[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 196 (Thursday, November 20, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Page S8262]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS

  Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. President, last week, Republicans in Congress 
passed a government funding bill that denies affordable healthcare to 
millions of Americans. But what most people don't know is that they 
also voted to provide millions of dollars to a few Republican Senators 
in a blatant, taxpayer-funded cash grab.
  Here is what happened. In the process of passing government funding 
legislation, Senate Republicans airdropped a provision into the bill at 
the last minute. This provision allows eight Republican Senators to 
collect millions of dollars from the U.S. Government, when what the 
Department of Justice did was to lawfully subpoena those phone records 
during a grand jury investigation. But now these eight Senators can sue 
the government for at least half a million dollars for each individual 
instance of a lawful access to those phone records. That means that 
each Senator could actually pocket millions of dollars, and that money 
would be paid from your hard-earned tax dollars--and that is even 
though the law was followed by the government at the time.
  Frankly, this is just outrageous to me. This is at the exact same 
time as 22 million Americans could see their health insurance premiums 
skyrocket because Republicans refuse to extend the ACA tax credits. 
This is at the exact same time as millions of seniors and veterans and 
families are learning that they will lose their SNAP food assistance 
altogether because of President Trump's ``Big Bad Bill.'' It is at the 
exact same time as families across my home State of New Mexico and 
across America are wondering how they will put Thanksgiving food on the 
table or how they will put presents under the tree in a month, how they 
will fuel their car to get to the job that is in jeopardy now because 
of President Trump's cancellation of Federal grants, exorbitant tariff 
taxes, and overall recklessness.
  But instead of fixing all of that, instead of tackling the 
affordability crisis in this country, instead of blocking President 
Trump's tariffs and undoing his war on American jobs, instead of 
fighting to protect the 41 million people whose SNAP benefits were in 
jeopardy during Trump's shutdown, Republicans made time to insert this 
payoff. It is unprecedented in American history.
  Let's put it another way. Everyday people are struggling. While one 
TikTok account called Dollar Tree Dinners--an account that teaches low-
income folks how to make filling meals from Dollar Tree ingredients--
has over 3 million followers, U.S. Senators could receive over $3 
million from your wallet.
  There are no existing records of Congress creating a taxpayer-funded 
cash pipeline for Senators to sue the government for doing its job. 
That is probably because it is so patently wrong.
  Even House Speaker Mike Johnson agrees with me, and when Speaker 
Johnson and I agree something is bad, you know it is really, really 
bad.
  As ranking member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on 
the Legislative Branch, where this provision was inserted, I can tell 
you that the process to include it was not normal. It was not in our 
markup. Normally, we have the opportunity to review new language, 
provide edits, and negotiate. None of that happened. This was slipped 
in at the eleventh hour, and now the American people are expected to 
pony up.
  I am furious that the Senate majority leader chose to airdrop this 
provision into that bill in particular with zero negotiation with the 
subcommittee that actually oversees this work. It is why this week, I 
introduced a bill with U.S. Senator Mark Kelly to shut down this 
taxpayer-funded payoff. We must reverse this last-minute giveaway that 
lets a few Senators pocket millions of dollars of taxpayer money while 
millions of Americans are revisiting their budgets to figure out how to 
make it to the end of the month.
  Like my Anti-Cash Grab Act, H.R. 6019 will eliminate the retroactive 
$500,000-per-instance cash claims for Senators. It will block millions 
in taxpayer-funded kickbacks to politicians. And it still keeps the 
door open for legitimate reforms to notification requirements without 
any of the self-enriching loopholes.
  Now, I disagree with the title of H.R. 6019, but I agree on the 
substance, and that is what matters here.
  The truth is that a country where a sitting elected official can get 
half a million dollars or more in one go while people around the 
country see their monthly costs rise by hundreds or thousands of 
dollars--that is a country that is not serving the people. This is not 
the America I know, and it is not the America we should be.
  This is a test. This is a test of whether Congress works for hard-
working families across America or for DC insiders. It is, to put it 
clearly, a test of our accountability, our transparency, and most of 
all, our integrity. I know which side I am on.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
immediate consideration of H.R. 6019, which was received from the House 
and is at the desk, and I ask unanimous consent that the bill be 
considered read three times and passed and the motions to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I object to 
a lot of stuff being said, but let's just start with sort of the facts.
  You said this was a lawful subpoena. What did I do wrong? What did I 
do to allow the government to seize my personal phone and my official 
phone when I was Senate Judiciary chairman? What did I do?
  There was an order issued that said if I was notified of this breach 
of my privacy, I am likely to intimidate witnesses or destroy evidence. 
Based on what?

  There are 10 of us involved here. What did we do to justify having 
Jack Smith issue a subpoena for the phone records of a branch of 
government--the Senate--where all of us had to decide whether or not to 
certify the election?
  So, no, it wasn't lawful. You have determined it was. You don't get 
to decide; a court does. We are not going to let the Democratic Party 
decide my fate; we are going to let a judge decide my fate. But I have 
to get in court and prove my case.
  To the majority leader, was this provision socialized with the 
minority leader?

                          ____________________