[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 53 (Sunday, March 22, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1504-S1506]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to
Proceed--Continued
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Democratic leader is
recognized.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, the Senate is in session once again this
weekend, and once again Republicans are doing nothing productive.
Yesterday, instead of considering legislation to tackle inflation or
end the war in Iran, MAGA Republicans wasted Senate floor time on a
radical culture-war amendment that went nowhere. It failed, and it
accomplished nothing--a total waste of time with nothing to show for
it.
And, yesterday, the Republicans once again blocked the Senate's
ability to finally start paying our TSA workers. These workers have
gone now for weeks without pay. They work around the clock. They keep
our airports running. Republicans had the chance to pay them once
again, and they refused. They refused.
The bottom line is this was the first time we saw ``yes'' or ``no''
votes from Republicans on an amendment that simply said ``Pay them.''
Don't wait, as the Republicans are saying, until we resolve all the
other issues in ICE. It simply said ``Pay them now,'' and they said no.
And that shows you, when they are voting yes on amendments that won't
actually pay them because it won't pass because it is tied to all the
other complications in ICE--including the desire that American people
have that we must have warrants when you bust into someone's home and
that the police should not wear masks--they say they will only vote for
TSA agents if we get rid of those things, if we don't make sure they
have to wear masks. That is fake. That is not really helping TSA
workers. Our amendment did. They all voted no.
But we are going to keep at it. I say this to TSA workers. I say this
to people at the airports who are waiting in line ungodly hours. We
will keep doing this and doing this until the Republicans see the light
and feel the pressure that they are holding up payment and relent.
Now, today, Donald Trump and Homan are saying they will deploy ICE
agents to airports starting on Monday. This is really disturbing. ICE
agents--who are untrained and have caused problems everywhere they have
gone--lurking at our airports? That is asking for trouble, and it will
certainly make the chaos at the airports even worse. No one has any
faith in ICE agents. They haven't received training. They don't know
what it is to be a TSA person and do what you need to do there.
The real problem here is they have no plan for using these ICE
agents. Trump says send them there, they send them there, and Homan
says they are still drawing up plans, with less than a day's notice.
What is this? We know what it is. It is another impulsive action by
Donald Trump. Some idea pops into his head, and he announces it, and
then the people working for him, a few of whom do have some degree of
talent and ability--not many--underlings--they have to rush to try to
implement what they know is an idiotic plan.
In this case, it is a plan that has no planning. It is another
impulsive action from Donald Trump. When he acts impulsively, there is
usually trouble. Whenever Donald Trump acts impulsively with no follow-
through, there is trouble.
ICE agents will be asked to do things they are not trained to do.
They don't know how to perform core TSA screening functions. Travelers
will be on edge with Federal agents looking over their shoulders. All
they will do is worsen the situation at airports, which are already on
edge.
So I have an idea for Donald Trump: Instead of sending ICE agents to
harass travelers at airports, why doesn't
[[Page S1505]]
Trump get his act together and agree to pay the TSA workers and get the
Senate Republicans to do so?
Iran
Mr. President, now let's talk about the disastrous war in Iran,
causing so much havoc, so much chaos, and raising everybody's gas
prices and prices on so much else.
Here is what Donald Trump said on Friday about the war. Donald Trump
said:
You know, I may have a plan or I may not.
For a war? Whoa. Here people's lives are at stake, billions are being
spent on an almost daily basis, and he says:
You know, I may have a plan or I may not.
These are the words of the Commander in Chief in the middle of a war
involving one of the most dangerous regimes on Earth:
I may have a plan or I may not.
That is unhinged and dangerous. Lives are on the line, and the
President says he may not even have a plan. Tens of billions are being
wasted. No plan. Troops being killed and injured. No plan. Civilians
being killed and injured. No plan. Gasoline costs $3.94 a gallon on
average. And Trump: I have no plan--or I may not have a plan, which
means none.
What does Donald Trump do? He lifts sanctions on two of the states
that are enemies to us in so many ways--Iran and Russia--so they can go
after our own troops and allies. Lifting sanctions on Iran and Russia
so they can go after our troops and our allies--it is the dictionary
definition of ``asinine.''
Donald Trump's military strategy is like watching a snake eat its own
tail.
This war needs to come to an end.
Secretary Rubio, Secretary Hegseth, and other Cabinet officials must
come before the Senate and testify under oath in public to explain why
we are in this mess and what the goal even is. Even some Republicans
are openly admitting they have no clue what the administration is
trying to accomplish in the Middle East.
Enough is enough. The American people do not want a war with Iran
that has no end. They do not want to see our troops deployed again and
again to the Middle East. They don't want to just have a knot in their
stomach every time they pull up to the gas pump and, soon enough, the
grocery store as well because of the higher prices caused by this war.
It must come to an end.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Alaska.
Nomination of Markwayne Mullin
Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I want to speak on the vote we are
getting ready to take here right now.
The minority leader, Senator Schumer, was on the floor just a minute
ago. I certainly hope we can continue to move forward in a good-faith
manner to fund Homeland Security and get the reforms and compromise
that have been demanded on both sides. I am hopeful we can get there.
But one way we can show that momentum--and I believe there is
momentum in these negotiations, because we all need to fund Homeland
Security--is to have strong, bipartisan support for the Secretary of
Homeland Security whom we are getting ready to confirm here in the U.S.
Senate right now. That is my good friend and fellow U.S. Senator
Markwayne Mullin.
And the Presiding Officer knows it. Every Senator knows it. He is
smart. He is thoughtful. He has good friends on both sides of the
aisle. As a matter of fact, I would say that Senator Mullin, of all the
Senators here, probably works more across the aisle--not just Senators
to Senators but Senate and House, Senate and White House. He is a
really indispensable convener for this body to get things done. That is
his reputation. Everybody knows it, and everybody thinks highly of him.
I certainly think highly of him.
But, to me, someone with that skill set and that reputation and that
experience of working across the aisle here, of working with Members of
the House--by the way, Democrats and Republicans--is exactly the kind
of leader we need at Homeland Security at this moment--exactly the kind
of leader we need at Homeland Security at this moment.
So I am very hopeful that we are going to have a strong bipartisan
vote for our colleague Senator Markwayne Mullin to move forward as the
Secretary of Homeland Security. Of course, that would be good for the
Senate, showing a bipartisan vote on someone who is clearly qualified--
and, yes, does have the temperament. I know that came up in the
hearing. But, again, when I watched him work for years in this body,
there is no one who works harder to actually try to get compromise to
move things forward. That is his reputation here. And I know my Senate
colleagues on the other side of the aisle agree with me on this.
So strong bipartisan support is what I have been pitching so many of
my Democratic colleagues on, for this highly qualified U.S. Senator. It
would be good for the Senate. It would be good for the Department of
Homeland Security. To be honest, given what has been going on with
Homeland Security, it would be good for the country, and I hope we can
get there.
As I mentioned, I have been working with a lot of my colleagues--
Republicans but especially Democratic colleagues--to say: Come on. We
need this at this moment. You guys should be a yes. You all know you
should be a yes.
By the way, in private--and I have a lot of good friends on the other
side of the aisle--they say: Hey, Dan, I know I should be a yes on
this, but--but--there are a lot of buts in terms of excuses. They are
not great excuses. I won't go through all of them.
Hey, I am from a really blue State. Tough on me. Hey, I might be
running for Governor. Hey, I might be running for President.
This is what they have said.
But I don't think that should matter. We have all taken those kind of
votes, tough votes, that we know are the right thing to do. And, again,
as I mentioned, it is the right thing to do right now for Homeland
Security, for the U.S. Senate, for the United States of America, a
strong bipartisan support for this great American, by the way, who is
highly, highly qualified.
And you know, the excuses are now coming out, the ``buts.'' I mean,
we have all taken tough votes. You know, I certainly have taken my few
in terms of Cabinet officials. I supported a strong number of Biden
Cabinet officials. Those weren't always popular votes back home in my
State. I certainly wouldn't have chosen those nominees had I been in
that position, but I am a strong believer in the general principle the
President should typically get the Cabinet that he wants. And I think
President Trump made an inspired choice by nominating Markwayne Mullin.
So I am hopeful that my colleagues--and everybody knows it is the
right thing to do, to give him a strong bipartisan vote.
Enough ``buts.'' I have heard too many ``buts'' from my Senate
Democrat colleagues. You know he is a qualified individual. You know he
is going to do a very good job leading this critical organization.
I am hoping a strong bipartisan vote can then help us lead to
compromise and get Homeland Security funded, which is what we need to
do. So I am looking forward to working with my good friend--and he is a
very good friend--Markwayne Mullin to be the next Secretary of Homeland
Security.
We are going to start voting on him here in a couple of minutes. I
look forward to working with him on the historic buildup of the Coast
Guard in Alaska that is happening--very exciting, icebreakers in the
One Big Beautiful Bill--the Working Families Tax Cut Act. I like that
name much better. The biggest investment in the Coast Guard in American
history--$25 billion--and everybody loved that: Democrats, Republicans.
He is the right man, right individual, to lead this organization at
this time, and I am hoping we have a strong bipartisan vote that he
deserves in the next couple of minutes to move his nomination forward.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Alaska.
Waiving Quorum Call
Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the
mandatory quorum call with respect to the Mullin nomination.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
The Senator from Delaware.
Ms. BLUNT ROCHESTER. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
[[Page S1506]]
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
____________________