[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 46 (Thursday, March 12, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1018-S1024]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HOUSING FOR THE 21ST CENTURY ACT
SAVE America Act
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, later today, we will finish up the 21st
Century ROAD to Housing Act, the latest piece of legislation in
Republican's affordability agenda. And next week, I will be bringing
the SAVE America Act to the floor, and we will be having a full and
robust debate.
So what is the SAVE America Act? It is a package of commonsense
policies--the kind of commonsense policies that should get an automatic
``yes'' vote from literally every Member of this body.
At the core of the SAVE America Act is the requirement that
individuals provide proof of citizenship to register to vote and then
show an ID when they go to the polls. In other words, it would require
Americans to demonstrate that they are eligible to vote and that they
are who they say they are when they go to do so.
Not to keep using the word ``commonsense,'' but it is pretty
commonsense, right? We require a photo ID for a whole lot of things in
this country, for obvious reasons.
Getting on a plane? Show your official government-issued photo ID.
Go to the doctor? The same thing, provide your government-issued
photo ID plus your insurance card.
Get hired for a new job? Provide your government-issued photo ID when
you start.
Public libraries ask for a photo ID. In New York City you have to
provide some type of photo ID to get a library card. In Baltimore, MD,
it is the same thing; in Washington, DC, again, photo ID.
I will stop with the list of libraries, but I think we can all agree
that if you have to show photo ID and prove where you live to get a
library card, it is not too much to ask voters to show ID to vote in
Federal elections. It takes about 10 seconds and protects the security
of our elections.
Americans overwhelmingly agree that voters should have to show ID at
the polls. Eighty-three percent of Americans--83 percent--in an August
2025 poll supported requiring photo ID at the polls for all voters.
That includes 71 percent of Democrats, 76 percent of Black Americans,
77 percent of Asian Americans, and 82 percent of Hispanic Americans.
It kind of feels like the only Americans not to support voter ID
requirements are Democrats here in Congress. That is right. We are
expecting continued, full-throated opposition to voter ID and the SAVE
America Act from Senate Democrats, as well as more of the unforgiveable
rhetoric that Democrats have already been engaging in.
The Democrat leader has been calling this bill ``Jim Crow 2.0,'' a
phrase that is not only deeply irresponsible and insulting for those
who actually lived through that dark chapter in our history but also
insults the overwhelming majority of Americans, including minorities,
who look at voter ID and see nothing more than commonsense.
In fact, I can really see only two reasons for Democrats opposing
this legislation: Either Democrats are just reflexively opposing this
proposal because it originated from Republicans, or Democrats believe
that there are, in fact, people out there voting illegally; and that it
is benefiting Democrats, and they want to keep it going.
I honestly cannot think of another reason to oppose something so
eminently reasonable as requiring people to demonstrate that they are
eligible to vote and that they are who they say they are when they go
to the polls.
Now, I will have a lot more to say about the SAVE America Act next
week, including about two other commonsense measures in the bill that
would prevent biological males from competing in women's sports and
protect minors from gender transition procedures--two other things, I
should note, that are supported by the American people.
I can't guarantee an outcome on this legislation, but I can guarantee
that we are going to put Democrats on the record and that they will be
forced to defend their outrageous positions on these issues and explain
to the American people why common sense and the Democratic Party have
parted ways.
Republicans are looking forward to this debate, and I look forward to
saying much more about the SAVE America Act in the very near future.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The Democratic leader is recognized.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, yesterday, for the second time in less
than a week, Republicans were given the opportunity to fund TSA and to
also fund FEMA, to stand up for our Coast Guard, and to make sure core
DHS operations are funded while negotiations on ICE and Border Patrol
continue. And for the second time in less than a week, Republicans said
no. Well, we are giving them another opportunity later this morning--
another opportunity to end their blockade of TSA. We are giving
Republicans the opportunity to end their blockade of FEMA. We are
giving Republicans the opportunity to end their blockade at CISA and to
end their blockade at Coast Guard and much else.
The bottom line is very simple. It is easy. You don't have to follow
politics very closely to see it. Democrats are ready to fund TSA;
Republicans are blocking it. Democrats are ready to fund CISA;
Republicans are blocking it. Democrats are ready to fund FEMA and Coast
Guard and most of DHS operations. We will give Republicans a chance--a
chance--to say yes.
We all know that we do not have agreement on how to deal with ICE. We
know, very simply, that Democrats just want ICE to behave like any
police department in America and use warrants and not wear masks, but
we don't have to tie that disagreement up and use people at the
airports and American citizens as hostages and say: We are not going to
fund FEMA; we are not going to fund TSA unless you give in to our
unreasonable and unpopular demands on reforming ICE. So we are going to
offer these bills one at a time and see where our Republican colleagues
go.
We know the American people are on our side. We know that the only
thing Republicans need to do is stay out of the way and these programs
will be funded today and problems at the airports will go away.
Mr. THUNE. Would the Democrat leader yield?
Mr. SCHUMER. I will.
Mr. THUNE. So I assume the Democrat leader is aware of the fact that
we have tried repeatedly to fund everything temporarily to allow the
negotiations over the ICE budget to continue.
Mr. SCHUMER. I am well aware, but that hasn't worked. What can work--
Mr. THUNE. And the reason that hasn't--
Mr. SCHUMER. No, no. I--
Mr. THUNE. The reason that hasn't worked--
Mr. SCHUMER.--am not yielding back.
Mr. THUNE.--is because the Democrats are blocking it.
Mr. SCHUMER. The bottom line is, Democrats are ready today. America,
watch. We will have Members on the floor saying ``Let's fund TSA'' with
no other preconditions. What will Republicans do? They are going to see
Republicans get up and block it. It is that simple.
Now, my friend--sometimes--much of the time.
My friend, the Republican leader, says: Well, we will only do it if
you go along with what we want on ICE and what we want on Border
Patrol--highly unpopular and wrong. So who is standing in the way,
America? Look at it. We are not putting any preconditions on funding
TSA. The Republicans are. And why?
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, will the Democratic leader--
Mr. SCHUMER. I will not yield.
Mr. THUNE.--yield for a question?
Mr. SCHUMER. No. In a minute.
Why? Because Republicans are in obeisance to Donald Trump's
insistence on having these marauding forces of ICE go through our
cities. We saw what they did in Minneapolis. We saw what
[[Page S1019]]
they did in Los Angeles. We saw what they did in other places.
Americans don't like it. Trump's numbers have suffered.
And so it is simple: Don't attach preconditions, fund TSA, fund CISA.
You will have that opportunity in a few hours. And if you get up and
block it and say ``We will only do it unless,'' Americans will know who
is to blame.
I yield.
Mr. THUNE. Well, I would say again to the Democrat leader that the
Democrats have had multiple opportunities--and will have another one
today--to provide funding for all of the Agencies that he just
mentioned, under a continuing resolution, to allow us to consider how
we are going to resolve the DHS issues that the Democrat leader has
raised, which are being negotiated, I might add, at the moment between
Democrats and Republicans and the White House. So there will be an
attempt. The Democrats will have an opportunity to block--because they
have now repeatedly--a continuing resolution that would fund all the
Agencies to which you just alluded and allow us more time to negotiate.
So those Agencies will be funded--
Mr. SCHUMER. Would my colleague--
Mr. THUNE.--if the Democrats don't block it.
Mr. SCHUMER.--yield for a question?
Will he support, without any Republican blocking it, a straight
motion to just deal with TSA and get it funded while we are trying to
work out these negotiations? Will he support that? No ands, ifs, or
buts; no preconditions, no keep negotiating on ICE but just get it
done. Will he support that?
Mr. THUNE. I would support a resolution, which will be offered, to
fund not just TSA but Coast Guard; Cybersecurity, CISA; FEMA; other
Agencies and Departments of our government that are essential not only
to national security and homeland security but to making sure that
people can move through our airports in this country, that the FEMA--
Federal Emergency Management Agency--has the ability to respond to
disasters. Those are things, I would say to my friend the Democrat
leader, that could all be funded today, and then we can continue this
discussion that he wants to have, which, again, there have been offers
made repeatedly, the most recent of which was about 13 days ago, I
think, from the White House, and the Democrats have yet to respond.
Mr. SCHUMER. Reclaiming my time. I rest my case. What the leader is
saying is he will only fund TSA if we will continue to fund--for a
short time, for a long time--ICE and Border Patrol, which he knows is
gridlocked, which he knows we don't agree with, and so it is clear. He
has made it clear.
Just fund TSA. That is it. He has a lot of rigamarole attached to
funding TSA: but do this, but do that, but do this.
You can't win the argument, Leader. It is simple. We are being clear.
We are being concise.
So the question is very simple. I say to my Republican friends:
Support the legislation that is coming on the floor today. And if you
do, TSA is funded like that. Every Democrat is for it. My guess is,
half to three quarters of the Republicans are wishing they would be for
it, but their leadership is insisting on attaching preconditions on ICE
negotiations and Border Patrol negotiations.
So all I say to my Republican colleagues: Stop the speeches that you
care about TSA. Don't talk the talk. Walk the walk. Let the legislation
that we are proposing go forward without blocking it, and TSA will be
back to work; our lines at the airports will be gone; and then we will
have legislation on CISA.
Don't talk to us about the need for safety and then block legislation
that allows CISA to go through. That is hypocrisy. Just let it go
through. And I know that our Republican leadership knows that we have
the high ground here, knows that the people are on our side.
And why do Republicans do this? Why won't they budge to give an inch
on ICE, which is highly unpopular, and even the President has said
hasn't done things right? That is the mystery, but it is probably
because some in the rightwing insist. And we know that the hard right
runs this party, and that is why they are doing so poorly with the
American people right now. That is why we Democrats are on the ascent--
because we are with the American people and the American people say:
Fund TSA now, and you can debate ICE.
There has been a debate on ICE. We believe we are right. We believe
something as simple as warrants should be used by ICE when you bust
into someone's house. We believe, simply, that ICE agents should not be
masked when every police department and sheriff's department is
identified, and the American people are with us.
But we don't even have to debate that today because what Republicans
are doing is insisting that we don't change a thing about ICE before we
move forward on TSA. That is wrong. That is using the American people
as hostages. And we are not going to do it.
And I remind my Republican colleagues, we are going to be back here
again and again, winning this debate and eventually winning the
American people, which will say to you folks on the Republican side:
You had better stop this blockade of TSA and CISA, of FEMA, and of the
Coast Guard. You had better stop using them as hostages until you get
your way on ICE and on CBP, where you are out of touch with the
American people.
I yield the floor.
Oh, no, I don't yield the floor. I have a few other subjects I might
like to touch on. There is so much to talk about. Donald Trump and the
Republicans are screwing up America in so many ways. So let's talk
about Iran for a minute.
Iran
Mr. President, as the war on Iran continues, Donald Trump does what
he usually does: He lies. He is lying to the American people.
According to public reporting, preliminary intelligence reports
suggest, tragically, that American operations may have been involved,
unfortunately, in this horrible missile strike on the all-girls
elementary school in Iran on the first day of the war. And when Donald
Trump was asked about those reports, what did he say? He said: Well, I
don't know about that.
That is ridiculous, and it is an obvious lie. Donald Trump is the
Commander in Chief, and he expects us to believe that he has no clue
about intelligence regarding a horrific attack on a school several days
after it occurred.
The vast majority of Americans, obviously, won't believe Donald
Trump. They know he is an inveterate liar. He lies daily. They will
know when he says he didn't know about this report--of course he did.
But there might be a handful of Americans who still might believe the
guy, who still don't understand that he is an inveterate liar.
And so think about that. He is saying he has zero clue about a basic
intelligence report regarding this strike. If he didn't know about it 2
or 3 days later, when all of America did, and he is not lying, which I
believe he is, then what chaos--what is going on in this
administration? The Commander in Chief, on something that affects
policy while we are at war, says he doesn't know about it? That talks
about the chaos and confusion that have taken over this
administration--the idea that something is all jumbled up in the White
House, that there is no information flow to the President on something
so important.
So either Donald Trump is lying when he says he knows nothing about
the school bombing intelligence findings--he gets these reports every
day--or he is dangerously uninformed, which says his staff is really
screwed up.
Equally unacceptable is Donald Trump's apparent miscalculation when
it comes to the Strait of Hormuz. In the early days of this war, Donald
Trump bragged that victory would come easily. ``We are going to win
shortly. No time. No problem.'' But now, after the United States has
damaged so much of Iran's infrastructure, the new radical Supreme
Leader is focusing on the one point of leverage Iran has always had
over the world's economy: the Strait of Hormuz.
A few moments ago, in his first public comments, the Supreme Leader
Khamenei, who is even worse than his predecessor, his father, said Iran
will continue to block the Strait of Hormuz. Freeing it could,
potentially, America, require boots on the ground.
How did Donald Trump not see this coming? How did his planners not
see
[[Page S1020]]
this coming? This is the one bit of leverage Iran has. Of course, we
knew they were going to use it. They have used it in the past. A
college student with a basic understanding of geopolitics could tell
you that Iran's greatest leverage is this narrow passage through which
a huge share of the world's oil must travel. And now 13 days as we are
into the war--I believe it is 13 days--the administration is scrambling
to contain the damage and deal with rising oil prices. And Donald
Trump, just by saying, ``Oh, the war is going to end soon,'' you are
not going to fix the shortage of oil or fertilizer or other products in
America.
After I said for days that he should, Donald Trump finally announced
that he is tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. He should have done
it sooner. But in any case, even this decision was marred by chaos and
confusion. It caught our allies completely off guard because for days
it seemed Trump would hold back.
There is such disorganization and chaos when we are in a war. We
can't afford chaos in a war. I don't know of any other time America
went to war and things were so chaotic.
There is not a single strategic decision that Trump has made in this
war that was not born from chaos, confusion, misinformation, and lies.
And there is nobody--nobody--up there in the White House around him
willing to stand up and tell him when he was wrong. In his first term,
Trump had Kelly, Trump had Mattis--people who had courage, who had
backbones, who had military backgrounds--and they told him the truth.
He eventually fired them for telling the truth, but they told him the
truth.
Where is the truth teller now? No one is there, and America is paying
the price, unfortunately, in lives, in the eight brave troops we lost,
in fortune--they said the first 2 days or the first week of the war
cost $11 billion; we could fix a lot of healthcare with that $11
billion--and in strength.
This has gone too far, with too much chaos, too little thought, and
it is hurting America.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning having
just listened to the minority leader talk about the Department of
Homeland Security, which the Democrats once again refused to fund.
How can the minority leader from New York have forgotten about why we
have a Department of Homeland Security in the first place? It was set
up after 9/11, after the Twin Towers were hit, so that it could never
happen again. Yet to sit here and listen to him talk about this
component of it or that component--this was a program fundamentally set
in place to protect our Nation and our citizens from the terror that
was rained upon us on 9/11. That is why the entire Department was
brought together and funded. Now we hear the minority leader--well, he
wants to peel off this part and that part and take the Department apart
as we are trying to protect the country.
He said something about what the American people are wondering. What
the American people are wondering today is why the Democrat Party
continues to stand up for illegal immigrant criminals against law-
abiding citizens. That is what I hear about in Wyoming: Why in the
world are Democrats wanting to stand up for illegal immigrant criminals
and not hard-working American citizens?
So for the last 27 days, the Democrats have shut down the entire
Department of Homeland Security lock, stock, and barrel. TSA agents are
missing their paychecks. Our Nation's infrastructure is more vulnerable
to cyber attacks. There have been two attacks by terrorist sympathizers
in the last 2 weeks.
The minority leader--you listen to his comments--is completely out of
touch with the American people and what people are worried about all
across this country. And there they go again. Here we have it.
Less than 5 months ago, Democrats shut down the entire government.
The government stayed shut for 43 days. Now we have gotten most of the
government funded, but they continue to shut down the Department of
Homeland Security for one reason and one reason only: because they want
to protect illegal immigrant criminals. When you listen to what he is
saying, when you listen to the comments by the minority leader, he
wants to stand side by side with illegal immigrant criminals, not with
the American people. Democrats want to defund law enforcement. They
want to abolish ICE. They want to turn our Nation into a sanctuary
nation.
Yesterday, once again, Democrats blocked Republican efforts to reopen
the Department of Homeland Security. Now, the White House and Senate
Republicans have made offer after offer. We negotiated in good faith.
Democrats in the Senate have not.
What we are doing here is critical. It is critical to the safety and
the security of our Nation. This is what we are doing: We are trying to
fund America's Department of Homeland Security. When this was set up
after the 9/11 attacks and the terrorism, what did they want to include
in that? TSA, the Coast Guard, Secret Service, America's cyber
defenses. It is the Department that stops smugglers, drug traffickers,
human traffickers.
The Department of Homeland Security was created to protect us as a
nation, and since 9/11 of 2001, this Department has been on the
frontlines in the fight against terrorism and securing the border. That
is the part the Democrats hate. They want an open border. They want
people to come in indiscriminately from all around the world. And Joe
Biden and the Democrats allowed it, with over 10 million illegal
immigrants coming into this country in the 4 years of the Biden
administration.
The people that work for the Department of Homeland Security--they
are the silent heroes of the Nation. They are the ones engaged in the
battle to keep our communities safe and secure. They shouldn't be
forced to miss their paychecks because Democrats continue to choose to
play politics. Right now, 50,000 TSA agents all around the country are
missing their paychecks. For the third time in 6 months, Democrats have
forced the TSA agents to work without getting paid.
A veteran TSA officer in Phoenix, AZ, was very clear. He said:
We are fed up. We've had enough.
I believe he is right. All Americans are fed up and have had enough
of this political posturing and gameplaying by the Democrats.
A CBS News report this week explains what is happening. Absences by
TSA agents have doubled--doubled since February 14 when the Democrat-
caused shutdown began. More than 300 TSA agents have left the job
entirely, and lines at airports continue to grow. In some airports, the
lines stretch out of the terminal and into the parking lot. Spring
break travel is picking up all around the country. Families are paying
the price. That is the price of Democrats' political obstruction.
It is the same and concerning story with regard to the Cybersecurity
and Infrastructure Security Agency. This is the Agency put in place
after 9/11, under the Department of Homeland Security--the entire
Department--that protects our Nation's critical infrastructure, and
that includes our energy infrastructure.
Since the Democrat shutdown began last month, only one in three
staffers at the Agency is working. Why? Because the others have been
furloughed because of the Democrat-caused shutdown. And those who are
still on the job are working without pay.
America is continually under attack in the cyber world--24 hours a
day, 7 days a week. That is energy, banking, financial institutions,
water, utilities, and our military. After the strikes in Iran, the pace
of cyber attacks against us accelerated. The Iranian Revolutionary
Guard Corps made their intentions clear. They said Americans ``will no
longer have security anywhere in the world, even in their own homes.''
Imagine the damage that Iran could do if they hacked our critical
infrastructure--because they are trying. But because of the Democrats'
shutdown--and we just heard the minority leader talk about it. The
shutdown is continuing, he is saying. Because of that, vulnerability
scans are on pause. That shouldn't happen. We need to get these open
and running. Protective guidance for our critical networks is not being
issued. We need that.
[[Page S1021]]
Democrats don't seem to care because they want to protect illegal
immigrant criminals, and we just heard it from the minority leader of
the U.S. Senate, the Senator from New York, who ought to be more
concerned than anybody about threats to our Nation. Our energy grids,
our hospitals, our State and local governments--they are all more
exposed.
It is not a question of if the Democrat shutdown is hurting the
American people; it is a matter of public record. Democrats are each
and every day endangering Americans on the ground, in the skies, and
even in cyber space.
The American people expect their government to take our Nation's
security seriously. Democrats don't seem to be thinking that way at
all. The American people expect Congress to fund the Agencies that keep
them safe, not that keep safe illegal immigrant criminals. And that is
what we heard from the minority leader--what we could do differently to
protect illegal immigrant criminals, not protect the American people.
The American people expect us to pay the people who protect us, who
protect our airports, who protect our borders, who protect our
networks, who protect our communities. That is what the American people
want. They expect us to confront the threats at home and abroad and do
it with urgency.
Mr. President, the Department of Homeland Security must be funded
fully and immediately, and I am tired of excuses from the Democrats
because that is all they are--excuses.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Unanimous Consent Request
Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. President, 12 days ago, Donald Trump took us to war
against Iran. Since then, 7 American servicemembers have been killed,
and 140 more have been wounded. Instead of protecting our troops, Trump
is making it easier for enemies to kill them.
None of us are mourning Ayatollah Khamenei. The moment this war
started, oil prices spiked. Anyone who has looked at a map knows that a
war in the Middle East affects oil prices. It has happened every single
time. But apparently no one at the White House looked at the map. So
now, American families, who are already struggling to put food on the
table, are paying 20 percent more for gas because of Trump's war.
The administration's response to the crisis they created is to back
off sanctions on Russian oil. So American families are hurting while
Trump is making more money for Vladimir Putin. The administration has
given Russia a lifeline just as they needed it.
U.S. officials confirmed last week that Russia is sharing
intelligence with Iran to help target U.S. servicemembers. Russia is
telling Iran where our troops are and where the military assets are.
Just think about that. Russia is giving Iran a map to find and kill
Americans, and in our response, we are going to allow them to sell
their oil to other countries to fund their war machines--all while
Steve Witkoff, the President's envoy, is happy to take Putin, a
professionally trained liar, at his word when he says they aren't
sharing intel with Iran.
We started a war with Iran, and we are now rewarding the ones that
are helping shoot us. How is this putting America first? How many times
do we have to remind this President that Putin is not our friend?
This is what happens when the administration starts a war without a
plan. They are scrambling to clean up their mess and thinking twice
about the consequences.
I know the consequences because I have lived them. Twenty-one years
ago, I was a Marine infantryman in the Al Anbar Province of Western
Iraq. Every day, someone was trying to kill us. I lost a lot of best
friends there. That is why I am standing together with you here today--
because I know what happens when we send soldiers into harm's way
without thinking through what comes next and what we are asking these
kids to do. And I know the people who pay for wars are never the
politicians who started them; it is the American people, the kids from
working-class neighborhoods who enlisted and their families.
What this administration did was not just wrong; it was illegal.
In 2017, Congress passed the Countering America's Adversaries Through
Sanctions Act--signed by Trump himself--requiring the White House to
notify Congress before making any significant change to U.S. policy
toward Russia. We passed a law because we understood that decisions of
this magnitude--decisions that touch our national security and affect
the safety of our troops--require transparency and accountability. They
require someone to be able to look the American people in the eye and
explain themselves.
But this administration did not notify Congress. Apparently, this
administration doesn't think it owes anyone any explanation. They don't
think they owe the troops they are putting in danger any explanation at
all, and they don't think they owe the families of the seven Americans
who are not coming home an explanation. They are making it up as they
go and asking Americans to pay for it with their lives.
If this administration wants to bring gas prices down, stop the war.
Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent
that the Senate proceed to the consideration of my resolution at the
desk; further, that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed
to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the
table with no intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The majority whip.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from South Dakota.
H.R. 6644
Mr. ROUNDS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the 21st
Century ROAD to Housing Act--a bipartisan, bicameral effort to address
one of the most pressing challenges facing families across the country:
the cost and availability of housing.
Housing affordability is not just an issue in major metropolitan
areas; it is a challenge in small towns, farming communities, and rural
counties across America.
In my home State of South Dakota, communities are growing, but the
housing supply has not kept pace with demand. Whether it is young
families trying to purchase their first home or workers moving into our
communities, the shortage of available housing is becoming a serious
challenge.
I want to thank Chairman Scott and Ranking Member Warren for their
leadership in bringing members together to incorporate priorities from
both sides of the committee. Their efforts resulted in a strong
consensus-driven package that addresses housing challenges in both
rural and urban areas.
We will be voting final passage on that act yet this afternoon.
I am proud that several provisions I have authored are included in
this legislation, each focused on cutting unnecessary redtape,
modernizing outdated Federal programs, and giving State and local
partners the flexibility they need to address housing challenges on the
ground.
First, the bill includes the Rural Housing Service Reform Act that I
introduced with Senator Smith from Minnesota. Senator Smith has been a
great partner as we developed this legislation over the past several
years, working together to address the unique housing challenges facing
rural communities across the country.
This bill provides the first comprehensive update to USDA's rural
housing programs in more than a decade. Across rural America, thousands
of affordable housing units financed through USDA's Section 515 Program
are reaching the end of their mortgage terms.
When these mortgages mature, the rental assistance, which is tied to
them, often disappears. That means that rents can increase sharply or
properties can leave the program entirely.
Without congressional action, up to 400,000 Americans nationwide
could face rent increases or displacement as these mortgages mature.
The impact will fall hardest on the Midwest and the south regions that
serve as the backbone of American ag, manufacturing, and energy
production. We are already seeing the effects.
Since 2016, more than 900 properties with over 20,000 units have left
USDA's
[[Page S1022]]
Multifamily Housing Program. On average, about 80 properties per year
will mature through 2028. After that, the pace accelerates dramatically
with hundreds of properties expected to mature each year in the
following decade.
In rural housing markets, once these units disappear, they are almost
never replaced. Many rural counties already face vacancy rates below 1
percent, and in more than half of rural counties across the country,
there is little or no new housing construction at all.
The Rural Housing Service Reform Act addresses this challenge
directly. It allows rental assistance to be decoupled from expiring
mortgages, preserving affordability for the families who rely on these
homes. It also modernizes the USDA housing programs by allowing income
calculations with HUD standards, streamlining loan approval and
foreclosure processes, updating outdated information technology
systems, and expanding eligibility for loan guarantees to include
properties with a small additional home on the property and in-home
daycare services.
These are practical reforms that strengthen the rural housing safety
net while helping communities maintain a stable workforce and local
economy.
The bill also incorporates two additional pieces of legislation I
introduced with Senator Kim to streamline housing development to bring
new units online faster.
The Unlocking Housing Supply Through Streamlined and Modernized
Reviews Act modernizes the environmental review process under the
National Environmental Policy Act for HUD-funded housing projects.
And the BUILD Housing Act strengthens coordination between HUD and
State and local units of government by expanding the ability of the
local partners to participate in environmental review and developmental
processes.
These reforms address a simple, but persistent problem: Too often
housing projects face duplicative or overlapping review processes that
delay construction without improving outcomes.
By aligning Federal standards and allowing greater collaboration with
State and local partners, these provisions will help move housing
projects forward more efficiently. We are cutting the redtape.
Taken together, these reforms represent a commonsense approach to
housing policy. They do not rely on sweeping new Federal mandates.
Instead, they focus on removing barriers, modernizing outdated systems,
and empowering the communities closest to the problem.
For States like South Dakota, these changes matter. Housing shortages
in rural communities can affect everything from workforce recruitment
to economic development. Employers across the State--from schools to
healthcare providers to ag businesses--regularly tell me that housing
availability is one of the biggest obstacles to expanding their
workforce and building their businesses.
When workers cannot find a place to live, communities struggle to
grow and local economies suffer. The Housing for the 21st Century Act
takes meaningful steps toward addressing these challenges.
I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and help
put our Nation on a stronger path toward expanding housing
opportunities for families in South Dakota and across the country.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The Senator from Nebraska.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. RICKETTS. Mr. President, it has now been 26 days since Homeland
Security has been funded and 51 days since the Democrats have announced
their intention not to fund the Department of Homeland Security.
The Democrats want the Department of Homeland Security to be closed.
How do I know they want it to be closed? Well, it is because the
Democrats are refusing even to talk to Republicans about what sort of
deal we may be able to do to get the funding for the Department of
Homeland Security.
Just this past weekend, my freshman colleague from Alabama who sits
on the Appropriations Committee and has the subcommittee that oversees
the Department of Homeland Security offered the ranking Democrat on
Appropriations a meeting, a meeting with our Republican leader, a
meeting with the Appropriations chair--the esteemed Senator from
Maine--and the White House. And the ranking Democrat refused to even
meet, much less negotiate.
Republicans want the Department of Homeland Security opened.
Democrats want to keep it shut down. Democrats are playing politics
with our national security and the safety of Americans and people in my
home State of Nebraska.
The Department of Homeland Security is funded to pay, for example,
our Coast Guard. In recent days, our Coast Guard in the Gulf of America
just intercepted a shipment of marijuana and cocaine worth about $1.3
million. That is what the Coast Guard does, keeps us safe from illegal
drugs coming into our country, and yet they go unpaid.
In fact, a Nebraskan called in to my office. His son and daughter-in-
law in the Coast Guard are deployed right now in Bahrain. They are
risking their lives for us, they are risking their lives to keep us
safe, and the Democrats won't pay them.
Or let's take your TSA agents that handle the security for a billion
travelers in the United States every year. They, too, are working
without pay because the Democrats will not fund the Department of
Homeland Security. TSA agents process about 2\1/2\ million people every
day going through our airports to keep us safe, and the Democrats won't
pay them.
I stood here not long ago, sadly, talking about our air traffic
controllers. I read letters from them and how the government shutdown
that Chuck Schumer led the Democrats on just a short while ago put
pressure on their families. Many of those air traffic controllers were
veterans.
The minority leader led the Democrats on the longest shutdown in
American history. Does nobody remember that, what it did to the
families? And yet the Democrats are doing the same thing again now on
the Department of Homeland Security.
The Agency that is assigned to keep us safe from the standpoint of
cyber security--the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency--has
furloughed 1,200 of their 2,000 people. Only 800 people are working
right now, putting us at risk.
We have a conflict in the Middle East right now with Iran, the
largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, that country that
regularly chants ``Death to America.'' We know that Iran has plotted
assassinations of our President, other officials, and dissidents here
on our very soil. And yet the Democrats are not willing to fund the
Agency that is meant to help keep us safe. Again, they are playing
politics with our national security and our safety.
There is common ground we can come to, to be able to get the
Department of Homeland Security open. But if the Democrats refuse to
even meet with Republicans to discuss this, the only conclusion I can
draw is that they don't want the Department of Homeland Security open.
And so they put all of us at risk, including my fellow Nebraskans.
Democrats must come to the table to meet. We must reopen the
Department of Homeland Security. We must pay our heros in the Coast
Guard, TSA, Secret Service, CISA, all these people who are working
right now to keep us safe are keeping us safe during this conflict in
the Middle East with the largest state sponsor of terrorism.
The least the Democrats can do is agree to meet with leadership and
have a conversation.
This must end. Democrats must talk.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority whip.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the sweeping surveillance powers
authorized under section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act, known as FISA, expire in just 40 days.
Section 702 grew out of a secret, warrantless surveillance program
conducted by the Bush administration after 9/11. When this illegal
spying program was finally discovered, Congress enacted 702 as a
temporary measure--a temporary measure. Like so many expansive
government powers that are adopted during times of emergency,
[[Page S1023]]
this authority has now become a fixture of our surveillance
architecture.
When it comes to collecting intelligence on foreigners located
abroad, the value of this tool is not in serious dispute, but there is
a fatal flaw at the core of section 702. This authority is also used
for warrantless spying on innocent Americans. Americans' private
emails, phone calls, and text messages with friends, family,
colleagues, business, and any number of other contacts around the world
are swept up under section 702. The government then searches these
private communications--protected by the Fourth Amendment, I might
add--without a warrant or other court order.
Congress has repeatedly failed to fix this end run around the
Constitution. As a result, for years, the intelligence community has
abused section 702 to spy on business and religious leaders, political
parties, campaign donors, journalists, and protesters across the
political spectrum.
In passing the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act in
April 2024, Congress codified new reforms intended to rein in these
abuses. These measures have substantially reduced the number of
unlawful searches.
But Congress failed to require a warrant for searching American
communications--once again, leaving the fox guarding the henhouse.
At the same time, Congress greatly expanded 702 to include
counternarcotics and immigration vetting, and conscripted a shocking
array of American businesses into section 702 spying.
Congress has a responsibility to protect our national security and
the privacy and civil liberties of Americans. That is why Senator Lee,
Republican of Utah, and I have introduced the SAFE Act, a bipartisan
bill that would reauthorize 702 with commonsense reforms to protect our
privacy as individuals.
Our bill preserves the core values of 702 as a foreign intelligence
collection tool, while preventing the government from using it to
target the constitutionally protected communications of Americans,
unless they get court approval.
Our warrant requirement takes legitimate operational and security
needs into account so that it won't be unduly burdensome or impede any
action in an emergency. There is an exception for emergencies.
What it would do is stop the government from accessing the private
communications of Americans without a proper basis under the Fourth
Amendment to the Constitution. Such a simple requirement to comply with
the Constitution should have been included in section 702 from the
outset.
The SAFE Act would also prevent government Agencies--like ICE,
Customs and Border Protection, and the FBI and others--from skirting
the Fourth Amendment to obtain Americans' sensitive information and
other personal details from data brokers.
ICE is using this data to track U.S. citizens exercising their First
Amendment right to protest, which should concern Senators on both sides
of the aisle.
If the FBI wants to track someone's phone, obtain their location
information, or access their Google search history, the Agency should
be required to get a judicial warrant.
Instead, government Agencies are exploiting gaps in our outdated laws
to buy our sensitive information from data brokers. It is a loophole
that Congress must address. Our bill--my bill with Senator Lee--does
that.
Once again, however, those who want to avoid real reforms are urging
Congress to just reauthorize section 702 without addressing this issue.
When Congress extended 702 in 2024, the argument was that we needed
more time. So Congress reauthorized section 702 for just 2 years to see
how the existing compliance measures were working.
``Later,'' they said. ``We need more time. . . . Let's see how the
reforms are working.''
Now, here we are, 2 years later, and the opponents of real reform are
saying exactly the same thing: Just give us more time.
We have been hearing these same excuses for over 20 years. It is time
to stop avoiding the issue and to protect Americans' constitutional
rights once and for all--not later, not next time.
In 2024, the last time section 702 was up for reauthorization, I
chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, which had jurisdiction over
FISA. I held a public hearing more than 6 months before the authority
expired so Members could ask the Biden administration how they were
using section 702.
Now, the Trump administration refuses to testify publicly about how
they are using this power.
Enough is enough. There is no excuse for ramming through an extension
of 702 at the last minute without regular order and without common
sense and in violation of the Constitution.
The American people deserve better from their representatives. They
can and they should protect the American people from threats to their
security and threats to their civil liberties.
I yield the floor.
H.R. 6644
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, today, I am voting in favor of the
21st Century ROAD to Housing Act. Whether they are renting or buying,
too many Americans struggle with the cost of housing. This bill
includes crucial reforms to streamline and enhance housing programs, as
well as important incentives for communities to build high quality,
affordable housing for all. I am also proud that this legislation
includes my bipartisan VA Home Loan Awareness Act and VALID Act to help
more veterans and their families secure affordable home loans.
We have much more work to do to deliver affordable housing to the
American people, but this bipartisan legislation is a step forward. We
need to examine ways to increase investment in housing supply and
improve financing options, as well as expand vouchers to directly
assist families. There are also different perspectives on how this
legislation's treatment of ``build-to-rent'' housing could affect
housing supply and prices. Accordingly, we must closely monitor housing
markets to ensure those provisions support housing affordability
appropriately and make adjustments if circumstances warrant. I look
forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to increase the
production of affordable housing communities need.
Mr. DURBIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. 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 South Carolina.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent
to speak for up to 5 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
H.R. 6644
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. President, the issue of housing is
not a Republican issue or a Democrat issue. It is an issue about
helping moms like the one that raised me--the amazing woman that she
was--to become a homeowner.
I grew up in rental property, and my first home that I remember was
the one that my grandparents were renting, a little 700-square-foot
place where me, my mother, and my brother shared a bedroom and a
bed. Our experience was one that was filled with tragedy and challenges
and a lack of resources, but the one resource we had a lot of was love
and hope.
The legislative process today gives us an opportunity to restore hope
for so many people who want to just experience their version of the
American dream, which is so consistently home ownership.
I am so thankful that back in those days when I was growing up, there
was a group of legislators--back in the late seventies and early
eighties--who created a program through the USDA that allowed my mom to
become a first-time home buyer at 38 years old. But today the average
age of a first-time home buyer is 40--40 years old before you ever
experience the American dream. That age is too old.
We as a legislative body can do now what a legislative body did
then--create opportunities, restore hope, and let young people
experience for the first time the American dream--the dream of home
ownership.
[[Page S1024]]
I am so thankful that it is so far so good, but we must finish the
task today. We can do what so many folks failed to do in this
legislative body for the last few decades--not a few years but a few
decades--which is to pass consequential legislation that makes it
easier to become a homeowner for those who are ready for that part of
their journey.
I urge this body to vote yes on this bill, and let's create more
homeowners at an earlier age. The age of affordability is now, and the
solution to affordability is, in fact, us. I urge my colleagues to vote
yes on this bill, and let's get the ball moving.
Vote on H.R. 6644, as Amended
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, all postcloture time
has expired. The clerk will read the bill by title, as amended, for the
third time.
The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the
question is, Shall the bill pass?
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, 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 Senator is necessarily absent: the
Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
The result was announced--yeas 89, nays 10, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 53 Leg.]
YEAS--89
Alsobrooks
Baldwin
Banks
Barrasso
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt Rochester
Booker
Boozman
Britt
Cantwell
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Coons
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Curtis
Daines
Duckworth
Durbin
Ernst
Fetterman
Fischer
Gallego
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hassan
Hawley
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Hoeven
Husted
Hyde-Smith
Justice
Kaine
Kelly
Kennedy
Kim
King
Klobuchar
Lankford
Lujan
Lummis
Markey
Marshall
McConnell
McCormick
Merkley
Moody
Moran
Moreno
Mullin
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Ricketts
Risch
Rosen
Rounds
Sanders
Schiff
Schmitt
Schumer
Scott (SC)
Shaheen
Sheehy
Slotkin
Smith
Sullivan
Thune
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--10
Budd
Cruz
Johnson
Lee
Paul
Schatz
Scott (FL)
Tillis
Tuberville
Young
NOT VOTING--1
Blackburn
The bill (H.R. 6644), as amended, was passed.
(Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina assumed the chair.)
(Mr. HAGERTY assumed the chair.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Scott of South Carolina). The Senator from
North Carolina.
____________________