns in a political game in the future.
My understanding is that the Senator from Michigan, on behalf of, I
suppose, other Democrats, is objecting to that.
Please, please help me understand. This is a straightforward proposal
which addresses the concern that millions of Americans have who are
heading to food banks and can't pay their rent, and you are coming down
here and saying you are going to object because you just want to pay
them for yesterday, not for tomorrow or for the next day after that?
It is about leverage, isn't it? Isn't that what you all have been
saying--it is about leverage? This isn't leverage; this is the lives of
the American people.
The Senator from Wisconsin has put forward a straightforward proposal
to pay people--Federal employees--today, tomorrow, and in the future.
And what you are essentially saying: Well, I am fine with paying them
for yesterday, but we are not going to pay them for tomorrow or the day
after that or for the future, and we don't seem to care that there are
men and women in uniform who are frequenting food banks, who are not
making rent payments, or who are trying to borrow to get by, because it
is leverage.
So I would hope--we are going to vote on this. So the Senator from
Michigan can object to the unanimous consent request the Senator from
Wisconsin made, but everybody in this Chamber is going to be put on the
record as to whether or not they want to pay Federal employees not
yesterday but today and tomorrow and into the future.
I am tired of political games. I really am. So feel free to object to
something that--I don't know how anybody in their right mind could walk
into this Chamber, look these people in the eye, and say: We are not
going to pay you.
So we are going to vote on it. You can object to it right now, but
everybody in this Chamber is going to vote on whether or not they want
to pay Federal employees--something that every single public employees'
union has said they support.
I yield to the Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. In reclaiming my time briefly, let me emphasize the fact
that if you pass this now--again, to the Senator from Michigan, I am
literally begging him: Do not object. Do not object. It is still going
to take a couple of days to actually pass this. If we have to go the
route of a motion to proceed and getting on the bill, that is going to
take quite some time. Our skies can't remain at this level right now.
We can't continue with these airport delays. We can't continue to use
public sector employees and the American public as pawns in this
partisan gamesmanship.
So, literally, I think the Senator knows me. He knows I am saying
this in good faith: Please do not object. Let this bill pass so the
House can come back, and the President can sign this into law, and
these good people who are being forced to work or who have been
furloughed can get the pay they deserve. Again, today, tomorrow, and in
the future, they will be assured they will never ever be used like
pawns in these partisan games.
Again, I underscore that I will not modify my request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard to the modification.
Is there an objection to the original request?
The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Madam President, to the Senator from Wisconsin, I know he
and I have worked on a lot of issues. That is not in question here. We
do have questions with some of the language in this bill just to make
sure that we have guardrails.
I want to pay Federal employees. That is why I have the bill that is
on the floor right now that I am trying to
[[Page S7979]]
move. It will pay Federal employees. It will pay contractors as well.
The Senator's is not doing that, I understand. But everybody who is
being shorted right now should be paid, and that is what my legislation
does. So we could do that.
You know, I am happy if the Senator wants to take my legislation and
put his name on it. I will support it, and we will pass it right now
and send it there, and people are going to get paid. So if the Senator
really wants to do that, we could do that today.
Does the Senator want me just to put his name on this bill and then
we will pass it? It would be fine to do that.
Mr. JOHNSON. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. PETERS. Excuse me.
In reclaiming my time, we can make that happen, and if the Senator
puts it on the floor later, we will go through the process. I would
hope that he and I, during that process, can work on language to
perhaps address some of the concerns that I have. It is not that we pay
people. That is not my concern. I wouldn't be offering this legislation
here today if I were concerned about that. I want to pay them. Labor
unions support my bill too--no surprise. They are getting paid. And
that is why I have introduced this.
This is not a political game. I hope we get this shutdown open. I
hope we are able to find common ground and say that we want to lower
the cost so Americans have affordable healthcare, and we don't want to
see their premiums go up and people lose insurance. I hope we can do
that. It is not a game. I don't see this as leverage.
Now, a President who refuses to release SNAP funds to feed people--
now, that is what is irresponsible and reprehensible leverage. Money is
available to feed people right now, and this President is saying no.
The court has ordered him to put that money into food, and he says: I
am going to appeal it.
That is absolutely despicable, that the President of the United
States wants to starve children in order to get his way.
We have to move beyond that. We have to find common ground. I hope we
can find common ground in this bill. My bill is just plain, simple,
clean, no games, no other language. We know we have to have guardrails
when we have a lawless President. We had better put some guardrails in.
He walks over Congress all the time. My colleagues on the Republican
side just let him walk over Congress all the time.
I don't know why you ran for office if you just want to be run over
by a President. We are a coequal branch of government. We are here to
represent the people of our States. So let's work together and be
thoughtful about this and understand that if Congress puts this law
forward, it actually goes the way we want, and we don't have a
President who basically thumbs his nose at Members of the Senate and
the House and does what he wants, and he knows the Republicans will
say: Oh, well. That is fine. We are just here to rubberstamp. That is
what we are here for.
So let's hope we can work together to get this right and pay
employees. They should be. They have a right to that. I think we can do
this, and we can get together and get beyond the rhetoric and games
from the leader, that I heard. It is also on this side as well.
So let's work together. Let's open up this government. Let's end this
shutdown. Let's make sure people have affordable healthcare in this
country. Let's make sure our own employees get paid. Let's do all of
that this weekend. I am on board for all of that. Hopefully, we can get
that done.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection to the original request?
Objection is heard.
The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. Again, let me correct--I hate to say--falsehoods that
were presented here in the Chamber.
My bill is completely silent in terms of Presidential authority.
To the Senator from Michigan, I know they want to put language in
there to restrict Presidential authority, but the fact of the matter
is--and I made him well aware of this--that it is a bill that would
never be signed into law.
So if the Senator is serious about actually paying the workers, he
will recognize that fact and admit that my bill is completely silent.
It does not add and it does not detract from Presidential authority.
There is nothing in the bill that does that.
Secondly, we have tried to come to accommodations with a number of
Senators on the other side for a couple of weeks, but they have pretty
much fallen on deaf ears.
Again, I know it is unfortunate that he objected right now. If we
proceed and vote and actually get on the bill--and I hope, at least, we
do that--that will take quite some time. So it seems he has already
objected.
What I am happy to do--not happy; I am very disappointed I am going
to have to do this--is to look at their language. If it is acceptable--
again, if he is doing anything with Presidential authority in the way
of adding or detracting, it won't be signed into law; it will be a
fruitless exercise. But if we accept their language--we will look at
it, and then maybe--maybe--we can come back down here and do another
unanimous consent request and pass this today. That is what I hope we
can do.
So we will look at the language. It is very unfortunate we didn't
pass it right now, but maybe later this afternoon, we can do so.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I appreciate that my colleagues from
Wisconsin and Michigan are striving to find a path to make sure that
folks are paid. Folks who are working should be paid, and folks who are
furloughed should be paid. But here is the problem with the proposal
from my colleague from Wisconsin, and that is, we have a President
right now who is violating the Constitution.
Every time you hear the President of the United States say ``Hey, I
am ending that program because it is not in alignment with my
priorities'' or a Cabinet member say ``We are going to kill those
grants because they are not in alignment with the President's
priorities,'' what you are hearing is an authoritarian statement in
violation of the Constitution.
So, in recognition, we have an out-of-control tyrant in the Oval
Office who is violating the Constitution. We have a responsibility
right here to defend the Constitution, and that is exactly why my
colleague from Michigan put those protections into the bill. If you
have a President who chooses what programs are funded and not, that is
an authoritarian country, and that is what we have right now.
The whole vision of our Nation was founded on these Senators and
these House Members coming from different districts and different
States, with different life experiences and different geographic
interests, and bringing them to forge a consensus or forge a vision of
how to address the challenges in every part of our Nation, not to have
one person down Pennsylvania Avenue who knows a little bit about New
York and a little bit about Florida and who has a certain one point of
view be a tyrant.
Martial law would be empowered by the proposal from Wisconsin, and
that is why my colleague from Michigan was absolutely right to ensure
we here in the Senate defend the Constitution.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, first, after I finish my remarks, I ask
unanimous consent that the following Senators be recognized for up to 5
minutes each: Peters, Baldwin, Kelly, and Welch.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Government Funding
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I will be brief. After so many failed
votes, it is clear we need to try something different. What the Senate
is doing isn't working for either party and isn't working for the
American people.
Democrats have said we must address the healthcare crisis, but
Republicans have repeatedly said they won't negotiate to lower the
healthcare costs until the government reopens. So let's find a path to
honor both positions.
Democrats would like to see an end to this shutdown, and we want to
respect Leader Thune's desire not to negotiate on the ACA until after
the government reopens. Therefore, we would like to offer a simple
proposal that
[[Page S7980]]
would reopen the government and extend the ACA premium tax credits
simultaneously and then have the opportunity to start negotiating
longer term solutions to healthcare costs. Let's do all three.
I have spoken with my caucus, and Democrats are offering a very
simple compromise. Democrats are ready to clear the way to quickly pass
a government funding bill that includes healthcare affordability.
Leader Thune just needs to add a clean 1-year extension of the ACA tax
credits to the CR so that we can immediately address rising healthcare
costs. That is not a negotiation. It is an extension of current law,
something we do all the time around here, as we all know.
But we also offer this: Let's create a bipartisan committee on
reforms that will continue negotiations after the government reopens,
ahead of next year's enrollment period, to provide long-term certainty
that healthcare costs will be more affordable.
This proposal reopens the government and ensures working families who
are shopping right now for their healthcare get certainty and financial
relief. While open enrollment has begun, insurers can update their
rates after we pass a simple extension of the tax credits.
With this approach, we do not negotiate healthcare in the shutdown,
as Leader Thune has maintained he wishes, and the American people get
the tax credit extension they want. That is what many of our Republican
colleagues have floated over the last 6 weeks as a compromise: a 1-year
tax credit extension and reforms to the credits beyond that.
We will agree with the Republican request not to start negotiations
until after the government reopens. All Republicans have to do is say
yes to extend current law for 1 year. It makes sense. And since what we
are proposing is only a simple extension of current law, the Senate
could do this within a few hours. This is a reasonable offer that
reopens the government, deals with healthcare affordability, and begins
a process of negotiating reforms to the ACA tax credits for the future.
Now, the ball is in the Republicans' court. We need Republicans to
just say yes.
I yield to Senator Peters.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Madam President, Republicans have repeatedly said that
they will not negotiate reforms to the healthcare law credits until the
government reopens.
I will tell you right now that all my colleagues on this side of the
aisle definitely want to open government, and we want to do it as soon
as possible. We are also willing to respect Leader Thune's desire to
negotiate after the shutdown.
So Democrats are offering today a very simple, straightforward
compromise, and if Republicans accept this, we could open the
government today. Wouldn't that be fabulous--show that we can come
together with a commonsense, bipartisan compromise and open government.
All we have to do is have a 1-year extension of the existing law
dealing with tax credits; and over the next year, we can figure out a
long-term solution to the healthcare challenge that we are facing as a
country.
This proposal opens the government and ensures that families who are
shopping right now for their healthcare can get immediate financial
relief at a time when costs are driving families to make incredibly
difficult financial decisions.
And we believe that, while we are trying to figure out a long-term
solution to the healthcare crisis, people should not be penalized,
people should not be suffering. Give the relief that they need now, and
over the next year we will work together to find a more comprehensive
solution.
We know that right now our Nation has experienced a healthcare crisis
where costs are skyrocketing and too many Americans are risking losing
their coverage. Too many Americans are struggling to choose between
food or gas or healthcare. And it is not just Americans in blue States;
let's be clear. Families in every State across the country are paying
these prices. Every one of us has families that are experiencing this
now in our States. But we can take action today to give our
constituents some immediate financial relief and prevent them from
being priced out of the insurance market.
We all want to end the shutdown. We want to ensure that government
services can continue, and we want to ensure our hard-working Federal
employees get the pay that they have earned. But Democrats have made
clear since day one that in order to get the votes that Republicans
need, we must address the healthcare crisis--because the American
people have made it clear they want Congress to take action on this
issue. It is literally life or death for far too many American
families.
I know many of my Republican colleagues want to work on this issue
too. I have had conversations with so many of my colleagues on the
other side of the aisle who want to try to figure out how we fix this.
But they have said repeatedly, ``We won't negotiate until government
reopens.'' Leader Thune has said:
[G]ive us the votes to open up the government. Then we will
have a conversation about some of these issues that you want
to discuss. And I think health care is certainly something
that we are anxious to talk about.
And perhaps, most importantly, even President Trump has said he would
be happy to work with Democrats on healthcare policies but only once
the government is reopened.
Well, I agree with my Republican colleagues: It is not realistic to
reform a major policy, major healthcare policy, in just a few days. It
is not going to happen. And I respect Leader Thune and President
Trump's desire to work on this when the government has reopened. I am
willing to compromise on that. My colleagues are willing to compromise
on this. It is something that can be done today if we need to. But our
Republican colleagues have to be willing to compromise too. Compromise
is a two-way street.
We want them to show us that these are not just empty words, that
they really are willing to compromise and they do want to take action.
So that is why we put forward this very simple proposal: Extend the tax
credits for 1 year. We are not asking to make any major changes to the
current law; just extend that and protect people who are suffering
right now and are hurting. We are just asking to keep the credits in
place for 1 year so that families can see some immediate financial
relief from the costs that are going through the roof, so that they can
make important decisions about buying their healthcare right now--right
now--during open enrollment.
This is live. People are dealing with this situation as we speak. We
can fix this. If we care about making sure families can afford their
healthcare, we should all agree on that. We should get 100 votes here
for people to say: We are going to do everything we can to protect
healthcare for Americans. And we can do that right now, and we can open
up government right now. We can pay employees. We can move this country
forward if we do that. All we need is a very simple extension of a law
that has already existed for some time.
We know from the start that any deal will ultimately have to be a
compromise. It doesn't have to be unanimous. There will be likely folks
on both sides that may feel uncomfortable with this, and I get that.
That is the way this place works.
But our proposal would try to work in a bipartisan way by creating a
bipartisan committee that will continue negotiations on reforms ahead
of next year's enrollment process so we are not pulling the rug out
from underneath families. We are going to do it ahead of time so folks
know exactly what to expect going forward.
I am telling the Presiding Officer now, if we vote for this
compromise today, we could open up government. This could all be behind
us. Families could get some certainty for their future, for the next
year, while we look at long-term solutions; the government can open.
But it takes all of us just to say: We are willing to compromise for
the good of the country.
My colleagues are standing here saying: We are willing to compromise
for the good of the country.
I just hope my Republican colleagues agree.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. WELCH. Madam President, there is a lot of focus on what divides
us, but
[[Page S7981]]
the real opportunity here is what unites us. We are having a contest
here with this shutdown, where our side is very concerned about what
happens with these tax credits; your side is very concerned about using
a shutdown as a tactic.
I think we both have pretty valid arguments, and one of the reasons I
think there is merit in our position is the reality that, once the
December 31 deadline arrives, people literally are going to lose
healthcare.
So what unites us? Both sides really do want to have all of
government paid and be reopened. And both sides, I believe, want to
make certain the people we represent continue to have access to
healthcare--that the healthcare they had in 2025 they are going to have
in 2026.
That won't happen unless we resolve this. And given the time crunch,
the only way, as a practical matter, we can do something that helps the
people you represent, that helps the people I represent, is to extend
what we have for another year.
So it is not an overreach on the part of, say, folks who want a
single-payer healthcare system. It is not overreach or diminishing any
concerns that folks on the Republican side--and, by the way, on our
side--have about the cost of healthcare.
We are in a practical crunch, where, unless this U.S. Senate acts,
the people we represent are going to lose healthcare. That is the fact.
That is just the fact. It is the way it is, and we talked about how
these premium increases are going to spike.
So what do we do in this situation where Leader Thune, who we trust,
who we respect, is taking a position that we won't have discussions
until we reopen government.
Why do we object to that or are cautious about that? We trust Leader
Thune. We trust our Republican colleagues. But what happens after it
goes out of the Senate? We have no guarantee whatsoever it will be
taken up in the House at all.
So the question that farmer in Vermont would ask me, at the end of
any agreement, is: Peter, what does this mean? Will I get my healthcare
in 2026?
And unless we have it where it is going to get a vote with some
support from our colleagues in the House, the answer is: I don't know,
but I hope so.
So we find ourselves with January 1 here, and that farmer, that small
business person, not having healthcare. And, again, this is the lament
I have. What we are trying to do here--the folks who are going to
benefit or not suffer are Republicans who voted for Trump and Democrats
who voted for Harris and Independents who didn't like either candidate
at all.
So we have an opportunity--and actually, we are the only people in
the United States of America who have an opportunity--the only people,
it is us, who have been entrusted by the people whom we represent, with
their vote, to solve this problem.
And what I think is being proposed has a quality that is rare around
here. It is restraint. We are not trying to overreach. We are just
saying: Maintain the status quo so that the folks in America who are
getting their healthcare with the help of some tax credits will
continue to have that healthcare in 2026, as they have in 2025.
So I hope we can come together for this temporary fix. And, by the
way, I just want to say, the cost of healthcare is exploding, and we
have an obligation if we want to maintain access to healthcare, to
address that.
It is not a solution to deal with the healthcare crisis by taking
people off of healthcare. They still get sick. So when our leader says
that we want this bipartisan committee to address the cost of
healthcare, we are sincere about that because the biggest threat to the
continued access to healthcare is the exploding cost of healthcare.
I yield to my colleague from Wisconsin.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, I rise today to echo, to underscore, to
emphasize what my colleagues have just presented. This is our path
forward. This is how we reopen the government and lower healthcare
costs for millions of Americans.
This is what compromise looks like. Look, if I had my way, we would
be making these enhanced premium tax credits for working families
permanent. But I understand that we can't get everything that we want.
That is how compromise works, and that is what our constituents expect
that we do when we come here.
I know that giving relief for the 275,000 Wisconsinites who are
shopping online at healthcare.gov for healthcare, as we speak--I know
that this relief is urgent, just like it is urgent that we reopen our
government.
I have had so many conversations with my Republican colleagues here
in the Senate. I know that so many of them have expressed privately
that they are supportive of a 1-year extension of Affordable Care Act
tax credits. They are hearing from their constituents who will no
longer be able to afford their healthcare also, just like we are.
So I hope my Republican colleagues can join us in voting to pass this
proposal so that we can finally put this shutdown behind us and allow
22 million Americans to rest easier, knowing that their healthcare
costs are not going to double, triple, or even worse.
I yield to the Senator from Arizona.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KELLY. Madam President, for more than a month, I have been here
in DC fighting to keep healthcare costs from spiking for my
constituents, and for more than a month, I have been hearing from
people I represent about what their healthcare costs now and what it
will cost if these tax credits are allowed to expire--people like
Leslie from Buckeye, who is a diabetic and whose premium is about to go
from $600 a month to $1,000 per month; and people like Jessica from
Yuma. She and her husband currently pay $560 per month for them and
their three kids. That is going to go to $3,100 per month if these tax
credits are not extended.
And for more than a month, I have been waiting for the President or
Republican leadership in the Senate to sit down with us and try to
figure this out, or even show that they care about the millions of
Americans in our States who are in the same boat, people like Leslie
and Jessica.
Now, that hasn't happened. The President, as far as I can tell, has
spent about 1 hour in the Oval Office with congressional leadership on
this issue--1 hour in 37 days. He has spent more time talking about his
ballroom and on two overseas trips and at a costume party at Mar-a-
Lago, and of course, on the golf course.
The House of Representatives has been on a 7-week paid vacation. They
are not even pretending to care about these rising healthcare costs;
and the Senate, not much better. Week after week, the leadership of the
Senate breaks for a long weekend, all while Americans are suffering.
And they are suffering even more because Donald Trump is using them as
pawns in this fight.
He is still trying to illegally withhold SNAP benefits from hungry
Americans, including children, to use as leverage. Donald Trump's
official position on the government shutdown is that he will let hard-
working Americans go hungry until we give in to his demands to let
healthcare premiums go up dramatically for millions of Americans.
Now, is that the position of my Republican colleagues? I keep hearing
from many of you that you want to do something about this, but you say
you can't negotiate, not now.
So let's just lay it out here. We need to extend government funding
to reopen the government, but we also need to extend these tax credits
so millions of Americans can actually afford their healthcare.
So let's do both--no gimmicks, no changes. Let's reopen the
government, but we can do that knowing that Jessica and Leslie and a
whole bunch of other people that we represent can take their kid to a
doctor and fill their prescriptions for another year.
There is no reason why we can't agree on this. If you want to reopen
the government and you want to help keep health insurance premiums from
spiking, then let's do it. But if you say no, if you say you can't vote
for something like this, well, let's just be honest about it. Tell the
Jessicas and Leslies in your State that they are not going to be able
to afford their healthcare anymore. Tell them that Donald
[[Page S7982]]
Trump thinks that they should go to a food bank for groceries so they
can have something to eat.
Now, I also think we need to be perfectly clear about why we are here
and how we got here. All of this--all of this--we have discussed over
the last month is because Donald Trump and Republicans in the House and
Senate wanted to give a big, giant tax cut to the wealthiest
Americans--a $4 trillion giveaway.
And, again, we want a deal. We can choose to fix this so Jessica and
Leslie and millions of others can afford to have basic healthcare.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
Ms. BLUNT ROCHESTER. Madam President, I actually have written notes
here. I came prepared to talk about the importance of the ACA tax
credits, and as I sat here, I prayed: What do I even say in this
moment?
There is a Scripture that says:
Choose ye this day.
Today, we have an opportunity to make a choice. We have an
opportunity to do something that is so plain and so simple.
There is a book in the Bible called the Book of Habakkuk. A lot of
people don't even know it. It is like three chapters. In it, it says:
We always hear, how long? Not long?
No, in it, it says long. It says pain. It says corruption. It says
suffering.
But what it does say is, make a plan and make it plain. So what we
come today to say is we have something that is plain and simple and
will lift up America. And that is the opportunity to vote, open the
government, and restore people's healthcare. It is that plain. It is
that simple.
We are not saying you are better than us and we are better than you.
We are saying link them together on behalf of the American people.
It is a sad day in America when people have to choose between their
healthcare and housing or their healthcare and food. We are not in a
pandemic. There are no wars on our shores. This should not be a hard
time for us. We are not without resources in this country.
So, today, as many people are being priced out of the American dream,
I ask my colleagues: Come to the table. Work with us.
I am so proud to be one of the freshman class--one of the most
diverse classes in the history of this Chamber--with Elissa Slotkin,
with Ruben Gallego, with Adam Schiff, with Andy Kim, and my sister
Senator Angela Alsobrooks.
Five of the six of us came from the House of Representatives. And so
for us, it is almost like we have a foot in both worlds. And for us,
this proposal is an opportunity to not only pass something here but to
pass something in the House that becomes a law and that gets something
for the American people.
We also have relationships and have been in conversations with our
former House Republican colleagues who also want to get something done.
And so, today, again, off script, but in my heart, we are standing here
for the American people saying we can end this today.
And we are saying to the President of the United States--I hope you
can hear us. We are saying to the President of the United States that
you said it yourself after Tuesday's election, this is hurting
Republicans. Well, you know what? It is also hurting all of America.
And so we hope that you will engage in something that is simple and
clear. Open the government and make sure we restore people's tax
credits together.
Again, how long? Long if we choose to be. But we have a choice in
this moment. And so we hope that you will come to the table. Let's make
a deal.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. McCormick). The Senator from Minnesota.
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Delaware, wise
words. And I thank Senator Schumer, all of our colleagues that have
gathered here today. We truly come in good faith.
I thank our Republican colleague who is listening to us right now and
for the good work that he has done in trying to bring people together.
And we know there are a number of our colleagues on the other side of
the aisle who have been working diligently with Democrats to try to
resolve this. And we come in good faith because we know this isn't a
blue-State or a red-State problem. It is everyone's problem.
When we look at the people who are on these Affordable Care Act
plans, they tend not to work at big corporations. If they did, they
would have healthcare; they do have healthcare. They tend not to work
in government, local, State, Federal; they tend to have healthcare.
They work at small businesses.
They are entrepreneurs, like the woman that I spent time with last
weekend in Eagan, MN, who has one employee. She is so proud of her
business. She has been doing better. He had cancer a few years ago, and
he got through it. He is married, has kids. That plan, she pays for 75
percent of the premium for the employee, and he pays for 25 percent of
the premiums. And she just looked at what happened, and she said: I
don't know if I can keep him on. They are going to double. Those are
the people we are talking about.
Farmers and ranchers, 27 percent of the farmers in our country are on
this kind of plan. So these are people that are just on the margins so
much because they have decided to go out on their own and be
entrepreneurs. Or when I talk to my rural hospitals, they tell me how
the people who are on these plans, if they can't afford a doubling or
tripling of the premiums, which is what we are seeing right now with
the numbers that came out on the Marketplace--if it is doubled or
tripled, they will just drop their plans because they still got to get
groceries. They still got to pay the mortgage. So then they are going
to drop their plans, and then the rural hospitals, that are already
just hanging on, aren't going to be able to make it.
So it is all of a mix of things that I think would defy people's
predictions of who is depending on these plans, and I think we are
starting to hear from them now. So we have this opportunity. This is
really, I would say, a practical plan. It looks at what we need to do
to open the government again. It looks at the work that has been done
by our great leaders in appropriations, and it says: OK. What can we do
about healthcare right now?
We disagreed with the bill that got passed this summer on our side,
but what can we do right now? And what we can do right now is stop this
doubling and tripling of these healthcare premiums. And it is not
something that is going to help in the end of December or January; it
is a now thing. They are making their decisions now.
So that is why we came forward with a lot of people in our caucus, as
you can imagine, having differing views and wanting more in good faith,
but we figure this is a good idea so that we can, one, help these
people in all our States, and then, two, look at reforms. We are open
to reforms, and then these reforms would have to be done before these
tax credits expire at the end of next year.
But it will get us through this, and, most important, it will get
people through it like Elizabeth of St. Peter, MN, who told me: ``I
have no idea how I am going to come up with the extra $200'' each
month.
This is what is happening. People who are terrified of what is going
on.
So we have this moment in time. We are ready to work through the
weekend. We hope our colleagues are as well. So let's get to the table.
I hope the President comes and meets with us. The amount of money we
are talking about here is about the same as the money that went to
Argentina. I am not going to relitigate that, but it shows what we
could do and why we could do it. So let's get it done. Thank you.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I join all of my Democratic colleagues
here today to offer this proposal on the healthcare issue that has been
holding all of us here and all of the American public for weeks now
because after Republicans refused to work with us to save the premium
tax credits all this past year, what we hear Republican leaders saying
now is they maybe, possibly, will talk about healthcare. It just has to
be later.
[[Page S7983]]
We are so far past that. Open enrollment is happening right now.
Republicans have already pushed millions of Americans off that tax
credit cliff. If we truly want to help these people, Republicans need
to work with us as fast as possible to pass this clean, 1-year
extension.
This is not some pie-in-the-sky request. As the previous speaker
alluded to, if Republicans had no problems with Trump's shoveling
nearly twice as much money at Argentina, why would they oppose giving
this kind of support to our own American families? Is there no time for
working families? Are there no funds for healthcare?
I cannot accept that. We cannot accept that. We can act, but we have
to do it now. Every day that passes, this damage gets worse, and, by
the way, harder to reverse. The best and quickest way to address the
MAGA healthcare hike is this clean 1-year extension of the enhanced
premium tax credit written into the CR that we ultimately will vote on
to reopen the government.
Like my colleagues, I have heard so many heartbreaking stories from
people in my State. They are not political. They don't care about
Democrats, Republicans, but I will tell you, they are at a breaking
point. Some of them have been on the verge of tears as they talked to
me, explaining how they simply cannot afford to buy healthcare for next
year. That weighs heavily on me and all of my colleagues. We carry
their stories with us. Their words are on repeat in my mind every
minute I walk through these halls.
I am here today fighting with my heart and soul. I am giving
Republicans every opportunity in the world to do the right thing. I
have been out here on this floor. I have spoken ad nauseam about how
letting these tax credits expire will actually hurt people in
Republican States the most.
So we are here today to say our hand is outstretched. We are ready to
go, a 1-year clean extension, and we can reopen the government and save
so many families misery in this country.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. President, I speak today to echo the sentiments
of my fellow Members of the caucus. This is a moment where, at least in
Colorado, we hear stories every day of people faced with the challenge
of whether to pay their rent or to make sure they maintain their
healthcare, people who have preexisting medical conditions that are
worried that if they go off their healthcare now, they might be pushed
into a circumstance where they can only receive attention in emergency
room situations, defeating the purpose of their treatments.
By going forward and taking a 1-year extension, nothing new, but just
a 1-year extension, we allow all those people in Colorado and across
the country to sort through their healthcare issues, to reequilibrate,
and to make sure that they are not left out in the cold. And I think
that is the key here. We are looking at tens of millions of people that
will either lose their healthcare or have dramatically significant
increases in the cost of their premiums if we do nothing.
So I hope that we can come together and move forward with this clean
CR with the extension of the subsidized tax credit for the ACA.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, all across our country, in every
congressional district, in every corner of every State, families are
suffering. They are taking a look at what it is going to cost to buy
healthcare for this coming year. And they are going: Wow. I won't be
able to afford that. I guess I will go without.
And we know what happens when people go without healthcare. And this
is clearly not something that is a blue issue or a red issue; it is an
issue for every family, affordable, quality healthcare.
And I know that is not just a concern held by Democratic Senators; it
is a concern held by Republican Senators. So we have a common desire,
Democrats and Republicans together, to address this concern. I think
about some of the folks who have written in from my home State, and I
know my colleagues on both sides of the aisle are getting the same
letters, the same phone calls. Erik in Corvallis got a letter that his
insurance premium is exploding from $183 to--get this--$1,588. Wow.
That is roughly a sevenfold increase.
I heard from Leah in Eugene whose monthly payment is going from $462
to $1,438, a threefold increase.
And Stacey in Lincoln City is seeing an increase from $1,300 to about
$3,200, almost a $2,000 increase.
So those stories are everywhere in our country. And there is so much
work we can do on healthcare together. The President has said: Let's
negotiate on those complex issues after the government is opened.
And those complex issues, they may be things like the cost-sharing
reduction program, they may be things like how do we lower the cost of
drugs so we don't pay more for drugs than the folks in Canada across
the border to the north pay for their drugs or the folks in England or
Australia or Japan.
We can work together on strategies to see where there is waste in the
system or are there scams and scandals in the system? Let's shine the
light on them, and let's fix them after the government reopens.
Well, let's just do this one piece, extend one particular tax
provision that is in law now for this coming year, so there is
immediate relief for folks who are getting on the internet at this very
moment and going: Oh, my goodness. I can't afford that--the Eriks, the
Leahs, the Staceys that exist in every corner of every State.
I have been hearing from small businesses, and they have been saying
that Main Street is ``Pain Street.'' Why? Because so many of the small
businesses in my State, and I am sure in every State, go to the ACA
exchange in order to buy insurance. And so they are reeling from that
impact. They are reeling from other economic fluctuations in the
country, and they are saying: Can't you figure this out? Can't you
figure this out?
So I have been hearing from colleagues on both sides of the aisle: We
want to fix these tax credits, these enhanced tax credits for people to
buy insurance.
Well, let's do it. We can open the government today. We can do it
today. Today, we can address the issue my colleague from Wisconsin was
speaking to just an hour or so ago. He was saying people who are
working should get a paycheck. That will happen if we pass this today.
He was saying folks who are furloughed should get a paycheck. We can do
that by putting them back to work by opening the government today.
And then we can negotiate on those complex issues to make this system
work a whole lot better because all of us know that our system is
overly complicated, overly bureaucratic, inefficient, and we know that
there can be improvements. So let's work on those things together.
The proposal that the minority leader has put forward says: Let's
form a special committee to work on those issues and find some
proposals to take us to a better place.
That is the type of partnership that we need to give encouragement to
the American people that we are willing to work together to solve the
challenges they see every day in their lives at their kitchen tables.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. President, colleagues, I rise in support of this
proposal to extend the ACA tax credits, extend the existing law for
another year, reopen the government, and give us time to negotiate the
longer term extension of the Affordable Care Act.
This whole discussion and, frankly, the whole debate we have been
having over the last several weeks over the Affordable Care Act brings
me back to the immediate aftermath of the passage of that bill when I
was doing sidewalk office hours inside the Glendale Galleria. I had my
little coffee table set up there.
I had someone come up to my table and ask me how I voted on that
bill, how I voted on ObamaCare. When I told him that I voted for it, he
was indignant.
He said: What could you possibly have liked? What could you have
possibly liked about that bill?
I said: Well, actually, there were a lot of things I liked about it.
I liked
[[Page S7984]]
the fact that if you had a preexisting condition, you could get
healthcare.
I remember another of my constituents saying that he was 65; he was a
preexisting condition.
I liked the fact that if you had a kid who was 26 or under, you could
keep them on your insurance policy if they didn't have one.
Then I said: I liked the fact that tens of millions of people that
can't otherwise afford healthcare are going to be able to get
healthcare.
He looked at me and said something that I never imagined I would
hear. He said: And you really think that is such a good idea?
That is, that millions of people who can't afford healthcare would be
able to get it.
I said: Well, yes, I do. Don't you?
He said: No, I don't. If they can't afford it, they shouldn't have
it.
And I recognize the moment he said it that he was speaking for
millions of people.
I had had one of those huge townhalls with 3,000 people, and no one
would say that even at those screaming townhalls. But his view was that
if they can't afford it, they shouldn't have it, and I think that view
is really at the center of this debate.
In the wealthiest country in the world, doesn't the government have
any responsibility to make sure that healthcare is accessible to
people? I think we do.
Now, who are these millions of people that are going to lose their
healthcare if we don't extend the ACA tax credits? Well, let me just
share the stories of two of them, my constituents who wrote to me.
The first one said:
My bronze HMO high deductible plan is $752.23 per month,
and using most, but not all of the tax credit, my monthly
premium is $200 per month and that is using $552.23 worth of
credits.
I'm currently single and retired so my income is well
within the limits to qualify for the credits. [But] if all
the credits go away for 2026, this will wipe me out and I
will likely go without insurance even though I know it is not
a good idea.
Here is the story from a second constituent:
Anyone else gotten their health plan rates for 2026? I did
today, and I will have to cancel mine. With chronic
conditions requiring daily prescriptions, weekly doctor
visits, current quarterly labs and biannual mammograms, my
share of cost will go up well over $1,000 per month, and as a
senior on a fixed and low income, I could not possibly come
up with a thousand dollars a month. Sadly, there are so many
seniors who will be in this position.
That is who we are talking about here. These are some of the millions
of people that will lose their access to healthcare if we don't extend
the ACA.
So I urge support for this. As Leader Schumer said, we can reopen the
government today if we can simply extend the tax credits for another
year and give us time, through a bipartisan commission, to work on a
more permanent extension. I urge support.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for this unified
support for a measure that is eminently reasonable, and I thank the
leader of our side, Senator Schumer, for advancing this proposal.
It is a compromise. It is simple and plain. And I will be very blunt:
It is not everything I would have wanted. Like the Senator from
Wisconsin, my friend Senator Baldwin, I would have wanted the
healthcare tax credits to be permanently guaranteed. I would have
wanted a guarantee as well that there be no rescissions or impoundments
of funds, as this President has done repeatedly. I would have wanted a
reversal of the firings, the so-called RIFs, the reductions in force
that have been eminently unfair and a guarantee of backpay to everybody
who has been furloughed. There are other provisions that, for me, were
profoundly important. It is a compromise. And ``compromise'' is not a
four-letter word; it is the way to get things done.
This picture of unity is worth a thousand of my words, but it is also
a clear response to a crisis that we face, and we face it today. It is
a crisis in healthcare. It is a crisis in hunger. It is a crisis in air
transportation.
For millions of Americans, it is a crisis of affordability. Nobody in
America needed Tuesday's elections to tell them that the cost of rent
and electricity and food and all the other necessities in life are
spiraling out of control.
And, yes, healthcare costs are spiraling out of control. They are at
the kitchen table right now across America, looking at the exchanges,
and concluding they simply can't afford those spiking premiums,
multiples of three and four times--and at least twice--what they were
paying. Many of them are taking the risk that they will go without
insurance.
This measure guarantees an outcome. The majority leader Senator Thune
has said he can't guarantee an outcome. All he can promise is a
process. And I am unwilling to accept a promise of some vote at an
indefinite point on an undefined bill sometime in the future because
the urgency of now for American families means they are making choices
about whether they can afford insurance at this moment for next year.
In fairness to the majority leader, he can't promise anything for
either the Speaker of the House or the President. They have been absent
without leave. They have been AWOL. They have refused to talk.
We are presenting them now with a reasonable compromise that the
majority leader can accept and our colleagues on the other side of the
aisle should embrace.
The problem here is one of trust. What we have seen from the
administration is a strategy of maximum pain to magnify political
pressure.
In just minutes from now, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First
Circuit, this administration will argue that SNAP benefits should be
ended after the President himself promised that they would be paid in
full in compliance with the district court orders in Rhode Island and
Massachusetts. There is no way to trust that SNAP benefits will be
provided without a guarantee from the courts.
The urgency that we face is also in air transportation. We all want
people to be able to reach their destinations safely. It has to come
first. And we need to make sure that the TSA and air controllers are
paid. They are heroes for having worked for so long without pay.
We need to stop the madness of this trend line. It is a through line
in the administration's tactics here. It is a through line of cruelty
and stupidity that has magnified the costs for the American people not
just in blue States but all across the country.
We should seek reform and improvement in the ACA, eliminating any
kind of fraud and stopping the spiraling increase in healthcare costs.
But I should warn my colleagues: We will not sacrifice the ACA.
Very revealing yesterday in the hearing of the Permanent Subcommittee
on Investigations was the commentary from a number of my Republican
colleagues in effect saying that we should kill the ACA--an effort that
has been part of their relentless campaign over the last 15 years to
decimate this resounding and important law that now is embraced by the
vast majority of the American people.
We put in the record stories of individuals from Michigan and
Pennsylvania and Iowa.
Aaron Lehman, a fifth-generation farmer, told us: I grow corn,
soybean, oats, and hay with my family. The Affordable Care Act has been
one of the best investments in rural healthcare in decades.
We cannot afford, as a nation, to go back to the days when
preexisting conditions were a pretext for denying healthcare. If
someone had a history of cancer, diabetes, heart disease, HIV, asthma,
depression, pregnancy--the list goes on--insurers could force patients
to pay more or refuse to offer them coverage at all.
Standing strong for the ACA very simply means providing healthcare to
Americans. Extending the healthcare tax credits for 1 year is a
compromise that makes sense. It will put the government back to work
fully and capably and fairly.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this reasonable
compromise.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, we are now in the 38th day of a
government shutdown. That means that Federal employees all over this
country who
[[Page S7985]]
have to feed their families are not getting paychecks. It means that
air traffic controllers are forced to work crazy hours. We worry about
the safety of our flights right now. We worry about Capitol Police
officers right here in DC having a hard time feeding their families.
These are hard-working people who are doing important work. They
deserve respect. They deserve to be paid. This shutdown must end as
quickly as possible.
On top of the fact that we have hundreds of thousands of workers not
getting paid, we now have a President who, for the first time in the
history of this country, is willing to allow our kids--low-income,
working-class children--to go hungry in order to try to make a
political point--a point, by the way, that the American people are
seeing through.
The cause of this shutdown is not complicated. For the first time
ever, the majority party in the Senate, which needs 60 votes to pass a
budget, is refusing to negotiate. It is their way or the highway; take
it or leave it; we have the majority; we are not talking to you--
despite the fact that they only have 53 votes.
To make the situation even more absurd and to show the American
people the contempt the Republicans hold for negotiations and
democracy, you have a Speaker of the House who has now given his
Members a 6-week paid vacation. The country is in the midst of a major
crisis, and Republican Members of the House are nowhere to be seen.
They are on a paid vacation. If that doesn't tell you everything you
need to know about whether Republicans are willing to negotiate, I
don't know what will.
Everybody in this country knows that our current healthcare system is
broken. They know that we pay by far--not even close--the highest
prices in the world for healthcare, and some 85 million Americans are
uninsured or underinsured. They know that we are the only major country
on Earth not to guarantee healthcare to all people as a human right,
something which must change.
What they also know is that Donald Trump and the Republicans, through
their horrendous One Big Beautiful Bill, are making a broken,
dysfunctional healthcare system even worse, taking it to the verge of
collapse. That legislation is doubling premiums for over 20 million
Americans who are in the Affordable Care Act exchange.
In my State, we are hearing from Vermonters who are being asked to
pay a tripling of their rates and even a quadrupling of the rates. Who
in God's name, at a time when healthcare costs are already so high, can
afford a doubling, a tripling, or quadrupling of their rates? That is
insane. Nobody in my State or, I expect, in this country can afford to
pay that.
Further, that One Big Beautiful Bill willh throw 15 million people
off the healthcare they now have, as a result of massive cuts to
Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. According to studies, that would
result in some 50,000 Americans dying unnecessarily every year--low-
income, working-class people who have chronic illnesses who will no
longer be able to get healthcare. That is what is being discussed.
Does anybody think it is a good idea to allow 50,000 of our fellow
Americans to die unnecessarily each year?
And all of this is being done in order to give $1 trillion in tax
breaks to the 1 percent.
No, I do not believe that Elon Musk and Mr. Zuckerberg and Mr. Bezos
and the other multibillionaires deserve a trillion dollars in tax
breaks in order to throw 50 million Americans off the healthcare they
have and double premiums for over 20 million Americans. I don't believe
that. The overwhelming majority of Republicans, Democrats, and
Independents don't believe that either.
The American people understand that the Republican Party controls the
White House; they control the Senate; they control the House of
Representatives. And, understandably, for that reason, poll after poll
shows that Americans hold the Republicans accountable for this
shutdown.
But it is not just polls. On Tuesday, there was an election in which
Trumpism was overwhelmingly rejected from Maine to California and a lot
of States and cities in between. And one of the key reasons is that
Americans want Democrats to make certain that they do not experience
huge increases in their healthcare premiums or get thrown off the
healthcare they have. That is what they are saying: We cannot afford a
doubling or tripling in our healthcare costs. Stand with us.
That is what that election was significantly about.
President Trump claims to be a dealmaker. In fact, he wrote a book
called ``The Art of the Deal.'' Well, Mr. President, the ball is in
your court right now. Help negotiate a deal. Show us what a great
dealmaker you are. Help us negotiate a deal which protects the
healthcare of tens of millions of Americans, and let us end this
shutdown today. We can end it in the next few hours.
That is what this struggle is about. That is what this shutdown is
all about. It is whether Republicans succeed in making a broken and
dysfunctional healthcare system even worse by making healthcare
unaffordable for working-class and middle-class Americans. It is about
whether millions of our fellow Americans no longer have health
insurance and that many of them will die unnecessarily.
Mr. President, we are hearing right now--every one of our offices--we
are hearing tragic stories of families having to decide whether they
can pay for their parent's cancer treatment, for example, or whether
they will see a parent die without that lifesaving care. There are
millions of Americans now dealing with chronic disease. They are
dealing with cancer. They are dealing with diabetes. They are dealing
with Alzheimer's. They are dealing with heart disease. And they are
wondering, if they get thrown off their healthcare, if premiums go so
high, how are they going to stay alive? How are they going to take care
of their parents, their kids?
That is what this shutdown is about.
And whether it is in Maine, New Hampshire, Nevada, or Vermont, the
American people want us to stand with them and that is what this whole
debate is about. We cannot fail the American people. They are looking
to us to make sure that they continue to have healthcare. Let us not
betray them.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I actually like good local journalism. I
am going to fight as hard as I can in the U.S. Congress to keep local
journalism and fight AI, that basically might obliterate it, for all
intents and purposes.
So I am just going to read my statement here.
In an article printed in the Vancouver Columbian on August 11, 2025,
the headline is ``Child care center owner urges Congress to take action
to save the [Affordable Care Act] tax credits, expansion.''
The owner of an east Vancouver child care center joined
Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., Monday morning to draw
attention to Washington's rising health care costs.
The two spoke at a news conference at Tree Hill Learning
Center on Southeast 196th Avenue, along with representatives
from a local insurance agency and Workforce Southwest
Washington.
Washington's Insurance Commissioner said that in May that
14 health insurers in the state were seeking a rate increase
for next year. The proposed increases for plans sold on
the individual health insurance market averaged 21.2
percent and ranged [anywhere] from 9.6 percent to 37.3
percent.
The office expects premium increases to affect about
300,000 people statewide.
Dana Christiansen, owner of Tree Hill Learning Center, said
this isn't the first time she has had to face rising
healthcare costs for her two Vancouver childcare facilities.
``Each year, I face a difficult decision of how much of the
rate [increase]--currently at 24 percent--do I take on and
absorb,'' Christiansen said. ``How much do I pass on to the
employee? How much do I pass on to the families in the form
of [higher childcare] tuition increases?''
Each rate change request is evaluated independently by
actuarial staff, said Aaron VanTuyl, spokesman for the
insurance commissioner's office. That's mandated by state
law.
[But] the rate changes are usually finalized in September,
VanTuyl said. Claims and administrative costs, medical and
prescription drug costs, company expenses and profits will
all be reviewed by the commissioner's office as part of
determining if they are reasonable.
Cantwell called the proposed increases a threat to health
care affordability.
The insurance commissioner's office said Congress'
anticipated failure to renew the enhanced premium tax credit
is contributing to the proposed increases.
[[Page S7986]]
Congress created the premium tax credit in 2014, as part of
the Affordable Care Act, to lower health plan premium costs
for eligible households. The American Rescue Plan in 2021
expanded who was eligible for the credit and the Inflation
Reduction Act extended it to this year. It's set to expire at
the end of this year.
``We [all] know that increased rates are something we could
deal with in Congress,'' Cantwell said. ``That is why today I
am urging Congress to take action . . . [on] the Affordable
Care Act tax credits and their expansion, and make sure
[that] we do so before the end of the year.''
The senator's office said rate increases are being
requested nationwide and three states have already approved
them.
The Congressional Budget Office expects fewer people will
participate in subsidized exchanges and the uninsured rate
will climb if the enhanced premiums aren't extended.
NBC News reported earlier this year that Republican
lawmakers are split on whether to extend the tax credit. Some
said the federal government could no longer . . . support it,
while others wanted it extended.
Just a little side note before I keep reading, five of my colleagues
on the other side of the aisle said they wanted the tax credits
extended. That was early in August.
The Washington Health Benefit Exchange, the state's health
insurance marketplace, estimated about 216,000 health plan
enrollees in Washington were eligible for the enhanced
premium tax credit.
Christiansen said her business already operates on thin
margins.
``I view providing healthcare benefits not as a perk, but
as a fundamental necessity,'' she said. ``I never want an
unforeseen illness to financially ruin an employee or force
them to neglect their health.''
Still, rising child care costs are forcing her [clientele]
to reconsider if they can afford to keep their child in a
licensed facility or continue working [at all].
``We cannot solve this problem alone,'' Christiansen said.
``We need the support of lawmakers, the insurance industry,
and regulatory agencies to address the root cause of the
rates and increases that are disproportionately affecting
those who need it the most.''
As the clock continues to tick here--that is actually the end of the
story. I wanted to read that story because that was August. It showed,
at that point in time, we had people on this side of the aisle who
wanted to negotiate. They were in the news. I summated it by saying
there were five people, but I am sure there are more by now.
That is why we are asking with this simple proposal: Let's open the
government, extend these tax credits for a year, because we know there
is bipartisan support in both the House and Senate to do that, and
continue to reform this so we can keep this childcare facility in
Vancouver, WA, in business.
Let's not make this--we shared a lot of stories about individual
people, but we haven't shared enough stories about the small business
impact and the economic impact to employers, when you take affordable
health insurance away from them and they don't have options.
This owner lamented in the story: Which should I do? Do I absorb
these costs and not be a profitable business? Do I make these employees
not have health insurance? Do I raise these costs and then these
parents can't have the childcare that they need to stay?
She told me on that day that, literally, some people decided to stop
work because they no longer could afford childcare. This is ruining our
whole economic picture by making insurance too expensive, by making the
costs play too big a role in our economy, and taking workers away from
us.
I support this 1-year proposal. I support us working together to
reform the system. I have championed many things in the Affordable Care
Act that drive down costs and have driven down costs, and I will work
with any of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to continue
and expand that work because it is important. It is important for us to
continue to have affordability, particularly in healthcare. As we have
a rising baby boomer population reaching retirement age, we have no
other choice but to focus on affordability.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, millions of Americans are counting on
Democrats to stop Donald Trump and Republicans from raising healthcare
costs.
I am here to say: Democrats will not back down. Fighting to lower
healthcare costs is a righteous fight.
For too many Americans, healthcare premiums are going up by hundreds
or even thousands of dollars a month. Who has that kind of money?
Just this week, I talked to a woman in Florida, practically in Donald
Trump's backyard. She is a wife, she is a mother of four lively kids,
and she is about to lose her health insurance because of Trump's cuts.
What does that mean for her? She has malignant melanoma, and now she
is looking at canceling her ongoing treatments because, once she loses
her insurance, she cannot afford treatment for her cancer. That is
deeply, deeply wrong.
Democrats are in this fight for the right reasons, and Democrats will
stay in this fight for the right reasons.
In July, congressional Republicans worked hand in hand with President
Trump on their biggest passion project--jamming through a bill to hand
out massive tax cuts to millionaires, billionaires, and giant
corporations. Then, just to put a little extra whip cream on top of
their Republican ice cream sundae, they paid for those billionaire tax
cuts by slashing healthcare coverage for millions of Americans. Every
single Republican voted for it, and every single Democrat voted against
it.
When the Republicans voted to cut healthcare funding last July,
Democrats said: We cannot sign off on a 2026 budget that cuts
healthcare for millions of Americans.
On September 30, the 2025 budget expired, and Democrats were ready to
negotiate to get some of those healthcare cuts reversed in the 2026
budget, but the Republicans didn't want to negotiate. Nope. The
Republicans decided they would rather shut down government than offer a
single nickel to help Americans manage healthcare costs. They told
Democrats to vote for the Republicans' spending bill--take it or leave
it--and they have repeated their ``take it or leave it'' through 15
votes and 38 days.
Democrats have asked over and over and over and over to negotiate to
help Americans with their healthcare costs, but Donald Trump and the
Republicans have flatly refused to even talk to Democrats to try to get
the government back open. Not even once have the Republicans been
willing to negotiate--not once.
So where are we now?
Well, Trump tweeted seven times in one day about his brandnew,
marbled bathroom at the White House while Americans have turned to
crowdfunding to pay for their healthcare and grocery bills.
Trump hosted a ``Great Gatsby''-themed party while he turned off food
assistance for millions of Americans. Do you know the message to 42
million Americans from Donald Trump? Eat dirt.
And Trump is weighing the important idea of etching corporations'
names into his grand, new, gold-encrusted ballroom while millions of
Americans who will lose their health insurance will get sick and be
forced to decide whether to give up care altogether or go bankrupt in
trying to pay for it.
Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are in disarray. The House is now
in its seventh week of a paid vacation. They couldn't reopen the
government if they wanted to because they aren't even in Washington to
vote. They have Members--Republican and Democratic Members--who want a
deal on healthcare, but Speaker Johnson just says: No. Everyone spend
another week on a paid vacation.
Here on the Senate side, Republicans are in chaos. Leader Thune puts
the same bill up over and over for the same votes, but he won't talk
about changing a single word. Now he can't even organize a vote among
Republicans to reorganize the government. Instead, Republicans are
fighting with Republicans over what to do, and still no one says: Let's
help families on healthcare and get the government open.
So Democrats have put a proposal on the table: Lower costs by
extending health tax credits for 1 year, and reopen government. Do it
all in one vote, and during this next year, we will continue to work to
make our healthcare system work better. It is a commonsense plan that
helps people across this country, and that gets our government open.
The Senate could do its part to reopen the government in less than an
hour. We could do it right now, this
[[Page S7987]]
afternoon. We just have to put the interests of the American people
ahead of politics.
Americans are demanding, urging, begging Congress to do something--to
do something before Americans are forced to get sicker and sicker
before they can get healthcare, to do something before healthcare costs
go up and up and up for everyone in this country.
People are sick of Washington politics. So we ask our Republican
colleagues: Help us do what is right for the American people and help
us do it right now.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, I stand here today on behalf of the people
of Massachusetts to say that we are angry.
We are angry that Trump and MAGA Republicans are doubling the costs
for millions of Americans and that their healthcare bills are going to
skyrocket when they promised lower prices.
We are angry that Trump and MAGA Republicans are stripping Medicaid
from the most vulnerable people in our communities.
We are angry that Trump and the MAGA Republicans are making families
with hungry children go to food pantries for their next meals and
forcing families to choose between groceries and rent.
We are angry that Trump and MAGA Republicans are using public
servants as pawns in their hateful, political games.
And we are angry that, during all of this, the Republicans have
refused to come to the negotiating table.
The House of Representatives has been out for 6 weeks. They are in a
political witness protection program across our Nation--refusing to
come to Washington to sit down to negotiate on these issues.
Americans are counting the hours that are left to solve this
healthcare crisis for them and their families. They are looking around
for help, and they are looking around for hope, but they are all
looking, instead, at cruelty, pain, fear. That is the agenda of Trump's
MAGA Republican Party.
Last weekend, I met with Jeff from Natick, who is fighting stage IV
lung cancer. He pays $35,000 a year for an affordable care healthcare
plan--$35,000 a year. If he can't keep that insurance plan on December
31, he will have to pay $300,000 a year. Jeff does not have $300,000.
That is about to hit him in about 7 weeks.
Barbara retired early to take care of her spouse with dementia. Her
bill is going from $7,500 a year to $18,000 a year. She cannot afford
that. There are 22 million stories like Jeff's, like Barbara's. There
are 22 million of them who will be facing Thanksgiving and Christmas
over the next 7 weeks, and there are no answers for them--22 million
people. That is outrageous. These people are afraid, and they are
angry.
By the way, we saw a lot of that anger come out on Tuesday night.
They came out angry. They came out, out of fear, to vote. That is what
happened. It is only going to build and build and build as each day
goes by, and we cannot get an answer from the Republicans on how we are
going to handle those people. How are we going to give them what they
need for those families?
It is very difficult to fathom the abject cruelty of this President,
who is happy to force Grandma to choose between paying for her
prescription and paying for her heating bill, to force a caretaker to
choose between being there for their parent with Alzheimer's or picking
up an extra shift, to force a single mom to choose between paying for a
checkup or paying for extra school snacks.
Since they took over in January, the Republicans promised that they
were going to solve the healthcare crisis in our country, and all it
has done is grow and grow and grow. Then they pass a bill to take away
all of the healthcare coverage for all of these 22 million people and
then transfer the money to billionaires in tax breaks. They swiped the
healthcare of 22 million vulnerable people for billionaires.
Ralph Waldo Emerson--the great Massachusetts poet--said that ``health
is the first wealth.'' MAGA Republicans and Trump have looted that
wealth--that health--for those people. These people are angry, and they
are afraid. They are afraid. They don't have the backup funding that
millionaires and billionaires have.
Now, my father drove a truck for the Hood Milk Company. He drove a
truck for the Hood Milk Company. I am his son. I believe that God
created a world where every single person is able to receive the
healthcare they are entitled to, to three meals a day, to put children
through school, to keep them safe from illness, to give Americans
dignity in tough times. Those are the families we are talking to right
now. It is the milkmen. It is the workers in nursing homes. It is the
children across our country who are going to see loved ones lose their
healthcare in 7 weeks, and the Republicans refuse to come to the table.
Every American has a right to live in dignity in tough times. That is
where we are right now. They are facing increases in electricity costs,
in healthcare costs, in food costs, in clothing costs--in everything.
We can solve at least the healthcare part of this issue right here. The
richest Nation in the world can ensure peace and health and opportunity
for every man and woman and child in our country.
We are the wealthiest Nation in the history of the world, and the
Republicans are about to let 22 million of them lose their health
insurance or see it increase by double or triple or, in the case of
Jeff from Natick, 10 times--from $30,000 a year to $300,000 a year--and
he is in stage IV lung cancer. And we are not even discussing this?
The House of Representatives is on a vacation for 6 weeks. Well,
those 6 weeks--if you project them forward from now, we are talking
about Christmas. That is what we are talking about.
What in the world is in the mind of Donald Trump that he would allow
these families for the next 6 weeks to worry about where the coverage
for their families is going to come from?
The very least we can do is extend the Affordable Care tax credits
for one more year and provide some desperately needed relief for those
who are struggling to get by, who need our help right now, who need the
peace of mind right now.
Of those 220 Republicans in their political witness protection
program across the country, they are going to have health insurance for
their families. They don't have to worry this Thanksgiving or Christmas
about the conversation that is going to take place.
All we are asking for is a vote to provide that healthcare for the
next year for those families and reopen the government so the Federal
workers can get paid and go back on the job. It is pretty simple. We
are looking for any Republican anywhere to come and discuss it with us,
negotiate it with us, and they just keep saying: No.
So this anger--this anger that people are feeling--these people are
pissed off at the Federal Government. They are pissed off that they are
losing coverage for their family members, and they want the Republicans
to come to the table and solve this problem. What we saw on Tuesday
night was the beginning of this anger being translated into action.
They asked an ancient Greek philosopher once: When will we know true
justice?
And he answered: We will know true justice when those who have not
been harmed are as angry as those who have been harmed.
Across our country right now, those who have not been harmed are
angry on behalf of those who are about to be harmed--22 million people
losing their health insurance, seeing skyrocketing health insurance
premiums. These are families--42 million of them--without food stamps,
without a SNAP program for nutrition for their families. People are
angry, and they deserve an answer.
All we are asking for is 1 year so that we can negotiate this issue--
1 year so we can give peace of mind to 22 million families so that they
will know they will have health insurance after this Thanksgiving and
Christmas.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I support this proposal and would like
Americans to know why.
Since before Donald Trump was sworn in for a second term, Senate
Democrats have known that this is a healthcare problem for millions of
[[Page S7988]]
American families that cries out for fixing.
Again and again, we asked our Republican colleagues to work with us,
sit with us, and negotiate improvements in a black-letter law that
makes Americans' healthcare better for American families. Again and
again we were turned down.
So on the Senate Finance Committee, everybody knew this day was
coming, long before Donald Trump took the oath of office. Now the
crisis is here, and I am here to say our door is still open.
The Senate Finance Committee has a track record of getting bipartisan
work done. Senator Crapo and I wrote a bill that transformed how
pharmacy benefit managers work in Medicare. It passed the Finance
Committee 26 to nothing. Despite this track record, Republicans still
refuse to sit down and even have a conversation about how to help these
Americans afford their premiums. That is why we have all been out on
the floor today.
I am in a fight for Bart and Carla from Eugene, OR, a few years away
from Medicare. They have had long careers as a carpenter and a teacher.
They worked hard. Now the rug is being pulled out from under them. They
have been paying $400 a month in premiums. Without an extension of the
credits, they are going to pay $2,200 a month. That is an increase they
just can't handle.
My Republican colleagues have provided a host of excuses about why
they can't work with us, but the excuses don't hold water. For example,
there have been allegations of fraud--the same straw man that they used
to make the largest Medicaid cuts in history.
Republicans pretend they are fighting for us, but, really, they are
just pushing up costs and kicking working people off their health
insurance. So to, again, try to bring everybody together, we introduced
legislation that would prevent bad-actor brokers from enrolling or
switching people into plans without their knowledge. That way we could
slap fraudsters with criminal penalties when they harm consumers. On
the Republican side, after all the talk, no cosponsors.
Finally, there has been an excuse that says this policy was created
during COVID, and now that the pandemic is passed, the tax credits
ought to lapse too. It doesn't make any sense to me. I don't see
Republicans coming down to the floor, for example, to say that
telehealth benefits for seniors on Medicare should expire because they
were created during the pandemic.
This is something I feel strongly about. As my friend from Minnesota
knows, I wrote that with the late Orrin Hatch on a bipartisan basis.
And the first Trump administration used them to great success.
Just because a good healthcare policy was created in a crisis moment
doesn't mean it ought to be ripped away from Americans once the crisis
is passed, especially when ending that policy would create a new crisis
for over 20 million people who no longer will be able to afford good
quality healthcare.
Those are just a couple of the Republican excuses. But the bottom
line is, over here, we want to protect families' healthcare and keep
premiums from rocketing into the stratosphere. Unfortunately, the
Republicans haven't shared that view.
My hope is--and we have had an important conversation. I appreciate
the leadership of Senator Klobuchar. We have had an important
conversation about trying to get our colleagues on the other side of
the aisle to do the right thing. Join us. Join us, as we have done so
often in the Senate Finance Committee, and lower Americans' healthcare
costs.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
Mr. WARNOCK. Mr. President, I believe in healthcare. Your health--my
mother told me a long time ago--was everything, so take care of your
health. It is vital. It is essential. I believe that healthcare is a
human right. It is certainly something that the wealthiest Nation on
the planet and in the history of humankind can and ought to provide for
all of its citizens. It is right, it is fair, but it is also smart. A
healthy nation is a strong nation. Healthy children are ready to learn.
That is why I have worked so hard and so long with my colleagues on
this issue. As a matter of fact, long before I came to the Senate, I
had been focused on this issue of healthcare, trying to get my home
State of Georgia to expand. I keep preaching that sermon because right
now, there are more than 500,000 Georgians who are in the healthcare
coverage gap.
I came here in 2017, to this place, not as a Senator but as a pastor
and as an activist. I remember getting arrested, I believe in 2017,
when there were major healthcare cuts on the table. As I began to make
my argument and gather with other pastors in the Rotunda, the Capitol
Police--very professionally, but they began to say to us: Pastors, you
can't gather and pray in the Rotunda. We will have to arrest you.
What they didn't understand is that I had already been arrested. My
mind and my imagination had been arrested by this idea that surely the
American Nation can do better than this.
Healthcare is a human right.
Dr. King, who led the church that I am still honored to lead, said
that of all the injustices, inequality in healthcare is the most
shocking and the most inhumane.
That is why I was proud to join my colleagues and I am proud to stand
with my colleagues in this fight. This is about 22 million Americans
who will see their healthcare premiums double; some, triple; and some,
quadruple.
This is not theoretical stuff for me. These are the people in my
community. These are folks sitting in the pews of my church. Many of
them will lose their healthcare if something doesn't happen.
A few weeks ago, I was at the Evans County Memorial Hospital in Evans
County. I have to tell you, that is a red district. I don't have a
whole lot of votes. I have some. Claxton, GA--known for fruitcakes. I
was at that hospital, and I can tell you that those folks were already
worried because of the draconian cuts to Medicaid in the Big Beautiful
Bill--the so-called Big Beautiful Bill.
Fifteen million Americans already stand to lose their healthcare, and
then the premiums are raised for 22 million Americans while giving Elon
Musk and people like him a tax cut? That is beyond the pale of
partisanship. For me, that is not about Democrats and Republicans. You
ask ordinary people on the street if they think that is fair.
I can tell you that those folks in Evans County--many of whom did not
vote for me, but I am fighting for them because I am their Senator too.
They are worried about it.
That is why we have been in this fight, and that is why we continue
to stand to this very day. It is day 38. We are holding vigil because
of the pain of the people we represent. There is a lot of pain to go
around: 22 million whose premiums may go up or have gone up--they are
seeing it on the portals right now; Federal workers who have been
furloughed; the kids who--like I was--are in Head Start. We have Head
Start centers that are about to shutter because of the government
shutdown.
Let's be honest. The folks on SNAP were dragged into this fight. They
were not a part of this. They were dragged into this fight. There are
already legal provisions to make sure that they are cared for. And this
administration right now is defying a court order to feed America's
hungry people.
With all of that pain from the crisis in healthcare, from the ongoing
government shutdown, we come to our sisters and our brothers on the
other side, and we extend a hand of compromise, because it hasn't taken
me long to learn, really, that is the only way you get anything done in
this body.
I work all of the time with colleagues with whom I disagree about 90
percent of the time, because it is not about them, and it is not about
me; it is about the people we represent.
The Founders were wise to organize our government in such a way that
that is the only way to have sustainable change, is to do it on a
bipartisan basis.
My colleagues have taken their position, and we have taken ours. Here
we are at an impasse. But I represent a State that elected me and
Donald Trump, so they expect us to figure it out.
Sometimes, when I am driving my car--I have a 9-year-old and a 6-
year-
[[Page S7989]]
old, a 9-year-old daughter and a 6-year-old son. Sometimes they are in
the back seat having a disagreement: He looked at me. She touched me.
Then they say: Daddy--you know, they call on me.
Here is what I say more often than not: Figure it out. The two of you
in the back seat of the car--that is your sister; that is your brother.
We are all in the same car. We are trying to get to the same
destination. Figure it out.
We are all in the same car tonight, Democrats and Republicans.
There is a way in which the poor and the wealthy--there is a way in
which they are all in the same car. COVID reminded us of that. Before
we had a vaccine, if my neighbor had the virus, I, too, was in peril.
That didn't make my neighbor my adversary; that means I have a vested
interest in making sure my neighbor has coverage.
So here is the proposal: a 1-year, clean extension of the ACA
subsidy. You know that is not what we want. You know that if we had it
our way, we would make it permanent. That is not what we fought for 38
days for--a 1-year extension--but we are offering that after standing
for 38 days. A 1-year extension, and then let's sit down, and, in the
words of Scripture, let us reason together. Let us have a conversation.
Let's reopen the government. Let's extend healthcare to folks who, in
real time, are opening up the portal, and they have sticker shock. And
then let's sit down and figure it out because, if we are honest, the
status quo is not working very well for anybody.
Anybody who is trying to defend the status quo has not been talking
to ordinary people. There are a lot of things that need to be fixed.
And we can do that, but we have to reopen the government and give
people a little bit of hope--give those 22 million Americans hope, give
the 44 million Americans who need SNAP some hope, give our Federal
workers some hope.
There is an African-American proverb that says: When the elephants
fight, it is the grass that suffers.
It is the grass roots in Georgia and all across the Nation right now
who are suffering because too often the politicians make the politics
about the politicians rather than about the people.
Let's center the people. If we center the people, we will compromise
and we will figure it out.
In closing--nobody believes a Baptist preacher when he says ``in
closing''--I have worked with Members of the Presiding Officer's party
on a whole range of things. And at the risk of embarrassing him, Ted
Cruz and I even work together every now and then. And I mention him
because, early in my tenure here, he and I worked on a little thing--
just a little provision--to try to get a little bit closer to building
out this interstate, I-14, that would run through Georgia all the way
to Texas.
The same road that runs through Texas runs through Georgia. And if we
can get that road built out, when it is time to get on that road,
nobody asks you: Are you a Democrat or are you a Republican? Nobody
asks you about your religion or if you have a religious tradition at
all. Nobody asks you. Some folks are going to church. Some are going to
the mosque. Some are going to temple. Some are going to the park. Some
are going to the beach. But they all get on the same road trying to get
to wherever they are going.
There is a road that runs through this American experience. There is
a road that runs through our humanity that ought to connect all of us
together, that ought to remind us that we all want our children to
thrive and we all want our families to have a future. Let us make haste
to that road and walk toward a brighter American future.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. 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. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Wisconsin.
Shutdown Fairness Act
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I came to the floor 2 weeks ago with a
completely nonpartisan, very sincere attempt with a bill that we call
the Shutdown Fairness Act to simply pay the Federal workers whom we
were requiring to work, the finest among us: the members of our
military, people in Federal law enforcement, TSA, and air traffic
controllers to keep our skies safe.
Now, when I was asking the Senate to proceed to that bill, the
Senator from Maryland offered an alternative. He called it the True
Shutdown Fairness Act. The main difference is that his was only going
to be for 1 year. My bill is permanent--permanently stops using Federal
employees and the American public as pawns in these sick partisan
games.
The other difference was my bill is focusing on the people we are
forcing to work. His bill added furloughed workers. So on the floor 2
weeks ago, I said if you are serious about passing this bill, if you
are serious about stopping--he said, he can't punish Federal employees
for our dysfunction.
If you are serious about that, I told the Senator from Maryland, vote
to get on the bill. I will include that; I will convince our conference
to include furloughed workers. Get on the bill. We will amend it. We
will get this passed, and we will start paying people.
He rejected that offer. Now, we started having discussions. His staff
immediately acknowledged the fact that my bill did not in any way,
shape, or form impact the President's authority in terms of determining
who was furloughed, who gets included in a reduction in force. It was
silent. Even though they falsely accused my bill of giving the
President greater authority, it didn't.
I came to the floor again today to pass an amended bill with
furloughed workers--by the way, a bill that is now supported by the
American Federation of Government Employees--I believe that is the
largest public employee union; the Federal Managers Association; the
Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association; the National Air Traffic
Controllers Association--and we are going to have the Senator from
Texas come down and talk about what is happening with air travel as we
speak; the International Association of Firefighters; and the
Association of Flight Attendants. These are public sector unions that
generally don't support Republican legislation.
What they particularly like about my bill is the fact that it is
permanent. It prevents Federal workers and, quite honestly, the broader
American public from being used as pawns again in these sick political
games being played right now with their lives.
So, in a few minutes, we are going to proceed to vote on a motion to
proceed to my original bill. That is how this works. The leader voted
no so he can bring it up for reconsideration. So we have to bring that
bill up. We already have the language for the substitute amendment,
which includes furloughed workers, that has been vetted by, quite
honestly, both Democrat and Republican Senate offices, by the Office of
Management and Budget, and by the public sector unions, which have come
out in support for it.
This is a bill that is ready for prime time. This is a bill that is
ready to be passed tonight. Now, it is unfortunate that we couldn't
pass it by unanimous consent because had we done that, the House is on
a 48-hour callback, and they will come back. The Speaker has already
said they will pass this in the House. And we get our military members,
air traffic controllers, these Federal workers who keep us safe--we can
get them paid.
So again, I am just asking--I am actually pleading with my colleagues
on the other side of the aisle to please vote to proceed to this bill.
We will substitute an amendment that includes furloughed workers. We
can pass this tonight. If we vote to proceed, we can then vote for
unanimous consent to waive all time agreements, and we could even pass
this yet tonight. Make our skies safer.
But I know the Senator from Alaska has a few words to say, and I know
the Senator from Texas will as well.
I yield to the Senator from Alaska.
Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, thank you to my colleague from Wisconsin
Senator Johnson. I have been proud to work with him on this bill over
the last couple weeks.
[[Page S7990]]
The way this came to the floor--Senator Johnson and I were making the
case in the conference. I had a bill that actually was a bill about
paying our troops. Imagine that--we want to pay our military during a
shutdown, including the Coast Guard.
Senator Johnson came to me and said: Dan, I have a broader bill.
Let's pay everybody who is required to work to keep us safe in America.
I said: Great idea. Let's do it.
So this is the Shutdown Fairness Act. Senator Johnson already talked
about what it does. It is very, very simple. If you are required to
work because your job is important--primarily because you are keeping
Americans safe--then you should be paid.
We have a great example right here. All these Capitol Police officers
right now keeping us safe right here in the Capitol--they are not
getting paid. Air traffic controllers and TSA are keeping us safe right
now in America. Senator Cruz is going to talk about what they have been
going through. They are not getting paid. They should be paid. Of
course, our military. President Trump has worked magic to keep them
getting paid, but that is going to run out soon.
So this is a very simple bill. There is nothing more American than
paying people for their hard work, especially when the Federal
Government is requiring them to work.
So what happened?
Oh, by the way, Senator Johnson mentioned that it is well over 200
groups now. I have a long list of public employee unions, the
Teamsters, private sector unions--all kinds of organizations across
America are saying to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle:
Pass the short-term CR but also pass this bill.
So what happened? When we worked this 2 weeks ago, there were a
number of Democrat Senators who came to us and were very interested in
doing that because it makes sense. How could you not be interested in
doing it?
We can negotiate healthcare and these other issues, but the men and
women in the Federal Government who are working without a paycheck--you
have been hearing stories about the FAA guy driving an Uber because he
has to feed his family. He is not getting paid. And he has a really
important job as an air traffic controller.
So we thought our bill was going to pass. A number of Democrat
Senators were like: Hey, we agree with this.
That was 2 weeks ago. So what happened? Here is what happened--the
same thing that has been happening every night. The minority leader,
Senator Schumer, and the Democratic leadership are pressuring the other
Democrat Senators: Don't do it. Don't do it.
The pressure comes on them. It is happening right now. The pressure
comes on.
Don't do it. We have to make sure the left wing of the party is
happy.
You heard Senator Schumer recently, that ``we are winning the
shutdown.'' I will tell you who is not winning the shutdown--by the
way, I have no idea who he is talking about when he says ``we,'' but I
will tell you who is not winning the shutdown: the men and women in
America who work for the Federal Government who aren't getting a
paycheck and are required to work.
So that is what happened last time. Senate Democrats were going to
vote for our bill, and the leadership on the Democratic side, because
they want to use these people as leverage, convinced them, pressured
them not to vote for it.
So I hope my Democrat colleagues, at least nine of you--actually, it
is eight of you--have the courage to look at your leader and go: You
know what, Chuck, sorry. I am going to pay the marines. I am going to
pay the Navy. I am going to pay the FAA. I am going to pay TSA. And we
are certainly not going to use them, as Senator Johnson said, as pawns.
Right now, they are being used as pawns.
So here is the deal. To my Democratic colleagues, 2 weeks ago, a
number of you were going to do this--we had discussions--and then you
kind of got pressured to not.
Show some courage. Walk up and vote with us to pay the men and women
in America, Federal workers who are keeping us safe and haven't gotten
a paycheck. There is nothing more American than that. Have the courage
to do it.
I yield back to my colleague from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. I want to thank the Senator from Alaska. He has been so
dedicated. He has been so tenacious in making sure that the finest
among us, the men and women of our military, get paid and then, you
know, signing on to my effort to broaden this to all Federal employees.
Again, as he said, they shouldn't have to go to food banks and they
shouldn't have to go to DoorDash to pay their child's tuition or feed
their family.
But we had a chilling report from the Senator from Texas, the chair
of the Commerce Committee, in terms of what is happening with air
traffic control in terms of our skies. But before we turn to the
Senator from Texas, the Senator from Wyoming has a few words to speak
on this bill.
Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Johnson for his
dedication to trying to pay the Federal workers who are being used in
what is a political battle--I want to excuse them from a partisan
political battle that is not of their making so they can go back to
work and serve the American people.
What we have here is a political standoff between Democrats and
Republicans in Congress. It has nothing to do with the air traffic
controllers. Some of them are Democrats, and some are Republicans. It
has nothing to do with any other essential or furloughed Federal
workers. Some of them are Democrats; some, Republicans.
Some of them probably agreed that we should shut down the government
so insurance companies can make billions more dollars off the American
taxpayers under ObamaCare. Some of them are Republicans and think that
we should open the government and work out this healthcare mess after
we open the government. Regardless of that, they are not in a position
to make those decisions. We are. We are.
So here we are in the longest shutdown in government history. The
Congress is responsible for it. It is political. It is not policy
driven. So since we are going to argue about politics and who is
winning and who is losing and who is setting themselves up to have the
next President or win the midterms instead of worrying about whether
the airways are safe, whether WIC is funded, whether SNAP is funded,
whether workers are funded, whether the military is funded; since we
are going to fight over who is going to win the election a year from
now, let's excuse the people who are not responsible for this
dysfunction from our dysfunction.
That is what Senator Johnson is trying to do.
Now, we all agree, Democrats and Republicans, that this is not fair
to Federal workers--people who are in the military, who are air traffic
controllers, who are essential, who are furloughed. It is not fair to
them. We all agree.
What Senator Johnson is doing is finding a way that we can be
together on a bipartisan basis, excuse the Federal workers from this
mess, let them be paid, and let us go on with our absurd, partisan,
political dysfunction if that is what we want.
If we want to fight about healthcare, it is my opinion that we ought
to do it after we fully open the government, but if we are not willing
to do that, let's at least let the Federal workers off the hook.
I applaud Senator Johnson. I applaud Senator Sullivan. I applaud
Senator Cruz.
We want to be able to keep Americans safe who are getting in
airplanes every day.
We want to keep Americans safe who are working in the military. They
don't make very much money, especially those young, first- and second-
year military employees. Some of them have young families. Some of them
have spouses. So I am telling you, they don't make much money, and then
you withhold their pay. Those are the people that are working paycheck
to paycheck. Let them out of our political dysfunction. Don't make them
suffer for our political misfunction and dysfunction.
I want to also thank any Democrat who will listen and be
compassionate towards your Federal workers in your districts.
This is wrong for those of us--whether we disagree about healthcare
or not,
[[Page S7991]]
whether you want to fund billions of dollars to give to insurance
companies for a broken healthcare system--fine.
We can have that debate, but don't penalize the Federal workers for
our dysfunction, our disrespect for them.
I yield the floor.
Mr. JOHNSON. I appreciate the remarks from the Senator from Wyoming.
I know people are coming down here to vote, but there are no time
restrictions, and this is extremely important. We have a number of
Senators who want to speak to this issue. We should give them time to
speak--hopefully, to convince our colleagues on the other side to,
again, be fair: Think about what your vote means to people that don't
want to be used as pawns.
I believe, again, that the Senator from Texas, our chairman of the
Commerce Committee, he has got some pretty, as I said, chilling
information to relate to the American public, based on what is
happening, if we do not pay air traffic controllers.
The Senator from Texas.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CRUZ. I thank Senator Johnson.
It is day 38 of the Schumer shutdown--the longest government shutdown
in the history of the United States.
Now, Senator Schumer told the world:
Every day gets better for us.
Senator Sullivan asked: Who is the ``us''?
I will tell you who the ``us'' is.
This is a partisan political show. It happened because, in March, the
Democrats decided to be reasonable and allow the government to stay
open. And the extreme-left wing of the Democrat party got furious, and
Senator Schumer nearly lost his job.
And now the government is shut down because the Democrats want to
show the radical-left wing in their base that they really, really,
really hate Donald Trump.
Now, on the Democrat side of the aisle, there is a talking point--a
talking point we actually had in the Commerce Committee yesterday. One
of our Democrat colleagues said: There is a Republican President. There
is a Republican Senate. There is a Republican House. This is the
Republicans' shutdown.
And I don't know who actually produces those talking points for
Democrats, but every one of them, word for word, said the identical
thing.
Well, I tell you, I spoke shortly thereafter, and I said: You know,
every witness in a court of law, before they testify, they are sworn
in, and they are asked that their testimony will be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I said: What my Democrat colleague just did there failed part No. 2,
the whole truth.
You are right; there is a Republican President. You are right; there
is a Republican House. And you are right; there is a Republican Senate.
What the Democrats also know is that, under the Senate rules, it takes
60 Senators to vote to fund the government. They all know that. That is
not something they don't know, and it is not an accident that they
don't mention it.
Why do we have a shutdown? Well, let's count. There are 53 desks on
this side of the Senate floor. There are 53 Republicans, which means
the government cannot be funded until at least 7 Democrats decide we
are going to fund the government.
By the way, this is not a new development. When Joe Biden was
President, 13 separate times we passed a clean continuing resolution.
What does that mean? We had a 60-vote threshold then too. That means
Republicans could have done this garbage any of the 13 times under Joe
Biden, but we did not. They didn't have 60 votes. What was different
when Joe Biden was President is Republicans voted with the Democrats to
allow the government to stay open.
And, by the way, in March, the Democrats knew that was the
responsible thing to do. It does not take much on the magic Google
machine to get video of every one of these Democrats saying on TV:
Government shutdowns are reckless. They are irresponsible. They are
wrong.
They all know that. But you know what they are counting on? I look
up, and the press gallery is virtually empty. They are counting on ABC,
NBC, and CBS lying to the American people. They are counting on CNN
lying to the American people. They are counting on MSNBC lying to the
American people.
This is not complicated. Fourteen times the Republicans on this side
of the floor have voted to open the government, and 14 times Democrats
have voted to keep the government closed.
And then, after they vote to keep the government closed, the
Democrats walk out to the reporters and say: Gosh, I can't believe the
Republicans closed the government. That is when a reporter is actually
supposed to do something really radical. It is called ``report.'' The
person telling me he or she is upset at the government shutdown, why
did you vote 14 times to keep the government shut down?
Now, there are lots of aspects of this that are painful, but there is
one in particular that has impacted American families all over the
country, which is any family that is traveling--traveling for work,
traveling to visit a sick relative, traveling to go to a funeral in a
family, traveling to go on a family vacation. There are, right now,
over 50,000 TSA agents. Many of them are going to work. They are not
getting paid. They missed their paycheck.
There are, right now, more than 14,000 air traffic controllers. Many
of them are going to work. None of them are getting paid.
That means they are trying to figure out--their last paycheck didn't
come. They are trying to figure out: How do I pay my mortgage? How do I
pay my rent? How do I pay my food? How do I feed my kids? How do I take
care of medical bills?
You know what the answer from the Democrats is?
Every day gets better for us.
If you are hurting and not getting a paycheck, Senator Schumer's
answer--I do appreciate his doing the Mr. Burns tent with his hands. I
wish he had started off with ``excellent.'' But that is, in fact, his
quote:
Every day gets better for us.
On Wednesday, there were over 15,000 flight delays. On Wednesday,
there were over 600 canceled flights.
Delta Airlines has called on the Democrats: Vote to reopen the
government.
United Airlines has called on the Democrats: Vote to reopen the
government.
Southwest Airlines has called on the Democrats: Vote to reopen the
government.
American Airlines has called on the Democrats: Vote to reopen the
government.
The National Air Traffic Controllers Association has called on the
Democrats: Vote to reopen the government.
Yesterday, I had a conversation with the Administrator of the FAA. It
was chilling. As everyone knows, the FAA announced that it is putting
in place a mandatory 10-percent reduction in flights in the 40 largest
airports in America. What the Administrator of the FAA told me
yesterday on the phone was why, and here is what Administrator Bedford
said. He said: Last Friday, which was Halloween, half of the busiest 30
air traffic control facilities were short-staffed. That includes New
York, Austin, Newark, Phoenix, Washington, Nashville, Dallas, and
Denver.
I want you to listen to this next statistic.
Nearly 80 percent of the air traffic controllers in New York City
called out. They did not show up to work--nearly 80 percent. Senator
Schumer represents New York City. Nearly 80 percent of the controllers
called out on Halloween.
There were rampant delays. The FAA said the aggregate data, the whole
national air space system, looked OK. But then they deaggregated the
data. Looking at the 40 biggest airports, in particular, painted a very
different picture.
Here is what the Administrator of the FAA told me: Pilots filed more
than 500 voluntary safety reports about air traffic control problems
they were encountering--air traffic controllers that were fatigued,
that were tired, that were making mistakes.
And what is the Democrats' view? Well, there is an old line that a
gaff is when someone in Washington accidentally tells the truth. You
heard Chuck Schumer say:
[[Page S7992]]
Every day gets better for us.
Here is what one Democrat aide told CNN.
Another senior Democrat aide said as long as public perception is in
their favor, the party will not concede short of ``planes falling out
of the sky.''
That is out of the words of the Democrats themselves.
Let me tell you, as chairman of the Commerce Committee, part of our
responsibility is to oversee the FAA and to do everything possible to
ensure safety.
Turning to my Democrat colleagues, saying: This is not a joke.
First of all, the shutdown happened because Senator Schumer had to
demonstrate he was tough so he didn't get primaried by AOC in New York.
Then the next threshold was the No Kings rallies. They had to show
they were tough enough that, when radicals were marching in cities
across the country, they were as angry as the blue-haired, angry
radicals.
Then we had election day. They were going to keep everything shut
down until election day because it energized their base. And then
Democrats won elections in the very blue State of New Jersey, the very
blue State of Virginia, and the insanely blue city of New York City.
And, suddenly, Democrats said: Holy cow. Our really leftwing voters
like it when we shut the government down.
Are there any Democrats on that side of the aisle for whom
responsibility matters? Or is every one of them proud to say: We will
keep it shut down until planes fall out of the sky.
God forbid that comes to pass. Over 500 voluntary safety reports
about air traffic controllers. You have got air traffic controllers
driving Uber to pay their bills.
And here is the good news. We can resolve it right now. Senator
Johnson's bill, that we will vote on in just a few minutes, is very
simple. It says: Any Federal worker that goes to work will be paid. If
you have to work--if you are a soldier, if you are manning the wall,
keeping this country safe, you are being forced to work, you will be
paid. If you are a Border Patrol agent, if you are an FBI agent, if you
are a TSA agent, and you have to work, you will be paid.
And if you are an air traffic controller and your job is literally
keeping, Mr. President, your children and my children safe when they
get on an airplane, you will be paid.
And to those in the media who persist in repeating Democrat talking
points, understand this: The vote right now, if we vote yes, the air
traffic controllers will be paid. If we vote no, the air traffic
controllers will not be paid. So every Democrat who votes no is saying:
We will not pay the air traffic controllers.
What does that mean? There are roughly 45,000 commercial flights a
day in the United States. The 10-percent reduction that the FAA has put
in place will be roughly 5,000 flights a day that will be canceled.
Now, if you assume 100 passengers are on each flight--I am a lawyer,
not a mathematician. So I am going to make the math simple. So 100
passengers, 500 flights a day, that is more than 500,000 Americans who
will have their flight canceled each and every day the Schumer shutdown
continues--more than 500,000. And millions more will have their flights
delayed.
So it is a simple choice. It is a simple choice. Do you want to pay
the air traffic controllers or not?
But I have got to tell you, you had better be ready to talk to your
constituents who said: Why was my plane canceled when I was going to
see my sick mother?
Well, because I, Democrat, voted against paying air traffic
controllers. That is the answer.
You won't like getting that answer, but I tell you what, that is a
lot better answer than if you have to look in the eyes of someone whose
family was killed because the Democrats get what they are explicitly
asking for, which is planes falling from the sky.
The Schumer shutdown--you are a leftwing, partisan Democrat, you say:
Every day gets better for us.
I will tell you who ``us'' ain't. It ain't the American people.
So do the right thing because every one of you knows it is the right
thing. Vote yes. Pay the air traffic controllers, and end this
ridiculous shutdown.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. I want to thank Senator Cruz for his sobering remarks.
This Chamber should be full. It would be nice if our Democratic
colleagues were here to listen. I hope they are listening on their TVs
in their office.
God, I hope it literally doesn't take planes falling out of the sky.
Tonight, you can continue your shutdown, but you can vote to pay the
air traffic controllers so that is far less likely. If you vote no and,
God forbid, it actually happens, can you live with yourself?
I came to the floor 2 weeks ago in as nonpartisan a fashion as I
possibly could, begging Democrats to pay people that are forced to work
that are keeping our skies safe, that are keeping our Nation safe. Two
weeks later, we haven't done it.
This isn't partisan.
Search your conscience. Ask yourself, honest to God, if a plane,
another plane--a plane has fallen out of the sky. I am not saying it is
because of air traffic control, but you heard of 500 safety instances.
Our air traffic control system is already antiquated. Can you live with
yourself if another plane falls out of the sky and more people
needlessly die because we are short of air traffic controllers?
I know the Senator from Alaska has a couple more comments. Then we
will turn it over to the Senator from Florida.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. SULLIVAN. I want to thank Senator Johnson for coming to the floor
and making this very strong case. It is about safety, and it is about
the American way. There is nothing more American than paying people for
the work that they do. We all know that.
Again, Senator Johnson's bill is a simple bill. It is about paying
the Federal workers who are required to work to keep us safe. All these
jobs we are talking about are jobs that keep the American people safe.
Of course, the military is a big part of this bill. They epitomize
the Federal workers who are keeping us safe, and they epitomize
courage. So do many of our Federal workers as well. I hope my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle just show a little bit of the
courage that our military displays every day all over the world--just a
tiny bit of that courage.
Again, to my Democratic colleagues, we know you are getting a lot of
pressure from your leadership. Senator Cruz did a great job explaining
the origins of that. By the way, it has nothing to do with healthcare.
It has nothing to do with anything. It has everything to do with
appeasing the far left of the Democratic Party, which is rising. So we
get that you are under pressure.
But you all know that voting for this bill is the right thing to do.
I know my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. They are good
people. As Senator Johnson just said, have a little bit of conscience
and a little bit of courage, the kind of courage that our military
displays every day, and vote for the Shutdown Fairness Act right now.
Every one of you knows it is the right thing to do. I hope you do it.
Mr. JOHNSON. I thank the Senator from Alaska and yield to the Senator
from Florida.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, first thing I want to do is
thank all the Senators that are speaking tonight.
I can't imagine voting not to pay somebody. In my State, here is what
is happening. We have people that are not getting food. At church on
Sunday, the pastor asked if we would actually bring in a whole bunch of
food because they knew because of what the Democrats are doing, people
would not get their food stamps. So all the food banks, they need way
more food.
I was talking to a reporter today in Tampa. He said the line is
unbelievable at one of the food banks he was at in Tampa today. When I
think about these people that are not getting their food stamps, I
think of my mom. My mom was a mom of five kids. We lived in public
housing. I never met my dad. She had to go to markets and stores and
ask for food. She never got food stamps, but she had to go ask for
food.
Just think about what is going on around our country. There are
people right now worried about if they are going to feed a 2-year-old
little kid. Can you just imagine what that mom
[[Page S7993]]
is doing? I mean, I just can't imagine how anybody ever could vote to
shut down the Food Stamp Program to not feed kids.
Let's think about all these people not getting paid. I will give you
my experience. When I was 19 years old, I got married. I was E-2 in the
Navy, and I was making 332 or 334 bucks a month. That same person
today--my wife and I, she was making 75 bucks a week as a legal
secretary. So those people, if something like that--I didn't have $25
in the bank. They wouldn't have said: Oh, it is OK not to pay the rent.
Any costs we had, no one would have said: Oh, don't worry. You don't
have to pay it now.
That is what is going on with our military. They have mortgages.
Their kids have school costs. Their kids want to play sports. They
might have medical bills. And my Democratic colleagues are saying they
don't care. I mean, did they ever live that life? Have they ever lived
a life where they were worried, paycheck to paycheck, how they were
going to pay for food, for the rent, for the mortgage? Do you think all
the lenders are going to say: ``We know the government is shut down so
you don't have to pay your mortgage''?
I just think--I don't know how you could not have a heart to open up
government. We can have a policy disagreement every day, and we should.
But to not make sure people get their food stamps, not make sure people
are showing up today, as Senator Cruz said, trying to keep us safe in
the skies or our military that is trying to keep our freedoms, and the
Democrats don't care if they get paid or not--just think about it.
Since I got up here--this is my seventh year--I have had a bill that
says No Budget, No Pay. The Democrats have blocked it, including
yesterday, because they want to get paid, even though they are making
the decision that other people don't get a paycheck. They are not
willing to give up any of their pay because, as one of them said, he
has a mortgage; why would he be expected to give up his pay? Well, they
are doing it every day to all the Federal workers. I just can't imagine
doing that.
I say to my Democratic colleagues: Open the government. Pay our
workers. Make sure people get food, have food on the table. Don't ever,
ever, ever in your wildest dreams do that to people in our country. It
is wrong to do what you are doing.
Senator Schumer came out and said he had a proposal. It is a joke. It
is a complete joke. I will tell you why. Let's think about what they
want to do. For us to be able to make sure that we start paying people,
they get food stamps, they want to make sure insurance companies
continue to get rich. So their proposal doesn't do anything.
Right now, people don't lose their ObamaCare subsidies. It is people
that make over 400 percent--that is over probably $128,000, $130,000 a
year--get subsidies for their healthcare. You could be a millionaire,
you get a subsidy. He wants to make sure millionaires get a subsidy for
people possibly to get any food.
He knows Republicans are not going to continue to support a program
that pays healthcare for illegals; that is wrong. It has taxpayers
paying for abortion; that is wrong. It has taxpayers paying for trans
surgery; that is wrong. Making sure--there is supposedly about 4 to 5
million people who don't even know they have these subsidies because it
is going directly to an insurance company with no responsibility by a
consumer. All you have to do to sign somebody up is know their name,
their birth date, their address. Sign them up, and insurance companies
get all the money. Why would we ever support something like that?
I want to thank my colleagues. I can't imagine. It is heartless to
not make sure people have food. It is heartless to make sure people
don't have money if they are working. If the Democrats vote against
Senator Johnson's simple bill to pay people that are busting their butt
to keep our freedoms, to keep us safe, do all these things--I don't
know how you can go home and feel good about what you are doing.
I yield the floor.
Mr. JOHNSON. I want to thank the Senator from Florida.
I see the Senator from Michigan. I believe he wants to speak to this
bill. We will have the last word.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Let the Chair recognize the Senator from
Michigan. Then we can go back to the Senator from Nebraska.
The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Thank you, Mr. President.
Let me first say that there is something we all agree on, Democrats
and Republicans, here in this Chamber. We want Federal employees to be
paid. It is simply unacceptable that they have to work and come to work
every day, do their job, and not get paid. That is why we have to end
this shutdown as quickly as possible, and we are focused on doing that.
But that is not really exactly the total story behind the Johnson
bill. I have legislation to pay Federal employees. We could vote on
that now. I offered it in a UC request to my colleague from Wisconsin
that said we have a bill to pay all Federal employees right now, no
strings attached, no language that gives the President more power, more
flexibility to do things that we should not want him to do.
But my Republican colleagues don't want to have that bill.
Senator Van Hollen, another colleague of mine, has a bill to pay them
that has complete support of Democrats. Let's pay them. We have two
bills that if we put them on the floor right now, we could pass. If my
Republican friends want to do it, we could pass with 100 votes.
It is my bill, but any of you can sign it. I offer it to my colleague
from Wisconsin. It could be your bill. Do it. I don't need any
authorship of it. But it is a bill that does exactly what my colleagues
across the aisle are saying: just pay Federal employees. That is what
it would do, but it was rejected.
Why?
There is a little bit more in this bill. The Johnson bill before us
actually creates an unlimited and permanent slush fund for President
Trump to use. You are not going to get support here from us to transfer
what should be congressional power to be able to determine when we want
money spent, and it actually gets spent the way it should be.
It is not about passing a slush fund to the President. The President
could justify the transfer of this money elsewhere. This is something,
clearly, the administration wants because it will give the White House
more power. The bill adds Presidential authority by omitting--it omits
the regular safeguards that we include in normal funding bills to
ensure that money actually goes where Congress intends.
We have been seeing a lot of that. The President, basically, is just
thumbing his nose at Congress every day. Unfortunately, my Republican
colleagues say that is OK. If the President doesn't want to listen to
the Congress, that is OK with them.
We are a coequal branch of government. We are elected by the people
back home to represent our people as Senators. We are not here just to
rubberstamp a President.
A lot of my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle, I am
surprised at, because there are a lot of really great people that I
have a lot of respect for. And yet we see the President constantly run
over Congress, and it is crickets on the other side. There is no
pushback from my Republican colleagues, either here in the Senate or in
the House.
There is actually, in this bill, there is no explicit guarantee or
requirement to actually pay out this money. The administration could
sit on this appropriation. We are just a blank-check appropriation for
employees, but the administration could just sit on it for some
particular programs they don't like.
That is why, in a normal appropriations bill, we put in language to
prevent that. Granted, the President has been ignoring Congress, but at
least we put it in saying these are the rules.
Congress has the power of the purse. It is article I of the
Constitution, and yet a lot of my colleagues don't seem to take that to
heart.
Most approps bills, including the House's continuing resolution
proposal, actually include restrictions on how funding should be used.
The Johnson bill includes no restrictions--no restrictions.
We know that Trump has shown that he will abuse the budget process in
[[Page S7994]]
very novel ways. He has said that he will refuse to pay backpay to
workers even when Congress has explicitly set it. This bill, hopefully,
does address that. He has transferred money illegally to pay for his
political priorities, and he impounds money whenever he finds any kind
of wiggle room to do that.
In a sense, this bill is a Trojan horse. It says that we are going to
help Federal employees, but it is really continued power for the
President.
I have heard my colleagues say that Federal employees are being used
as pawns. That is what this bill does. It is using Federal employees as
pawns to give the OMB and the President a whole lot more power to use a
slush fund of money in any way he chooses.
We know OMB Director Russ Vought likes this bill. We know what Russ
Vought is about. In fact, I think there was a leaked speech that Russ
Vought had, and we mentioned this in the committee.
I appreciate my colleagues saying how wonderful Federal workers are,
but this is what the OMB Director said, who says this is a really good
bill, that the Johnson bill is a really good bill. He said that he
wants the bureaucrats to be affected by trauma.
When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want
to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the
villains. . . . We want to put them in trauma.
I hope my Republican colleagues called out Mr. Vought when he said
that because you care so much about our employees. I appreciate that.
But when folks in the administration say things like this, please say
that is wrong; that we really do care about you--not when you are
trying to put a bill forward that is going to give the President an
unlimited slush fund.
Let's be real. If you want to pay employees, which I hope you do, and
if you want to move forward, then take a bill that we know has the kind
of guardrails that our appropriations bills normally do to make sure
the money is actually spent as we intend in Congress, which is the way
it is supposed to work under article I of the Constitution.
I still believe in the Constitution. I still believe that we are a
coequal branch of government, that we are not simply a rubberstamp for
the President. If we don't change that way, that is how you lose the
checks and balances that our Founders cared so deeply about.
You know, as our Founders were debating the Constitution, they didn't
trust any of us. They knew; they were politicians too. They knew you
couldn't trust anybody. So they figured: We are going to have three
branches. We are going to have the judiciary check the Congress and the
President. The Congress will check the Presidential power.
Article I is the Congress. They thought the Congress was the most
important one. But they kind of assumed that the Congress would
actually exercise its power and check Presidential power, not just hand
more to him with a smile and then use a false pretext in order to give
that money. So that is what this bill is about.
You know, I have tried to work with Senator Johnson, and I will
always want to work with him. We have worked on a number of bills
together. We have language.
Again, of the bills we have that I have introduced, which is the
Military and Federal Employee Protection Act--a straight, clean bill.
They talk about union support. Every union has supported my
legislation. Every union has supported Senator Van Hollen's.
We are now getting unions. Unions are starting to read the fine print
on this bill right now. We have AFSCME that has now come out against
it. We have the SEIU that has just come out against it. We have the
AFL-CIO that has just come out against it. We have the IFPTE that is
just coming out. I guess our union friends are going to read the
language of this bill and are going to be like: Oh, we should have read
the fine print.
Like, yes, it is really important to read the fine print.
So we can't support this bill. We can support a bill that pays all of
our employees, but it has got to be one that has the types of
protections we have in every other appropriations bill we try to pass
out of this body.
So I am going to oppose this, but hopefully we can find a way to work
together. We have two bills ready to go that we could pass today, but
with this bill, we are going to object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I am not quite sure what planet the
Senator from Michigan comes from, but here on planet Earth, when you
read the actual language of the bill, none of these phantom provisions
exist in there. But I will go through those point for point before we
call for the final vote.
Right now, I think the Senator from Nebraska has a few points he
wants to make.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Mr. RICKETTS. Mr. President, earlier today, we heard about an offer
from the minority leader. It shows just how unserious he and the
Democrats are. That offer is full of horse hockey. It has things in it
that Republicans cannot accept, and he knows it.
My colleague from Michigan, the Democrat from Michigan, was just
talking about power because that is what it is about. He mentioned
power.
A number of other folks have talked about leverage. They need to have
this shutdown for leverage. A number of Democrats have said this.
But what I am here today to talk about are people; not leverage, not
power--people--air traffic controllers.
These are letters that I have received from air traffic controllers--
handwritten letters--that are talking about what they are going through
right now because of the minority leader's shutdown. Let me just read
you some of these.
My wife suffers from a chronic autoimmune disease that
without her medication would cripple her. Our monthly copay
for her specialty medication is $2,800 a month. We have less
than 2 weeks before her next round of medication is due. Our
situation is not sustainable even with pulling money from our
savings.
That was from one of our air traffic controllers in Nebraska.
Here is another one:
Each shutdown gets harder than the last. The mental stress
of the unknown gets harder each time. With my growing family
and medical bills for my family, it gets harder every time.
Both of my children have neurobiological disorders that
require constant monitoring and medical care. I take pride in
my job and the service we provide here at Omaha Approach
control. As a patriot and veteran, I take my Federal oath
. . . seriously. I will always continue to do my job [and]
keep the skies safe and expeditious.
Here is another one:
Myself and my family, to include my 3-year-old daughter,
are struggling to make ends meet. I now have to decide
between putting food on the table, paying my mortgage, paying
[my] car note, and many other things . . . I need to survive.
Are the Democrats deaf? Do they not hear from the people who are put
in these situations?
This is their shutdown. This is their Biden budget they are not
voting for. They voted for this 14 times over the last 19 months, and
now they won't because their far-left wing tells them not to. We have
patriots here who are suffering.
Why don't they show some of the courage that these people are and
stand up to the far-left wing and vote for this bill so at least the
people who are working can get paid? Is that so much to ask--that we
pay the people who are actually trying to keep the skies safe?
A Democrat staffer was earlier quoted as saying we are going to do
this ``until planes start falling from the sky.'' Well, folks, we
already heard that the FAA is going to cut back 10 percent this week on
the number of flights because of safety concerns.
But it is the people--the air traffic controllers and our law
enforcement and everybody else who is working in a Federal job who is
not getting paid--who are paying the price for the minority leader's
shutdown.
I yield to my colleague from Wisconsin.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I appreciate the comments from the
Senator from Nebraska.
I think the Senator from Utah would also like to speak to the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I want to commend my friend and colleague the
[[Page S7995]]
Senator from Wisconsin for his outstanding work on this bill, the
Shutdown Fairness Act.
Senator Johnson seized on something very important here. We are
surrounded by people in this very building and throughout the United
States and across the globe--people who are faithfully, valiantly
working for the U.S. Government. Now, some of them are staffers in this
very room who are not being paid. Some of them are the Capitol Police
officers we greeted on our way in who are keeping the Capitol Complex
safe. Some of these are soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, guardsmen
all over the world who are serving the U.S. Government at risk of life
and limb to keep us safe, and there are countless others in different
occupations who are not being paid.
Why? Well, they are not being paid because our friends on the other
side of the aisle are wanting to expand government yet again. They may
think that this is the right message, that this is a winning message.
It is not. It is not the right message. It is not a winning message
even for them because it highlights something. It highlights the danger
in putting too much trust, too many responsibilities, too many
functions in the U.S. Government--so much so that when a crisis like
this emerges, and the Schumer shutdown now drags well into its second
month, they see that what the American people have previously regarded
as a service performed by the government to them is now being held over
them to extort even more money out of them under the threat of planes
falling from the sky.
We are told by Democrat after Democrat on television interviews and
elsewhere: Well, it is OK. It is OK because this is leverage. This is
our leverage.
Well, what do they want to use that leverage for? They want to use it
so as to paper over the failures--the abject failures--of ObamaCare,
this law that has succeeded in doing exactly one thing: enriching large
health insurance companies while making all Americans poorer. Premiums
have skyrocketed. Coverage has diminished. Quality has completely
tanked as a result. They know this. They understand this. They see
premiums continuing to increase year after year after year.
So what do they want to do with it? Well, they want to spend a lot
more money moving forward--money at a time when the U.S. Government is
already $38 trillion in debt; money to hide, to conceal what it is that
ObamaCare is doing to the American people, when, in fact, what
ObamaCare has done is diminish the healthcare options that the American
people have.
It used to be that you could negotiate with a health insurance
company and buy a health insurance policy, but ObamaCare, in many ways,
made what was once health insurance illegal.
We need to make health insurance legal again. We need to allow a
willing customer to pay a willing insurer for a health insurance policy
rather than an ObamaCare health plan, which very often, through its
Byzantine labyrinth of Federal regulations, just adds to the cost and
adds to the profit, the bottom line of these huge healthcare companies.
So, yes, they want to take this to extort the American people and
their position of vulnerability at a time when we are told planes may
start falling from the sky; at a time when people's airplane tickets
are being rendered valueless because a lot of these flights are not
going to be able to be made. And all kinds of other problems are
happening while, at the same time, our Federal workforce is not being
paid.
These are not the right people to punish for the failures of
ObamaCare. Don't let them carry that burden. Don't make them do it.
They didn't do this to the American people; ObamaCare did.
Let's fix ObamaCare. Let's make it legal again to have health
insurance--actual health insurance, not that sort of bastardized form
of health insurance that has emerged from ObamaCare's endless
regulations that have resulted in diminished quality, lower coverage,
and endlessly higher premiums.
This shutdown has gone on long enough. This shutdown should come to
an end, and it should come to an end by the very generous offer made by
Republicans time and time and time again to continue at spending levels
that, until just months ago, were the Democrats' own spending levels.
It is not enough for them.
We have got to end the madness and end the shutdown.
At the very least, even if we are not to end the shutdown, we should
pass Senator Johnson's bill. We should do that tonight. We should do it
right now because regardless of what you think we ought to do with
ObamaCare or any other aspect of government, these workers who have now
gone for some time without a paycheck should not be required to make
this sacrifice, especially when you consider what it is for--hiding the
true cost of ObamaCare. That is shameful.
Again, I thank and I commend Senator Johnson and his team for putting
together this legislation. I am proud to support it, I wholeheartedly
endorse it, and I plead with my colleagues to vote for it.
Let's get these workers paid. They deserve nothing else.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Mr. JOHNSON. I want to thank the Senator from Utah for his remarks.
Mr. President, I don't want to spend time refuting all of the
misrepresentations from the Senator from Michigan in terms of what
phantom provisions he claims are in my bill. There is no slush fund. It
is completely silent on Presidential authority. I know some people want
to reduce authority, but that is a bill that won't be signed. If you
want to pay the Federal workers, if you want to stop punishing them for
our dysfunction, if you want to stop using them as pawns in this
political game, that is a demand you have to drop.
The money appropriated in this bill will go to pay workers. That also
is a false argument.
But if you are not quite satisfied with the language, which has been
out there--and we have been trying to work and get feedback for 2
weeks, and we have gotten excellent feedback from leadership, from
discussions on both sides of the aisle, from OMB, trying to perfect
this thing--the solution is get on the bill. Get on the bill and offer
an amendment. Keep talking to us. Don't close it down.
We heard from a number of our Republican colleagues. We heard from
the Senator from Michigan. Obviously, passions are running high. But
there is a great deal of frustration, certainly, on our side when the
other side simply won't take yes for an answer.
I came down here 2 weeks ago in as nonpartisan a stance as I possibly
could be because, as the Senator from Michigan stated, we all agree
that these people ought to be paid. So the way to do that is not to
offer a bill on unanimous consent that has no chance of being signed
into law; the way to do that is to vote to proceed tonight to this
bill.
If we could iron out our differences, we could yield back time and
get this thing passed that the Speaker of the House has already said he
would come back and pass. We are so close.
I realize there may be hard partisans. I know there are liberal
unions that have now come out against us. But the bulk of the public
sector unions are for it. They prefer my bill over anything else. They
may also support it because this is permanent. This ends using the
Federal workforce and, quite honestly, the American public as pawns in
these partisan games for all time. Again, the American Federation of
Government Employees, the Federal Managers Association, the Federal Law
Enforcement Officers Association, the National Air Traffic Controllers
Association--again, I hope our Democratic colleagues listened to
Senator Cruz's chilling and sobering remarks just a few minutes ago;
the International Association of Fire Fighters; and the Association of
Flight Attendants.
This bill has support because it makes so much sense. It is fair.
We had three Democrats join us 2 weeks ago. There are two other
Democrats who have voted for the House CR. That brings us up to a total
of 58. Now, we voted against this because we didn't have furloughed
workers. We have added furloughed workers. So hopefully those two will
join us.
I have talked to enough Democrat Senators trying to get their input,
trying to get this passed. I know there are Democrat Senators who want
to vote for this bill, who can vote for this bill.
So putting all partisanship aside, again, I want to appeal to your
better
[[Page S7996]]
angels. Search your conscience. Sign on to the bill. Vote for a bill
that ends using Federal workers and the American public as pawns.
The Senator from Maryland said last week: Let's not punish Federal
workers for our dysfunction.
I think my closing argument has to be to go back to what the Senator
from Texas was talking about--the air traffic controllers and that
situation. Five hundred safety issues were reported recently in our
skies.
Search your conscience. Can you imagine--I mean, honestly, think
about it. Imagine what the one Democrat staffer said: We are going to
cling to this until planes fall out of the sky.
Think about how you would feel if, God forbid, a plane--another
plane--fell out of the sky and people died. How could you live with
yourself?
Now, again, you can continue the shutdown. I mean, that is your
political choice. You can continue to vote against the very reasonable
House continuing resolution. But you can still vote to pay Federal
workers. You can vote to make sure that air traffic controllers get
back to their stations and keep our skies as safe as possible. You can
vote to dramatically reduce the chance that a plane will fall out of
the sky. We just need two more of you; two more of our colleagues on
the other side of the aisle who are working with, quite honestly, folks
on this side, trying to end the shutdown; just two of those whom I
spoke to that I thought would vote for this. I am begging you--two
more.
Let's get on this bill. Let's pay Federal workers. Let's make our
Nation safer. Let's do the fair thing. Let's do the right thing. Let's
vote to proceed to this bill and get it passed.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.
Withdrawal of Motion to Proceed
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I withdraw my motion to proceed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has that right.
The motion is withdrawn.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
____________________