[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 196 (Thursday, November 20, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8250-S8259]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page S8250]]

Trump appointees win again. Eight of the ten least partisan judges were 
nominated by President Trump.
  In short, President Trump has a history of nominating highly 
qualified jurists to the bench.
  Today, the Judiciary Committee voted for a few more out here for us 
to consider on the floor of the U.S. Senate. I am proud to say that 
under my chairmanship, the Judiciary Committee has and will continue to 
advance highly qualified nominees to serve the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip.


                         Operation Midway Blitz

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, you heard the speeches. We all did. Donald 
Trump, the President of the United States, speaking to cheering crowds 
at rallies, he would say, inevitably: Murderers, rapists, terrorists, 
the criminally insane, sexual predators that came into this country 
illegally, we are going to remove them.
  He made that promise over and over again. Well, in Chicago, IL, we 
have seen what those words have led to.
  For almost 3 months, Chicago, in my home State of Illinois, has been 
under attack by President Trump since he launched what he calls 
Operation Midway Blitz.
  During that time, chaos and terror have reigned supreme. This 
operation isn't just targeting the ``worst of the worst''--the rapists, 
the murderers, the terrorists, the criminally insane. That is what he 
promised. But American citizens--legal residents of the United States--
and immigrants who have built their lives and raised their families 
here and pose no threat to public safety have been the actual targets.
  A court forced the administration to come clean on this: Just how 
many of these dangerous, worst-of-the-worst criminals are you 
arresting, deporting in the process of Operation Midway Blitz?
  The administration finally released their numbers. Six hundred people 
have been arrested under Operation Midway Blitz: 600 terrorists, 
rapists, murderers, criminally insane--except that is not the truth at 
all.
  During Operation Midway Blitz, 16 people out of the 600 actually had 
a criminal history that poses a high risk to public safety--3 percent, 
less than 3 percent of all of those arrested. What about the rest?
  These violent raids by ICE agents aren't just targeting adults; they 
are targeting families. I want to tell you the story.
  Two weeks ago, Raphael Veraza and his 1-year-old daughter Arianna--
both citizens of the United States--were enjoying a shopping day at 
Sam's Club. The little girl is barely 1 year old. Who would have 
thought that a simple father-daughter trip to Sam's would turn into a 
trauma that these two people will never ever forget? But the Verazas 
became a target for ICE for obvious reasons: He was shopping while 
being Hispanic. Enough said.
  Listen to what happened to this dad and his daughter because of 
Operation Midway Blitz of this administration. Mr. Veraza and his 
family said they were in their car when they heard a helicopter and 
cars honking. With the uptick in raids in the Chicago area, Mr. Veraza 
knew those sounds signaled that ICE agents were nearby. To keep his 
family safe, he decided to leave.
  Unfortunately, before this American citizen and his 1-year-old 
daughter could drive away, a masked agent--masked agent--pointed a 
pepper spray gun through the family's open car window and fired the 
weapon at close range. The pepper spray hit Mr. Veraza in the face, and 
his daughter also breathed it in.
  Because of this violent, unprovoked action from ICE agents, both 
Arianna and Raphael were briefly hospitalized. He told reporters after 
the incidents happened:

       My daughter was trying to open her eyes . . . She was 
     struggling to breathe.

  Does this incident seem like a Federal immigration agent setting out 
to make America safer? Does this man look like a rapist, a murderer, a 
terrorist, criminally insane, worst of the worst? What was his crime? 
Being an American citizen shopping at a local Sam's Club? His only 
crime was he appeared to be Hispanic.
  Pepper-spraying a 1-year-old little girl and her father during a 
shopping trip is shameful and outrageous. If it happened to any of us 
on my side of the aisle or the other side of the aisle and you heard 
about this family, your heart would go out to them.
  This man was doing nothing wrong. Yet he was treated like a common 
criminal because he is Hispanic.
  President Trump is turning Federal immigration officers into his own 
secret, masked police force. I see it every day in the city of Chicago 
as reported. He is violating the rights and liberties guaranteed by the 
Constitution to all of us, including the right to due process and the 
rule of law.
  Let me be clear. The President and his administration's actions are 
not about politics, nor about public safety. It is time for all of us 
in Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike, to put politics aside, 
speak up, and condemn this growing threat to our democracy. If it 
happened in your hometown, you would be outraged, and you should be. It 
is happening in Chicago almost every day.


                               Healthcare

  Mr. President, on a separate topic, America is facing a healthcare 
crisis that is unnecessary, and it is happening under this President's 
watch. Congressional Republicans spent the summer slashing more than $1 
trillion from the Medicaid Program. This will threaten healthcare for 
11 million people and jeopardize rural hospitals all across America. 
Smalltown hospitals--many of them will not survive.
  Despite the President's promises, prescription drugs are still 
unaffordable, and Big Pharma continues to rip off American patients. 
And now, in just 6 short weeks, more than 20 million Americans will see 
their health insurance premiums double or even triple.
  Imagine, if you will, when you take a look at what you paid last 
month for health insurance, that it is going to double on January 1 or 
worse. Tens of millions of Americans are terrified to look at their 
premium notices because Republicans have refused to extend the enhanced 
premium tax credits that made insurance affordable. In red States and 
blue States, for families, small business owners, farmers, and 
Americans nearing retirement, the peace of mind that health coverage 
brings will soon be out of reach.
  With these tax credits set to expire, 4 million people will lose 
their insurance because their premiums will become unaffordable. They 
will be one sickness, one accident, one diagnosis away from absolute 
financial ruin or worse. Housing, utility, and grocery prices have gone 
through the roof already. Who can also afford to see their healthcare 
costs for their family double or triple? But President Trump and his 
billionaire buddies are out of touch. They don't have a clue what it is 
like to live paycheck to check and what the loss of health insurance 
means to a family.
  As U.S. Senators, we can change that. We have the power to prevent 
these dramatic premium increases and avoid a healthcare catastrophe, 
but to use that power requires both courage and compromise.
  As part of the agreement to reopen the government, which I voted for, 
the Republican leader promised to put a bill on the floor--one chosen 
by the Senate Democratic side--to extend the enhanced premium tax 
credits. So shortly after Thanksgiving, after we have enjoyed the 
holiday with our families, Senators will come back to Washington and 
make a fateful choice for American families across the Nation: Will we 
sit idly by while millions of Americans lose their healthcare coverage, 
or do we sit down, Republicans and Democrats, and solve this problem?
  Why were you sent here to the Senate? Each Senator has their own 
explanation. I believe I was sent here to make life better for the 
people who live in my State and this Nation.
  Can we find common ground? Can we reach an agreement? Can we do 
something that really makes a difference in the lives of our 
constituents? If we do it, they will be absolutely mystified that what 
they believe to be an incompetent Congress could rise to the occasion. 
The answer to this question is going to be closely watched by millions 
of Americans.
  With each monthly premium payment or skipped doctor's visit, patients 
will be reminded of what we here decided to do.

[[Page S8251]]

  Wouldn't it be amazing to end this year and start a new one by doing 
the right thing for these people who are victims of legislative 
decisions?
  I was on the floor of this Senate 15 years ago--it was one of the 
most important votes I cast, to create the Affordable Care Act. Do you 
remember what life was like before the Affordable Care Act? I can tell 
you a few highlights.
  If you had a preexisting condition or even a hint of such a 
condition, you either couldn't get insurance or it was limited in its 
coverage to a ridiculous level. You also had a situation where most 
health insurance policies never covered mental health or addiction.
  I remember what happened on the floor of the Senate when we debated 
this issue. Why wouldn't it be covered? Why wouldn't we take mental 
illness as an illness and not a curse and something that could be 
treatable?
  Well, two Senators stood up and argued to do that. One of them was 
Paul Wellstone--he used to sit right back there--from Minnesota. He was 
a character. I loved him. We all did. He was a college professor who 
took a beat-up, old schoolbus and got elected to the Senate from 
Minnesota.
  A member of his family had a mental illness, and Paul Wellstone 
argued that we ought to do everything we can to help them and, first 
and foremost, make sure basic health insurance policies must cover 
mental health and addiction.
  He had an unlikely ally who used to sit in that seat there to my 
right--Pete Domenici from New Mexico. He had been in the Senate for 
quite a few years, a Republican Senator, highly respected. He was one 
of the leaders in the Senate and had a child born with a mental 
illness.
  He teamed up with Wellstone. What an odd couple politically. They got 
it done, so that you couldn't buy a health insurance policy in this 
country that didn't cover mental illness and addiction.
  They didn't know at the time--none of us did--that we were going to 
face an opioid crisis and that addiction problems would not be confined 
to poor minorities but would touch many families who thought they were 
well beyond the reach of that scourge.
  That provision was guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. The 
insurance companies did not want to include it in their policies. We 
forced them to do it. Now to walk away from that kind of protection is 
unthinkable.
  There was also a provision which was basically practical. We said: If 
you have a family health insurance plan that covers your children, it 
will cover them until they reach the age of 26.
  Why would we want to extend to age 26? Because during that period of 
time, your son or daughter will be finishing college, looking for their 
first job, maybe struggling to make student loan payments and trying to 
get off on their own, and we would give them a helping hand by allowing 
them to stay on mom and dad's health insurance plan. It is very simple, 
it is very logical, and it works. Are we going to give that away as 
part of the war against the Affordable Care Act? I certainly hope not.
  We can make the Affordable Care Act better, that is for sure. There 
are things we can do to reduce the cost of healthcare in America. One 
of them is pretty obvious.
  Ever turn on the television recently and not see an ad by a 
pharmaceutical company? I doubt it. Almost every minute, night and day, 
they are running ads trying to entice Americans to ask for expensive 
prescription drugs. It is one of the main drivers in the cost of 
healthcare going up in America.
  How many countries allow the pharmaceutical companies to advertise on 
television like we do in the United States? Only one other country in 
the world allows that--New Zealand. New Zealand.
  Why do pharmaceutical companies want to do that? They want to entice 
you to ask your doctor to prescribe a drug that may help you. It has 
reached a point where Americans across the board cannot only pronounce 
but can spell Xarelto. We have heard it so often, over and over again. 
To ask a doctor for that drug is not uncommon because it has been 
suggested to you three times a day, every day, for months.

  The American Medical Association and others say this is wasteful. 
People should be prescribed drugs they actually need rather than those 
that just might help them in remote circumstances. Little things like 
that can make a difference.
  Senator Chuck Grassley and I introduced a bill to stop direct 
consumer advertising on television. It actually passed the Senate a 
couple years ago. Let's go back and make this part of the future of 
healthcare in America after--after--we have restored the tax credits 
that families desperately need immediate help on.
  There is no excuse. We are going to have a new year coming soon, just 
a few weeks away. Families look forward to it and the opportunity. Give 
them a better life for millions of Americans by giving them help with 
tax credits to pay for their health insurance premiums. That is the 
reality of where we are.
  I am committed to this cause because I know that it really makes a 
difference. As I said before on the floor, at one point in my life, as 
a young father with a little daughter who had a medical issue, I had no 
health insurance. I felt helpless. I don't want that feeling to be 
spread across America because of our lack of ability to reach a 
compromise. We can and we must. Rising premiums affect constituents in 
my State, and they affect those in Texas, South Dakota, Louisiana, 
Florida, Kansas, and Wyoming.
  I believe the basic elements of an agreement are achievable. If 
Republicans are serious about preventing catastrophic premium 
increases, let's get together and get it done as soon as we return from 
Thanksgiving. We don't need to hold healthcare hostage and add extreme 
issues on its conditions to passing. We shouldn't undermine a deal to 
meet political goals.
  Let's do something right for the families of America. They will be 
just amazed that we did, as they should be.
  Global issues, such as proposals by Senator Sanders of Vermont--
Medicare for All as an option to health insurance--are worth a debate. 
Proposals by Senator Cassidy of Louisiana to privatize health insurance 
are worth a debate, there is no question about it. Let us make that the 
second item on the agenda after--after--we provide tax credits to help 
families pay for these health insurance premiums.
  We can't upend the entire healthcare system in America by January 1 
of next year. Let's get the highest priority done right away before 
Christmas. We have an opportunity. We have a responsibility to help 
Americans afford their healthcare, and that starts with a bipartisan 
vote in the Senate.
  I hope my Republican colleagues will not waste this opportunity, nor 
should the Democrats waste it either. We need to make a real and 
positive difference for the people in this country who are counting on 
us.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. 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 Maryland.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 935

  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, on October 23, a genocidal militia 
called the Rapid Support Forces, also known as the RSF, entered the 
city of El Fasher in the Darfur region of Sudan.
  Countless reports describe how they murdered men and boys and raped 
women and girls. Credible reports indicated that RSF fighters entered a 
maternity hospital and slaughtered 460 people--doctors, nurses, 
patients, and their loved ones.
  They turned the city into a killing field, going house to house, 
rounding up people to torture and murder because of their ethnicity. 
RSF forces entered a shelter for displaced people near El Fasher 
University and raped at least 25 women at gunpoint.
  Over 100,000 survivors have fled the city, making it out, trying to 
take the roads. But the RSF has targeted those who try to escape.
  The massacre has been so brutal and so bloody we can see it from 
space. The Yale Humanitarian Research Lab has flagged satellite photos 
that appear to show incidents of mass killings, with dozens of unarmed 
people lying dead and sand stained with blood.

[[Page S8252]]

  In late October, the same Yale lab was told that more than 10,000 
people were killed in 3 days.
  Human rights groups also report that hundreds of unaccompanied 
children, some carrying babies, have fled El Fasher to other Sudanese 
towns, seeking to escape the violence.
  Sadly, we have seen this story before because the RSF have a horrible 
history and lineage. They are part of what is known as the Janjaweed 
militias, who committed genocide in Darfur 20 years ago, and they want 
to continue the Janjaweed's genocidal mission of eliminating other 
ethnic groups.
  I do want to salute the journalists and human rights analysts who are 
working to expose these terrible truths, but it is up to us as to what 
we do with that truth. And the truth is this could have been prevented. 
We had warning, and we could have done more to stop it. And we can 
still do more now to stop the ongoing genocide.
  El Fasher was under siege for 18 months. The civil war in Sudan has 
been raging for more than 2\1/2\ years. More than 150,000 people have 
died, and approximately 14 million have been displaced in Sudan, 
marking the largest and fastest displacement crisis in the world.
  Earlier this year, at the beginning of his administration, Donald 
Trump gutted USAID and suddenly cut off our humanitarian aid to Sudan. 
More than a thousand soup kitchens closed overnight. While others have 
stepped up, the vacuum left by AID's departure means that even more 
innocent people are dying.
  And even as we cut humanitarian aid for the victims of genocide, we 
have not effectively used our leverage and influence to end the war, 
because throughout this conflict, we, the United States, have continued 
to send weapons to the United Arab Emirates, the UAE, whom we know are 
arming the murderous RSF.
  Report after report from the United Nations, human rights 
organizations, and journalists have provided evidence that the UAE is 
doing this. In fact, in January of this year, the Biden administration 
confirmed to me directly that the UAE was providing material support to 
the RSF, even though the UAE had assured the United States that it 
wasn't and that it wouldn't.
  So this is not a question for debate, and, in fact, if the UAE is not 
supplying the RSF with weapons, then they should have no concerns about 
this legislation.
  And around the same time that I heard from the Biden administration 
about the UAE supplying the RSF, the U.S. Government concluded what is 
clear from plain sight, that the RSF and their allied militias are 
committing genocide in Darfur.
  According to the State Department's assessment, ``the RSF and allied 
militias have systematically murdered men and boys--even infants--on an 
ethnic basis, and deliberately targeted women and girls from certain 
ethnic groups for rape and other forms of brutal sexual violence. Those 
same militias have targeted fleeing civilians, murdering innocent 
people escaping conflict, and prevented remaining civilians from 
accessing lifesaving supplies.'' End of quote from the State Department 
of the United States.
  So we know this has been going on. We have known it for years. And 
the Trump administration has reiterated the finding by the Biden 
administration State Department that the RSF is engaged in genocide in 
Darfur.
  We are not helpless. We are not innocent bystanders in the face of 
these unspeakable crimes. We have leverage. We just need the political 
will to use it.
  And I should say, I recognize--we recognize--that the RSF is not the 
only party to this conflict in Sudan. The State Department has 
determined that the Sudanese Armed Forces, known as the SAF, have also 
committed atrocities throughout this war. And there are also other 
external actors fueling the war in Sudan, including countries like 
Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Russia, and others.
  I commend the U.S. mediators who have been trying to bring peace to 
the region, both in the previous administration and now. But at the 
same time, we have got to recognize, after 2\1/2\ years and after all 
the bloodshed and the ongoing genocide, that talk is not enough; that 
we have to use at least the leverage we have and use our influence more 
effectively when it comes to the UAE and its army of the RSF.
  I would gladly work with my colleagues across the aisle to say that 
the United States should not be supplying U.S. military assistance to 
any country that is fueling the ongoing war and genocide, but surely--
surely--we can agree that we should begin by not providing weapons to a 
country that is, in turn, fueling a genocide--what we have determined 
is a genocide in Darfur.
  And I should say that Secretary Rubio, during his confirmation 
hearing for Secretary of State, was asked about this very issue, and 
here is what he said: We need to ``raise the fact that they''--
referring to the UAE--``are openly supporting an entity that is 
carrying out a genocide.'' That was Secretary Rubio, nominee.
  But I asked the Secretary and I asked the President and I asked my 
colleagues: If we agree that there is a genocide going on and we agree 
that it is being committed by the RSF, shouldn't we agree that we 
should at least pause the transfer of weapons to the UAE, which is 
fueling the genocide in Darfur? And why haven't we done that?
  Well, Donald Trump visited the UAE over the summer. Instead of 
demanding accountability for their role in the genocide in Darfur, he 
gave away the crown jewels of American AI, and many of our most 
sophisticated chips were promised to the UAE. In return, a UAE-backed 
firm gave the Trump family's newly launched stablecoin business a $2 
billion boost.
  And it was just days before President Trump visited the UAE that the 
administration green-lit the sale of $1.4 billion of arms to the UAE.
  What about the genocide they were fueling in Darfur? Did he say 
anything about that? It doesn't seem that he raised those issues during 
his visit to the UAE. In fact, President Trump said just yesterday in a 
speech that Sudan was ``not on my charts'' until the Saudi Crown Prince 
brought it to his attention.
  Really? Really, President Trump? This has been going on for 2\1/2\ 
years. You have been sending military assistance to the UAE that, in 
turn, is fueling the RSF's murderous rage in Darfur, and it just wasn't 
on the President's charts until yesterday. What was on his charts was 
all the corrupt deals that were going down in the UAE.
  So here are the facts. The UAE is aiding and abetting a genocide in 
Darfur. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has been providing highly 
sophisticated U.S. technology to the UAE, removed many of the 
safeguards that have been in place to prevent that technology from 
falling into China's hands, and shipping them advanced technology and 
deadly weapons, while a UAE state-owned company invested $2 billion in 
the Trump family's crypto scheme.
  Now, earlier this year, in the summer, Senator Murphy and I, along 
with colleagues, filed a joint resolution of disapproval to try to stop 
those weapon sales to the UAE, sending a message--or trying to send a 
message--that the U.S. foreign policy could not be manipulated by 
corrupt bargains. Unfortunately, that effort failed.
  If we want to stop the ongoing horrors in Sudan, we need to begin by 
applying our leverage and stop the UAE from funneling weapons to the 
RSF. That is why I have been working for years during this conflict 
with Congresswoman Sara Jacobs. We introduced the bill. It is called 
the Stand Up for Sudan Act. It would prohibit the United States from 
selling weapons to the UAE until the President certifies that the UAE 
is not arming the RSF. So if the UAE is really not doing this, they 
shouldn't have to worry about it because President Trump won't make 
that certification.
  And I acknowledge that the UAE is an important partner to the United 
States. But that doesn't mean that even with partners, we shouldn't use 
our leverage to stop them from fueling a genocide.
  I remember many days when Senator Rubio took to the floor of this 
Senate, and he talked about having an American foreign policy based on 
values and principles, on human rights, on self-determination. That has 
all gone out the window in this administration. It seems like a quaint 
thing, but it doesn't have to be a quaint thing in this body, in this 
Senate, where Senators can stand up for our values and

[[Page S8253]]

can make sure we exercise our leverage to prevent the ongoing genocide 
in Darfur.
  I am going to close with a story about an orphan boy in Sudan. He 
told the Norwegian Refugee Council and the New York Times that ``his 
parents and siblings were killed . . . in a strike as they tried to 
flee El Fasher: On a broken foot, he wandered alone to the northern 
gates of the city until others who were fleeing put him on a truck''--a 
truck to another city.
  Then he told reporters:

       Now I'm here alone. At night I find places where people 
     gather and sleep on the ground near them.
       I hope someone helps me.

  That boy needs our help. Thousands of innocent people need our help, 
and for goodness' sake, we could take one small step to exercise just 
some of our influence to end the ongoing genocide in Darfur, and that 
is by adopting a resolution that Congresswoman Jacobs and I have put 
forward.
  So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Committee on Foreign 
Relations be discharged from further consideration of S. 935 and the 
Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill 
be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider 
be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Iowa.
  Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
  Mr. President, I object. The United Arab Emirates is a close partner 
with whom we have vital cooperation on regional security, 
counterterrorism, and Middle East stability.
  Five thousand American warfighters serve at Al Dhafra Air Base, and 
UAE has one of the largest U.S. Navy ports in the Middle East.
  The UAE has used American-supplied military equipment to protect U.S. 
personnel from Iran and its proxies. The world is seeing the damage 
Iran-backed chaos can have. And while this administration showed Iran 
what ``peace through strength'' truly means with Operation Midnight 
Hammer, we cannot forget that Iran's goal is still chaos. They still 
chant, ``Death to America.'' After all, it was not but 6 months ago 
that Iran launched hundreds of missiles and drones toward Israel and 
U.S. military personnel. And while their nuclear abilities have been 
cut off, Iran has again demonstrated reckless behavior to evade 
sanctions by illegally seizing a Marshal Islands-flagged oil tanker.
  Applying a blanket ban on the export of U.S. defense articles to the 
UAE leaves our partners in the region unequipped to deter any act of 
aggression and sends a message of weakness to our adversaries, like 
Iran and its terrorist proxies. Meanwhile, it poses an unnecessary risk 
to U.S. personnel, our personnel in the Middle East.
  Our allies in the region must have the weapons systems not only to 
defend themselves and our warfighters in the area but also to deter 
Iran's reckless destabilization efforts.
  My heart does break for what is going on in Sudan, and, thankfully, 
this is the era of the peace President. As the President said the other 
day, ``We will work with Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and 
other Middle Eastern partners to get these atrocities to end, while at 
the same time stabilizing Sudan.''
  Working with our partners is key to a safer world, which is why my 
colleagues must reject this legislation and pursue a smarter, more 
strategic, and unified approach to ending the crisis in Sudan.
  And for these reasons, I object to this legislation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I was listening carefully to my 
colleague and, of course, she raises the question: If the UAE is 
telling us the truth when they say that they are not sending any of 
their weapons to the RSF to help fuel the genocide in Sudan, why do my 
colleagues protest so loudly against this measure?
  It must mean that they don't believe the UAE when it is doing it 
because the pausing in the transfer and sale of U.S. weapons to the UAE 
in this legislation is predicated on a finding from the President that 
the UAE is, in fact, arming the RSF. So if their denials are true, then 
my colleagues should have nothing to worry about in terms of the impact 
of this legislation.
  And, in fact, if they are lying to the United States, that should 
cause concern.
  Now, I agree that the UAE is an important partner, and they have been 
an important partner in a variety of interests in the Middle East 
region, including countering Iran's malign influence there. But, 
colleagues, does that really mean that we should look the other way 
while they are supplying an entity that our own government has 
concluded is committing a genocide in Darfur?
  Surely, the UAE needs the United States for all sorts of things. They 
clearly want our AI technology, our semiconductor technology. In fact, 
as I described, they went to great lengths to essentially provide $2 
billion for the President's family crypto schemes in order to get that 
American technology.
  So this is not a situation where its either-or. We can continue a 
partnership with the UAE, which, again, says that they are not 
supplying the murderous RSF with weapons or we can choose just to look 
the other way.
  And I will just close again with this. I remember Secretary Rubio--
and I hear so many of my colleagues take to the Senate floor--calling 
out human right abuses around the world.
  It is always convenient to call out human rights abuses by our 
adversaries. We all talk about the awful things China does when it 
comes to the Uighurs. We talk about what Russia is doing in Ukraine and 
other places. But for some reason, we cannot find it in ourselves to 
say to a partner that we value our relationship with the UAE, but we 
are not going to stand by and supply you with weapons while you 
continue to provide weapons that are fueling a genocide in Darfur.
  What happened to any semblance of a values-based American foreign 
policy? We can pursue our interests, and we can pursue our values. We 
don't always do it perfectly. But for goodness' sake, Senator Rubio 
talked about the importance of human rights; Secretary Rubio, 
apparently, has thrown that out the window along with the President of 
the United States.
  I am very disappointed that our colleagues cannot join together in a 
bipartisan manner to just use a little American influence to try to 
stop a genocide in Darfur.
  I yield the floor.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hagerty). The Democratic leader is 
recognized.


                           Political Violence

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, earlier today, Donald Trump shared a post 
on Truth Social calling for Democratic Members of Congress to be 
hanged. He also posted a message that said:

       SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!

  Let's be crystal clear. The President of the United States is calling 
for the execution of elected officials. This is an outright threat, and 
it is deadly serious. We have already seen what happens when Donald 
Trump tells his followers that his political opponents are enemies of 
the state. Every time Donald Trump posts things like this, he makes 
political violence more likely.
  None of us should tolerate this kind of behavior. We all remember 
what January 6 was like. We lived through January 6. We have lived 
through the assassinations and attempted assassinations this year. We 
have Members whose families had to flee their homes.
  When Donald Trump uses the language of execution and treason, some of 
his supporters may very well listen. He is lighting a match in a 
country soaked with political gasoline.
  Every Senator, every Representative, every American--regardless of 
party--should condemn this immediately and without qualification, 
because if we don't draw a line here, there is no line left to draw.
  Who would have thought the President of the United States would be 
saying his opponents should be hanged? It is outrageous. No President 
has ever stooped as low as Donald Trump--none. He has made political 
violence a feature of his politics, and if we don't draw a line here, 
there is no line left to draw.
  And, today, he crossed yet another line that no democracy can afford 
to

[[Page S8254]]

tolerate. He must be condemned forcibly, loudly, and without excuses 
before someone takes his words as permission to do the unthinkable. 
Anything less enables the flames of hatred to grow and spread.


                             Affordability

  Mr. President, on affordability, in less than a year, Donald Trump 
has gone from promising to bring costs down ``on day one,'' as he said, 
to claiming that the word ``affordable'' is some kind of ``new word'' 
and even a ``con job.'' That is right. Donald Trump doesn't even want 
to see the word ``affordable'' on his teleprompter because it will send 
him into a tailspin.
  Poor guy, he can't reduce prices. He doesn't care about prices, but 
he doesn't want to see the word because it will send him into a 
tailspin. If there was ever ostrich-like behavior, that was it.
  Here is what he said yesterday at the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum:

       That's the new word they use, ``affordability''. . . . We 
     are bringing prices down, but they came up with a new word: 
     ``affordability.''

  What the heck is Donald Trump talking about? Does he think 
``affordable'' is some kind of new made-up fancy word? Doesn't he 
realize that working and middle-class Americans talk about 
affordability all the time: I can't afford this; I can't afford that.
  Is he trying to hide the problem by denying the word?
  Does he think that rising grocery prices, rising rent, rising 
healthcare are all some kind of lie invented by Democrats?
  Does he think, if the word is abolished, that people will then 
automatically, magically, be able to afford all the things that they 
can't afford anymore?
  When was the last time Donald Trump actually spoke to someone earning 
a middle-class income or someone who earned minimum wage?
  If Donald Trump actually spent time talking to real people around the 
country, instead of bragging about ballrooms and jetting around the 
world in luxury, he would realize there is nothing made up about the 
affordability crisis.

  These kinds of comments from Donald Trump give the game away. He has 
absolutely no conception of what everyday Americans are going through 
right now. He is on another planet.
  It has gotten so bad that he doesn't even want to listen to people 
talk about rising costs.
  Here is what he said just a few days after the recent election:

       I don't want to hear about the affordability.

  Well, he is going to hear about affordability from the American 
people, above all, because they can't afford a whole lot of stuff.
  And when Donald Trump wants to know why his popularity is sinking, it 
is because of things like this.
  The No. 1 crisis that the average American feels when they sit down 
and try to figure out how to pay bills is they can't afford them, and 
Donald Trump says he doesn't want to hear about affordability.
  Do you hear that, America? Donald Trump doesn't even want to hear 
your worries about your high rent or high grocery costs. Don't even 
mention that they are ``affordable'' because that word sends him into a 
rage.
  It is unbelievable. This President--unbelievable--he thinks that by 
saying you abolish a word, you abolish the problem.
  And the magnitude of this problem is so large. Ask America, Trump: Is 
your healthcare too expensive?
  They will say: Yes.
  Are your groceries too expensive?
  They will say: Yes.
  Can you afford your healthcare?
  They will say: No.
  Can you afford your groceries? Can you afford the cost of 
electricity? Can you afford to buy a new car?
  They will say: No.
  And he doesn't want to hear about it.
  He says extending the ACA premium tax credits, which would save 
people thousands a month, is nothing but a waste of time. This 
President is so out of touch with Americans, and, every day, more and 
more Americans are realizing how out of touch he is when he says things 
like this.


                               Healthcare

  Mr. President, let me talk now about HSAs and the healthcare debate.
  After Democrats pushed Republicans for months to fix ACA premiums, 
Americans are now about to fall off a healthcare cliff, and Donald 
Trump has no plans to fix it whatsoever.
  Maybe he thinks healthcare is affordable for people. It isn't for 
most.
  If Donald Trump were smart, he would have worked with Democrats at 
the drop of a hat to extend the ACA tax credits for at least another 
year. We offered him that. But, instead, he is telling Republicans to 
push half-baked ideas like health savings accounts and direct checks.
  Let me say this very plainly. Donald Trump's Republican ideas about 
HSAs are nonstarters for Democrats because they are completely flawed 
and woefully insufficient for our Nation's healthcare problems. If 
Republicans push this flawed policy, they will go nowhere in the 
Senate.
  First, neither HSAs nor a lump-sum check will do anything to help 
people afford insurance. If your insurance plan goes from $1,000 a 
month to $4,000, a one-time check isn't going to go very far. For 
cancer patients who pay thousands of dollars for lifesaving medications 
in one month, their HSAs will do nothing--nothing--to help them afford 
care.
  Second, implementing changes this complex would be practically 
impossible before the end of the year. People are signing up for health 
insurance right now, and health savings accounts cannot be used to pay 
for premiums, period.
  Third, Republicans talk about ``waste, fraud, and abuse'' and have 
railed on insurance companies. But the Republican policies will do 
nothing--absolutely nothing--about either problem. So either 
Republicans don't understand how healthcare works or their complaints 
about fraud and abusive insurance companies are cynical and 
disingenuous.
  That is why Democrats insist that one of the best things we can do 
right now is extend the ACA premium tax credits, because when people 
talk about costs, healthcare is near the top of the list of their 
worries, if not at the very top.
  It is shameful that Donald Trump and Republicans have given up 
entirely on solving the healthcare premium crisis. When people's 
monthly payments spike next year, they will know it was Republicans 
that made it happen. And more than that, they will know Democrats are 
the ones who are fighting on their behalf to lower costs and rebuild 
the sunny American optimism our country desperately needs.


                             Anti-Semitism

  Finally, on anti-Semitism, anti-Semitism in America has reached a 
dangerous tipping point. Jewish Americans are facing threats, 
harassment, and violence at levels we have not seen in generations.
  As I have said many times in this Chamber, anti-Semitism is the 
canary in the coal mine. Where there is anti-Semitism, there lurks 
White supremacy and other pernicious forms of hate.
  Three days ago, the President of the United States declined to 
condemn Nick Fuentes' hateful views and defended Tucker Carlson's 
decision to give Fuentes a platform. The President was asked about his 
thoughts on the interview. He declined to condemn Nick Fuentes.
  That is disgusting. For Donald Trump to excuse and protect the spread 
of Nick Fuentes' ideology confirms what many of us have long said: 
White supremacy and anti-Semitism are taking deep roots, unfortunately, 
within the Republican Party.
  Just as we saw from the leaked texts of young Republicans, just as we 
saw from text messages of administration officials, the Nick Fuentes 
saga on the right reveals that anti-Semitism and White supremacy have 
been growing with disturbing currency within the rightwing and within 
the rightwing of the Republican Party.
  But I know this is not true of everyone on the Republican side, 
especially not for many Republicans in this Chamber. Therefore, I will 
soon lead a resolution, here in the Senate, rejecting Nick Fuentes and 
his White supremacist views and condemning Carlson's platform of hate 
and condemning White supremacy whenever and wherever it occurs.
  In the coming days, I will work to grow support for my resolution so 
the Senate can take a clear stand against hatred and anti-Semitism. I 
hope my

[[Page S8255]]

Republican colleagues will join me in this effort and cosponsor this 
resolution.
  Calling out anti-Semitism should not be a partisan issue. In fact, 
when we refuse to condemn anti-Semitism, when we stay silent and fail 
to reject anti-Semitic rhetoric, when we normalize hateful figures 
spewing disgusting anti-Semitism, that is when anti-Semitism spreads 
throughout society like a poisonous wildfire.
  Americans don't want to see that happen. So my resolution will give 
every Senator--every single Senator--a chance to make an important 
stand against hatred. The country must see us unite and fight this 
awful form of bigotry.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                         Intelligence Community

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, 2 months ago, I came to this floor to warn 
about the growing politicization of our intelligence community. I laid 
out in detail how this administration, led by Director of National 
Intelligence Gabbard, was dismantling the independence, integrity, and 
credibility of the very institutions we rely on to keep Americans safe.
  I had hoped that by sounding that alarm early, the administration 
might reconsider its actions or at the very least slow its march toward 
turning our intelligence Agencies into instruments of political 
loyalty, but, instead, the situation has only grown more dangerous.
  I want to say at the outset that this will not be the last time I 
come to the floor on this issue as we continue to see the unraveling of 
that independence. I intend to continue making these speeches for as 
long as it takes because the stakes for our national security are too 
high to let this pattern go unchallenged.
  Since my remarks in September, we have seen not restraint but an 
escalation--an escalation--of political retaliation, of the hollowing 
out of expertise, and of the outright manipulation of intelligence. We 
are watching in real time an administration strip away the guardrails 
that have protected this country for generations.
  I have had the distinct privilege of representing the people of 
Virginia in this body since 2009. In nearly 17 years, one of the most 
consequential responsibilities I have held has been that of serving on 
the Senate Intelligence Committee, first as a junior member and then, 
for the last 8 years, as chairman and vice chairman.
  I always tell our new members that getting a seat on the committee is 
a double-edged sword. On the one hand, you get access to things that no 
other Senators hear, and you see capabilities that would astonish even 
the most seasoned spy novel reader. But the other part of the edge is 
you get to see the full scope of threats facing the United States: 
daily reports about terrorist plots, cyber attacks, hostile foreign 
services targeting our citizens and institutions. Once you have seen 
that picture clearly, you don't sleep quite as soundly at night.
  It is precisely because these threats are real, persistent, and in 
many cases growing that I am so deeply concerned about the Trump 
administration's reckless actions--actions that have left our country 
more vulnerable than at any point in recent memory.
  Just last month, FBI Director Kash Patel testified before the Senate 
Judiciary Committee that the FBI has experienced a 300-percent increase 
in terrorist cases opened this year alone, on top of a 30-percent 
increase in foreign espionage cases.
  At the Senate's Intelligence Committee's annual threat assessment 
hearing, Director Gabbard reiterated that foreign terrorists remain 
intent on striking the United States and our citizens, that a large 
number of cyber and intelligence actors continue to target our critical 
infrastructure, and that these adversaries possess weapons capable of 
hitting U.S. territory and disabling vital U.S. systems.
  Indeed, in an interview earlier this month, Director Gabbard 
repeated:

       Terrorism continues to pose the greatest both short- and 
     long-term threat to the American people.

  Whatever one thinks of the individuals delivering these messages, the 
assessments themselves leave no ambiguity of the dangers confronting 
the United States. Yet, in spite of these clear and present threats, 
the Trump administration has chosen a course of action that weakens our 
defenses and leaves Americans more vulnerable to the very risks its own 
officials have publicly described.
  Since Inauguration Day, the President and his handpicked FBI 
Director--again, Kash Patel--have forced out thousands of experienced 
agents for reasons that appear more political than professional--for 
example, for refusing to acknowledge who actually won the 2020 election 
or FBI agents being thrown out for prosecuting the violent criminals 
who attacked the Capitol Police on January 6 or being pushed out for 
simply being friendly with someone critical of the President.
  Alarming court filings suggest that even Director Patel has privately 
acknowledged that many of these actions may be illegal yet justified 
them by saying that his keeping his position depended on carrying them 
out.
  The list of those purged reads like a who's who of the Bureau's most 
decorated public servants.
  Those agents forced out include former Acting Director of the FBI 
Brian Driscoll, who rose through the FBI's ranks in some of its most 
elite units, including the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team. In 2015, he 
supported U.S. Special Operations in rescuing an American humanitarian 
aid worker, Kayla Mueller, from ISIS. Special Agent Driscoll would 
later rise to the head of the FBI's Critical Incident Response Group--
the FBI's elite team in charge of dealing with terrorists, child 
abductors, bomb threats, and hostage situations.
  For his service, Agent Driscoll was awarded the FBI's Medal of Valor 
and Shield of Bravery, only to have Director Patel fire him because he 
would not purge agents whom the President deemed politically disloyal.
  Other purged individuals include Bobby Wells, who joined the FBI 
shortly after 9/11 and spent decades in counterterrorism. He eventually 
became the head of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, leading efforts 
against al-Qaida, ISIS, and other global networks. Notably, he helped 
bring to justice the mastermind of the Kabul International Airport 
bombing that killed 13 American servicemembers--an accomplishment 
publicly touted by the President. Yet the President fired him shortly 
thereafter.
  This list includes Michael Nordwall, who was the head of the FBI's 
Criminal, Cyber, Response and Services Branch, who led efforts to 
combat ransomware attacks, online fraud, and sophisticated cyber 
intrusions targeting critical U.S. infrastructure.
  Further, the list includes Ryan Young, who was the head of the FBI's 
Intelligence Division, overseeing the collection and analysis of all 
intelligence on domestic and foreign threats, trying to make sure that 
field offices had the situational awareness to prevent attacks.
  Other senior agents were forced out from dozens of FBI field offices 
nationwide--from Washington to Miami, to New Orleans, to Las Vegas and 
Seattle. Among those heads of FBI field offices forced out was Special 
Agent Jacqueline Maguire, who was the lead investigator into the five 
hijackers of American Airlines Flight 77, whose expertise was critical 
to understanding 9/11 and preventing further attacks.
  Most recently being pushed out includes Steven Palmer, a 27-year 
veteran of the FBI and the third head of the FBI's elite Critical 
Incident Response Group.
  In just 3 months--3 months--three separate heads were fired.
  As head of the Critical Incident Response Group, Mr. Palmer led teams 
tasked with responding to terrorist attacks, mass shootings, hostage 
crises, high-risk national security incidents--work that required 
split-second decision making under extraordinary pressure. He was fired 
not for failing his duties, not for misconduct, and not for political 
disagreements about law enforcement; he was fired because the American 
people learned that Director

[[Page S8256]]

Patel had been using the FBI's $60 million jet at $20,000 a flight to 
go on dates with his girlfriend.
  To make matters worse, recent reporting indicates that Patel now has 
also pulled agents off of an FBI SWAT team to provide a security detail 
for that very same girlfriend--an unprecedented use of some of our 
Nation's most elite units, ordinarily assigned to deal with terrorism, 
hostage situations, or mass shootings; thousands of FBI agents all 
forced out not because they failed to do their job but because they 
refused to bend the knee to partisan politics.
  As if these individuals were not enough, the truth is, the FBI, in 
recent months, has reassigned between 25 and 45 percent of its agents 
who handle counterterrorism, cyber, espionage, child sexual abuse, and 
other critical missions. What have they been reassigned to? Well, they 
have been reassigned to immigration, while our office hears regularly 
that they want to get back to the cases that they had been working on 
and instead are stuck on a detail where they do nothing.
  As a matter of fact, data reveals a 33-percent decrease in hours 
spent on child exploitation cases this year compared to previous years.
  Firing agents who investigate terrorists, foreign spies, cyber 
hackers, and child predators doesn't make America safer, especially 
when the President's own intelligence officials warn publicly and 
repeatedly of the many threats facing our Nation.
  Just this summer, the ODNI issued a bulletin warning of al-Qaida and 
ISIS plots targeting the homeland. And just last month, the FBI 
disrupted ISIS terrorist plots in Michigan and New Jersey that might 
have been aimed at Halloween. I shudder to think what would have 
happened if the FBI had missed those plots, if the terrorists had 
semiautomatic rifles that suddenly let loose on kids trick-or-treating.
  The FBI Agents Association, which represents over 90 percent of all 
active FBI agents, issued a sobering warning earlier this month that 
Director Patel ``disregarded the law and launched a campaign of erratic 
and arbitrary retribution'' and that his actions ``make the American 
public less safe.''
  This is the FBI Agents Association. They don't make these kinds of 
comments. How far do you have to be pushed to basically say the current 
Director of the FBI is making America less safe?
  But this political purge is not simply limited to the FBI. Since 
April, the National Security Agency--the Agency in charge of spying on 
communications of our adversaries--has been without a permanent 
Director or Deputy Director after President Trump fired Gen. Tim Haugh 
and his Deputy, Wendy Noble, at the behest of conspiracy theorist Laura 
Loomer; the same for the Defense Intelligence Agency, whose Director, 
Gen. Jeff Kruse, was fired after the DIA provided a fact-based 
assessment that contradicted the President's false televised claims 
that the United States had ``obliterated''--President Trump's words 
``obliterated''--Iran's nuclear program.
  The pattern of reckless firings has extended to nearly every corner 
of our national security enterprise: Hundreds of workers who were 
responsible for maintaining our country's nuclear weapons, fired; staff 
managing foreign assistance programs ranging from detention of ISIS 
terrorists in Syria to air defenses in Ukraine, fired; hundreds of 
analysts monitoring China and Russia, fired, including a 29-year 
veteran of the CIA who supported President Trump's Alaska summit with 
President Putin whose undercover identity was publicly and 
incompetently disclosed by DNI Tulsi Gabbard; more than one-third of 
CISA--the Agency established for the absolutely explicit purpose of 
protecting our critical infrastructure, water, power, and our elections 
to prevent those entities from being attacked by cyber tools--a third 
of that Agency, fired, even as major cyber attacks hit State and local 
governments in at least 44 States, including a massive ransomware 
attack on Nevada's online government systems in August, a ransomware 
attack in July on local government networks in St. Paul, MN, and a 
cyber attack on city systems in Mission, TX, in February--folks are 
slow to respond--a third of CISA, it is a relatively new Agency but has 
been making progress, all fired.
  The irony is stark: Despite persistent efforts by China, Russia, 
Iran, and other adversaries, the 2020 Presidential election was one of 
the most secure in history, thanks in large part due to steps taken 
during the Trump administration's first term to safeguard our critical 
infrastructure. Yet now, much of that hard-won protection has been 
dismantled, leaving Americans more vulnerable than ever.
  Cyber Command--which under GEN Paul Nakasone disrupted the Russian 
troll farms in 2017--lacks a permanent Commander. The Foreign Influence 
Task Force, stood up by President Trump in his first term to share 
information with State and local partners about foreign interference in 
our elections, that task force has been completely disbanded. All the 
while, the administration's own intelligence reporting warns--and, 
again, I am going to go back to a quote:

       Beijing will continue to expand its coercive and subversive 
     malign influence activities to weaken the United States . . . 
     is likely to feel emboldened to use malign influence more 
     regularly in the coming years, particularly as it fields AI 
     to improve its capabilities.

  That is what China is saying.
  Russia:

       Moscow's malign influence activities will continue for the 
     foreseeable future and will almost certainly increase in 
     sophistication and volume.
       Iran's growing expertise and willingness to conduct 
     aggressive cyber operations make it a major threat to the 
     security of U.S. networks and data.

  The administration's own comments say these are threats we can't 
avoid. Yet you dismantle the foreign malign influence center, you fire 
a third of the people who are supposed to be responding to cyber 
attacks, you take FBI agents who were working on cyber and stick them 
on the immigration detail. This does not make America safer.
  The truth is, the pattern is unmistakable: Political loyalty is now 
valued over competence, and the very institutions created to protect 
Americans are being dismantled right before our eyes.
  We can no longer pretend that politics and national security are 
separate. Every day that we allow this purge to continue is a day we 
leave Americans more exposed in their homes, on the streets, and 
online.
  The next attack will not wait for Congress to act. The next threat 
will not ask permission. And when it comes, the consequences will not 
be measured in polling numbers or election results; they will be 
measured in lives lost, infrastructure damaged, and national security 
compromised.
  This is the moment to stand up to defend our intelligence Agencies; 
to protect those agents; to allow the intelligence community to speak 
truth to power, even when the power doesn't want to hear it; and, 
frankly, at the end of the day, to safeguard the American people. If we 
fail that and don't stand up for these men and women who have put their 
lives on the line, if we don't stand up for keeping classified 
information classified, if we don't stand up and say to those who 
undermine our infrastructure by cyber attacks, if we don't stand up for 
those terrorists planning, we will bear the cost later--a cost that 
could be catastrophic.
  I think we are a better country than this. These men and women 
deserve our support, and, unfortunately so far, they have not gotten 
that support. We can and must do better.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.


                               Healthcare

  Mr. HUSTED. Mr. President, as I said on this floor many times, the 
government shutdown had many victims: air traffic controllers, TSA 
agents, and many other public servants, and, of course, the American 
people themselves who were the most affected by this. Thankfully, the 
bill passed in this Chamber last week put that chaos behind us.
  But that wasn't all that it did. In some small way, the difficult 
time proved that we can work together to do tangible things to reduce 
healthcare costs in this country. As a matter of fact, I worked on a 
bipartisan basis to introduce the SMART OTC Act, which became law as 
part of the government reopening. It was a good part of that reopening.
  The bill aims to make lowering the cost of over-the-counter drugs 
more accessible to patients by eliminating the

[[Page S8257]]

redtape at the FDA. We know that when you can take a prescription drug 
and make it an over-the-counter drug, prices go down. In fact, on 
average, in cases where we have been able to do this, it reduces prices 
from 30 to 95 percent. It was an important part of that provision and 
an example of a way, on a bipartisan basis, we can get some of these 
kinds of things done. It is an example of how we can attack 
affordability with commonsense reforms without adding the debt burden 
to future generations. I am proud to have worked on that bill to make 
things better for Ohioans and the entire country.
  But the shutdown is finally over. I want to thank my Republican 
colleagues and the Democrats who joined us to help end it. 
Unfortunately, 40 others chose a different path, and we wasted 43 days 
from focusing on issues like growing the economy and making things more 
affordable.
  I have been in the Senate less than a year. I wasn't here when 
Congress passed ObamaCare or the Biden COVID subsidies that have been 
used to prop up the ACA exchanges. But I want to be part of the 
solution. I didn't create the problem, but I am here to be part of the 
solution. We owe it to the American people to honestly assess the 
problem before we cast a vote on it.
  Healthcare costs are rising. The ACA exchange system is too expensive 
and too complicated, and it has failed to reduce the underlying cost of 
healthcare. It has failed. The truth is, healthcare inflation is the 
No. 1 driver of inflation in the 21st century.
  Just look at this chart. It shows at the beginning of the century, 
all inflation and healthcare inflation were about the same. But if you 
look here around the time that ObamaCare was enacted and went into law, 
you see the disparity growing. Medical care, medical costs, healthcare 
costs began to spike and rise.
  It was not a solution for healthcare costs and making healthcare more 
affordable. As a matter of fact, the ACA made care less affordable. And 
this problem will not be solved by pouring more taxpayer dollars into 
the coffers of big insurance companies, which has been the path of how 
ObamaCare has been operated since its enactment.
  Former Education Secretary Bill Bennett once said of higher education 
financing:

       Higher education is not underfunded. It is under-
     accountable and under-productive.

  That is the same that we can now say of the ``Unaffordable Care 
Act.''
  But I believe there is a way forward on the issue that can protect 
families from punishing premium costs and cut costs driving inflation, 
and we can do so without putting another $350 billion on the national 
credit card for a program we know is dysfunctional.
  If we want to lower the cost of care, we must deliver reforms that 
put patients in charge, and I believe we can earn bipartisan support 
with a straightforward and responsible framework focused on what I call 
the ``fraud, freeze, and fix'' approach--the ``fraud, freeze, and fix'' 
approach.
  You do this paired with a short extension of the premium subsidies, 
and we can address the shortcomings of the ACA, lower healthcare costs, 
and provide the American people with something we can actually 
implement.
  Now, I want to explain what I mean by fraud, freeze, and fix.
  First of all, let's deal with fraud. The COVID-era zero-premium 
subsidies that were created created a cottage industry for abuse. Much 
of the explosion of fraudulent enrollees is attributable to zero-dollar 
premiums, which were created in 2021. These plans are fully subsidized 
by the taxpayers and have created incentives to enroll individuals 
without their knowledge.
  This is how it works. Brokers are enrolling people who never asked 
for the coverage, one. Two, insurance companies get paid. Three, 
brokers get a commission. And, four, taxpayers get the bill.
  There have been criminal convictions in many States across this 
country where this fraud is actually being perpetrated, and it needs to 
be fixed. Hard-working taxpayers have footed the bill for almost $35 
billion to insurers who enrolled people who did not use the plan a 
single time. And we know why--because not all, but some of those 
people, were enrolled fraudulently.
  Requiring everyone receiving a premium tax credit to pay a small 
amount--at least a small amount--toward their health insurance will 
help realign the incentives and reduce fraud. It won't be allowable if 
we construct the program like that. It will make certain that Americans 
cannot be enrolled in plans without their knowledge or consent. It is 
an important step if we want to move forward in helping to advance a 
solution.
  The second part is the freeze part. We need to limit the subsidies to 
where they are right now so it doesn't become a growing burden for the 
American taxpayer.
  The ACA required insurers to lower deductibles, copays, and out-of-
pocket costs for enrollees making between 100 percent and 250 percent 
of the poverty line. However, in 2017, a Federal court ruled that the 
cost-sharing reduction payments violated the appropriations clause. But 
insurers are still required to lower the costs, but this results in 
artificially high premiums. Additionally, because the premium tax 
credits are calculated against the second lowest cost silver plan, 
silver loading also supercharged the Federal subsidy spending of this.
  It created a system that got gamed, but we can fix it. If we 
appropriate the cost-sharing reductions, we can lower premiums by 10 to 
20 percent, while also delivering savings to the taxpayer.
  Freeze it and fix it. That is the freeze part, one of the ways that 
we cannot put America in a bigger burden and bury the cost to the 
taxpayers, and we can also lower premiums by saving money.
  And then, finally, is the fix portion. This is the most important 
part because subsidies do not lower costs. They transfer the burden. 
The fix involves how we actually do reforms that lower the costs. There 
are several bipartisan healthcare initiatives that address lowering the 
price of healthcare for our constituents.
  Many--``many'' may be an overstatement, but there are several bills 
right now that I know have bipartisan support that will lower costs 
that we can accomplish.
  For example, price transparency is one of the most bipartisan ideas 
in this Chamber. It gives patients, employers, and small businesses the 
power to see what the prices are and then compare them and decide 
whether or not they can find a better deal for what they are paying. 
Transparency exposes inflated costs, sparks competition, and makes the 
other reforms that we are talking about actually work because we can 
price shop and we can find out whether or not we are being ripped off 
by what we are paying.
  Another example that I know there is bipartisan support for is PBM 
reform. There has been a bipartisan appetite to lower the cost of 
prescription drugs by addressing the role that the middlemen play in 
increasing these costs: bipartisan PBM reform, something we know can 
reduce costs.
  And 340B reform, where both Republicans and Democrats have raised 
concerns about the 340B program, which is no longer efficient or 
serving its intended goal of supporting patients and healthcare 
providers who serve vulnerable populations, like our rural communities.
  These are just some of the reforms that have bipartisan support. The 
list goes on. You can easily find them. We need to do them. It will 
help drive down the actual costs of healthcare in this country.
  Transparency, where I started with this, is a necessary step in the 
idea of an HSA expansion that President Trump has proposed, where we 
send money to consumers rather than to the insurance companies. You 
have to have transparency if you expect people to shop. This will 
achieve the intended goal of creating consumer choice, and it would 
protect families from premium shock, and it would protect the Federal 
budget.
  There are two things we need to do: protect families from the 
inflationary costs that the ACA has created, but also protect the 
taxpayer.
  We didn't get into this mess overnight, and we won't get out of it 
simply by writing bigger checks. If this debate ends with one side 
saying extend everything and the other side saying we oppose 
everything, nothing will get done, and we will have failed the American 
people.
  But we have a chance. What I outlined right there, I know there is 
bipartisan support for. And there is more,

[[Page S8258]]

but that is a start: fraud, freeze, and fix.
  We have a chance right now to do better, help families afford 
coverage, pass bipartisan reforms to cut costs, and refuse to add 
another $350 billion to the national debt.
  I am the newest Member of the U.S. Senate. I wasn't here when 
Congress created this problem, but these ideas are part of the 
solution. If anyone in this Chamber is willing to work together, let's 
go. It is time to do it. The time is now. The American people deserve 
nothing less. Let's get ready to get the job done. Time was wasted 
during the government shutdown. There is an urgent need to address 
these issues. Let's go.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.


                    Tribute to Officer Andrew Hinds

  Mrs. MOODY. Mr. President, I rise on the floor today to recognize one 
of the Sunshine State's best. On a Sunday morning in October, Officer 
Andrew Hinds was on regular patrol duty with the Riviera Police 
Department--Riviera Beach Police Department, they would correct me--
when he spotted smoke coming from a neighborhood.
  He didn't think twice. He immediately rushed toward the smoke, where 
he found a truck fully engulfed in flames, just feet from a family's 
house, threatening to spread and consume that house.
  Neighbors flagged him down and told him that people were still 
inside, including small children. Officer Hinds didn't hesitate. With 
fire consuming the truck and while suspecting the vehicle could explode 
at any moment, he quickly called dispatch, banged on the door to wake 
up the family, and quickly moved everyone out of the home to get them 
out of harm's way.
  The family of four inside was asleep and unaware of the fire, and it 
is no doubt that Officer Hinds' quick reaction and calm under pressure 
saved their lives and their home.
  I am so proud to honor this heroic act today on the U.S. Senate floor 
as one of the Nation's newest U.S. Senators with our ``Florida's 
Finest'' award.
  Ever since I was Florida's attorney general, and now as our State's 
newest U.S. Senator, it has been important to me to continue to honor 
the extraordinary work of our selfless law enforcement officers that 
protect Floridians every day.
  Our ``Florida's Finest'' award honors those Floridians and law 
enforcement officers who demonstrate selfless courage and go above and 
beyond in service to their fellow man.
  Because of this officer's quick response and his own willingness to 
put others' safety ahead of his own safety, a tragedy was averted.
  I am so grateful for Officer Hinds and all of Florida's amazing law 
enforcement officers who, on a daily basis, put service above self. 
They are all making our State--the great State of Florida--stronger and 
safer.
  Thank you for allowing me this moment, Mr. President, to recognize 
this incredible law enforcement officer with our ``Florida's Finest'' 
award.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.


       Recognizing the 250th Anniversary of the U.S. Marine Corps

  Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, on the campus of Indiana University, a 
tablet placed on the floor of the student union pays tribute to the men 
and women who served in the Civil War.
  Over 80 years ago, in March 1942, three young Hoosiers stood over 
that marker. They raised their right hands, and they joined those 
ranks.
  When the oath began, they were college students in the last days of 
childhood. When it was complete, they were U.S. marines, the first to 
fight for their country. They joined a long line of American heroes, 
dating all the way back to the Revolutionary War.
  On November 10, 1775, when America contemplated a difficult 
amphibious assault on the British supply hub in Nova Scotia, the 
Continental Congress called for the raising of a regiment to execute 
this difficult expedition.
  It required a special breed of warrior, capable of fighting on land 
and sea. Just the type of men ``acquainted with maritime affairs,'' as 
the Continental Congress phrased it, were to be found at Tun Tavern, a 
brewhouse on Philadelphia's waterfront.
  On the same day the colonial government passed its resolution, they 
commissioned Samuel Nicholas to raise this force. Not long after, he 
walked through the tavern's door and appointed its owner, Robert 
Mullan, chief recruiter. Together, with the lure of high adventure, 
mugs full of cold beer, and the call to defend their homes, they 
enlisted two battalions of men. These men were the first members of the 
U.S. Marine Corps.
  So beginning on that day in Philadelphia, to countless days like the 
one on the campus of Indiana University, millions of men and women have 
answered their Nation's call. For 250 years, from the shores of Nassau 
to the walls of Abbey Gate, they have defended our flag, our way of 
life, and freedom's friends far from its shores. They have been asked 
and have often done the impossible.
  Because of their daring, their relentlessness, and their ingenuity, 
the U.S. Marine Corps will always be synonymous with danger--danger to 
any foe that would threaten the American people. A history of 
vanquished foes can testify to this: Barbary pirates, whose strongholds 
Leathernecks marched across the African desert to conquer; British 
Redcoats mowed down during the Battle of New Orleans when marines 
formed the center of the city's defense under General Jackson; Mexican 
cadets, who watches as marines stormed the Halls of Montezuma and 
raised the stars and stripes over Chapultepec Castle; German soldiers 
driven from Belleau Wood by the greatly outnumbered 4th Marine Brigade; 
Japanese troops who bombarded marines as they landed on the black sands 
of Iwo Jima and then listened from their bunkers as the Americans 
cheered while six members of the 5th Marine Division planted their flag 
at the summit of Mount Suribachi; the al-Qaida insurgents killed and 
captured in Fallujah when the marines fought from street to street, 
house to house. These and countless other battles were won at terrible 
cost--tens of thousands of marines killed or wounded in action, widows 
and widowers, sons and daughters left behind.
  The history of the Marine Corps is one of incredible heroism and 
great sacrifice, but to reduce the Marine Corps to only those virtues 
is, I believe, to understate its importance in American history. 
Marines are not simply warriors but, as Ronald Reagan once said, the 
ideal of ``soldierly virtue.''
  On the wall of my office hangs my Mameluke, the curved saber a marine 
carries at his side. Its history began on the shores of Tripoli when 
that band of marines took the Libyan port city of Derna. For this 
victory, they were awarded a Mameluke from an Ottoman prince. Two 
decades later, it officially became part of a marine officer's dress 
uniform. Today, its use is largely ceremonial, but if used wisely, it 
becomes a tool with multiple purposes, like the marine who carries it.
  You see, marines are not just taught the virtues that make men and 
women soldiers--courage under fire, physical strength--but they are 
also taught the virtues that make them good citizens once their service 
has ended.
  This photograph captures the moment in 1942 when those three young 
Indiana University students swore the oath--an oath to defend their 
country. The lives of the men in it, on the battlefield and off of it, 
demonstrated what it means to be a U.S. marine. They were honorable.
  Three years after the picture was snapped, the man at its center 
wandered around Okinawa. He was searching for souvenirs to send home. 
He was there as part of the American assault on the island, which was a 
precursor to attacks on the Japanese mainland.
  ``The death and destruction leave bad taste in my mouth,'' he wrote, 
``and strike me deeply as the horrible part of the war.'' This from 
Lieutenant Colonel Maurice ``Pat'' David as he wrote his family in 
Nashville, IN. But his cause was just, he wrote. The bodies of old 
women and young girls murdered by the Imperial Japanese Army proved it.
  He encouraged his parents not to worry about his safety, but months 
later, he was severely wounded, returned to the States, and later 
awarded a Purple Heart.

  Through his service in the Corps, Lieutenant Colonel David attended 
law

[[Page S8259]]

school in Washington, DC. He then served as a legal officer before 
retiring from the Marine Corps after 22 years of service. He then 
returned home to Southern Indiana, settling in Columbus with his wife 
and daughters.
  Lieutenant Colonel David served his country with honor during his 
time in the Marine Corps, and he did the same for his community after 
the war concluded. He was elected a superior court judge, practiced law 
for nearly 20 years, and after retiring, he served as a senior judge. 
As a lawyer, he was dedicated to his clients. As a judge, he treated 
the attorneys before him thoughtfully, reasoning they were his clients 
as well.
  When he died in 2016, it was after living a life defined by what he 
learned in the U.S. Marine Corps: integrity, devotion to justice, 
service of a cause greater than oneself.
  These men were courageous too. In fact, the man to Lieutenant Colonel 
David's right in the photo was Leonard Alford of Garrett, IN. A year 
after he stood at the memorial plaque in Bloomington, Alford sat in a 
tent staring at the Pacific Ocean.
  ``I know you have been worried because you have not heard from me,'' 
he wrote to his parents from an island he was not at liberty to name.
  He had earned a Silver Star leading the men of the 4th Marine Raider 
Battalion in the Battle of New Georgia as his men fought across the 
Solomon Islands. Afterwards, they were redesignated the 2nd Battalion, 
4th Marines, and Alford was made company captain. Members of the 
original 4th Marine Regiment were lost on Bataan and Corregidor.
  ``We hope to be able to keep their good name,'' he shared with his 
family. Because of Captain Alford's courage, they did.
  Two years later, when Captain Alford was awarded a second Silver 
Star, which was turned to Gold, it was awarded posthumously.
  In the closing weeks of the Okinawa campaign, he led a charge towards 
one of the island's remaining Japanese strongholds. Under heavy fire, 
ignoring his safety, he steadied the marines, ensured their advance, 
and he sacrificed his life for the success of the campaign and the 
freedom of his country.
  Oh, they were committed too. In fact, the last man in the photo was 
Cpl John Irwin Murray of Hartford City, IN. In the years after the 
photo was taken, John Murray remained on campus, drilling with Pershing 
Rifles.
  After graduation, he trained on Parris Island. Corporal Murray spent 
16 months on Guadalcanal and Guam. He then deployed to China with the 
6th Marine Division.
  After the war, he settled in California, where he married and raised 
a family and worked as an accountant and a teacher.
  Unlike the two other marines in this photo, there is very little 
public information about Corporal Murray's life--occasional updates in 
the Indiana University alumni magazine on his time in the Marine Corps, 
his letters home from the Pacific lamenting how few other Hoosiers he 
met there. But you see, he lived a meaningful civilian life, without 
fanfare.
  Commitment to duty doesn't demand glory or a long military career; it 
is about showing up when needed and then quietly contributing to 
society afterwards. Our service continues in the everyday work of 
building communities and supporting families.
  Corporal Murray represents something essential about the Marine 
Corps. Most of us who serve will return to become good citizens, 
neighbors, and workers, carrying a sense of duty into ordinary life. 
That is not less important than the other two paths; it is an 
expression of the same commitment.
  Whether on land, sea, or air, in war or peace, in service or after 
service, for 250 years, the U.S. Marine Corps has not just trained 
warriors but made citizens. There are no fiercer defenders of our 
freedom, no greater examples of the virtues that make our Republic 
function.
  So as we celebrate this great anniversary throughout the month of 
November, we thank and salute the men in that photo and every member of 
the U.S. Marine Corps--always faithful--for their service and for their 
sacrifices. It is impossible to imagine America without the Marines.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I ask that we commence with the previously 
scheduled vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The joint resolution was ordered to a third reading and was read the 
third time.


                         Vote on H.J. Res. 130

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the joint resolution 
having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the joint 
resolution pass?
  Mr. PAUL. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin) and the Senator from South Carolina 
(Mr. Scott).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Fetterman), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly), the Senator from 
Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. 
Warren) are necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 43, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 623 Leg.]

                                YEAS--51

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

                                NAYS--43

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

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Fetterman
     Kelly
     Klobuchar
     Mullin
     Scott (SC)
     Warren
  The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 130) was passed.
  (Mr. MORENO assumed the Chair.)
  (Mr. CURTIS assumed the Chair.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). The Senator from Kansas.

                          ____________________