[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 25, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1589-S1599]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to
Proceed--Resumed
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 311, H.R.
7147.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 311, H.R. 7147, a bill
making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, we are on day 40 of Democrats' shutdown of
Department of Homeland Security--day 40. And that is on top of
Democrats' recordbreaking 43-day full-government shutdown in the fall.
Altogether, thanks to Senate Democrats, a lot of DHS employees have
been working without pay for more than 80 days so far this fiscal year.
That is shameful. It is no wonder TSA agents are quitting in droves--
anyone would be if they had been working without pay for almost 50
percent of the fiscal year so far.
My Democrat colleagues, of course, are working with pay, having
rejected a Republican proposal to stop Senators' pay while DHS
continues to be shut down. I am hoping that Democrats can at least
envision what it is like for stressed-out Homeland Security workers
wondering if they will be able to
[[Page S1590]]
pay their rent, and I hope they will recognize the situation can't
continue.
Homeland Security workers are hurting; travelers are beyond fed up
with the disastrous situation at U.S. airports; and we cannot continue
to keep this critical Department unfunded. Democrats have a proposal
before them with legislative text--the latest serious offer from
Republicans to get this Department back up and running.
Democrats have repeatedly said that they want to pay TSA, Coast
Guard, FEMA, and employees who defend America from cyber attacks. This
bill would do it. I hope Democrats will work with us to finalize an
agreement and reopen the Department of Homeland Security this week.
SAVE America ACT
Mr. President, since we began debate on the SAVE America Act, my
Democrat colleagues have spent a lot of time hedging. And that has been
particularly evident on the issue of voter ID--something that Democrats
have spent years decrying as a tool of voter suppression but are now
suggesting they somehow support.
Democrats can read the polls as well as any of us, and I suspect that
Democrats are not eager to be seen as on the 20-percent side of an 80-
20 issue, so they are trying to have their cake and eat it too.
So the Democrat leader is out there claiming Democrat support for
voter ID--as long, of course, as he doesn't have to vote for any ID
proposal that we actually put forward.
On Thursday, the junior Republican Senator from Ohio offered an
eminently reasonable voter ID proposal. All that it would have done is
require a photo ID for voters when they go to the polls--a driver's
license, military ID, Tribal ID, passport--the types of IDs that are
sitting in wallets right now that the American people use on a regular
basis.
Democrats said: No, we don't like that. And so they blocked it.
And more than blocked it. The junior Senator from Oregon offered an
alternative bill that would have actually banned voter ID for absentee
ballots.
And then yesterday--yesterday--Democrats said the quiet part out
loud. The Democrat leader came down to the floor and made it clear when
Democrats say they support voter ID, they mean that they support voter
ID just as long as the ID requirements in question are meaningless.
That is right. The Democrat leader brought up a bill Democrats
introduced a few years that included a voter ID requirement--well, sort
of.
Let me read a few of the IDs that the Democrats' bill would have
accepted: A debit card, a lease or mortgage document, a utility bill,
any document containing the individual's name--name, not photo--issued
by a government, or a photocopy of any one of the above.
Now, sure, Mr. President, some of these things are accepted or
requested as adjunct documents when you are trying to get something
like a driver's license or a library card--along with, you know, things
like photo ID or a birth certificate. But just showing a utility bill
to prove your identity? Give me a break.
If someone asked you for an ID in any other circumstance, are you
going to pull out your electric bill? Can you get into a bar by showing
your lease? Can you prove eligibility to work at your new job by
pulling out the water bill? No, you cannot. Now, I would like to see
someone try to get on a plane by presenting a photocopy of their debit
card.
When Republicans say voter ID, we mean an actual ID with a picture
issued by a government. The kind of ID that is required for a whole
bunch of things in our daily lives--starting a new job, driving a car,
doing an early pickup at school, opening a bank account, getting a
library card.
The Democrat leader suggested that photo IDs are somehow out of reach
for voters--that they need ``inclusive'' voter ID options. How does the
Democratic leader think Americans are navigating all of the scenarios I
just mentioned? Well, I will tell him: With their photo IDs. And yet,
it is somehow an intolerable burden to ask Americans to bring those IDs
with them to the polls.
Give me a break. Requiring a photo ID isn't onerous. It is common
sense, and the American people agree. Poll after poll shows that
Americans of both parties strongly support requiring a photo ID at the
polls. And just to reassure my Democrat friends, a 2019 study published
by the National Bureau of Economic Research found:
[S]trict ID laws have no significant negative effect on
registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined
by age, gender, race, or party affiliation.
Democrats are going to have another chance tomorrow to support
election integrity by implementing a commonsense photo ID requirement.
Will they stand with Americans, or will they continue to oppose any
meaningful ID requirement at the polls?
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The Democratic leader is recognized.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, this morning, Democrats sent Republicans
our counteroffer on legislation to reopen DHS, pay TSA workers, while
at the same time rein in ICE with commonsense guardrails. Our offer is
a reasonable, good-faith proposal that contains some of the very same
asks Democrats have been talking about now for months.
Leader Jeffries and I have spoken about this agenda, and he agrees we
need these strong reforms.
Now, over the last day, Republicans have made the outrageous and bad-
faith claim that Democrats are somehow moving the goalposts back in
these negotiations. They are saying Democrats changed the ask. They are
saying Democrats are backtracking and suddenly introducing new demands
at the last minute.
This is nonsense--nonsense.
Democrats and the American people have been very clear from the
beginning about what we need in order to move forward. We have been
talking about ICE reforms from day one. These are not new demands.
These are not surprise demands. They are not things we came up with
yesterday.
They are commonsense reforms, reasonable reforms, reforms that police
departments across America follow every day. These are reforms the
American people overwhelmingly support and things that Republicans know
perfectly well we have been seeking since these negotiations began--
since these discussions began as well.
So for Republicans to now act as though Democrats have changed our
position as though we have moved the goalposts is poppycock, bad faith.
And for Republicans to send us a proposal that has no reforms is bad
faith as well and will only slow things down. They know it is bad
faith.
In fact, over the weekend Democrats had constructive conversations in
person with our Republican colleagues. They--the Republican
colleagues--conceded that some of the reforms, verbally, that we have
been looking for, they said: These make sense.
We thought there might be a path forward on some of the ways to
reform ICE and to get some of the things everybody knows ought to be in
Federal legislation. We thought there had been some progress.
But then Republicans sent us their offer yesterday, and it contained
none of what had been talked about, none of the reforms we had been
discussing. So if anyone is slowing down negotiation and hurting TSA
workers, it is the Republican leadership who did not include one single
reform.
Republicans, frankly, are struggling to get on the same page among
themselves. That is probably why they have been so erratic here.
Moderates in the Republican caucus say one thing; conservatives say
another. Donald Trump is all over the place, seemingly without a clue
of what is going on. They are still worried about and afraid of what he
might say or do. That is what this is all about.
So let me say this: We are ready to discuss these issues at a
moment's notice with Republicans. We will not walk away. We are not
walking away, and we want to get to a solution.
We now have given Republicans our response. It is a serious offer,
and time
[[Page S1591]]
is of the essence, I say to my Republican colleagues. The Easter
holiday is coming. Families are going on spring break. TSA lines are
literally stretching out the door at airports. People are exhausted.
And our TSA agents need to be paid.
Enough is enough. It is time for Republicans to drill down and work
with us to solve this thing. We have asked the Republicans nine times
already to support TSA. We have told Republicans: Just support TSA
while we settle these disputes with ICE, and they have refused nine
times. They say they want their position on ICE met first before they
do anything to fund TSA and pay our workers.
The way to pay TSA is to vote to send their paychecks now while we
settle this dispute regarding ICE. We can and must do both--negotiate
reforms to ICE but vote to pay our TSA workers now.
That is why, today, for the 10th time--10th time--Democrats will go
to the floor so that we can pay TSA immediately as we negotiate ICE. We
hope our Republican colleagues will finally see the light and join us.
Let me say it again: Enough is enough. It is time for Republicans to
drill down and work with us to solve this thing.
SAVE America Act
Mr. President, finally, on the SAVE Act, which seems to have now been
intertwined in these negotiations because of Donald Trump and
Republican obeisance to him, let me say this to our Republican
colleagues: If you want to shove the SAVE Act into reconciliation, then
have at it. We are going to fight you tooth and nail throughout the
reconciliation process every step of the way.
You are going to find it very difficult to jam massive changes to the
American election system, to turn the American election system inside
out, as it were, by using a process that was never designed for that
purpose. Reconciliation was not, is not, and will not be intended to be
a backdoor for sweeping election law; that is not what it is for.
So if Republicans want to head down that road, they should understand
it will be a hard road. Democrats will fight them every--every--step of
the way on that road, and it will not go the way they think or want.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, as you and we can all see, the cherry
blossoms are popping out along the Potomac River and around the Capitol
and are approaching peak bloom.
We all know what comes next; we get a lot of visitors who come to the
Nation's Capital at this wonderful time of year to see the cherry
blossoms. They come during spring break, and it is good to see friends
from back home come to the Nation's Capital to visit and learn more
about how our government functions or sometimes how it doesn't function
as well as we would like.
Families taking a vacation, as well as elementary, middle, and high
school groups, are learning about civics, which is a good thing. More
of our kids need to know how our government works because they are
going to be the leaders of tomorrow.
So I am glad the Senate is still debating a very important piece of
legislation called the SAVE America Act because it really goes to the
very foundation of self-government.
All it says is that in order to be an American citizen--excuse me, in
order to vote, you need to be an American citizen, and in order to cast
a ballot, you have to produce a voter ID.
So it makes you wonder, with the polling showing that 70 to 80
percent of people polled--Republicans, Democrats, and Independents
alike--support both of those provisions, why is it that our Democratic
colleagues oppose it?
Surely, it can't be because they want people other than American
citizens to vote or they want to make it easier to cheat. But sometimes
I struggle to figure out what the reason is that they reflexively
oppose even commonsense provisions like this.
By now, we have heard the argument on both sides. Our Democratic
colleagues argue that the SAVE America Act is just too hard for
ordinary Americans to comply with. They are claiming that the same
people who can present a valid government ID to board a plane, buy a
beer, drive a car, rent a hotel room, or open a bank account simply
won't be able to do the same to cast a ballot.
We know that is not true, and it just doesn't make any sense. It is
clear that this is just a pretext to say that they apparently don't
care whether illegal aliens vote in our elections. Republicans, on the
other hand, believe that every illegal vote cast dilutes your vote and
undermines the integrity of the election system.
We want more people to participate in the election system. We need to
build confidence that it is going to work and operate with integrity.
So by resisting commonsense measures like demonstrating American
citizenship and producing a voter ID--which would contribute to
building confidence and thus, hopefully, get more people to participate
in our elections--that is something they apparently are not interested
in.
President Trump, I think, is right to make this a priority, but I am
sure like me, he scratches his head and wonders, What is the contrary
argument?
If we don't stop illegal aliens or noncitizens from voting in our
elections, it is not long before we will have a country that is not
representative of the American people.
You know, the very basis for our form of government is as stated in
the Declaration of Independence: The authority that we exercise on
behalf of the people who vote for us in elections is based on consent
of the governed. The power doesn't come top down, it comes bottom up.
And if people who are not qualified because they are not citizens to
vote in our elections--it undermines that very basic foundation and
compact between the people and those who exercise power on their behalf
here in Washington, DC.
I am committed to doing whatever it takes to muscle this through the
Senate, including using the reconciliation process, if necessary, to
get around Senate Democrats' obstruction, but at the same time, we are
not giving up on moving it through regular order here on the Senate
floor.
Our colleague Senator Lee from Utah has been a proponent of using the
talking filibuster; in other words, not letting people sit on their
hands and just object and stop progress on important bills like this
but to force people to talk and debate because I think the American
people need to hear the arguments--pro and con--and they can make up
their mind whom they agree with and what they believe.
That is what the world's greatest deliberative body was supposed to
be all about, which is otherwise known as the U.S. Senate.
So if Democrats really don't believe that illegal aliens should be
able to vote, they need to come to the floor and prove it.
If they think we should not make it easier to cheat in elections by
not requiring people to show a photo ID, they need to come to the floor
of the Senate and debate it. I would love to hear the arguments to the
contrary.
As I said, a recent Harvard-Harris poll showed that 71 percent of
voters, including 50 percent of Democrats and 69 percent of Independent
voters, support the SAVE America Act. It is hard to find that kind of
consensus anywhere in America today, as polarized as we are. But this
means that Senate Democrats are defying the wishes of their own voters,
their supporters.
Now, we have heard this nutty idea that somehow the SAVE America Act
will disenfranchise voters. Well, the only people it will
disenfranchise are people who are not qualified to vote.
But if you extend that logic a little further, in other words, 70 to
80 percent of people polled support the SAVE America Act; and if you
believe it will disenfranchise voters, that means that 70 to 80 percent
of people polled are willing to disenfranchise themselves--again, what
a silly, absurd, and false argument.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. President, it is beyond shameful that Senate Democrats have
continued to keep the Department of Homeland Security unfunded and shut
down.
I would have thought, by now, with some of the lines at the TSA
security checkpoints in places like the Houston International Airport--
the Bush International Airport--that finally people would wake up and
say: You know, we
[[Page S1592]]
are causing too much needless pain and collateral damage to people who
have nothing to do with this fight.
We know that essential operations of ICE, or Immigrations and Customs
Enforcement, like the Homeland Security Investigations, which is an
important office that conducts operations to prevent human trafficking,
are hamstrung; and we know TSA workers are continuing to work without
pay. These are not wealthy people. These are public servants who are
performing an important function keeping us all safe, and they have to
show up. They are showing up and working without pay.
But then there are some who simply can't outlast the political stunts
here in Washington, and more than 300 of them have left their jobs. And
you can't blame them. If you are not getting paid because of the
politics here in Washington, DC, you may not be able to wait that out.
You may just have to look for a job--another job.
But each new hire to replace a TSA agent requires 4 to 6 months of
training and certification, and I can't imagine that there is a long
waiting list of people who want to become TSA agents if they have this
sort of environment to look forward to. So it certainly doesn't help
with recruiting new people to fill the gaps.
But we know that President Trump, left with no other alternative, has
asked ICE to assist and help out at the airports. And some Democrats
are getting downright hysterical about the fact that now ICE is
necessary to help process people through the airports.
Some are even saying that the traveling American public is in danger
when these professional law enforcement officers are working to help
assist people to move through these security checkpoints at our
airports.
Meanwhile, the truth is, as we have seen in videos and social media,
ICE agents are handing out water bottles to travelers and helping keep
the flow of traffic organized and hopefully expedited.
I think it is encouraging that these men and women are willing to
jump in and become team players, even in this difficult and charged
environment where Democrats continue--this is the party of ``defund the
police'' or ``abolish ICE.''
Now they have found a new way to try to prevent the enforcement of
our immigration laws by saying: We are not going to fund ICE.
That is not what the American people voted for last November--in
November 2024. The reason why President Trump was elected, among other
reasons, was because of open borders and 40-year-high inflation. And,
of course, we know President Trump has effectively secured the border,
but now Democrats have found a new way to prevent people from--who got
here in the first place, who don't deserve to be here--from being
removed from the country by saying: We are simply going to refuse to
fund immigration enforcement.
And then, of course, we know that, despite the fact that the
President was elected by the American people, having won the electoral
vote and the popular vote in every single swing State, Democrats
continue to try to oppose the duly elected President of the United
States out of a demonstration of what has become known as Trump
derangement syndrome.
In other words, whatever he proposes, they oppose. It is just
reflexive. More than 70 percent of Americans support his efforts to
remove criminal illegal aliens from our country. And almost daily we
hear of tragedies, of innocent individuals being killed or harmed, as a
result of some of the people that were let into the country during the
Biden administration that need to be removed.
Well, I am hopeful that we are moving closer to a deal which will
help these good men and women that work at the Department of Homeland
Security get a paycheck. President Trump knows how to make a deal, and
I am confident that, under his leadership, we will find a way. Unless
the Democrats continue to move the goalposts, which the minority leader
continues to try to do, I am optimistic that we will find a way to get
them paid by the end of the week.
These antics are not a way to govern. We need paychecks for our TSA
agents and secure elections, both. This is what the American people
chose during the last Presidential election, and I am confident, under
the President's leadership, we will accomplish these priorities and,
finally, after more than a month, reopen the Department of Homeland
Security.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority whip.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today having heard
the minority leader talk about the ongoing problem that the country is
seeing before their very eyes, which is the shutdown of the Department
of Homeland Security caused by the Democrats.
Republicans have continually come to the floor to vote to open the
Department of Homeland Security, and working with the Democrats, there
have been a number of proposals, one of which the Democrats actually
agreed to the other day. And yet today, on the floor the Senate, the
minority leader said: Oh, no, that is just ``poppycock.'' That was his
word.
The Democrats have continued to move the goalposts over all of this
time when we were talking about the importance of funding the
Department of Homeland Security--a Department that was set up after 9/
11 to deal comprehensively with our Nation's security.
There are issues of border security, cyber security, flight security.
The TSA is part of that. This has gotten so bad. I saw on the news this
morning that there are members of the Department of Homeland Security,
who are not getting paid, who are working every day, and who are now
donating their plasma--not donating it but giving it to get paid.
That is what the Democrats--they talk about getting blood out of it.
That is what the Democrats are doing. Blood is on their hands. We are
seeing this today with the unfunding of the Department of Homeland
Security.
Americans are rising up to say to the Democrats: We care about these
people that are working and not getting paid.
My own Rotary Club in Casper, WY, came out today with an email to all
the Rotarians. One of the members of the club has offered a matching
donation of up to $2,000 for supplies and gift cards to be donated to
TSA employees at the airport. Now, these people have been working
without pay because of the shutdown of the Department of Homeland
Security.
It says: Please consider supporting the local TSA personnel and help
secure the matching donation by donating supplies or gift cards.
It goes on to say: Currently, there are approximately 40 TSA
employees in Casper who are not being paid. The airport is collecting
food and other supplies--dog food, cat food, toilet paper, et cetera--
because of what we are facing here and with an offer that we have made,
and the Democrats are now saying, well, it is all ``poppycock.'' They
don't seem to care.
The employees cannot accept cash, cannot accept cash-equivalent cards
like Visa gift cards. However, they can accept gas cards and gift cards
to places like Walmart or Target, which give them the flexibility to
purchase what they truly need.
This is what we are seeing here in this Chamber with what the
Democrats are doing because they do not want to fund the Department of
Homeland Security that keeps our Nation safe.
Well, there is now circulating, and that it is evident, that the
Republicans have all seen, which is a Member of the Senate--a Democrat
Member of the Senate--on television telling the Nation--this is a clip
where a Member of the Senate says--this is a Democrat--the people we
care most about, he says, are ``the undocumented.''
Not these people who are working every day--the people the Democrats
care most about are the undocumented, the illegal immigrants, the
people who are not citizens of this country but are here and have been
unleashed into this country--10 million or more--during the Biden
administration.
And that is what we are talking about here today on the floor, and
why we will be voting later today on the proposal that the Republicans
have made that the Democrats agreed to 2 days ago. But now they have
withdrawn their support because, as we hear from a Democrat spokesman
and a Democrat Senator, the people that they care most about are not
the citizens of the United States; they are the
[[Page S1593]]
undocumented, the illegal immigrants who are here among us today.
SAVE America Act
Mr. President, I have also heard Senate Democrats on this floor say,
when it comes to voting, they are open to the requirement of a photo
ID. Senator Schumer said, just last week, that his Democrat caucus is
not opposed to a photo ID when you show up to vote.
We now have a pending amendment to the SAVE America Act to do just
that. It is a straightforward amendment from Senator Jon Husted of
Ohio. It simply requires a photo ID when Americans show up to vote.
Democrats blocked this very bill on this floor last week. Then they
offered a counterproposal, a nationwide ban--a ban--on photo ID
requirements. I mean, it is the exact opposite of what the American
people want. I mean, it is hard to believe, but that is what they said.
They wanted to ban photo ID. Democrats did this even though 32 States
currently require photo ID. So I guess they want to rip it out of all
the States that already have it.
Mr. President, 21 Democrat Senators on that side of the aisle in this
very Chamber represent States where voter ID is the law of the land.
They live by it. They vote under it. They were even elected under it.
Why do Democrats believe that voter ID is fine for their home States
but not for our Nation?
We are going to give every single Democrat in this Chamber the chance
to go on the record on that very topic. They are going to have the
opportunity to show the American people where they stand on commonsense
requirements for photo ID.
The vote is a clear yes or no for Democrat Senators. It doesn't touch
voter rolls. It doesn't touch mail-in voting. It is a clean up-or-down
vote on whether voters should be required to show a photo ID in order
to vote.
The bill offers a clear, broad definition of photo IDs. Voters can
use a driver's license. They can use State ID. They can use a U.S.
passport. They can use a military ID. They can use a Tribal ID. Those
are identifications Americans carry with them every single day. They
use it to cash a check, to board a plane, to buy a beer. People use it
every day. It is just common sense.
Asking for a photo ID at the ballot box is common sense and a common
practice in States all across the country.
As I said earlier, 36 States require or request an ID to vote. Of
these 36 States, 32 require a photo ID. That is most of the country.
And yes, that includes Democrat States. Of course, we know that there
are many large and liberal States that lack voter ID laws--sanctuary
States like California, New York, Oregon, Illinois--and they don't
protect the voter rolls.
So, once again, we are seeing Democrats angling for illegal
immigrants to have an impact on our elections. Why is that? As I said
earlier, the people we care most about, the undocumented. He said, the
illegal immigrants who are here among our Nation.
That is who the Democrats will tell you they care most about, not
law-abiding citizens but illegal immigrants.
Democrats allowed 10 million illegal immigrants. They flooded in the
country. The lesson is clear. We cannot allow illegal immigrants to
undermine and erode the integrity of our elections. That is why we are
in this shutdown right now because of the Democrats' preference of
illegal immigrants over American citizens and the safety and security
of our Nation.
But adding photo ID requirements would be a significant step toward
restoring confidence in elections in all 50 States.
So I want to thank Senator Jon Husted of Ohio. Senator Husted knows
exactly about administering elections, and he knows it better than any
Member of this body. He spent 8 years as Ohio's secretary of state. His
job was to run fair, safe, and secure elections; and he succeeded at
it.
He knows how to do it. He knows what works. And he succeeded in one
of the most closely watched battleground States in our Nation. His
amendment makes it easy to vote, harder to cheat, and it does so
nationwide.
A clean, simple photo ID amendment leaves Democrats with no excuses.
They can't claim photo ID is too hard. They can't claim it is too
confusing. They can't claim it is too burdensome.
The question before the Senate is, Will Democrats take a reasonable
and responsible step toward what most Americans consider common sense?
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The minority whip.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, not once, not twice, 10 times we Democrats
have brought to the floor of the Senate an opportunity to restore all
of the appropriations in the Department of Homeland Security but for
one Agency, ICE and a related Agency, Border Patrol. Ten times the
Republicans have voted no--ten times. Let's get it done this week and
done as quickly as possible.
We proposed this to the point where the Republican leader met with
the President and said: We ought to be for this. He said: No, not until
you pass this voting bill.
This voting bill is controversial. It seems to change. My friend from
Wyoming--he is my friend--the Senator from Wyoming said: We are
offering an amendment to change this bill.
This bill has been changed over and over again because it is a mess.
Why is it a mess? Because the premise is wrong. The premise that there
are illegal aliens voting in the United States in any measurable number
is wrong.
We did a survey. We looked at 24 years, 1999 to 2023. How many
illegal aliens were caught voting in the United States? There were 50
million every election cycle who were registered to vote. How many of
those were illegal aliens?
Over a period of 24 years, what is your guess? Seven million? You
would think so, wouldn't you, from Senator Barrasso's statements? How
about 700,000? How about 70,000? How about 700? How about 77?
That is the exact number that was found. Mr. President, 77 people
over a span of 24 years were not eligible to vote as illegal aliens and
voted anyway, 77 over 24 years.
So now the Republicans want to change the system. They want people to
reregister. This is the first I have heard that they are going to
accept a driver's license. Up until now, you needed a passport. How
many Americans have passports? Forty-nine percent.
If you wanted to get a passport in time to register to vote for
November, what do you have to do? Well, you have to fill out a form and
you have to write a check and you have to wait weeks to receive it.
How big is that check that you have to write so you can be sure you
vote? Mr. President, $165 for you to get a passport--$165. You wait
weeks and maybe months before it is delivered to you to prove you are
an American citizen so you can vote in November.
What is wrong with this picture? For 77 voters or attempted voters,
in 24 years, we are going to require every American to come up with
this proof? Oh, there is an alternative. Your birth certificate, you
can prove you are an American that way in this reregistration effort by
the Republicans.
Have you found your birth certificate recently? I think mine is
upstairs in the bedroom closet in a cardboard box. I am not sure. I
would have to go look. Some people don't have access at all to them.
Why are we going through all this? The bottom line is: There is a
good reason and a real reason. The good reason is to make sure that
noncitizens don't vote. I agree with that premise. The real reason is:
Donald Trump is scared of this election in November.
Remember when he said: The States give me some more Republican
Members of the House? Redistrict your State. Draw up your map, save it
for unusual times. He did that because he is concerned about the
outcome of the election.
So when you hear this explanation about voter fraud, remember 77 in
24 years, 77 examples. And for that they want to change it.
In terms of showing their driver's license as an ID, I do it every
day, and you do it too. It is pretty normal. That is not a problem, but
that is not what this bill says. They think they want to change it.
Let's see them change it.
In the meantime, let's pay everybody: TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard, and the
basic Agencies at Homeland Security except for ICE. We are working
[[Page S1594]]
with the White House and negotiating new terms for the ICE agents.
Let's get it done this week.
For 10 different occasions, we have come to the floor and said: Fund
the rest of the Agencies including TSA. I still think we should be
there.
Political Prisoners
Mr. President, I come to the floor at this time to discuss a separate
issue, totally unrelated. Over the course of the time I have served in
the Senate, I have pointed out political prisoners jailed around the
world. Others have joined me over the years. Our current Secretary of
State Marco Rubio joined me on the floor one time to help further
history of bipartisan support for those pursuing freedom and democracy
around the world.
Sometimes those released as a result in pressure from this Chamber
actually come to see me in Washington, and they say how important it is
to know that they were remembered.
I want to salute my staffer Chris Homan, who joins me on the floor
here. This has been his personal project for many years with great
success.
Thanks, Chris.
Today, let me raise a few issues and cases for your consideration.
Let me start with the United Arab Emirates. We are one of that nation's
top human rights defenders. Ahmed Mansoor tragically has marked 9 years
in jail. He was arrested under the guise that his social media posts
advocating for human rights threatened social harmony.
Despite the dismal conditions of his incarceration, Mr. Mansoor has
remained steadfast in his commitment to human rights, even conducting
multiple hunger strikes to protest jail conditions.
We have strong ties and many shared interests with the UAE, but its
continued involvement in this horrific Sudanese civil war and jailing
Mr. Mansoor complicates the relationship.
Adding to the strain is Emirati Ambassador Otaiba's bewildering
refusal to engage on these issues. I appeal to him to finally release
Mr. Mansoor.
Next, Azerbaijan. Vice President Vance recently visited this country.
In 2023, anti-corruption researcher and advocate Dr. Gubad Ibadoghlu
and his wife were forcibly dragged from their vehicle and severely
beaten. His dubious arrest was a tragic result of writings about the
rampant corruption stemming from Azerbaijan's oil and gas industry.
While eventually placed under house arrest in 2024, he has still been
denied a trial and medical care; and his family continues to suffer
harassment.
In fact, his son Emin, who desperately hopes to reunite with his
father, is here today in the Senate Gallery. He is one of the many
wrongfully detained individuals in Azerbaijan who should be fully
released immediately.
In a number of cases in China, starting with Gulshan Abbas, a doctor
serving a 20-year sentence--20 years--likely a result of her sister's
advocacy for the Uyghurs.
Hong Kong publisher Jimmy Lai, jailed since 2020, a tragic example of
that island's loss of freedom under Chinese rule.
Pastors Jin Mingri and Gao Quanfu and his wife Pang Yu, arrested amid
a crackdown on religious freedom.
I apologize for mispronouncing the names.
The Chinese have worked with my office on such cases in the past and
made some important gestures, but it is time to do something. Release
these individuals.
I urge President Trump to raise with Chinese President Xi when he
visits China the fate of these prisoners.
In Tunisia, last July, I came to the floor to call for the release of
prominent Tunisian lawyer and political commentator Sonia Dahmani. She
was arrested in May 2024 for peaceful radio and television political
commentary and subjected to appalling prison conditions.
Her sister Ramla was also sentenced in absentia to 2 years in prison,
simply for publicly advocating for her sister's release.
While I am glad Sonia was conditionally released last year, the
government is still harassing her with nonsense charges.
I urge President Saied to end this vendetta against Sonia and Ramla
and take steps to restore press freedom in Tunisia, once a symbol of
great democratic hope after the Arab Spring.
Lastly, Equatorial Guinea, an oil-rich African nation with a history
of repression and growing ties with the Russian military, human rights
advocate Joaquin Elo Ayeto had been arrested in 2019 and eventually
released a year later, not long after which he came to meet me in my
office here in Washington.
Unfortunately, he was rearrested under new specious charges in 2024.
It is time to end this official harassment against Mr. Ayeto.
I urge President Mbasogo to show the same compassion displayed in
2022 and release him without delay on humanitarian grounds.
What we have here really matters, not just to these individuals and
their families. My friend and jailed Russian dissident Vladimir Kara-
Murza often reminded me that for political prisoners the worst
nightmare is the thought that people have forgotten them.
Let me remind Ahmed, Gubad, Gulshan, Jimmy, Pastors Jin and Gao,
Pang, Sonia, Ramla, and Joaquin you are not forgotten, and we will
continue to speak out for your freedom.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Iran
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today nearly a month into President
Trump's ill-advised war of choice in Iran, which has obviously
destabilized the region, disrupted global supply chains, degraded our
munitions stockpiles, cost the lives of 13 American servicemembers,
with more than 200 additional suffering injuries.
Fortunately, it is clear that even though this was a war of choice
and can be decided by the President's own timing, he started this with
no clear endgame and without adequately preparing for Iran's very
predictable response, which obviously would have included the Strait of
Hormuz, which obviously would have included Iran attacking other gulf
nation-states.
The intelligence on this is consistent and overwhelming for years
and, frankly, closes the Strait of Hormuz, which is one of the world's
most strategically vital maritime checkpoints.
Now, look at the Strait of Hormuz for a moment.
Way back in the seventies, when we had an oil shock, 7 percent of the
world's oil went through the strait. Today, 20 percent goes through.
Back in the seventies, no natural gas went through the Strait of
Hormuz. Now it is close to 20 percent. So the closure of the strait has
wreaked havoc on both the global oil and gas supply chains. As I said,
normally, about 20 percent of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas
passes through the strait.
Today, traffic through the strait has nearly grounded to a halt. It
is literally down 95 percent since the start of the war. The
International Energy Agency has already called the effective closure of
the strait and all of the other ancillary items coming out of it the
worst global energy disruption in history, eclipsing even the Arab oil
embargo of 1973--I am old enough to remember that, and the Senator from
Maryland is old enough to remember that--which caused huge gas lines
and damage all around the world.
So, if we just measure what has happened so far in these 3 weeks-
plus--the date of the closure of the strait--it has removed
approximately 400 million barrels of oil--around 4 days of the world's
supply--from the market. Again, much of the oil that is still getting
through had started on tankers before the war started. Those 400
million barrels of oil that have been removed--and that number will
rise exponentially now--have led to price increases of around 50
percent for Brent crude. That is the global benchmark for oil.
As well--and this has gotten some coverage in our country but not
enough--Iran has also carried out significant strikes on oil and gas
facilities throughout the gulf. In total, more than 40 energy sites in
9 countries across the Middle East have been severely damaged due to
the conflict, including the world's largest liquefied natural gas
facility in Qatar, which is to be closed down. That produces about a
fifth of the world's LNG.
Many of the facilities that were not even attacked still took out all
of the natural gas from the facilities because, if a missile were to
hit them with the
[[Page S1595]]
gas in the facility, it would cause a massive explosion. While I am no
expert here, I have been told to restart those facilities will take
weeks to months. The truth is, even if the President feels in his bones
today or tomorrow that we have won the war and he stops the bombing--
with no guarantee that Israel will stop or that Iran will stop--and the
strait starts to get reopened, we are still going to see economic pain
across the globe for weeks, months, or, potentially, a year.
For consumers in the United States, the conflict, obviously, has led
to a severe shock at the gas pump. Since the war began, average gas
prices in the United States have increased by about $1 a gallon--30
percent. I will take a bet with anybody in this Chamber that we are
going to see an average gas price of $4 that will be maintained for
some time. That $4 price will be the highest since 2022.
And, here, let's take the optimistic view. Even if the strait is
reopened today, the average household in our country will still be
expected to pay about $740 more in gas prices for the remainder of the
year. That is just gas.
What about diesel?
While Americans are struggling at the pump, skyrocketing diesel costs
are threatening to increase the pain for households across a series of
domains. Last week, diesel prices eclipsed $5 per gallon on average.
That was only the second time in history that diesel got above 5 bucks,
and that is about 40 percent higher than before the war began. Diesel
is the trucking industry's second largest expense, and for most
trucking firms, that diesel cost accounts for about 20 percent of the
total operating costs. For most freight companies, a 40-percent rise in
the diesel cost results in about an overall increase of 10 percent on
all the items that are shipped. We depend on the trucking industry to
ship goods. If their costs go up 10 percent, they are not going to pay
it. That is going to get passed on to consumers. That will mean
everything in the supply chain from lumber that is used to construct
homes to groceries and everything in between.
And while we Americans are already feeling the impact at the pump,
many nations across the globe, particularly in Asia, are facing even
more extreme costs. Of the, roughly, 20 percent of the world's oil and
gas that goes through the Strait of Hormuz, about 80 percent goes to
Asia, and the impacts there have been even wilder. Oil prices have hit
150 bucks a barrel.
As the supply tightens and prices skyrocket, one country, the
Philippines--literally because they get 100 percent of their oil from
the gulf--has said we can't operate a full economy, so there is a
mandatory 1-day-a-week holiday.
Vietnam has urged its residents to work from home. Cambodia and Laos
have closed about a third to 40 percent of their gas stations because
they just don't have fuel.
Now, we buy a lot of stuff from Asia--from Vietnam, from Bangladesh,
from the Philippines, from China, from everywhere. If those costs have
gone up 40 percent, all the stuff we buy from those countries are going
to go up for American consumers as well. So whether it is electronics,
clothes, appliances, if you haven't seen a price increase yet, don't
worry. It is coming very shortly, and it will be significant.
Let's talk about jet fuel.
Americans can also expect to pay more on air travel due to the war in
Iran as the price of jet fuel has more than doubled since the conflict
has begun. In many cases, airlines have already responded by raising
fares and canceling flights. Some estimates indicate the airlines have
raised fares about 20 bucks each way--going and coming--on average. As
a matter of fact, United recently raised its fares 15 to 20 percent
just last week. Also, United, which, I think, is a precursor of things
to come, has literally eliminated a number of long-haul flights. So,
for anyone who is planning on going to Europe, who is planning on going
to Asia or who is planning on going to South America--maybe not cross-
country flights yet--your choices are going to drop dramatically.
This is all related to oil, natural gas, and jet fuel, but the fact
is that the President's war in Iran and the subsequent closure of the
Strait of Hormuz is really wreaking havoc on a lot of industries from
semiconductors to new cars. Let me tell you why.
For example, the current situation is threatening to upend the global
semiconductor industry and other advanced technology industries by
impacting the availability of a crucial input--helium.
Now, most of us here at home think about helium as what we use for
party balloons. Senator Van Hollen, I know, has used it many times to
make his voice sound higher as well, but--and I didn't realize this--
helium is also a critical input in many advanced technology industries:
chipmaking, medical imagery, aerospace. The truth is, there is no
viable replacement for this helium.
Qatar is the world's second largest supplier of helium behind the
United States, and they literally produce, approximately, a third of
the world's supply--about 63 million cubic meters out of a total of 190
million cubic meters produced globally.
So, if the strait stays closed, you get rid of 27 to 30 percent of
the world's supply of helium. Again, it is a global market. Spot prices
on helium have already doubled, and the costs could rise another 50
percent if the strait remains closed.
The nations, again, that are going to get hit first on this are
Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan, which, again, are home to some of the
world's most advanced chip facilities. None of the chips we put in our
rockets in the most advanced jet fighters are made in America. They are
all made in Taiwan.
So what is going to happen?
The chip facilities in Taiwan and South Korea believe that about 70
percent of their helium comes from the gulf. If it goes away, they
can't replace that. There are no such things as helium strategic
reserves.
Again, if the President says, OK. He feels it in his bones, ``I won
the war. I am going to stop,'' it will take weeks, not days, to restart
the Qatar helium production, meaning that, even in these next couple of
weeks, with already the spot pricing doubling, there is going to be a
supply chain risk that will take place over the coming weeks and
months.
Aluminum. This closure is also disrupting the aluminum supply chain--
a material essential for construction, transportation, energy
generation, and more. The region, again--and I didn't realize this
before the war--accounts for, approximately, 9 percent of all global
aluminum production. Major smelters--I think there are four in the
world, and two are in the region--have been forced to curtail supply
due to the continued closure of the strait. Since the war began 3 or 4
weeks ago, global aluminum prices have spiked to their highest rate in
the last 4 years.
Again, that is what we have seen so far, and a prolonged closure
could see significant impacts here in America. Today, we rely on the
Middle East for about 20 percent of our imported aluminum. Even before
the war with Iran had started, aluminum prices in our country were at
record highs due to the President's tariff policy of putting 50-percent
tariffs on aluminum products. So, if you add the tariff policy with
already high aluminum prices and shut down some of the smelters, this
is going to drive up the cost of aluminum not just around the world but
in the United States as well. A lot of aluminum goes into autos. If you
are thinking about buying a new car, it may not be a good time. It may
be better to buy today than a month from now, but the cost is going to
go up.
The President's war of choice in Iran is also threatening global food
production and the livelihood of farmers in the United States and
across the world. Typically, about one-third of all fertilizer shipped
globally passes through the Strait of Hormuz; but not dissimilar to the
oil and gas production and transit, that fertilizer exiting the gulf
has literally ground to a virtual 100-percent halt just as the spring
growing season is starting in America.
I talked to a farmer in Amelia County in central Virginia. His costs
have already gone up 40 percent, and that means that the back end when
he collects--when his products grow, who is going to eat those costs?
American consumers.
The United States relies on the Middle East for about 15 percent of
our fertilizer inputs. This has already caused--as I said, in Amelia,
it was 40 percent--nationwide, a 30-percent increase in fertilizer
prices in America.
[[Page S1596]]
That fertilizer shortage has also been already shortened because we are
short on nitrogen, and we are short on potash, which we get from
Canada, again, because of the tariff policy. So what we grow and what
the costs are for this growing season are going to be dramatically
affected. Where is that going to show up? Prices at the grocery store.
Now, how has the President responded to this energy crisis caused by
his war of choice?
On Truth Social, he stated: When oil prices go up, we make a lot of
money.
Who exactly is making that money?
It is not ordinary Americans who were paying more than $380 million a
day just on the increased price of gasoline before the war started.
As a matter of fact, if you are going to pick winners and losers at
this point, American consumers are losers across five or six different
domains. The winners? Russia and Iran.
And this is the one that kind of just blows my mind. In response to
rising oil prices, President Trump and his Secretary of the Treasury
announced he was lifting sanctions on 140 million barrels of Iranian
crude. What does that translate into? That translates into more than
$14 billion to the bad Government of Iran, who is shooting at American
soldiers, who is bombing our allies. That $14 billion could be a
lifeline to that government.
I still remember like back under Obama, where I think there was some
payment around the JCPOA with $300-plus million released to Iran. Every
one of my Republican colleagues said: Oh my God. This is the worst
thing ever--the worst thing ever. How could this happen?
Well, now, in the middle of a war--we weren't in a war at that
point--in the middle of a war where Iran is attacking us, this
President has given a green light to fund $14 billion to the Iranian
regime--funding our enemies. How is that in America's best interest?
In another master stroke by the ``king of deals,'' President Trump
lifted the sanctions on approximately 130 million barrels of Russian
oil, directly helping Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
You know, recent reports indicate that Russia has already earned
about $230 million per day on crude oil exports during the first 2
weeks of Iran's war. Since February, that is about $10 billion. What is
that $10 billion going to buy? It is going to buy Russian drones,
Russian tanks, Russian missiles--maybe call me old-fashioned--that are
attacking and killing our allies in Ukraine--the allies that, thank
goodness, we have supplied military equipment to, and we are funding
their enemy.
Now, again, you start a war of choice, you think about these things.
You think about the ramifications and the cost increases. You think
about how this would affect our allies. You think about, do we really
want to benefit our enemies? You think about the fact that maybe we
ought to have a plan to get American nationals out of the Middle East
before the war starts. You might even say, maybe I will quietly tell
Saudis and Emiratis and others: Hey, store up some oil and natural gas
because this war is going to start.
The President says he didn't think they would close the Strait of
Hormuz; he didn't think Iran would attack the gulf countries.
I sit as vice chair on the Intelligence Committee. The intelligence
community has been absolute not for weeks, months, but for years that
if you start a war with Iran--and the Iranians are bad guys. Prior
Presidents, including President Trump--I remember one time he was going
to bomb Iran in his first term, and he pulled back because of all of
the implications of starting that war without enough planning.
So he started into this war of choice with no planning on how we
protect Americans, on what this is going to do to American consumers.
Hey, does it really make sense in this war to fund our enemies Iran and
Russia?
This is what happens when strategy, actual strategy, is replaced with
impulse; planning is replaced by wishful thinking; and warning from our
intelligence professionals whose job it is to make these predictions,
who made the prediction that there was no imminent threat--when those
intelligence professionals are ignored instead of heeded.
Now, we can't fully predict the full, long-term impacts of President
Trump's war of choice in Iran, but we can make a pretty damn good
conclusion at this point on who is going to get hit the worst: working-
class Americans.
We all talk about affordability--both sides. You know, it is hard for
a single political figure--even the President--to dramatically bring
down prices, but it sure is not hard for a single political figure--in
this case, the President of the United States--to raise prices:
fertilizer, aluminum, helium, jet fuel, diesel fuel.
I just hope everybody will remember every time you go to the gas pump
and you look at that price--Lord knows this happened when prices rose
under Biden. There were these cute little stickers saying: Joe Biden
did this.
Well, there is no doubt in my mind and, frankly, on any factual
basis, when you gas up your car every week and you see that extra
dollar or dollar-and-a-half increase in price, that price was brought
to you by one political figure in America: the President of the United
States.
We are going to feel the consequences of this war for a long time to
come, and everything I talked about here gets exponentially worse--not
on a linear timeline but an exponentially long, worse timeline--if the
strait remains closed.
Americans deserve better. Our servicemembers who are in harm's way
deserve better. Frankly, the world deserves better.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
Energy
Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I will try to truncate my remarks. I know
we have a vote coming up at 2 o'clock. I will try to keep the floor
running on time.
I rise today in support of my colleague's effort to overturn the
IRS's new rule which is making it harder for wind and solar projects to
qualify for critical clean energy tax credits.
Families across the country are already struggling to get by with
rising costs--costs that are going up at the grocery store, at the
doctor's office, when you are trying to pay the monthly rent or your
mortgage, at the pump, and, increasingly, our energy bills.
Since President Trump took office last January, California household
electricity costs have increased by 15 percent. That is more than five
times the rate of inflation. So it makes no sense that this
administration is making it harder to build the very energy projects
that would help--energy projects that would increase supply of
electricity, energy projects that would help bring down the cost of
electricity. One of the many ways they are doing it is with this new
IRS rule that is changing the rules in the middle of the game.
For years now, companies could qualify for a clean energy tax credit
once they had invested at least 5 percent of a project's cost into the
project. It is what we refer to as the ``5 percent safe harbor.'' That
is how businesses make their plans, that is how businesses make their
investments, and that is how businesses were able to break ground on a
number of necessary projects.
But now, even with projects that are already underway, they may not
qualify for the tax credits anymore that they were counting on, that
they were planning on. The net result--not project by project but
overall--is that fewer of these projects will get built, and the
projects that do power through somehow may get to the finish line, but
they will be more expensive. That means less energy comes online, and
once again the price of that electricity is going to be higher for
families and for businesses and for everybody.
I am proud to represent California, where we are leaning in on clean
energy production, not just to meet the growing demands on the grid of
our growing economy and our growing population but also modernizing in
a way that will make us more resilient to the threats of wildfires and
extreme heat.
We have experience in this, and we know. I can share with you,
colleagues, that building more clean, reliable, and affordable energy
projects isn't just an option; it is fundamentally essential.
So we have to recognize the impact of this rule and recognize that it
is part of a broader pattern. Over the past year, we have seen repeated
efforts to block or delay clean energy projects,
[[Page S1597]]
whether it is halting offshore wind, canceling funding, or undermining
projects that are already underway, as I just explained. At the same
time, as my colleague and friend from Virginia just articulated, global
instability is driving up fossil fuel costs even further.
This, colleagues, is a perfect example of why the Congressional
Review Act exists. When an Agency takes an action that harms the
American people, we in Congress don't just have the authority, we have
the responsibility to step in. That is what this resolution does. It
overturns the misguided IRS rule, it can restore certainty for
business, and it can help get clean energy projects back on track.
So I urge my colleagues to support the energy investment credit CRA.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, before he leaves the floor, let me thank my
colleague from California for very important remarks with respect to
this issue. And I am very pleased to be able to join Leader Schumer and
Senator Cortez Masto on the floor to talk about energy costs and
particularly clean energy jobs.
Here is what people need to know about our resolution: American
families and businesses from coast to coast have been getting battered
by rising energy costs. Data centers are gobbling up energy while
Americans get roasted during hotter summers and freeze during icy
winters.
Donald Trump got back into office last year, and instead of bringing
down costs, he and fellow Republicans sabotaged wind and solar--the
cheapest and cleanest ways of getting energy on the grid. Then we had
to deal with utility costs continuing to rise. The cost of trucking
consumer goods shot up around the country. And Republicans looked at a
multitrillion-dollar global market for clean energy--absolutely
explosive growth and upside for whoever dominates that kind of
manufacturing, and they said the United States isn't interested in
being a leader. They surrendered to China and the Europeans.
If that wasn't enough incompetence and mismanagement, Donald Trump
started a war that is driving energy costs into the stratosphere.
Americans didn't even have to think about the Strait of Hormuz before a
month ago. Now every time they pull up at the gas station to fill up
the tank, they are reminded that Donald Trump singlehandedly created an
energy crisis unlike anything we have seen in generations.
And it is not just about the price Americans pay at the pump; this is
rippling through our economy. As I noted, utility bills are continuing
to rise. The cost of trucking consumer goods? Continuing to rise. The
cost of food in grocery stores? Continuing to rise because fertilizer
and fuel are more expensive. We could spend the day with more and more
examples.
Donald Trump doesn't seem to know or care about this. When he talks
about the war he started, it sounds like he is not sure what is going
on. When he talks about energy production in our country, it seems like
he is stuck in the middle of the last century. It is a nightmare
scenario for American families and businesses getting buried by rising
costs today.
On top of that, the job market is in sorry shape. The Trump economy
isn't producing the jobs Americans need. That is particularly true in
manufacturing.
So my colleagues and I are putting forward a proposal that is a first
step toward fixing the energy crisis in the country. We believe it is
common sense. It would overturn a regulation from the Trump
administration that tied up wind and solar projects with a whole lot of
additional bureaucratic redtape.
Almost a decade ago, I wrote a set of tax credits for clean energy in
the Inflation Reduction Act. It was a very new approach to energy
policy. It kicked off a manufacturing boom unlike anything that has
been seen in decades.
Donald Trump and Republicans killed much of it in 2025, and they
specifically targeted wind and solar. They clobbered those industries
by cutting off the tax credits as of 2027. If that wasn't enough,
Donald Trump and the Treasury Department tied them up with even more
redtape last summer.
So here is what our proposal is all about. Leader Schumer, my
colleague from Nevada, and I say in our resolution: Let's ditch the
extra redtape. That is what I hear Democrats and Republicans say most
of the time: Ditch the redtape. That way, more projects could get
underway. We would get more energy on the grid helping to fight the
cost increases people deal with all around America.
It is a real head-scratcher to me why anybody would oppose this
commonsense resolution. If you do, you are voting for higher energy
prices for your constituents at home.
My view is, the entire Trump approach to energy production and energy
costs ought to go into the dustbin. It is not working. But what my
colleagues and I have put forward is not a total rewrite of the law. It
is one step--a practical, commonsense step that we believe ought to get
support from both sides.
So that is what we are saying on our side: Let's get rid of some
system-clogging redtape. Let's get more projects underway and produce
more energy, and let's fight these terrible energy hikes.
That is what we are after. That is what my colleagues and I are
trying to do. I urge the Senate to support our resolution. And I want
to thank Senator Cortez Masto and Leader Schumer for their excellent
work over many months.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 107.
The resolution seeks to overturn a Trump administration IRS notice
intended to prevent abuse of the forthcoming phasedown of tax credits
for wind and solar projects by requiring project developers to take
meaningful steps toward project construction.
While Democrats assert that reversing this notice would help with
affordability issues, the result would actually be exactly the
opposite. Overturning this notice would create more uncertainty and
unpredictability for current projects and discourage focus on more
reliable and affordable energy sources.
Under the Biden administration, the Democrats enacted massive new
incentives for ``green energy'' projects under the Inflation Reduction
Act, abandoning secure, reliable American energy sources for unreliable
and costly solar and wind projects. As Republicans predicted, the cost
of the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act subsidies far
exceeded predictions. A 2023 report by Goldman Sachs found that the
cost of these Green New Deal incentives could exceed $1.2 trillion--
more than three times what the Democrats claimed.
As part of the Working Families Tax Cut Act, Republicans succeeded in
reining in these high costs while also preserving tax incentives for
reliable baseload power like hydroelectric and nuclear. Congressional
Republicans also imposed new, prohibited foreign entity restrictions to
prevent the flow of American taxpayers' dollars to Chinese companies
and encourage energy supply chains to return to the United States.
This resolution would ultimately disrupt important progress toward
achieving President Trump's ``America First'' energy agenda, create
unpredictability by overturning guidance, while also impeding the
Treasury Department's official work to implement the Working Families
Tax Cut Act.
I encourage my colleagues to vote against this resolution.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Department of Homeland Security
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I know we are waiting for the Senator
from Nevada to come to the floor to make a few remarks, and I want to
thank Senator Wyden for his remarks.
I am just looking around the floor here and thinking this would be a
great time to propose a unanimous consent request that we fully fund
TSA. I won't do it at this moment. I see the chairman of the Finance
Committee here. But I want to make the point, Mr. President, that we
could get it done right now. We could end the lines at airports around
the country, we could fund TSA, we could fund FEMA, and we could fund
the Coast Guard as we continue negotiations to rein in a lawless
[[Page S1598]]
ICE operation--an ICE operation that took the lives of two American
citizens in Minneapolis; a lawless ICE operation that is not focused,
as President Trump promised, on the worst of the worst; a lawless ICE
operation that is trampling over people's First Amendment rights around
the country and due process rights.
So as I was looking around the floor, I didn't see any Republican
colleagues for a moment, and I think it is worth making the point to
folks watching that we could have gotten unanimous consent to open
FEMA, to open TSA, and to open the Coast Guard. That is what we should
do, and we should do it now.
I see the Senator from Nevada.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Ms. CORTEZ MASTO. Mr. President, I don't have to stand here and tell
Nevadans that energy prices are high. They see it every day at the gas
pump and on their electricity bill statements.
In the United States, the average residential energy bill in 2025 was
about 30 percent higher than it was in 2021, but the Trump
administration seems insistent on making it even harder for working
families to afford their energy bills.
Overseas, President Trump's war with Iran is causing oil prices to
shoot through the roof, resulting in high costs for Americans at the
gas pump.
Add to that this administration's war on clean energy. Specifically,
President Trump's IRS recently submitted a rule that makes it harder
for wind and solar energy companies to claim a vital tax credit. This
rule makes it more expensive to build America's clean energy future,
makes it harder for the United States to meet the increased demand for
electricity in this country, and will lead to higher energy prices for
working families.
But the Senate has the power to do something about this misguided tax
policy. That is why today I am leading an effort with my colleagues to
pass this Congressional Review Act to overturn this IRS damaging rule.
The clean energy industry is producing some of the fastest growing
and most cost-effective new power across the world. We need industries
like solar and wind that will help us meet growing demand. It will
create jobs--good-paying union jobs--and it will bring down energy
costs for American families. It is obvious we should be embracing clean
energy and investing in it, but instead, we have seen President Trump
do just the opposite by passing regulations that are killing clean
energy jobs in the United States.
We know the President's tax law--the so-called Big Beautiful Bill--
gives tax breaks to the President's wealthiest friends at the expense
of hard-working Americans. It is actually blowing up our national debt
by $4 trillion. It is cutting $1 trillion from Medicaid and kicking an
estimated 16 million Americans off of their healthcare. What people may
not know is that it also decreased incentives for solar and wind
companies that are helping keep energy prices down for hard-working
American families.
While the Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act that we passed expanded
tax credits for clean energy projects, created jobs, and put us on a
future of lowering energy costs for families, President Trump gutted
them. That alone is estimated--what he has done is estimated to
increase electricity prices by up to 18 percent.
The President's tax bill shortened the timeline for when solar and
wind companies can claim these tax credits. He did it because he wants
to phase them out. He wants to phase them out in favor of fossil fuel.
He wants to pick winners and losers.
You know, the only losers in this country because of the picking and
choosing of this administration of winners and losers is the American
public and these companies.
If these companies want to claim these clean energy production and
clean electricity investment tax credits now, they must begin
construction on the projects by July 4, 2026--this year. This year,
they have to begin construction. If they begin construction after that
date, they don't get this tax credit. That was in the Big Beautiful
Bill.
Here is where the problem gets worse. To pass his Big Beautiful Bill
out of the House, President Trump made a deal with the far-right
Republicans in the House to use the IRS to further diminish the solar
and wind projects because he just hates them.
Last August, the IRS proposed a new rule to completely change an
established standard for what it means to begin construction under the
IRS Code on these solar and wind projects.
Now, remember, since 2013, the standard for what was considered
beginning of construction included two of the following: You either had
continuous physical work on or off the job site as beginning
construction or you had a project in which 5 percent of the total costs
had been spent, and they called this kind of a safe harbor.
What the new IRS guidance rule does is revoke that second prong. It
revokes the longstanding 5 percent safe harbor. What does this mean?
This rule, keep in mind now, is only for solar and wind. Again, this
President is picking winners and losers. He doesn't like solar or wind.
So this IRS guidance only applies to solar and wind, not for other
energy projects.
It is going to have a huge impact in Nevada, where we have solar
year-round, and it is going to have a huge impact across the country.
Solar and wind projects were already scrambling to stay eligible for
the tax credits they rely on after Trump passed his bill, but with the
new IRS rule, companies will have to delay their projects or halt them
altogether.
This harmful new rule will potentially eliminate thousands of jobs,
it will drive up electricity bills for American families, and it will
risk power for millions of homes in Nevada and across the country.
It is clear that this action is yet another attempt by this
administration to strangle the types of energy that the President
personally does not like.
Demand for electricity is higher now more than ever, and we need to
prepare for an electrification future that is going to bring us
emerging technologies like AI, and we need solar and wind as part of
that generation.
That is why I stand before you today and ask my colleagues to join me
to revoke this IRS rule. I can't stress this enough. If we as a
Congress want to prepare for the future and have the energy needs that
we demand as a country, we have to include solar and wind, we have to
include clean energy. What this IRS rule does is just the opposite.
So I hope my colleagues will join me in passing this resolution.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Banks). The clerk will call the roll.
The bill 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.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, today's vote is simple. Will Republicans
join us to save good-paying energy jobs, strengthen our grid, and undo
the damage from Donald Trump's war on clean energy; or will they bow
before the throne of Big Oil once again?
This CRA vote is a necessary step to reverse the damage from Donald
Trump's anti-clean energy vendetta. It will overturn the IRS's
eleventh-hour rule change that makes it harder for wind and solar
companies to claim tax credits needed to expand investment, increase
output, and put Americans to work. This IRS rule does nothing but raise
taxes on energy producers. Experts have warned this could raise
electricity by 10 percent.
Do you hear that, America? What Trump has done is going to raise your
energy costs 10 percent just on this alone. It is going up higher
because of other things. It also hurts local communities that rely on
jobs.
It is nothing but another front in Donald Trump's war on affordable
American energy, and in this case--this is a harsh word, but it is a
corrupt giveaway to his Big Oil and Big Gas donors.
It was public. It was in the newspapers. They said: If you give us a
billion dollars in campaign contributions, we will get rid of all the
deregulation and giveaways they could possibly imagine. It is a
crooked, corrupt scheme that is raising people's energy costs along the
way.
If you are a Senator and you care about good-paying jobs, care about
our
[[Page S1599]]
grid, and want to lower people's energy costs, support this resolution.
I thank Senators Cortez Masto, Wyden, and everyone who has shown
leadership on this issue, and I want to thank my Democratic colleagues
for leading the way.
Last week, Senate Democrats released our newest ``Broken Promises''
report, exposing how Donald Trump is driving up people's energy bills.
Trump made a promise to the American people on the campaign trail: I
will cut your energy bill in half. But has he done that? Of course not.
Energy prices are up. And they aren't just up; they are rising and at
triple the rate of inflation. Some States are seeing double-digit
increases over the last year. And now, thanks to Donald Trump's idiotic
war with Iran, gas prices are at $4 a gallon.
We must put a stop to all of this today, and that is what this vote
is all about.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
____________________