[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 15, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1749-S1764]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

 DIRECTING THE REMOVAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM HOSTILITIES 
   WITHIN OR AGAINST THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN THAT HAVE NOT BEEN 
              AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS--Motion to Discharge

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, pursuant to section 1013 of the 
Department of State Authorization Act, fiscal years 1984 and 1985 (50 
U.S.C. 1546a), and in accordance with section 601(b) of the 
International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act, I move 
to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further 
consideration of S.J. Res. 123, to direct the removal of United States 
Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Iran, unless explicitly 
authorized by a declaration of war or a specific authorization for use 
of military force.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to discharge from the Committee on Foreign 
     Relations, S.J. Res. 123, a joint resolution directing the 
     removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within 
     or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been 
     authorized by Congress.

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. 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for the quorum call be rescinded.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 Majority whip.


                                Tax Day

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today is April 15. Americans all across 
the country know that it is tax day in America.
  We just heard the minority leader come to the floor, and it sounds 
like he is almost despondent that this year the American people are 
able to get higher tax refunds than in the past.
  Because of what we have been able to do and pass, people are keeping 
more of their hard-earned money. For people that are filing their taxes 
for the first time under this new tax law, the Working Families Tax 
Cuts, they are seeing that they are keeping more. And this is what we 
promised: to put more money in people's pockets.
  I hear about it at home in Wyoming. I was home, traveling in the 
State, and recently spoke to a group of veterans. They were meeting 
with their families in Dubois, WY. We had a ``welcome home'' for our 
veterans.
  I was also in Sundance, WY; Gillette, WY; Laramie, WY. I visited with 
students. I was in Lusk, WY, as well as Newcastle. I sat down with 
farmers, ranchers, and small business owners. Across the board, we 
talked about new opportunities that they are experiencing as a result 
of the law, since Republicans cut taxes dramatically, and how that 
appears to them in their daily lives and what it means to them and 
their families.
  And those families in Wyoming aren't alone. Americans all across the 
country are seeing smaller tax bills and larger tax refunds.
  So the Internal Revenue Service has released data today on the tax 
refunds. The average refund this year is over $3,400 per family. Now 
that is nearly $250 per month in people's pockets. That is much higher 
than it was last year. These are the refunds that people are getting.
  And yet, when I hear the Senator from New York, he referred to the 
amount of money that people are getting back in their refunds, and I 
think he said the word ``dud.'' Maybe to him that is a dud. Maybe to 
him, in New York City, that is a dud.
  For working families in Wyoming, $250 a month means a lot of money in 
their pockets. When they go to the gas station, the grocery store, when 
they

[[Page S1750]]

plan what they want to do over the summer--all of those things--this is 
real money in the pockets of Wyoming families and American families. 
And the best we can hear from the minority leader is, it is a dud.
  That is not what I am hearing around my home State. It is probably 
not what you are hearing in your home State of Oklahoma. People 
understand that money in their pockets matters to them, and it matters 
to their families, even if the Democrats don't believe that or the 
minority leader doesn't see it the way we see it.

  But in so many ways, he doesn't--because we think it is important for 
people to keep more of their hard-earned money, and it is a direct 
result of the bill that we passed, the Working Families Tax Cut law.
  So what have the Democrats said to do about that? Well, they tried to 
do the opposite last year. They wanted to pass a $4 trillion tax 
increase on the American people--not $4,000, not $4 million, not $4 
billion--$4 trillion of increased taxes. That is where they were 
headed.
  They weren't just heading that way. They voted for that. They voted 
for the largest tax increase in American history.
  And Senator Schumer, today, talked about a poll. And what did he say? 
He said Americans think they are paying too much in taxes right now. 
Can you imagine what they would have been saying if they were paying 
what they are paying now plus 4 trillion additional dollars in taxes?
  Why in the world would, then, the minority leader come to the floor 
and put together a group and lead the charge to raise taxes by $4 
trillion, if he comes to the floor and talks about the fact that 
Americans think they are paying too much in taxes?
  I think we are paying too much in taxes. I want to cut more taxes. 
That is what the people of Wyoming want. That is what Americans want. 
That is certainly what Republicans want.
  So it was just interesting to hear the minority leader talk about 
these refund checks that are putting more money in people's pockets and 
saying: Well, it is a dud.
  It is not a dud for the people of Wyoming. They are encouraged by 
what we are doing, and they want us to do even more. And we need to do 
more.
  The Democrats talk about a $4 trillion tax increase. That is raising 
taxes on families, on workers, on small businesses, all across the 
board. Well, Republicans permanently lowered taxes, and we did it for 
hard-working families and small businesses.
  You know, in doing so, we made it easier for all Americans--whether 
they are working, whether retired--to keep more money in their pockets. 
More than 53 million Americans have benefited from at least one of the 
new Republican tax cuts. That is a lot of people.
  So if you are a senior and receive a Social Security check, you are 
benefiting for the first time from our ``no taxes on Social Security'' 
pledge. This is a new $6,000 deduction for seniors.
  Mr. President, 30 million seniors have already benefited, and 
everybody doesn't even have their taxes in yet. The deadline is tonight 
at midnight.
  Well, if you are a mother or a father with children, you are 
benefiting from the expanded child tax credits. That is $2,200 per 
child, per year.
  Millions of parents have enrolled their children in Trump Accounts. 
That is a big deal. For parents with newborn children, the savings 
accounts get $1,000 deposited into them straight from the U.S. 
Treasury. It happens immediately when your child is born. And I am 
happy to report that there are groups of individuals around the country 
who are matching those contributions in the Trump Accounts and adding 
more in individual States or to young people born in different 
locations--all of this in an effort to get these young people off on a 
good start.
  In Wyoming and across the country, more than 6 million Americans are 
benefitting from the ``no tax on tips'' provision in the Working 
Families Tax Cut law. These are our waiters, our barbers, our 
bartenders, the tour guides. They have claimed an average deduction of 
over $7,000 on the no tax on tips.
  More than 25 million Americans have benefited from no tax on 
overtime. They are the firefighters, the police officers, the nurses, 
the linemen, the coal miners in Wyoming and in your home State. They 
have claimed an average deduction of over $3,000 on overtime.
  So hard-working Americans are being rewarded--rewarded for working 
more--working more. Think about that. That is not what the Democrats 
are proposing. What we did was put incentives in for people working 
more, to keep more of what they earn.
  Democrats are looking to take more for the government. We are looking 
to find ways to let people keep what they earn.
  So the extra money goes right into their bank accounts, not to the 
bureaucrats in Washington or the Democrats that want to take that money 
to spend it. That is why they wanted to raise taxes by $4 trillion. 
They wanted to tax more so they could spend more. It is all wrong.

  The Working Families Tax Cut law protects 2 million family-owned 
farms and ranches in my State and in the Presiding Officer's from the 
dreaded death tax. The small business owners in our communities talk 
about that when I walk Main Street, and I saw it in Newcastle, WY, 2 
weeks ago. Instead of being forced to sell their land or their small 
businesses to pay taxes to Washington so Democrats can spend more, 
families in Wyoming are now able to plan for their futures for 
generations to come.
  The Working Families Tax Cut law also allows businesses to 
immediately deduct up to $2.5 million in new equipment. That means more 
jobs, more growth, more people in the workplace. It means more 
opportunities for farmers, for ranchers, and for Main Street America.
  Because of lower taxes and more opportunities, workers across our 
Nation are seeing bigger paychecks--another thing that the Senate 
minority leader referred to as a ``dud'' earlier today. Real wages are 
up this year. This is significant progress.
  The only people who seem to be upset about lower taxes, bigger 
refunds, and higher wages are the elected Democrats in this body, who 
voted for a $4 trillion tax increase, and the minority leader, who led 
the charge. Democrats want to raise taxes on the American people. They 
believe that the money you earn isn't yours. They want it so they can 
spend it. Democrats believe that the money you earn belongs to the 
government. That is why the Democrat Party is known as the party of 
high taxes.
  It is not just here in the U.S. Senate; it is in the States and the 
big cities that are run by Democrats across the country.
  This year, in the State of Virginia, a Democrat Governor was elected 
and sworn into office. So Democrats in Virginia now control the house, 
the senate, and the Governor's mansion--a big flip in Virginia. Since 
they took over in January, Democrats have introduced 50--50--new tax 
increases. That is the Democrat mindset: Raise taxes. Get power. Raise 
taxes.
  Democrats want to raise taxes on barbershops, on nail salons, on dry 
cleaners, and gymnasiums. They are proposing new taxes on firearms and 
on ammunition in Virginia. That is what has happened now that Virginia 
has elected Democrats.
  Democrats like to use the word ``affordability.'' Apparently, the 
Democrats' idea of affordability is higher taxes paid by working 
families so they can spend more money on liberal social programs. That 
is where we are in America today.
  Republicans know the best way to make America affordable is with good 
jobs, growing paychecks, lower taxes, and that is exactly what we are 
seeing here today, on April 15, as people file their taxes and see the 
larger refunds this year--refunds of over $3,400, over $250 a month.
  The American people know the money belongs to them, not to 
Washington. They have earned it. They should keep more of it. 
Republicans trust people at home to know best what they want to do with 
that money--what they want to spend, what they want to save, what they 
want to invest.
  So this tax day, I come to the floor to say the American people have 
more money in their pockets because Republicans--all of us--have passed 
the Working Families Tax Cut law. Republicans are going to continue to 
fight for an America where families get to keep

[[Page S1751]]

more of what they earn and make the decisions about how to spend it.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The President pro tempore.


                                  Iowa

  Mr. GRASSLEY. I have two items I would like to discuss. During the 
Easter break when the Senate was not in session, I was holding in Iowa 
Q&A's in 25 of our 99 counties. My annual practice allows me to hear 
directly from the grassroots. At my meetings, Iowans set the agenda. No 
issue is off limits.
  I had a chance to hear from the Rural Health Transformation Fund--how 
it is working out for our hospitals and helping our communities. For 
example, in Pella, IA, they are using the Federal dollars to invest in 
a PET scan machine and an oncology nurse.
  Then I also had the working families tax cuts coming up and how that 
is making a difference in rural America.
  I also heard from farm families and rural bankers about the high 
costs of impacting farmers' bottom line.
  To relieve some pressure on this farming situation in the Midwest 
and, of course, my State of Iowa, I am calling on President Trump to 
use his emergency powers to suspend the countervailing duties on 
phosphate fertilizers. I also appreciate the President's recent tweet 
in regard to his concern about high fertilizer costs for farmers, so I 
am suggesting one way to him of how he could fix that.
  I have long been beating the drum on another issue affecting our 
family farmers, and that is for the nationwide, year-round E15. There 
has never been a more important time to infuse markets with $14 billion 
to boost the farm economy. That $14 billion is not my figure. It comes 
from the economists for the Iowa corn growers.
  Finally, at these 25 county Q&A's I held, Iowans told me they are 
sick and tired of government shutdowns. As a cosponsor of the Prevent 
Government Shutdowns Act, I hope that we will consider that it costs 
money to shut the government down, and it costs money to reopen 
government. We ought to applaud Senator Lankford on his legislation for 
a continuing resolution that he has been trying to push Congress to 
adopt for maybe the last 5 or 6 years. There is no better time to use 
an example of the need for Senator Lankford's legislation than the fact 
that we had a 43-day, all-government shutdown last year, and this year 
we have already, for the Department of Homeland Security, had a 45- or 
46-day shutdown so far. Senator Lankford has the best idea that that 
will never happen again in our government--any shutdown.
  Congress' failure to fund the government shouldn't be penalizing the 
hard-working men and women of this country.
  At my 99 county meetings, I promise to bring Iowans' views back to 
the policymaking tables, and I intend to roll up my sleeves and keep 
working on behalf of Iowans.


                    FISA Section 702 Reauthorization

  Now, on another subject--and more critical because of timing--deals 
with FISA Section 702 reauthorization. In 5 short days, Section 702 of 
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act--FISA for short--is set to 
expire.
  Section 702 is an essential national security tool. That law is 
responsible for over 60 percent of the intelligence in the President's 
daily brief. Section 702 enables our intelligence and law enforcement 
community to thwart attacks before they occur. It is, as I see it, a 
preventative national defense-national security issue.
  Section 702 has saved countless lives in the United States and even 
abroad. It gives our military a strategic edge, allows us to hunt down 
foreign terrorists and rescue hostages, and helps us defend critical 
infrastructure from cyber attacks.
  More recently, Section 702 has enabled more than 90 percent of CIA-
driven synthetic drug disruptions abroad and prevented a mass casualty 
terrorist attack at a Taylor Swift concert overseas.
  So there is no doubt that this is a powerful, critical tool to 
protect Americans. But there is also no doubt that powerful tools like 
this require strong oversight and accountability.
  I have put a lot of attention into the fact of congressional 
oversight as it applies to Section 702. I have and will continue to 
demand transparency. I will faithfully make sure that we execute in 
Congress its duty to encourage oversight, but we must balance our 
oversight responsibilities with our responsibility to protect our 
country and our countrymen. I refuse to incapacitate our intelligence 
community at a time of conflict and when threats to our national 
security and prosperity continue to multiply.
  Two years ago, the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act--
RISAA for short--added critical and successful reform to section 702 in 
response to some abuse and overreach. I have been monitoring the 
implementation of these reforms for 2 years, and so I want to discuss 
with you some of my concerns.
  One important RISAA reform was a provision that grants access to 
select Members of Congress to attend and conduct oversight of ``any 
proceeding of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.'' This 
ensures that these hearings, which necessarily occur in secret because 
of national security, are subject to congressional oversight in a 
secure way. That was intended in our legislation.
  But at the end of the Biden administration, the Justice Department 
imposed a set of unlawful restrictions on congressional access to these 
proceedings. Among other things, the rules DOJ imposed allowed the 
Justice Department to kick Members out of the courtroom at will, also 
prohibiting them from even taking notes and even prohibiting them from 
requesting information or sharing what they learned with their 
colleagues. And from my standpoint of emphasis upon oversight and 
following the law, this was an untenable position and situation and, of 
course, contrary to the compromise that was worked out during the last 
reauthorizations 2 years ago.
  I have been fighting to fix this issue for months. I even wrote a 
letter to Attorney General Bondi with my Democratic colleague Senator 
Durbin, demanding change. We both recognize that transparency and 
congressional oversight is not a Republican or Democrat responsibility 
or issue, but it is rather a separation of powers issue--something that 
you learn in eighth grade civics or high school government classes--
that we call checks and balances. Around here, we don't use that term. 
We use the term of ``oversight.'' In other words, Congress passes laws 
that appropriates money, and we have a responsibility after we do that 
to make sure that the executive branch faithfully executes these laws.
  So today, I am happy to say that this issue has now been resolved, 
and an important transparency and accountability tool has been returned 
to the Congress. So I am really grateful to the Trump administration 
and the Department of Justice for revising and repairing the misguided 
and noncompliant procedures that were written in the previous 
administration. This new Department of Justice policy restores the 
intent of RISAA and the constitutional separation of powers to its 
proper boundaries with Congress as a coequal branch.
  Additionally, because of my oversight, the Foreign Intelligence 
Surveillance Court is working to create overflow space to ensure that 
all eligible Members and their staff will be able to attend proceedings 
and thus exercise their oversight authority.
  I have no reason to understand how the Department of Justice under 
Biden thought they could get away with violating this responsibility 
that the compromise gave us to exercise our oversight responsibility. 
But that is the way it worked out, and now we have that corrected.
  So now that DOJ has made this right, the reforms from the last 
reauthorization are in full effect. In the last public audit, the FBI 
achieved a 99-percent compliance rate with the U.S. persons queries, 
which have also decreased sharply overall in recent years.
  The reforms that we imposed in RISAA are working. If it expires, so 
do its civil liberties protections and many of the oversight 
mechanisms.
  The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board recently reported 
that section 702 targeting and querying compliance remains at nearly 
100 percent throughout the intelligence community. FISA, including 
section 702, remains subject to intense Agency, judicial, and 
congressional oversight and

[[Page S1752]]

scrutiny. So if section 702 expires, so do its civil liberties 
protections.
  I have spent my career in the Senate holding the government 
accountable. I will never stop asking questions or abandon my oversight 
duties. That doesn't mean that we should blind ourselves and gamble 
with the safety of our communities. So with these oversight reforms 
fulfilling the intent of the previous reauthorization, I will support 
this year's reauthorization. Let's reauthorize 702 before it expires.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ricketts). The Senator from New Jersey.


                         War Powers Resolution

  Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, it has been 2 weeks since we last voted on 
a War Powers Resolution to responsibly end Trump's unauthorized, 
unconstitutional, reckless war with Iran. In just those 2 weeks, the 
war has continued to spiral out of control, and Americans are paying 
the price.
  Here is where we are since we last voted and why we are calling up 
another War Powers Resolution for a vote, why we are forcing that 
debate onto this floor. Americans are facing soaring costs, and this 
war is making those costs explode and get worse. Prices are rising 
because of the decisions made by President Trump without congressional 
approval. Gas and essentials are surging as global energy markets react 
to the blockade, the destruction of energy infrastructure, and the 
unbelievable, immense uncertainty in the market. Inflation jumped 
sharply, driven overwhelming by energy costs tied to the conflict. 
Analysts say we spent $25 billion during the month of March on the war, 
and this month, it is expected to be similar.
  Now, remember, the President launched this war without congressional 
consent. He has basically said that any President is entitled to commit 
tens of billions of dollars, to commit American lives--13 we have lost, 
hundreds of Americans injured--as he began this war without 
authorization, without transparency.
  Observers note that this is a war the administration initiated not 
only without approval but with shifting reasons for the provocation of 
our going to war itself.
  This President has said everything: We are going to stop this regime. 
We want regime change and then we don't. He has said that we are going 
to save civilians from being murdered by this regime, and now, he says 
that is not the priority.
  He says: Oh, we are getting in for the nuclear crisis. Even though I 
had obliterated it just months ago, it is now a crisis again.
  His shifting reasons and provocations are bad enough, but now the 
outcomes he says he seeks are outcomes that have shifted themselves. He 
has failed to tell the American people why we are in this. He has no 
endgame.
  Just today, the administration deployed 10,000 more U.S. troops into 
harm's way into this region. Naval forces have expanded to now enforce 
a maritime blockade that takes the efforts of tens of thousands of 
American military professionals, and officials are preparing for 
potential additional strikes and ground operations.
  So where does that leave us? Well, No. 1, if the war ended today--
which it won't. It seems to be expanding. But if it ended today, the 
oil shock, the economic crisis would go for months and months longer--
again, Americans paying the price. We still have our American troops in 
greater harm's way. We have an Iranian regime who--even though their 
near-term combat capabilities have been significantly degraded--now are 
flexing more power in that region and influence by choking the Strait 
of Hormuz, which we have not been able to stop.
  The situation is worse. The regime is more extreme. The fissile 
material to make a nuclear weapon is still there in that theater. This 
President has made the situation worse, at the cost of tens of billions 
of dollars, American lives, and hundreds of troops injured.
  The thing that makes this all worse is the enabling that Congress is 
doing of this war, their failure to ask for accountability, this 
failure to have even one open hearing on the biggest military 
engagement since the war in Afghanistan, not one open hearing where 
Congress has asked for accountability, for transparency, for facts and 
information.
  On top of that, this body was designed just for that purpose--to 
provide a check and a balance, to provide oversight--and what we have 
done is nothing of any substance to play that critical role.
  Our Founders warned us what an out-of-control Executive could do if 
not checked by Congress, and we are not doing it. The price we are 
paying--every American is feeling it. That is why this war is 
overwhelmingly unpopular with the American people of all political 
backgrounds, because they know. Not only are they feeling the pain of 
it economically, not only are they seeing the pain of it when American 
troops are killed in battle and the families live with that loss, not 
only knowing the pain of the hundreds injured, but they are also seeing 
with their own eyes how the situation is getting worse and not better.
  We are bringing this War Powers Resolution back to the floor today 
because Congress cannot look away. Congress must do their job. Congress 
must stand with the American people, ask the tough questions that we 
deserve answers to, hold this President to account, really do our job 
of asking the hard yet urgent questions.
  We need transparency. We need accountability. We need the Senate to 
do its job. So today, I again lead, with a handful of my colleagues, to 
bring these War Powers Resolutions, to demand a debate, to demand that 
this body show some account for its inaction on a war, for allowing an 
Executive to spend tens of billions of dollars, throw the world and our 
Nation into economic shock, not achieve any of its stated goals with 
the nation of Iran, and make more of that region more dangerous and 
unstable by the day.
  We must do our job. We must defend the Constitution, which spells out 
the checks and balances that should be happening but are not. But we 
will continue this fight. We will continue to force debate on this 
floor. We will continue to call on my colleagues across the aisle not 
to just let Donald Trump do whatever he wants but to hold him to 
account, to hold public hearings, to ask the difficult questions, to 
demand accountability.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.


                       Working Families Tax Cuts

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, well, today is tax day. It is not a 
day that conservatives usually celebrate, but this year it is a little 
bit different. And that is thanks to the working families tax cuts, the 
Big Beautiful Bill, that are allowing individuals to keep a lot more of 
their hard-earned money.
  And as we have this discussion on tax day, it is imperative that we 
remember government doesn't create jobs, it creates the environment for 
jobs growth.
  Government is not the one that is generating income. All of that 
comes from hard-working taxpayers. They send their hard-earned tax 
dollars here to Washington, DC. And today is a day we should be mindful 
of the imperative that we should be good stewards of the taxpayer 
dollar.
  Now, one of the things that we heard so much about during the Biden 
administration was, every time you turned around, taxes were going up; 
inflation was going up because taxes were going up; and government 
spending was going up.
  Well, things have changed. Things have changed. And as I said, 
because of the tax cuts in the Big Beautiful Bill, what we know is, 
citizens are seeing more money stay in their pocketbook without having 
to send it to DC.
  What we also know is, tax refunds this year are up 24 percent, just 
over $3,500--$3,500--for most refunds. A big reason why is that almost 
half of the filers are claiming new tax breaks that were created in the 
working families tax cuts, Big Beautiful Bill.
  So think about that. Half of the filers are benefiting from the bill 
that every single one of our Democrat colleagues voted no on that bill.
  Now, Americans who claim these added deductions are seeing refunds 
that are $775 higher than they were last year, and as we think about 
that, that is more money in your pocketbook for groceries, for gas, for 
car payments, for education expenses, for clothing, for things that 
your family wants to do with your hard-earned money.
  Now, earlier today, we heard from our IRS head, and what we heard 
from

[[Page S1753]]

Mr. Bisignano is that they are really executing the mission that was 
put before them to drive efficiency, to process these claims, to answer 
questions, and to make certain that people know they can set those 
withholdings lower, and when they have got a deduction coming, they 
know how to claim that deduction, and that they get those refunds 
faster.
  We should keep in mind that all of this is happening because of 
President Trump and because Republicans, indeed, have put the American 
people first.
  They have put these hard-working taxpayers first. That is what people 
want to see, put them at the first of the queue. They deserve it.
  Now, if we had not passed the working families tax cuts, Big 
Beautiful Bill, last spring and summer, we would have had a $4 trillion 
tax hike. Think what that would be doing to you right now if your taxes 
had gone up, if those escalation rates had kicked in, things had gone 
up. And what we do know is that while our colleagues across the aisle, 
the Democrats, wanted to see Americans pay more in taxes, that what 
that equates to is, there would be fewer jobs; there would be lower 
wages; and I think one of the big ones, especially when you talk about 
a State like mine, Tennessee, where small business is your largest 
employer, then there would be less opportunity.
  But because we passed that bill last summer, there is more 
opportunity. And our small business employers, people that are there on 
Main Street, are prospering, and businesses are growing.
  Now, I do want to highlight some of these provisions that our 
Democratic colleagues chose to vote against. What we put in the working 
families tax cuts, the Big Beautiful Bill, that is yielding these 
deductions that about half of the tax filers are taking is this--this 
is one that I have worked on for years--and it is the bonus deduction 
for every senior. And for 88 percent of our Social Security recipients, 
it has eliminated all the income tax they have on that Social Security.
  Now, I actually printed out that page from the 1040 form, and I think 
it is so important to see. Section 5 has that enhanced deduction for 
seniors. So it is, for every senior, a $6,000 deduction. If you and 
your spouse are both over 65, that is a $12,000 deduction, but it is 
part 5, when you get to the point that you are filling out this form, 
and all the instructions are right there. That is a really big deal. 
And what we know is that because of this provision, seniors are saving 
$670.
  Now, think about that. If you are a senior and you are using that 
deduction and you are represented by Democrats, they voted against 
that. They voted against allowing you to have a $6,000 bonus deduction. 
And what we know is that 30 million seniors have already used that--30 
million seniors. According to Mr. Bisignano, it is the most used of all 
the deductions. It is money in your pocket.
  Now, there are millions of workers who are seeing lower taxes on tips 
and overtime. With the new tips deductions, senior filers are seeing a 
savings of $1,370. Some have gone as high as $5,500. These are savings 
that are leaving money in your pocket.
  But, again, every single Democrat in this Chamber, every single one 
voted against that. So if you are a worker who uses and receives tips, 
they voted against that. If you are a senior who works with tip income, 
they voted against your senior deduction, and they voted against your 
deduction with tips.
  Now, we also know that children that are born can do Trump Accounts. 
They are eligible for that $1,000 seed account. These accounts will 
grow all through that child's life. This is a way they can have money 
for education or for a first home or keeping that account and letting 
it grow until they are ready for retirement.

  But if you have a baby that was born this year, a child or a 
grandchild, every Democrat voted against--against--their having that 
nest egg.
  So how wonderful it would be if these children came out of college 
debt-free. How wonderful would it be if they had that money for a 
downpayment. And think about overtime work. We have so many Americans 
that work overtime. Again, they are benefiting, but the Democrats voted 
against no tax on overtime.
  And they also voted against the enhanced child tax credit, which 
benefits more than 40 million American families. So if you have 
children that are under 18 and you are taking that enhanced child tax 
credit, you are looking at that, and you see when you get to that 
bottom line and you look at your total deductions, your total credits, 
Democrats voted against that.
  You know, it is so interesting, they think they should have the right 
of first refusal on your money. They think they know better what to do 
with your money than you do. They say: Send more of it to DC, and we 
will put it where we want it. But what we know is that the American 
people want to keep their money and keep it in their pocket.
  Now, we also have a deduction for interest that is paid on ``Made in 
America'' vehicles. That is an important thing. So if you bought a car 
this past year, that interest on that car payment, you are going to be 
able to deduct every penny.
  The Democrats also voted against the permanent extension of the 
lifetime gift tax exemption. Now, in Tennessee, this was very important 
to us for family farms. We raised that to $15 million per individual 
for a couple that has a family farm or maybe a small business 
manufacturing company. That is $30 million. So they will be able to 
pass that company and its assets on to their children and grandchildren 
so that they can continue to run this business.
  But, bear in mind, every Democrat in this Chamber voted no. They 
voted against your being able to take what you have worked hard for, to 
build, to build that company, to carry on the legacy of that farm.
  They voted against your being able to do that. They voted against an 
increase to the standard deduction. That is used by 90 percent of all 
filers. So as you fill out your tax form, remember, the Democrats said 
you don't deserve it, they do. They want your money. They don't want 
you to keep your money so they voted against raising the standard 
deduction.
  They voted against the permanent extension of the 2017 tax cuts for 
businesses, which fueled investment across America.
  You know what, they really have been the ``no'' caucus when it comes 
to cutting taxes. They have been the ``no'' caucus when it comes to 
allowing you to live your version of the American dream.
  What they want, they want that control; they want that power. They 
want to be able to say: Give it to us. Let us decide what to do with 
your money. And, oh, by the way, they want more of it. They want you to 
have less.
  They want more so they can waste it in the name of programs that by 
and large many have outlived their usefulness for the American people.
  So this is tax day. We should be grateful for President Trump's 
leadership. Without him, there would be no Working Families Tax Cut; 
there wouldn't have been that Big Beautiful Bill. So instead of 
celebrating historic refunds, Americans, if the Democrats had been in 
charge, if they had their way, would be struggling to pay another $4 
trillion in taxes. Think about that one.
  I am so pleased that we were able to get these taxes passed, signed, 
sealed, delivered, and signed into law, and that on this tax day, tens 
of millions of Americans are celebrating increased deductions, 
increased tax credits, and more money in their pockets because of 
larger refunds.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.


                         War Powers Resolution

  Ms. DUCKWORTH. Mr. President, I have come to the floor today as a 
U.S. Senator, of course, but also as a former soldier who served in 
uniform the last time a President rashly sent our men and women into an 
unjustified war in the Middle East.
  I spent nearly a year in Walter Reed Army Medical Center recovering 
from injuries I earned in Iraq. Every morning, as I struggled to sit up 
straight, every time I was rolled into yet another surgery, I made sure 
to read the poster I had next to my hospital bed. It was a framed copy 
of the Soldier's Creed, the words that those lucky enough to wear the 
Army uniform live by.
  That same framed copy now hangs by my desk here in DC. As I glanced 
at it

[[Page S1754]]

this morning, I realized there is perhaps no greater proof that Donald 
Trump never deigned to serve a day in his life than the mockery he 
makes of the Soldier's Creed's commitments every single day he has been 
in office.
  The creed may be associated with the Army, but the sentiments hold 
true for all of those who wear the uniform of this great Nation. Its 13 
lines tell us to be disciplined, physically and mentally tough, 
trained, proficient, and to look out for those who look out for us, to 
look out for one another.
  Donald Trump is supposed to be our servicemembers' Commander in 
Chief. The very, very least we should expect of him is to epitomize the 
standards that we ask our troops to swear by, to live by. The very, 
very least we should expect of the Commander in Chief is to be as 
competent, disciplined, and professional as the men and women whose 
very lives hinge on his capacity to lead, on that competence and 
professionalism we expect to see in the White House.
  The creed makes clear that our troops will never quit, that they will 
never leave a fallen comrade behind. Yet ``Cadet Bone Spurs'' is 
someone who will always quit. And every hour he orders our 
servicemembers to remain in unnecessary, growing danger, he is proving 
that Donald Trump does not give a damn about leaving a comrade or so, 
so many comrades behind. Every moment that Donald Trump leaves our 
heroes mired in the muck of this illegal war of choice with Iran, he is 
showing that he cares more about saving face than leading our troops.
  So I come to the floor today with a simple question. Our military men 
and women go out there every day and do their jobs, no matter the 
risks--all on Donald Trump's orders. So I ask you, Mr. President: Why 
the hell can't you do your job too? Why can't you live up to the same 
level of proficiency as our troops?
  Look, I am proud of every mission I completed in Iraq, but I would 
never ever wish another endless, needless, unjustified war like the one 
I served in on anybody else. I wouldn't wish it on the heroes who are 
packing up their rucks right now, knowing they may never touch American 
soil again. I wouldn't wish it on their families, who are being forced 
to spend their days anxiously awaiting news from half a world away. And 
I wouldn't wish it on the American people, who want their President to 
focus on bringing the costs down here at home, not starting new, 
expensive, taxpayer-funded wars continents away.
  But Trump either doesn't understand or he simply doesn't care about 
that. From the moment this conflict began, the President has tried to 
shroud his incompetence behind the valor of our servicemembers. When 
asked to justify his illegal actions, Donald Trump has tried to hide 
his cowardice behind our heroes' courage. He has tried to act as if 
questioning why we are at war is the same as questioning the skill and 
bravery of our troops themselves. It isn't.
  And I am here to call bullshit on the President of the United States 
because I know that our military will always do the best job possible. 
When given a mission, our servicemembers will say: Yes, I will serve. 
They don't say: Why me. They don't ask: Will I be safe? No. They dust 
off their boots, they show up, and they do what is asked of them to the 
best of their ability every single time, time after time, tour after 
tour, no matter the risk, no matter the sacrifice. They will always, 
always execute their orders to the maximum capability of their 
professionalism, and they are proud to do it.
  That isn't the problem. The problem here is that the person who is 
supposed to be leading them spends more time talking about his Marie 
Antoinette ballroom than he does sitting in the Situation Room, trying 
to get us out of this war.
  The problem is the guy who claims to be making America great again 
looks at the word ``America'' and only sees the letters ``M'' and ``E'' 
in the middle of it.
  The problem is that the Commander in Chief not only has no idea what 
the end state is like for his war of choice but probably doesn't know 
what the term ``end state'' means at all.
  The problem is that even in the last 2 weeks, the man who is in 
charge of our Nation's nuclear codes has himself gone increasingly 
nuclear. He is not believing literal war with Iran is enough. He has 
now gone on to proverbial war with the Vatican, choosing to pick fights 
with the Pope, of all people--the Pope.

  Rather than trying to engage in any semblance of real diplomacy to 
end the conflict in the Middle East, he has threatened to annihilate an 
entire civilization, terrifying people overseas and here at home, who 
are understandably worried about retaliatory strikes.
  Now, after 1 half-assed day of so-called negotiations with Iran, he 
has whipsawed to the next risky frontier in the region--a dangerous, 
complex, partial military blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, launching 
it at our Nation's expense with no justification, no explanation, or 
any real plan as to what comes next. His only plan seems to rely on the 
valor, willingness to sacrifice, and professionalism of our military 
men and women. But let me tell you, that is not enough. They need a 
true commander.
  But Trump is Trump, and he is actively, unabashedly telling us how to 
ignore what we are all seeing with our own eyes. He is trying to 
declare ``mission accomplished,'' despite his obvious failures at every 
single turn. He is declaring ``We did it. We're winning'' after all 
signs point to the opposite. We are still at war. Americans are still 
at risk. Civilians across the region are still dying for no reason that 
anyone can truly articulate.
  In reality, the only thing that Donald Trump has accomplished over 
the last 6 weeks is more chaos. Because of his choices, a new, young 
Ayatollah is in charge who seems even more radical than his father was. 
Thirteen American heroes have been killed and hundreds more wounded. 
More Gold Star parents are grieving their children.
  More American families are struggling to avoid the spiking gas 
prices. They are unsure if they can pay even more every time they go to 
the gas station, but they have to because they need to get to work; 
they have to take their kids to school; they have to take their aging 
parents to the doctor. The farmers of Illinois, the farmers of this 
great Nation have seen, at a time when we should be planting, their 
input costs skyrocket because of Donald Trump's war of choice.
  Look, war is always tragic, but when it is preventable, when it is 
unjustified, it is not just tragic, it is a travesty. Trump wouldn't 
let himself be dragged by the bone spurs to serve in Vietnam, so how 
dare he--how dare he--drag our Nation into a war of his choice today? 
But this draft dodger--this five-time draft dodger--is too infatuated 
with maximum pressure to make a serious effort at even minimum 
diplomacy.
  Once again, the Trump foreign policy doctrine has proven reckless, 
senseless, and dangerous--a doctrine in which fact and fiction are one 
and the same, one in which our Commander in Chief seems to come to 
military decisions by virtue of temper tantrums and announces them via 
tweet in the middle of the night and one in which avarice outweighs 
advice every single time.
  Look, unlike Trump, I actually know what it is like to leave your 
blood soaking into the desert sand a half a world away. I know what it 
is like--I know what it is like--and what is at stake for the troops 
this administration is sending into harm's way. We must safeguard their 
valor and their professionalism by doing our jobs.
  I can tell you this: It is a whole lot easier to cover your eyes and 
order other Americans to sacrifice their children and sacrifice 
themselves if you don't have to do any of the sacrificing yourself. It 
is easier to send other people's children to fight in a war if you know 
your own children are cozy in a penthouse suite somewhere. It is easier 
to ignore the everyday realities of war from inside the hallowed halls 
of the White House where you have McDonald's being DoorDashed to the 
Oval Office. But it is nearly impossible--it is near impossible--if you 
have been actually outside the wire yourself.
  So I have come to the floor today to keep true a promise I first made 
over two decades ago. I ran for Congress not because I wanted to be in 
Congress, not because I wanted to be a Congresswoman or a Senator. I 
ran for Congress to honor the men and women who carried me out of that 
bloody war zone.
  I made a promise that when the drums of war started beating again, I 
would be in a position to make sure that our elected officials fully 
consider the true cost of war--not just in terms

[[Page S1755]]

of money but in human lives and in the sacrifices of the men and women 
who wear the colors of this great Nation. That was the vow I made to 
the troops I deployed with and to all of those who have served since I 
hung up my uniform.
  I am here today under this great Capitol Dome to keep that most 
sacred oath because right now, thousands of our troops are ready to do 
their jobs even if it means laying down their lives. And it is tragic, 
it is disgusting to me that even as they prepare to do their jobs, our 
President and some Members of this Chamber seem so eager to neglect 
their own.
  So as those drums of war echo louder than they have ever in years, I 
am here to remind Donald Trump that he does not have the authority to 
unilaterally force us into war. He may never have read the 
Constitution, but I have.

  So let me direct his attention to article I, which makes clear that 
only Congress--only Congress--has the power to declare war. We are the 
ones tasked with deciding when and how Americans are sent into combat. 
We are the ones charged with that most solemn duty. Yet Trump is acting 
as if article I simply doesn't exist, as if obeying the Constitution is 
optional, as if our founding document is just a yellowing, crumbling 
piece of paper that he can crumble up and toss into the garbage can at 
will.
  This should not, must not be a partisan issue. No matter if you are 
struggling to pay rent or if your name is plastered in fake gold on a 
building on Fifth Avenue, no one can ignore the Constitution, 
especially if you have sworn an oath to defend it. No matter if you are 
a Mar-a-Lago worker who is pulling down double shifts or if you are the 
President of the United States, no one is above the law.
  Look, I believe fully that there are certain solemn and urgent times 
when our military must be called upon to defend us. There are certain 
moments when the threat in question is significant and imminent, 
instances when military force is the most effective tool at hand, and 
when using it is necessary to protect America and her interests.
  The thing is, from what little information the Trump administration 
has shared publicly that he hasn't immediately contradicted--and 
sometimes in the same sentence--this was not one of those times. If the 
administration thinks that I am wrong and there was an imminent, 
reasonable, actual threat to America, then guess what. The floor is 
theirs.
  Come to the Senate. We are just 20 minutes from the White House. It 
is not hard to find. It is even faster in your motorcade, Mr. 
President. It is not hard to find us. We are the building with the big 
dome on top. We are only a 20-minute walk.
  Trump knows where the Capitol Building is. It is the spot he told the 
insurrectionists to march toward on January 6.
  So, if his team actually believes that the war is justified, then 
they need to come to Congress and do their jobs: Explain their case and 
give the American people a say through their elected representatives, 
the Members who sit at every one of these desks in this Chamber.
  They need to respect the American people enough to finally tell them 
why they are being forced to bear the costs of this conflict, both in 
dollars and cents and daughters and sons.
  They need to respect our servicemembers enough to prove why war with 
Iran is worth having more children grow up without their moms or dads. 
They need to make it clear that they have thought this through and well 
enough that they can actually articulate what an end state with this 
war of choice in Iran would even look like.
  When their case has been made and when the debate here in Congress is 
completed, then the Members of this Chamber must vote. It is our duty. 
Yes, it is our burden. It is the least we can do for those who are 
willing to sacrifice everything to safeguard this democracy.
  But if the Trump administration refuses to do that--if they refuse to 
adhere to the Constitution--well then, it begs the question: What are 
you hiding? What are you hiding, Mr. President? We already know you are 
incompetent. What else are you hiding?
  Look, we have now been at this war of choice--of Trump's choice--for 
a month and a half. Thousands are dead or are grieving, wounded, and 
suffering. Only someone as inept and unfit, someone as callous and 
cruel as Trump would see this as winning. Only a draft-dodging coward 
would think that this is the right way to engage in a war. Only a man 
so unqualified to be Commander in Chief would be proud to keep on 
risking our heroes' lives without even having a concept of a plan for 
how to get them back home without risking more graves at Arlington.
  We can't let this chaos continue unchecked. As our troops continue to 
sacrifice whatever is asked of them, we Senators--we Senators--need to 
do the absolute minimum required of us. That is why, this week, I am 
calling up my War Powers Resolution, demanding that the Trump 
administration finally end this illegal war, and calling for some 
actual public oversight and accountability on behalf of the American 
people. It will come to the floor for a vote shortly.
  So, to my Republican colleagues, you have a choice--a simple one, 
really. You can vote with me to end this conflict and show that you 
actually care about putting America first, like you claim; or you can 
vote to put Trump's ego first, proving that, when push comes to shove, 
you care more about protecting Trump's thin skin than the Constitution 
that you swore to defend.
  At this point, it is pretty clear. Donald J. Trump will always be 
more interested in looking out for his own self-interest rather than 
truly serving America's interest.
  So my question is, if any of my Republican colleagues are actually 
brave enough to stand up and tell Donald J. Trump--the five-time draft-
dodging coward--``enough.''
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I rise in support of my colleague's War 
Powers Resolution.
  I am proud to be a cosponsor with Senator Duckworth, and I am very 
humbled to be here in the Chamber and listen to her--to listen to her 
recount her own experience as to her own vow as a Member of this body 
and to take the very painful lesson that she absorbed when her future 
was completely altered by her wartime service and put it to a positive 
use in trying to protect others like her.
  Senator Duckworth proves a point that gets proven over and over and 
over again: that our military serves with distinction and bravery and 
that they serve with professionalism and excellence. But so often, the 
issue for them is the quality of the civilian decisions about whether 
they go to war or not. So often in my lifetime--in Vietnam and Iraq and 
now in Iran--that brave service was compromised--really, betrayed--by 
poor civilian decision making and for improper political reasons, 
rather than a careful assessment of what was in America's best 
interests.
  I have been asking the question since this war began: Have we learned 
nothing from 25 years of war--unproductive war--in the Middle East?
  It is pretty apparent to me, in having asked that question over and 
over again, that this administration has not.
  This administration has not factored in the 14,000-plus deaths in 
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have not factored in the more than 
65,000 American troops and contractors who were injured. They have not 
factored in the hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. They have not 
factored in the fact that the U.S. military engagements did not produce 
a safer region. They have not factored in the $8 trillion spent during 
those 25 years. They have acted as if that history is now wiped away, 
and we can engage in a war in the Middle East without reflecting upon 
these lessons that are written in blood and in the precious resources 
of our Nation.
  So I am not going to ask the question again today, ``Have we learned 
nothing from 25 years of war?'' because I think the answer to that, 
sadly, is plain.
  So let me ask a different question: What have we learned in 45 days 
of war in Iran? What have we learned?
  I would argue that we have learned at least three things: War is 
costly. An unwise war is deeply unpopular. Those who would make 
diplomacy impossible

[[Page S1756]]

make war inevitable. I think those are the lessons that the last 45 
days have taught us.
  First, war is costly.
  As my colleague laid out, 13 members of our armed services--one who 
lived in Spotsylvania County, VA, who had purchased a home, who was 
within a few months of retirement and was wanting to retire to that 
home with his family--have died. Spouses and kids and parents and 
friends and brothers and sisters are mourning the losses from this 
unwise and illegal war.
  Hundreds of our troops have been injured, and stories come out about 
the depth of those injuries and the lack of planning that left them 
exposed to the attacks that caused them to be injured. While I wish it 
were otherwise, it is likely that there will be more such stories.
  There is also the cost in dollars. We are spending, by some 
estimates, between $1 billion and $2 billion a day. We are expecting to 
see the President, sometime soon, send over a new request for a 
dramatic increase in funding to fund this Iran war.
  But let me talk about costs in a different way, just the cost to 
everyday Americans' pocketbooks.
  Today is tax day. Today is tax day. President Trump is the ``taxer in 
chief.'' Last year, he imposed chaotic tariffs on the world's economy, 
right before tax day, and those tariffs cost American families a couple 
of thousand dollars each. With this one-man tariff war that President 
Trump started without having congressional authority--that was, 
ultimately, in significant part, struck down as illegal by the Supreme 
Court in February of this year--last year, right before tax day, 
President Trump stood up and showed by his actions that he was the 
``taxer in chief.''

  This year, on tax day, we are seeing Americans pay more for food, pay 
more for energy, and pay more for building supplies because of the 
actions of this President--in particular, just the price of gas at the 
gas pump in Virginia and nationally. The price of gas has gone up $1 a 
gallon since February 27, just because of President Trump's unilateral 
decision to take us to war.
  Virginians buy 8 million gallons of gas a day. So that is $8 million 
Virginians are having to shell out of their pockets--that they weren't 
having to shell out--because Donald Trump started this war.
  This is happening in Illinois. It is happening in Connecticut. It is 
happening in Nebraska. It is happening in every State, and it is 
happening all over the world. We are reading about economies that are 
shutting down 1 day a week. We are reading about street protests in 
allied nations over the cost of petroleum, all driven by this one man's 
deciding to take us to war.
  So the first lesson from the last 45 days: War is costly.
  The second lesson is, an unwise war is deeply unpopular. This war is 
deeply unpopular with the American public.
  Most of us took the last 2 weeks of recess to travel around our 
States. I represent Virginia, which I believe is one of the most pro-
military States in the country. I spent significant time in the Hampton 
Roads area, which is the center of American naval power, where we build 
ships and subs, and it has the biggest Navy base in the world.
  I spent a lot of time with Virginians over the last 2 weeks. This war 
is unpopular. Virginians are deployed, and they don't know why, and 
they don't know when they will come home.
  The USS Ford carrier, today, passes the record for the longest 
deployment of a carrier in American modern history. They were supposed 
to be home with their families before Christmas, and they are still 
deployed away from their families, with significant maintenance issues 
reducing the quality of life on that ship.
  This war is unpopular. But, of course, it is unpopular. If you go to 
war without a clear rationale--and the President has floated five or 
six of them. If you go to war without a clear plan, without apparently 
anticipating what everyone would have anticipated with the closure of 
the Strait of Hormuz, if you go to war without allies, if you go to war 
without Congress, the war will be unpopular. With no plan, no 
rationale, no allies, and no congressional debate, the war will be 
unpopular.
  This was so easy to predict at the beginning. For some reason, the 
President thought the magic of his own personality could turn a war of 
choice into something that would be embraced by the American public. 
The American public is too smart for that.
  So an unwise war is deeply unpopular. That is a lesson of the last 45 
days.
  Then, the last lesson, I believe, is a profound one that we have to 
acknowledge, and that is this: Those who make diplomacy impossible make 
war inevitable.
  The President, the Vice President, and his U.N. Representative--even 
within the last 2 hours, in a hearing before the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee--said the war was necessary to stop Iran from 
getting a nuclear weapon. There is no intelligence that said that Iran 
was near getting a nuclear weapon. If what President Trump wanted was 
to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, then he committed one of 
the most egregious blunders in the history of the United States, in his 
first term, when he tore up a diplomatic deal that did precisely that.
  The United States and our European allies and adversaries--China and 
Russia--engaged in a 20-month negotiation with Iran that led to an 
agreement. On the first page of the agreement--page 1--Iran reaffirms 
that it will never seek to purchase or develop any nuclear weapons. We 
had the agreement with Iran for no nuclear weapons. We had mechanisms 
of inspection. We had limitations on centrifuges and limitations on the 
enrichment of plutonium or uranium.
  We had a diplomatic deal, and the President tore it up. The deal was 
working according to our allies. The deal was working according to 
President Trump's first Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense, 
who urged him to stay in it.
  The deal was working, according to the International Atomic Energy 
Agency that was investigating and inspecting Iranian facilities, but 
President Trump took a deal that guaranteed no nuclear weapons ever, 
and he tore it up. The United States doesn't walk away from diplomatic 
deals; other nations do that. But the President established a dangerous 
precedent. And many of us said to him at the time: If you tear up a 
diplomatic deal, you are paving the path to war. It might be soon or it 
might not be soon, but you are paving a path to war.
  If you make diplomacy impossible, you make war inevitable, and that 
is exactly what Donald Trump has done. Those troops who have died, they 
have died because Trump tore up a diplomatic deal. The costs that are 
being experienced by American consumers, we are suffering those costs 
because Donald Trump tore up a diplomatic deal. The injuries to 
civilians, to schoolchildren, the injuries to American troops, those 
are occurring because Donald Trump tore up a diplomatic deal.
  We still have a seal that is available right here on the walls of the 
Senate that has the eagle representing the United States and in each 
claw it is holding the arrows of war or the laurel branches of peace, 
and the seal of the United States always has the eagle looking to the 
laurel branches. We are supposed to prefer diplomacy first.
  But Donald Trump has decided that a Department of Defense now needs 
to be a Department of War, and rules of engagement to protect civilians 
now can be dismissed and called stupid and things that we don't need to 
follow.
  I hope this body still believes that America should prefer diplomacy 
first. I hope this body still believes in the United States being a 
values-based nation, not a bully nation. That is what this vote is 
about, and that is why I am so proud to join my colleague to support 
it, and I will continue to be on the floor with my colleagues every 
week until we stop an illegal and unwise war.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Armstrong). The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I am here on the floor to add my support 
to the resolution being brought before us by Senator Duckworth. This is 
the third week in a row that we are having an opportunity on the Senate 
floor to have a short debate and a vote on the most significant 
military engagement

[[Page S1757]]

in the Middle East in many of our Senate careers.
  We are now a month and a half into this bungled, mismanaged war, and 
we have yet to have a single hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee or the Senate Armed Services Committee on this war, on this 
military operation.
  In the absence of these privileged motions that we are bringing--
thankful to Senator Duckworth for bringing one this week--we would have 
no debate, no vote on the floor on the authorization of war, maybe the 
most sacred charge we are given as U.S. Senators.
  We should not normalize that. We should not fail to note how 
extraordinary it is that our Senate Republican leadership has declined 
to do any oversight of a war that is costing billions of dollars every 
week, that has already led to the loss of over a dozen American lives, 
that has erupted a regional war throughout the Middle East and is 
literally melting down economies all over the world, especially in the 
developing world--not a single hearing--not a single hearing--in the 
U.S. Senate. Secretary Rubio, Secretary Hegseth have not come to the 
Senate to explain what their plan is, what their strategy is, what 
their endgame is.
  And I think we know the answer. They simply can't explain what is 
happening. They can't articulate a strategy. They are not ready to 
answer questions from Democrats or from Republicans who, I think, 
increasingly are starting to scratch their heads about how on earth 
this is in the U.S. national security interest.
  Very quickly, because I know we have a number of other colleagues who 
want to speak, let me just talk about what has happened since we last 
had an opportunity to vote.
  First, the impact on the U.S. economy is getting more acute. There 
are more and more Americans who are unable to make their lives work 
because we have seen a 30-percent increase in gas prices since this war 
began. Farmers have seen a 35-percent increase in fertilizer, a 50-
percent increase in diesel costs.
  That increase in agricultural costs is going to almost immediately 
spill over into big increases at the grocery store. And so amidst high 
inflation, you are now going to see costs just become prohibitive for a 
lot of American families--a 30-percent higher gasoline cost simply 
because of this war of choice.
  And agricultural economy, which was already in crisis--60 percent of 
farmers had already said that they were in a worse financial shape this 
year, prior to the war, than when President Trump came into office--now 
that gets even worse.
  What is the impact on our national security? Well, the President has 
said that there are a bunch of different meandering explanations and 
objectives for this war. He said that we want to destroy their missile 
program. Well, what have we found out in the last 2 weeks? We have 
found out that we have come nowhere close to destroying their missile 
program. In fact, they still likely have the majority of their 
missiles. And during the cease-fire, Iran has used that time to 
rehabilitate and rescue many of the missiles and the launchers that 
were buried in rubble. China stands ready, as soon as the bombing fully 
ceases, to help them immediately rebuild their missile program. There 
is no way this campaign is going to eliminate their missile program.
  Just the same, we were told that part of the objective of this war 
was to eliminate their nuclear program. And yet, a month and a half 
later, they still have all of their enriched uranium. We have not 
destroyed Iran's knowledge of how to produce nuclear weapons out of 
existence because neither are possible through a bombing campaign 
alone.
  Sometimes regime change is an objective; sometimes it isn't. The 
President said: Well, we were gone last week. In fact, we have already 
achieved regime change. Well, technically, there is a new Ayatollah, 
but there is absolutely no evidence that this new Ayatollah, that this 
new crowd of elite leadership--mainly coming out of the hard-line 
IRGC--is any less provocative, any less dangerous, any less adversarial 
to U.S. interests. In fact, the opposite is probably true. A doddering 
90-year-old Ayatollah was replaced by a group of leaders that are 
likely much more fanatical and probably much more effective in their 
aims to try to attack U.S. interests there and around the world.
  Of course, one of our objectives is a new objective, the objective to 
reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The Strait was open before this war began; 
it is now closed. It is unclear whether President Trump knew that they 
would close the strait and just threw up his hands, didn't care about 
the impact on the U.S. economy or whether he didn't know--which would 
be egregious in and of itself--and was shocked to find out that Iran 
would close the strait.
  We are now a month and a half into this war. The strait is still 
closed. The President is trying to reopen the Strait by blockading it, 
which is a very strange strategy, one that, in day two of this new 
plan, does not seem to be succeeding.
  Finally, what is the impact on the world? And I just want to touch on 
this very shortly. A new war is erupting in the Middle East; Hezbollah 
was empowered by the attacks; and there is a prospect of a massive new 
ground invasion of Lebanon from Israel. Already, hundreds have died in 
that conflict. Last weekend, you likely saw images of just vicious 
bombings of what looked to be civilian infrastructure happening inside 
Lebanon. But a new war in the Middle East between Israel and Lebanon, 
in which thousands will likely die, in which millions will be 
displaced, that is horrible for U.S. interests, for our allies' 
interests. The region is exploding in violence.
  But even more cataclysmic in its scope is what is happening to 
developing nations. Developing nations' economies are literally melting 
down right now because a 30-percent increase in fuel costs for a short 
period of time is something that wouldn't tank the entirety of the 
American economy, even though it does great damage to individual 
families. But in nations where a short-term fuel shortage or a 30-
percent immediate spike is something that a government or a very poor 
population cannot manage has caused a lot of these countries' economies 
to simply melt down. These governments are now closing their public 
operations. Universities in some developing nations are permanently 
closed because they can't afford to keep the lights on.
  There is a rolling disaster happening throughout the world because of 
these energy price increases that have been designed, manufactured, by 
Donald Trump. So it is not just that the Middle East is exploding; it 
is not just that we aren't meeting any of our objectives in Iran; it is 
not just that American consumers are being harmed--there are billions--
billions--of poor people all around the world whose lives are more 
miserable, whose lives are slipping into greater chaos because of this 
war.
  So we will be down on this floor week after week, every single week, 
to force at least a short debate, to force a vote. And my hope is that 
at some point our Republican colleagues, besides one, choose to join 
us.
  It is OK for you to support President Trump, generally and 
politically, and admit that this war was a massive mistake. We did that 
when there were Democratic Presidents in office. President Obama helped 
participate in a war in the Middle East, helping the Saudis be involved 
in a conflict in Yemen. Many of us thought that was a mistake. We came 
to the floor and opposed President Obama. We actually filed resolutions 
making it harder for President Obama to fuel that war.
  So I hope, at some point, our Republican colleagues decide they can 
choose to just say what is clear and obvious--this war was a mistake; 
it should end as quickly as possible--and not believe that this is 
somehow incommensurate with their broader political support for the 
President.
  You can, as a U.S. Senator, occasionally stand up to the leader of 
your party if it is a matter of right and wrong. I believe this is a 
matter of right and wrong. Maybe it won't be in today's vote, but 
hopefully in one of the votes we will continue to have, we can have 
some bipartisan agreement that this war needs to end.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, first, I want to salute Senator Duckworth 
for bringing this critical issue to the floor so that the American 
people can hear

[[Page S1758]]

what our views are on this war but also reflect their views. I also 
want to salute her for her heroic service in the U.S. Army.
  Thank you, Senator.
  I rise today to discuss the war in Iran. Forty-six days ago, 
President Trump unilaterally launched this war. He declined to make his 
case before the American people. He refused to consult Congress. He 
failed to present evidence of an imminent threat, and he ignored his 
advisers, who warned him about the peril of such an operation.
  President Trump believed he alone had the judgment to engage our 
Nation in a major conflict, and he alone had the ability to secure a 
quick, complete victory.
  After more than 6 weeks of war, what has the President accomplished? 
Thirteen American servicemembers have tragically lost their lives. More 
than 300 have been wounded. Thousands of civilians across the Middle 
East have been killed and injured, and hundreds of thousands displaced. 
The United States has lost dozens of aircraft, sustained significant 
damage to our bases, and burned through an alarming amount of our 
missile inventory and other munitions.
  Global oil prices have surged more than 45 percent, and the cost of 
gasoline and household goods in our communities have risen 
significantly. American families are bearing the cost of a war they 
wanted nothing to do with and have gained nothing from.
  In sum, the President took a difficult status quo and somehow managed 
to make it far worse.
  On February 27, the Strait of Hormuz was open to maritime traffic. 
American farmers could count on fertilizer shipments. Our high-tech 
chip makers, in whom we have invested billions of dollars, could count 
on helium deliveries.
  Today, the Strait of Hormuz is closed. Incredibly, it is now 
President Trump who is blockading the strait, rather than Iranians. 
This is a bizarre and incoherent strategy. A blockade will push prices 
even higher, with ripple effects on food, fuel, and consumer goods 
across this country--indeed across the world.

  Additionally, Iran has demonstrated that it responds to military 
pressure with defiance, not concession. This blockade is unlikely to 
change Iran's negotiating position, and I worry it will do nothing more 
than place our servicemembers in greater danger.
  Only under President Trump's chaotic tenure would a month and a half 
of fighting result in the United States being in a weaker strategic 
position than before the war began. Here are the facts. Iran still 
retains its nuclear program. Its ballistic missile capabilities and 
drone arsenal, although diminished, still pose a threat. Moreover, the 
regime has learned it can effectively control the Strait of Hormuz when 
it chooses. President Trump has badly damaged America's standing with 
our allies, emboldened our adversaries, and lost any moral authority he 
had on the international stage. The American people, including many of 
his own supporters, strongly disapprove of this war.
  At this stage, we must ask: What comes next?
  The President has shown he will not listen to military and regional 
experts and is uninterested in earning the support of the American 
people.
  While that is a decision he can make, if he is unconstrained by 
anything other than his ``own morality,'' then Congress has a duty to 
constrain him through the powers we hold as the constitutional check 
and balance on the President.
  Congress controls the purse. Congress declares war and ratifies 
treaties. Congress represents--and answers to--the American people. It 
is long past time for Republicans to stop avoiding their constitutional 
duties and start reining in the President's ability to unilaterally 
wage war. At a bare minimum, it is long past time they hold public 
hearings with Cabinet officials to provide accountability for the 
American people.
  Now, I am relieved that the cease-fire appears to be holding for the 
moment. The administration should use this time wisely and immediately 
return to negotiating a diplomatic agreement. That means engaging in 
serious, structured conversation with Iran to address nuclear weapons, 
ballistic missiles, their proxy activity, but also the sanctions that 
are in place and the security guarantees that the Iranians will demand.
  It also means taking a realistic approach to opening the Strait of 
Hormuz. The Iranians have a complex, layered network of sea mines, fast 
attack boats, air and sea drones, missiles, and hidden launch sites in 
the cliffs around the strait that provide them with many effective 
options to threaten ships in the passage. Even if the United States 
cleared the strait of mines and began escorting commercial ships with 
our own Navy vessels, militarily suppressing and defeating Iran's 
ambush network is not a sustainable long-term option. A diplomatic 
arrangement is the only real answer. And I must say that to achieve 
this diplomatic arrangement, the President needs and should announce a 
group of experts--not real estate developers and golfing buddies--to go 
over there. This is not going to be settled by the friends of the 
President cutting a deal.
  It took us almost 2 years and complicated discussions about nuclear 
policy, nuclear objectives, et cetera, to get the JCPOA. It is going to 
take us a while to settle this issue, too, and we can't settle it with 
a casual group negotiating on a weekend.
  The President said he was shocked that Iran closed the strait and 
bombarded gulf nations in response to his attack. That is rather 
astounding because everyone with a modest knowledge of the Iranian 
regime was not particularly shocked. Indeed, the course of this war was 
entirely predictable. Generations of American military and political 
experts have examined the Iran problem and repeatedly reached the same 
conclusion: War with Iran would not achieve our goal.
  Indeed, President Trump was given the same warning by his advisers. 
According to press reports, Gen. Dan Caine the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs warned the President of becoming entangled in a prolonged 
conflict and expressed concerns about U.S. casualties and the 
difficulty caused by a lack of allies. General Caine also raised the 
possibility that Iran would block the Strait of Hormuz, stating it was 
long believed Iran would deploy mines, drones, and missiles to close 
the world's most vital shipping lane.
  A separate intelligence official reportedly emphasized, in his words:

       It wasn't just predictable. It was predicted. He was told 
     in advance.

  The President ignored the advice and decades of historical lessons 
and attacked anyway.
  At this juncture, the administration has realized that the Iranians 
are not going to capitulate and that the difficult work of diplomacy 
cannot be wrapped up in a mere 21 hours of negotiation. Facing this 
reality, the President has several options.
  First, the President could simply declare victory, as he has done so 
often, and leave the region without a deal. But what would he leave 
behind? A battered Iran with more antagonistic and radical leaders who 
may have concluded the only way to avoid future attacks is to acquire a 
nuclear weapon. With hundreds of pounds of enriched uranium on hand, 
that possibility is very real--and could be accelerated with Russian, 
Chinese, or North Korean assistance.
  Second, the President could launch new military strikes to try to 
force the regime to surrender. However, this would inevitably result in 
renewed attacks against our forces in the region and a prolonged 
closure of the strait. And as I mentioned earlier, the regime has 
already demonstrated that its threshold for pain is high and its regard 
for its people is low. An extended military campaign would not change 
the Iranians' negotiating demands.
  Now I would propose a third route. The President can resurrect 
serious negotiations with Iran across the full range of issues dividing 
our two nations. The agenda must be broad enough for both sides to 
claim benefit. That is the only way you get to a deal, and we hope 
``The Art of the Deal'' is present in this situation.
  The United States must address nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, 
and malign proxy activity, and Iran will seek guarantees against 
further military operations, sanctions relief, and other assurances.
  President Trump was foolish, in my view--and reflecting Senator 
Kaine--to

[[Page S1759]]

tear up the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action he inherited from 
President Obama, but with diplomacy, his administration may be able to 
regain some of the important pieces that he previously abandoned.
  But there is an additional obstacle to peace that must be addressed: 
Prime Minister Netanyahu. Prime Minister Netanyahu has spent the better 
part of 30 years gathering support for what he believed to be an 
inevitable confrontation with Iran. His personal and political fortunes 
are entirely aligned with the continuation of this war. As he faces an 
election and a criminal trial, he is using the war as personal and 
political armor. Unless Trump is willing to force Netanyahu to stand 
down, Israel will continue operations regardless of what America does.

  Mr. President, this war was ill-conceived, I oppose it, and if it is 
still ongoing after 60 days, I will vote against an authorization of 
military force to continue it. I am proud to be here today in support 
of Senator Duckworth's proposal. From day one, Trump lacked any clear 
objectives and realistic views of the consequences, but peace can be 
accomplished. The path forward requires honesty from President Trump 
about what military force can and cannot achieve, the discipline to 
negotiate seriously, and the courage to lead our allies rather than 
alienate them.
  Unfortunately, this President, I believe, cannot be trusted to chart 
this path. He has shown an intractable instinct for destruction first 
and diplomacy last. He will never secure a peaceful conclusion to this 
conflict as long as Congress allows President Trump to wage war 
whenever and however he sees fit. Yes, we have to stand up and be true 
to the oath we all took: to preserve and protect the Constitution of 
the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this War Powers Resolution. 
I urge them to choose the path of peace before the costs of President 
Trump's war become irreversible.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today because I had conversations with 
a woman in New Jersey recently that I just can't get out of my head. I 
was in Atlantic City talking with a woman there about how she felt 
things were going in our country and for her and her family. What she 
said really stuck with me, seared into my mind. She said that with 
everything going on right now--this war and rising costs--she felt like 
she was ``drowning.'' That was the word she used--``drowning.''
  That is the impact this war is having on the American people. And 
when someone is drowning, you don't just stand by and wait; you don't 
hesitate; you don't wait for somebody else to act; you act with 
urgency, swiftly and decisively.
  That is what we are trying to do here right now. We are acting by 
bringing up another War Powers Resolution to bring an end to this war 
and give the American people the relief they need.
  I know the Trump administration and Republicans here in Congress 
think that this war is going just fine. Depending on what day it is, 
Trump either is saying the war is over or threatening to escalate it. 
That is the problem. We are engaged in a war without a clear mission, 
without taking negotiations to end the war seriously, and without the 
consultation or buy-in of the American people.
  It is a war this administration seems to think can go on almost 
indefinitely. They don't care about the consequences; they are simply 
posting their way through it on social media.
  What we have seen from Republicans here in Congress isn't any better. 
A month and a half into this war, and we have not had a single 
hearing--a month and a half in.
  By the way, we haven't had a hearing at all about what happened in 
Venezuela either.
  Every one of our offices gets a flood of calls every day from people 
tired of this war, people who can't afford this war, who can't afford 
to pay for the decisions that this President made, and the Republicans 
in Congress have stood by and watched like bystanders.
  Donald Trump, this administration, this Republican Congress--they 
have all just stood by and watched as the American people feel like 
they are drowning. If anything, they are making that feeling of extreme 
anxiety worse. That anxiety is driving our urgency to act.
  There were a number of reasons why the woman I talked to was feeling 
that stress and anxiety, and one of them was gas prices. Gas prices 
were below $3 a gallon in February. In New Jersey, the average price is 
a little more than $4 a gallon right now, but it is so much higher in 
some of the biggest population centers. You go around the country, and 
you can find gas for $5, even $6 a gallon right now. If you are a 
working parent and you have to put gas in the tank every single week to 
get the kids to school and yourself to work, you are paying 
significantly more at the pump.
  Ending this war is an urgent matter. It is not just gas for our cars 
that is driving this urgency. Look at the price of diesel. The average 
price of diesel--what a lot of trucks that transport goods run on--was 
$3.72 in February. It is more than $5.80 in New Jersey right now 
according to AAA. That means everything you buy, from meat and eggs to 
coffee and clothes, is getting more expensive because the cost of 
shipping it costs more than $2 more per gallon than before.
  If you are a working family looking at your bills and wondering how 
you are going to make ends meet, ending this war is an urgent matter.
  Another concern I have heard from so many is the unhinged way that 
this President has been acting during this war. Threatening to destroy 
a civilization--that is not American; that is not what we do; that is 
not who we are.
  I am proud to represent tens of thousands of servicemembers in New 
Jersey, hundreds of thousands of veterans, people who are obeying the 
law, people who are abiding by the principles of our country. But this 
Commander in Chief is threatening to change that.
  When the American people see a President threatening what would be 
war crimes in America's name, it sends a shock through our 
consciousness; it sends a clear signal that ending this war is an 
urgent matter. That is why we are doing what we are doing right now--
because the American people can't wait for this President to act like a 
responsible Commander in Chief. They can't wait for this Republican 
Congress to wake up. They need relief, they need it now, and they 
deserve it now.
  I can't go back to that woman in Atlantic City and tell her that she 
should wait, that we can address her concerns later.
  I urge my colleagues to think about the people back home who need 
help now and the power we have with this vote to deliver it for them. I 
urge my colleagues to support this resolution by Senator Duckworth--
someone who knows better than any of us the toll that war takes and the 
urgency needed to stand up for our neighbors.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from New 
Jersey for his powerful words, and I, too, rise in support of this War 
Powers Resolution put forward by our colleague Senator Duckworth, who 
knows a thing or two about the costs of war.
  This is a resolution to halt President Trump's unjustified, illegal 
war against Iran--a war that the overwhelming majority of American 
people want to see end; a war that this Congress never authorized and 
where we have never had a hearing from a Trump administration 
decisionmaker about the war; a war that was started by President Trump 
and Prime Minister Netanyahu that has made us less--not more--safe; and 
a war that has made us much worse off, not better off.
  We have lost 13 American servicemembers. Hundreds more have been 
wounded. Thousands of civilians, innocent civilians, have been killed 
throughout the region.
  And the sacrifice of our servicemembers deserves more respect than 
the President casually remarking that ``[s]adly, there will likely be 
more. . . . That's the way it is.'' That is what President Trump said.
  Well, that is not the way it is, and it is not the way it should be, 
and it is not the way an American President should talk about our 
troops. We must not and cannot normalize President Trump's reckless 
actions that have brought us to this point.

[[Page S1760]]

  The costs of this war are mounting. We just saw it today: The 
President intends to send thousands more troops to the Middle East--
6,000 as part of a naval deployment and thousands more to come later.
  This war has already cost us, in addition to lives, $52 billion--$52 
billion--and another billion dollars every day from the American 
taxpayers. On top of that, on top of what taxpayers will be shelling 
out, we are seeing Americans struggle with rising prices: gas prices, 
oil prices. Of course, when you have rising gas and oil prices, it 
drives up prices on everything else, like fertilizers that our farmers 
need as we go into the season of growing. And all this coming from the 
President who promised that he would focus on lowering prices and 
ending wars. He promised the American people he would be ``a 
peacemaker,'' and he is a warmonger. He lied, and because of his lies, 
people are dying.
  Now the President wants to put even more lives at risk to open the 
Strait of Hormuz. We should all remind our fellow Americans that the 
Strait of Hormuz was open before the President started this war. It was 
open before the President started this war, and now the President's 
main goal is to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
  The President also said the other day that we achieved regime change. 
He just didn't tell the American people that when he knocked off some 
of the top Iranian leaders--the ayatollahs--they were replaced by an 
even more militant and even more radical regime. That is the 
President's definition of ``regime change.''
  Now, the President likes to claim periodically that we won. In fact, 
more than 3 weeks ago, the President of the United States said ``We 
won,'' the United States won. He said that a few days ago. The 
President said ``We won.''
  My question for my Republican colleagues is, If we won, what the hell 
are we still doing there? If we won, why are we still there? Why are we 
still putting American lives at risk? Why are we spending a billion 
dollars of taxpayer money a day if we won?
  Well, we didn't win. And it is impossible to measure how you win 
because the President never set forth clear rationales for this war 
because there wasn't really one to be had. And certainly they have 
advanced no endgame, like what does it mean for him to win the war that 
he already said that he won.
  So we know from the President's own words that there is no clear 
endgame here, and it is clear every day that this war is not in the 
interests of the American people.
  Now, we have seen from President Trump not strength or leadership. 
What we have seen is recklessness. Now we in the Senate should apply 
some brakes and accountability. We have seen a President threatening 
massive war crimes in the name of the American people, threatening to 
end a civilization.
  Colleagues, this is a time for sober and serious American leadership, 
and Donald Trump is not a serious leader.
  In addition to threatening to end a civilization, he has attacked the 
Pope because the Pope seeks peace. He has posted an image of himself as 
Jesus Christ. This is the man in the White House who is running this 
war. He is putting American lives at risk and endangering people 
throughout the world, and he is simply not fit to be Commander in 
Chief.
  So all of this without the consent of the American people. That is 
where Congress is supposed to come in.
  So when the Presiding Officer is looking at a President of the United 
States who is so unhinged, how is it that we can only find one 
Republican Senator, Senator Rand Paul--how is it that we can only find 
one to stand up for the Constitution and against this President who 
clearly is not following the will of the American people, a President 
who took us into an illegal war that is making us less safe and worse 
off? That is our job. That is our job, and this Senate keeps ducking 
its responsibility.
  This resolution put forward by Senator Duckworth is another 
opportunity for our Republican colleagues to show that they are going 
to exercise their responsibilities under the Constitution of the United 
States. We will keep offering War Powers Resolutions so the American 
people know that we are working every day to end this war which they 
want to see come to a close. Maybe we can begin that process today.
  I thank Senator Duckworth for offering this resolution and really 
urge my colleagues to search their souls and talk to their constituents 
and vote yes.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following my 
remarks, the following Senators be permitted to speak prior to the 
scheduled vote: Senator Schiff for up to 10 minutes, Senator Risch for 
up to 5 minutes, Senator Duckworth for up to 3 minutes, and Senator 
Schumer for up to 2 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise today to stand with the American 
people, who are demanding that we bring an end to President Trump's war 
in Iran.
  It has been over a month since President Trump made the decision to 
take us to war, and I would like to take a moment to reflect on what 
this illegal war has achieved and what it has cost.
  President Trump's war has delivered higher costs for Americans at the 
pump, and it has jacked up the cost of fertilizer and fuel for 
Wisconsin farmers. As Americans struggle to afford basic necessities, 
the Trump administration has spent tens of billions of dollars on a war 
that Americans did not ask for. We have lost 13 servicemembers, with 
hundreds of others injured. Thousands of civilians have been killed, 
including dozens of schoolgirls by an errant U.S. missile. President 
Trump has eased sanctions on Russia and shown Iran how to profit from 
blocking the Strait of Hormuz. The same oppressive regime remains in 
place, Iran still controls its enriched uranium, and the United States 
is no closer to a guarantee that Iran will not pursue a nuclear weapon.
  In short, President Trump's war of choice has accomplished next to 
nothing at a tremendous cost to the American people, and still Donald 
Trump has been unable or unwilling to offer a coherent reason for why 
we are at war.
  The American people are looking to Congress to do something. The 
people's branch is supposed to be a check on this President. We need to 
stand up on behalf of our constituents, who do not like this war and 
who want it to end. Americans know the cost of this war. They are the 
ones who are paying for it.
  My Republican colleagues have a choice: Do your job, stand up to this 
President, and send a clear message to Americans by ending this war 
today, or live with the consequences as more civilians are killed, more 
servicemembers are put in harm's way, and more American families 
struggle to make ends meet. The choice is yours.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. President, we are now in the second month of Trump's 
Iran war, and we have already, tragically, lost 13 servicemembers, 
including one--CW3 Robert Marzan--from my home State of California.
  We are now in the second month of Trump's Iran war, and more than 200 
servicemembers have been injured, some very seriously.
  We are now in the second month of Trump's Iran war, and we have 
already had two American pilots shot down over Iran, necessitating a 
rescue under extremely dangerous conditions--a heroic rescue, a daring 
rescue, and one that was only possible because we have the most capable 
Special Forces in the world but a rescue mission that we must all 
acknowledge put an incredible number of our servicemembers at grave 
risk and could have easily gone wrong.
  We are now in the second month of Trump's Iran war, and we have 
squandered tens of billions of dollars that could have been used to 
build hospitals and affordable housing, to build childcare centers and 
senior centers, at a time when the President says we can't afford 
daycare or Medicare or Medicaid.
  We are now in the second month of Trump's Iran war, and Americans are 
paying astronomical prices at the gas pump, at the grocery store, on 
their utility bills and medical bills, but the

[[Page S1761]]

President's actions and inaction are only making life more unaffordable 
for our citizens.
  We are now in the second month of Trump's Iran war, and the President 
has offered no proposal to even authorize the use of force in Iran, nor 
have Republicans demanded one. We have not had a single open hearing on 
the war, nor have Republicans called for one. The case for the war in 
Iran has never been made, will never be made, and my colleagues will 
not put the matter to a vote for fear they will lose that vote or be 
held accountable for it.
  How long can this go on? And the short, terrible answer is: for a 
very long time. It is beginning to have all of the telltale signs of a 
quagmire.
  For this war had no clear purpose. It had no well-defined goal. It 
had no strategic plan. Its rationale has shifted endlessly with the 
wind and the whims of the President. It has vacillated between being 
about regime change and then not about regime change, about missiles 
and then not about missiles, about oil and then not about oil, about 
Iran's nuclear threat and then not about its nuclear threat since the 
President had said the Iran nuclear program had been obliterated a year 
earlier.
  Ironically, the administration's nuclear endgame now sounds a lot 
like the JCPOA, the much-maligned agreement that Trump tore up and now 
seems reconciled to embrace--the JCPOA or something like it.
  Iran had blockaded the Strait of Hormuz sending oil prices 
skyrocketing, and now the Vice President says: Two can play at that 
game. So we are in the blockade business too.
  How does that help the American family that can't afford to fill up 
the car, the trucker put out of work, or the farmer with no fertilizer?
  The simple truth is that this administration has no idea how or when 
this war will end. It is hard to end a war when you are not clear on 
why you began it.
  We can only be certain of one thing: at some point the President will 
claim victory. But what kind of victory will it be? One in which Iran 
for the first time can demand tolls from ships passing through Hormuz? 
One in which the regime has survived--and empowered and embittered--is 
even worse with more crackdowns on the Iranian people, even less 
tolerant of dissent, or worse still, with a fervent desire to break out 
and build a bomb? One in which we suffer persistent and higher gas 
prices because of long-term damage that has been done to gulf oil and 
gas infrastructure? One in which Russia is richer and will be richer 
for the foreseeable future from the higher oil prices it can charge so 
that it can better fund its war with Ukraine?
  Is this the victory that Trump will declare? One for which we have 
paid dearly in blood and treasure? One for which we will have cut 
healthcare by $200 billion more for defense to replenish the stocks of 
the weapons that he has used?
  Does that sound like victory? Does that feel like victory?
  In 1984 at the height of the Cold War, Ronald Reagan said this, he 
said:

       History teaches that wars begin when governments believe 
     the price of aggression is cheap.

  Sadly, the lessons of that history have come to pass, and they have 
come to pass in the form of a President who now too often sees 
aggression as cheap as he has launched not one, but two wars against 
Iran, as he has launched unilateral strikes in South America and 
Africa, as he has overseen a war on vessels in the Caribbean and the 
Eastern Pacific, as he has blockaded Cuba and threatens to ``take it'' 
along with Greenland.
  To Donald Trump, war has become easy. It has become a kind of 
default. And as a result, he has become the President he promised he 
would never be. Far from his promise to end wars, he is now the 
President determined to start them--and lots of them.
  The Founding Fathers warned us of a man like this, a President grown 
too fond of war, seduced by the quick success of the apprehension of 
Maduro and Venezuela and of the access to another country's oil, that 
such an operation begat, he was induced to make war against Iran.
  But Iran is not Venezuela, and the son of the Ayatollah is no Delcy 
Rodriguez, not another pliant regime figure to be easily manipulated.
  In the same speech, Reagan also said this:

       To keep the peace, we and our allies must be strong enough 
     to convince any potential aggressor that war can bring no 
     benefit, only disaster.

  This is peace through strength, his most famous mantra in foreign 
policy.
  Well, what is the strength of our alliances now? The President has 
turned our back on the security pacts that Reagan championed, like 
NATO. He has failed to consult with our allies before embarking on this 
war of choice and claimed we didn't need allies, and then complained 
when our allies did not come to our assistance in reopening a strait 
that previously had been opened, but now was closed.
  The President has undermined our credibility with friend and foe 
alike as he threatens to end a civilization or to commit war crimes or 
as he has ordered military strikes while talks were ongoing or as ``two 
more weeks'' becomes--well, becomes a kind of punch line.
  And what have we taught Iran the ostensible aggressor in Ronald 
Regan's formulation? Have we taught Iran that war can bring no benefit, 
or is Iran now convinced it can bring the world economy to its knees 
and impose its will by imposing fees on passage through the Strait of 
Hormuz? Does it believe that while the U.S. military can pound its navy 
and missile sites, it can still strike U.S. targets and our partners in 
the region with rockets and drones? Does it believe it has an 
asymmetric advantage over the United States because drones and missiles 
are cheap and interceptors are expensive?
  Ronald Reagan will be right, that we have convinced the aggressor 
that war can bring no advantage, only disaster if, in fact, it is we 
who are the aggressors.
  This war should never have begun, and it is long past time for the 
U.S. Congress to put an end to it.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to oppose the 
resolution we are going to vote on here in just a little bit. I think 
this is the--I don't know how many times I have been here on this--but 
this is the same old, same old again.
  The resolution isn't very long. It is a few pages long, and really, 
the operative language is very short.
  It says:

       Congress hereby directs the President to remove the United 
     States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Iran.

  That is all it says. It says: President Trump, put your tail between 
your legs and run. That is what this resolution says.
  Now, let me tell you where we are. First of all, I want to talk to 
Iran. Iran: Nobody is coming to help you, not the Russians, not the 
Chinese, not the North Koreans, not Venezuela, not Cuba. Nobody is 
coming to help you, Iran, except for the 47 people over here.
  The 47 people on this side of the room are trying to direct the 
President of the United States who is defending the United States--they 
are trying to direct him to remove the Armed Forces that we have--our 
brave, young men and women who are engaged in these hostilities--they 
are trying to remove them from these hostilities. These 47 people. 
Nobody else in the world.
  So to them I say: The President of the United States has not only the 
right to do this--I know you claim he doesn't--but he has the right to 
do this. Not only does he have the right to do this, he has the duty to 
do this. He took an oath to defend the people of the United States of 
America.
  How did we get here? Forty-seven years ago, Iran started this 
conflict. We did not. We did not start a war with Iran. We don't want a 
war with Iran. But we have to defend ourselves. Forty-seven years ago, 
they took over our embassy in Tehran and held all of our United States, 
American people who were employed in that embassy for 444 days.
  Finally, Ronald Reagan was elected President. We got them out. But 
since that time, Iran has killed thousands--not hundreds--thousands of 
Americans wherever they can find them. They do it with all kinds of 
methods including IEDs, which are deadly.
  Fortunately, President Trump in Trump 1 took out General Soleimani

[[Page S1762]]

who was the godfather of that operation, and that has ratcheted back. 
But they are still killing them with IEDs.
  The President of the United States is defending the United States of 
America. You can pass all the resolutions you want. This President is 
going to defend this country.
  Now, I know you say it is illegal. If, indeed, it is illegal as you 
claim it is, you are in the wrong room. You ought to be in the room 
across the street in the U.S. Supreme Court, because if it is illegal, 
you should sue him and you should stop it. You are not doing it because 
you know you are going to lose that case.
  The President of the United States under article II of the 
Constitution gives the President the authority. He is doing it. This is 
not going to be a forever war. Indeed, if anything, it is ending what 
seems like has been a forever conflict with Iran.
  Mr. President, you are doing the right thing. You have done a great 
job thus far. This is going to end fairly quickly. Keep up the good 
work.
  My friends on this side of the aisle, vote to oppose this resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Banks). The Senator from Illinois.
  Ms. DUCKWORTH. Mr. President, I just listened to my colleague on the 
other side of the aisle who raised concerns about my War Powers 
Resolution, and I am disappointed--but not in any way surprised--that 
they continue to carry the President's water on this war.
  I would welcome the chairman of Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 
scheduling oversight hearings for Secretary Rubio. I mean, as a former 
member of the committee, the Secretary should be used to testifying 
before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.
  He should schedule them because we and the American people are owed 
actual answers on this administration's conduct, planning, and 
diplomacy during this war of their own making.
  And right now, American servicemembers are already in harm's way 
6,000 miles east. These troops are ready to do their jobs no matter the 
risk or the sacrifice required of them, just as our brave American 
troops have always done time after time and tour after tour.
  So to me, it is tragic that even as they continue to do their duties, 
our President and Members of Congress from the Republican side of the 
aisle seem so ready to neglect their own duties.
  I want a democratic Iran. I want to see its people free from the iron 
grip of its brutal authoritarian regime, and I am not about to shed a 
tear for the previous Ayatollah's death. But that does not mean we 
should not be gravely concerned by the consequences of Trump's actions 
in his war of choice.
  Look, I know there are solemn and urgent times when our military must 
be called upon to defend us. To determine when that is, there are four 
questions we should be asking. No. 1, is the threat significant? No. 2, 
is the threat imminent? No. 3, is the military the most effective tool 
for the goal at hand and that there are no other tools that can do the 
job? And No. 4, would the military be counterproductive to its most 
solemn mission of protecting America?
  With this unconstitutional, unjustified, and unwanted regime-change 
war in the Middle East, Trump has traded deterrence for instability and 
chaos and made all of us less safe in the process. It is time for us to 
rein him in.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, first, I want to thank my colleagues--my 
colleague from Illinois, who has done such a good job and knows all 
about what our veterans go through in the horrors of war; my colleague 
Tim Kaine, who has been so involved in this issue of War Powers 
Resolutions for decades--or a decade--and so many others of us who are 
introducing resolutions on this issue.
  Now, Republicans have voted against this resolution three times now. 
But as the war drags on for 47 days, with no end in sight, they should 
join us today on this resolution to end this war once and for all.
  With gas costs costing over $4 a gallon, with inflation climbing, 
with mortgage rates going up, the American people literally cannot 
afford for Republicans to forego another opportunity to work with 
Democrats to end Trump's disastrous war, at long last.
  Congress cannot simply sit on the sidelines while our brave 
servicemembers are risking their lives on the frontlines. The stakes 
are too high, and the risks are too great for Republicans to stay 
silent.
  I urge my Republican colleagues to listen to the majority of 
Americans who are calling for an end to Trump's wanton war of choice. 
We still don't know the goals. We still don't know the costs. We still 
don't know the length of time.
  There are so many unanswered questions on the most important issue 
that this Senate can face, which is whether to go to war, and then 
total silence from the other side--not a single hearing, not a single 
discussion on this.
  Well, I am going to tell my Republican colleagues: They are not going 
to be able to escape continuing to vote on this. Until our Republican 
colleagues join us, we will continue forcing a vote on our War Powers 
Resolution, week after week after week.
  This is an American issue, not a partisan one. This is one of the 
worst forays America has ever made, with so much damage that is going 
to be lasting.
  And so I urge my colleagues to do what they know is the right thing 
and join us in voting for Senator Duckworth's resolution.
  I yield the floor.


                      Vote on Motion to Discharge

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
discharge.
  Mrs. BRITT. 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 bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the 
Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Justice).
  The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 52, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 79 Leg.]

                                YEAS--47

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

                                NAYS--52

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

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Justice
       
  The motion was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.


                                Farming

  Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, I am back again talking about 
something that is very, very important to everybody in the United 
States of America. There should be alarms going off about what is 
happening. I know we have a lot of bad things happening all over the 
world. We are in conflicts. We are in situations where we are trying to 
control our own destiny when we are not getting a lot of help from a 
lot of people that we should be counting on.
  But let's talk about the United States of America for a second. Let's 
talk about our farmers. Our farmers are in trouble. We better wake up 
and smell the roses because what is happening in this country should be 
a crime. We have lost, just in the last few years, 150,000 farms and 
over 25,000 farmers--150,000. And we take pride in what we do in this 
country. We do everything as first class as we possibly

[[Page S1763]]

can and we are running people out of business right and left and it is 
getting worse.
  Nobody is listening. Nobody is out there pounding on all of our doors 
saying, ``We need help,'' other than the ones right now that are in 
desperate and dire need.
  Again, we have a lot of problems. But you think we have problems. We 
start and continue to lose these farmers that we have in this country, 
and we continue to eat the trash that is sent in from these foreign 
countries, we are going to have many, many more problems.
  It is a big deal because there is not one State in this country that 
doesn't deal in farming in some capacity--not one State. We are all 
involved in it. We all have skin in the game.
  Agriculture is the backbone of who we are and what we are. And if we 
are going to continue to be the place that everybody wants to move to, 
to be a part of, and not a Third World country like a lot of these 
places that we are allowing to ship food in from, we better wake up.
  You know, for some reason, the past administration either didn't 
understand the importance of agriculture or our farmers or, to put it 
bluntly, they really didn't even give a damn about it, to be honest 
with you. Instead, they were focused on outsourcing our food, our 
lumber, our fish. Anything to do with farming or agriculture, we, for 
some reason, were turning over everything to people outside our 
country. And the people that are the cream of the crop, that are true 
Americans in this country, are our people in agriculture.
  You would think that we would have learned a thing or two back during 
COVID. I can remember standing up here back in the early part of COVID, 
back in--what was it--2020 and talking about how in the world have we 
allowed this country to outsource everything that we do medically? 
Because when we looked up and COVID was rampant, we were looking around 
for masks, we were looking around for drugs, looking around for things 
that save people lives. And guess what. We don't make any of that stuff 
anymore. We outsourced it all. Now we are doing the same thing to 
farmers.
  You know, it is very dangerous to be reliant on countries like China, 
Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Brazil, all these people that are either 
socialists or communist countries. We can't continue to do this. We 
can't do it.
  We built this country on hard work and effort and not by handouts and 
not by cheap things that we buy to keep this country going, such as 
what is coming from China or some of these Third World countries.
  One thing that we need to be doing to help our farmers is we need to 
be tariffing the heck out of these countries that are sending in food 
that is taking over our grocery stores and our restaurants that they 
say is great food, it is reliable, it is best in the world, when it is 
nothing but trash. That is all it is, is total trash. For some reason, 
because we think that the price is a little bit better, we are getting 
involved in that--in terms of our grocery stores and our restaurants--
and we are serving things that we shouldn't be serving and it is 
causing a lot more problems.
  You know, we have got the best food safety programs and standards in 
this country by far. We have got to know where it was raised. We have 
to know what has been sprayed on the food or where the fish was caught. 
All the things that go along with food safety go along with farming.
  You know, over the past decades--past few decades, the beef-packing 
industry has shrunk to the point that there are only a few plants 
processing the majority of our Nation's cattle today, and that is 
beyond stupid--really, it is. Think of what we have done. We have 
outsourced most of our food processing, especially when it comes to 
beef, to these gigantic processing companies that, by the way, are 
owned--two of them--by foreign entities.
  President Trump did an Executive order to try to get to the bottom of 
what these foreign-owned meatpacking companies were doing because their 
prices were going so high. They were price-fixing. And what do you 
think is going to happen when you run into a situation where you allow 
people to control the market?
  Think about it. These foreign entities are controlling America's meat 
supply at the expense of American farmers and their families--people 
that work hard, like all of us in this country--not to mention that the 
consolidation of these few processors has threatened Americans' food 
supply.
  You know, in 1980, these foreign processors controlled about 36 
percent of the beef market. Think about that. In 1980, they controlled 
36 percent of the beef market. Now, today, these processing plants--two 
of which are foreign-owned--control 85 percent of the U.S. beef-
processing market, and we are asking for huge problems.
  I am not a mathematician, but I know that those numbers mean that our 
American-owned small meat processors have been pushed out of business, 
and that is what they have done. That is how they do it. They try to 
control everything, so they put in these four meatpacking processing 
plants across this country, they control it all, and the little guys 
are gone.
  And this country was built on small businesses, small farms--
everything that produced good product for U.S. citizens. That is how we 
were raised. That is how we were brought up.
  We need to open up competition and find ways to support American 
meat-processing plants. We have got to do it. We have to do it. I mean, 
that is the job of our Agriculture Department. They have started 
working on that, started trying to open up more to see what we can do. 
But we cannot continue to allow four meatpacking processing plants to 
control everything that we do when it comes to beef.
  You know, when I was growing up, it was common to see ``Made in 
America'' labels on everything at the store. ``Made in America.'' We 
were all proud of it. Now, it is rare. Most of the labels we see are 
``Made in China'' or ``Made in India.'' I want to challenge everybody: 
When you go in the store and you think that this product is made in 
America, all you have to do is look at the box or the can or whatever. 
You will be very, very surprised where that product is made. Very 
surprised. And most of the time, it is not going to be made in the good 
old U.S.A., and it is hurting our American farmers. It is hurting us 
bad.
  They can put a name on it, they can put a label on it, but that 
doesn't mean a hill of beans. Unless it says ``Made in America,'' we 
are selling our country out, we are selling our farmers out--people 
that have built this country.
  In addition to growing our own food and producing our own medicine, 
we need to be using our own cotton. I want you to think about this: Our 
cotton farmers are broke. They have had three bad years, and it is 
getting worse and worse every year.
  Now, this is planting season. They are putting all the cotton in the 
ground. They are putting fertilizer. They have got all these people out 
there working these tractors and machines worth hundreds of thousands 
of dollars that they use to plant this cotton. And if you look at it at 
the end of the day, the cost of putting this cotton in the ground is 
far and above the amount of money that they will receive when they sell 
this cotton.
  Used to, that didn't happen. Used to, we were not challenged as much. 
But what have we done? We have allowed foreign countries to do 
everything they possibly can to outgrow and do things at a rate faster 
than us, and then we are allowing all this cotton to come in from other 
countries. Brazil is one.
  And, again, if we continue to allow Brazil--without tariffing these 
people and let them know: Hey, if you are going to send your cotton in 
here, we are going to have a tough time, and we are going to lose our 
farmers so we are going to start tariffing your cotton and put a 
pricetag on it when it comes to this country.
  We do not owe Brazil one thing. Our farmers don't owe them anything. 
We owe our farmers in this country. You know, in my State of Alabama, 
we are one of the top cotton producers in the country, and we bring in 
more than $400 million of revenue every year to the State of Alabama. 
You know, our stores are filled with shirts, jeans, towels, bedding, 
but the problem is that you look on that tag, most of them are made 
overseas--everything with cotton. I mean, we don't really use cotton in 
this country anymore unless it comes from overseas.

[[Page S1764]]

  American cotton farmers produce the highest quality of cotton in the 
world. I mean, but they are undercut by all this foreign junk that we 
are bringing in. So there is a lot of work that goes into cotton 
production, and one thing about our cotton farmers, they work 365 days 
a year. They make the best product they possibly can, but, 
unfortunately, we are held to a standard that a lot of people and a lot 
of things that go on--whether it is textile mills or people that are 
involved in the cotton business use the foreign cotton, and we don't 
use near as much in our country.
  So my point here is that Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi and 
I, we are introducing a bill called the Buying American Cotton Act. 
Now, here is the reason we are doing this: We have to save our cotton 
farmers. If we don't do it in the next few years, it will be over. They 
will all be gone. And every American in this country, when you buy 
something with cotton in it, that cotton is going to come from a 
foreign entity.
  We have to do something to help them, and there is a way to do it 
without costing a lot of money. There is a way to do it in this 
building. All we have to do is pass the Buying American Cotton Act to 
incentivize folks to buy American cotton and bolster our American 
cotton producers instead of arguing about bailouts when our cotton 
farmers go under and they need help. Of course, we always, as the 
Federal Government, try to help them out, but you can't help them out 
enough where they can really survive in a long period of time.
  So what we want to do is get away from the subsidy part and give them 
an opportunity through the Buying American Cotton Act to give tax 
credits when people buy American cotton. That is all we want to do. 
When people buy American cotton, they get a tax credit for it.
  If you buy Brazilian cotton, you don't get a tax credit. We have to 
do something to help our farmers--especially these cotton farmers. When 
farm income improves, everything else improves. The safety-net programs 
go down, not to mention the additional economic activity that a strong 
rural economy will contribute to when you get this tax base done with 
farmers making a profit. Again, they haven't made any profit going on 4 
or 5 years.
  Instead of spending money--that is the reason we did this bill. 
Instead of spending money, we wanted to make sure that these farmers 
don't need a subsidy at the end of the year. If we give tax credits to 
entities that buy American cotton, we will not have to pay subsidies 
anymore. This is an end-all solution to helping the cotton farmers 
across this country.

  Cotton is not just for T-shirts and stuff either. Cotton is for 
medical supplies, you know, military, critical materials that we use 
across this country. Cotton plays a key part in national security.
  A nation that cannot supply its own basic materials is a nation that 
has surrendered its independence. And so that is why I am up here 
today. We are getting ready to celebrate our 250th anniversary, and our 
farmers have been a huge part of that. For 250 years, we grew our own 
food; we cut our own timber; we caught our own fish. We did everything 
we possibly could. But what have we done? Corporations have run out the 
private sector in this country--the small businesses in this country. 
They moved it to corporations out of this country, and they have put us 
in harm's way. They have really put us in harm's way.
  So the Buying American Cotton Act puts our farmers in a situation 
where we do not have to, as a government entity, bail them out every 
year when they are losing money because they won't lose money, because 
if we buy their cotton in this country--we are the biggest buyers of 
cotton all over the world, the United States of America, so let's help 
our cotton farmers.
  And one other thing I want to say about this: I have talked about 
this several times on the floor. It is getting pretty serious, and it 
is something that, again, we look at it and say: Oh, it is not going to 
continue to happen.
  Just recently, we estimated that China has bought and owned, as of 
today, 300,000 acres of American farmland. I want you to think about 
that--300,000 acres that the Chinese own. Who is our biggest adversary? 
China. And we are allowing them to buy American farmland in this 
country, and a lot of it is by our military bases. Now, I wonder why 
that happens? And I don't think we are stupid, but we are crazy if we 
continue to let this happen.
  It is an urgent and national crisis, and we have got to make sure 
that we keep an eye on this. And we understand there are some States 
that are going and telling China now that they cannot buy farmland 
because they run it through different entities. And that is one thing 
that we need to make sure that at the end of the day, that we keep an 
eye on this.
  But I want to come up here today and let people know, our farmers are 
in the fourth quarter, OK? And if we don't have a good year this year, 
we are going to have a serious--serious--problem with our farmers going 
out of business. And when farmers go out of business, they are big 
contributors to our country when it comes to tax base, buying things, 
producing things, and making our country much stronger.
  So I plead with people: Please start understanding what is going on 
here because if we don't put our foot down and we wait too long and our 
farmers are gone and they have sold their land, we have got a big 
problem ahead of us.
  And, again, I think it is a huge national security threat when you 
are having to buy everything out of the country. Again, go back to one 
thing: Did we learn anything from COVID? Evidently, we didn't. And next 
time we look up and you are going to have to buy everything coming from 
another country--especially when it comes from ag--we have got huge 
problems.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.

                          ____________________