[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 102 (Wednesday, June 17, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2881-S2883]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS

  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. President, at a time when hard-working families across 
this country are being squeezed by skyrocketing costs, you would think 
that the President of the United States and Washington Republicans 
would be focused on finding ways to help people afford their groceries, 
access affordable healthcare, and keep communities safe.
  In fact, that is what Donald Trump himself ran on. He promised he 
would lower costs ``on day one.'' That is a quote, ``on day one.''
  Instead, now that he is in office, Trump is completely fixated on his 
corrupt slush fund where he would give your tax dollars--your tax 
dollars--to his political allies.
  So how did we get here? Donald Trump sued his own IRS and Treasury 
Department to try to get $10 billion--your tax dollars--for himself. 
But then, of course, he was so kind that he agreed to drop his lawsuit 
against his own government--our government--as long as it set up a 
slush fund of $1.8 billion to pay out to his allies, supporters, and 
even January 6 rioters who assaulted police officers.
  Understandably, the American people strongly oppose this corrupt 
attempt to misuse their tax dollars. So the Justice Department had to 
come out and claim that the fund is dead.
  But Donald Trump has made it perfectly clear that he still wants his 
slush fund to move forward so he can pay January 6 rioters who beat up 
police officers at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. I was here, and, 
frankly, I don't trust his cronies to put an end to it. It is 
unbelievable.
  Whether it is $1 billion for a ballroom, $1.8 billion for a slush 
fund, Trump is focused on himself, not on the hardships of our 
communities--your communities--our families, not on the hardships 
people are facing.
  Our families are struggling to put food on the table. Our families 
are worried about losing their healthcare. Our police departments are 
struggling with staffing shortages. That is why Congress has a 
responsibility to put an end to this wasteful slush fund, once and for 
all.
  So I have introduced a package of three bills that would make sure 
the slush fund can never happen and would instead redirect that $1.8 
billion to programs that actually help hard-working families and keep 
our communities safe.
  My first bill would permanently block the slush fund from being 
created, and if the Trump administration still moves ahead with it, it 
would direct the funding to SNAP, the food assistance program that 
Washington Republicans have gutted to pay for their One Big Beautiful 
Bill.
  So in Nevada alone, nearly 55,000 people lost SNAP benefits between 
July of last year and January of this year. And as a reminder, 40 
percent of SNAP recipients in Nevada are children--are children. 
Children are going hungry because of Trump's cuts to pay to 
billionaires.
  That means nearly 55,000 Nevadans now have to worry about how they 
are going to afford groceries at a time when groceries and gas prices 
are just going through the literal roof.
  Now, imagine how many families $1.8 billion could help feed. Imagine 
how many parents could feed their children with that kind of money 
instead of paying January 6 rioters and Trump's allies.
  And in my State, that kind of money could restore SNAP benefits for 
all 55,000 Nevadans--55,000 Nevadans who lost their benefits for more 
than 15 years.
  I could feed those families for 15 years.
  Mr. President, so I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the 
Judiciary be discharged, and the Senate now proceed to the immediate 
consideration of S. 4705; further, I ask consent that the bill be 
considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
  The only reason we are standing here and having this debate in the 
first place is because Democrats in administration after administration 
repeatedly weaponized the Federal Government against their political 
opponents and the American people. That is the entire reason this fund 
was proposed.
  Weaponization of government by the Democratic administration is the 
entire reason for the lawsuit, and my Democrat colleagues could not 
distract from that fact by pretending to care about fiscal 
responsibility or the cost of living.
  Democrats and Republicans in Congress running massive deficits is why 
the cost of living has skyrocketed.
  Look at what the Democrats did when they controlled government under 
the Biden administration. Inflation hit 9 percent. At the same time, 
they weaponized the government.
  I, unfortunately, have seen it firsthand. Democrats weaponized the 
government over the past three Democratic administrations. Under the 
Clinton administration, my company was illegally targeted by our 
government because I dared to stand up against ``Hillary care.''
  Under the Obama administration, we saw conservative nonprofits 
targeted by the IRS to sabotage their mission to oppose the Obama 
machine.
  Under the Biden administration, I was surveilled again illegally. My 
tax

[[Page S2882]]

returns were stolen and leaked to the public. Did the Biden 
administration do anything about it? Absolutely not. I was spied on 
after January 6. Democrats weaponized the government to target me and 
people like me. Not one person has ever been held accountable, and now 
they want to object to compensating victims.
  How about Democrats apologize to people whose doors they beat down, 
whose information they stole, whose privacy they violated, and whose 
lives they ruined?
  What about Scott Smith, a father just miles from this Chamber in 
Loudoun County who was targeted by the FBI because he demanded 
accountability from the school board after his daughter was sexually 
assaulted at school and the school board tried to cover it up.
  How about Joe Robertson, a 77-year-old Montana Navy veteran--a 
veteran--who was fined $130,000 and sentenced to 18 months in prison 
for building a pond in his remote property to fight forest fires 
because the government would not do its job to keep his family safe?
  What about the specific religious groups that were targeted? 
Catholics were singled out by the Biden administration as potential 
domestic terror threats for living their beliefs. Mark Houck, a father 
of seven kids and pro-life activist was targeted and publicly arrested 
for his protests. His home was raided, he was dragged through Federal 
court, and he faced trumped-up charges for the crime of living his 
Catholic faith.
  DOJ data shows that they weaponized the FACE Act for decades to throw 
the book at pro-lifers who expressed their First Amendment rights.
  I think any government that has the power to villainize one specific 
religious group or belief is a serious problem that precedes disaster. 
That is why back in my home State I am fighting against self-proclaimed 
Nazis like Kanye West for performing in my State using public dollars 
and facilities.
  It is clear from DOJ evidence that the Biden administration 
weaponized the government. Meanwhile, Members of this body gave 
themselves the power to sue over being surveilled in Arctic Frost, yet 
Democrats don't want to extend that remedy to the American people they 
serve.
  If the Democrats want lower costs for American families, they should 
look at how Congress spends money. Congress is spending $2 trillion--$2 
trillion--more than we take in year after year.
  If you spend more money than you take in, in government, it causes 
the cost of living to increase. Has a single Democrat acknowledged a 
problem with that? No.
  Democrats walked away from this year's appropriations negotiations 
because Republicans refused to run the outrageous deficits Democrats 
want to continue to force onto the backs of the American people. Do my 
Democrat colleagues know what that deficit spending does? It fuels 
inflation, which makes your dollar buy less and less and forces prices 
higher.
  Still my Democrat colleagues just want to spend and spend and spend. 
I am a victim of weaponized government. The American people are victims 
of weaponized government. A lot of them need to be made whole as best 
as we can.
  If my Democratic colleagues want to decrease spending to lower the 
cost of living, great, me too. Let's balance the budget. We all have to 
do it in our homes. Let's go find some wasteful earmarks and fraudulent 
programs to cut. We know they are there. Thousands are there. These 
bills are nothing more than a bad-faith attempt to slander Republicans 
because the Democrats want to deflect from their own documented history 
of corruption and weaponization.
  I absolutely object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Nevada.
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. President, if my Republican colleagues want to make 
prices lower, they can start by removing tariffs and not entering into 
unnecessary wars, but I want to get back to the issue at hand, which 
this slush fund. The slush fund, if it is truly dead like some say, 
then why not pass my bill?
  Why not make sure that it is gone for good? What are Republicans so 
afraid of? And so if feeding hungry children isn't Washington 
Republicans' priority, there is another chance for them to do the right 
thing for our families. Because last year, Washington Republicans 
gutted--gutted--Medicaid and took healthcare coverage from millions of 
Americans in need so that they could give more tax breaks to 
billionaires, people who need it the least.
  They gutted healthcare for families to give tax breaks to 
billionaires. And as of January of this year, nearly 170,000 fewer 
Nevadans were enrolled in Medicaid compared to 2023. That means fewer 
people seeing a doctor, fewer people getting preventive care, fewer 
people being able to afford treatment or the medication that they need, 
fewer people getting the care they need for their children when they 
are chronically or terminally ill. It is cruel, and the money that 
Trump wants for his slush fund could pay for more than 2 years of 
Medicaid coverage for every Nevadan who lost it because of these 
Republican cuts for payouts to billionaires.

  So instead of rewarding Trump's political allies, we can help 
families get healthcare because nothing is more important than your 
health. Nothing.
  A diagnosis can change your life in an instant, and I want people to 
be able to afford their prescriptions. I want people to be able to take 
their children to see a doctor. A diagnosis changes your life, and they 
took away healthcare.
  And so a much better use for taxpayer dollars, that is what I want to 
do. I want to put it back into those Nevada families who are struggling 
with those life-altering diagnoses that we are all so very afraid of. 
And that is what my second bill aims to do. It will permanently block 
this slush fund from being created.
  And if the Trump administration finds a way to move ahead with this, 
my bill would redirect the $1.8 billion to Medicaid, to help those 
mothers that I talked to, those parents, again, with sick children, to 
help those taking care of their family members. It matters. It is 
caring. And what they are doing and what they did to cut Medicaid is 
cruel.
  Mr. President, so I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the 
Judiciary be discharged, and the Senate now proceed to the immediate 
consideration of S. 4703; further, I ask consent that the bill be 
considered read a third time and passed, and that the motions to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, in my lifetime, the cost of 
healthcare for a family of four has gone from $700 a year to over 
$25,000. ObamaCare, which my Democratic colleagues all supported, was 
supposed to reduce family healthcare costs by $2,500. If that was true, 
we wouldn't be worried here about healthcare costs, would we? If you 
look at the cost of a new car in my lifetime it has gone from 16, 1,700 
bucks. I think the minimum new car is probably $20,000.
  If you look at the cost of housing, it just came out that in 242 
cities in this country, the starter home is a million dollars. Now, 
what has caused all this? Government. Bigger and bigger government, 
more and more regulations. There is a study that just came out that 
said the Federal regulations I think it costs $3 trillion a year, 
something like $15,000 per family.
  So if my Democratic colleagues actually really cared about the cost 
of living, they would stop passing bills that would have more and more 
regulation and stop running $2 trillion deficits.
  Now, as I already said, what we are talking about in these bills are 
nothing more than a bad-faith attempt to slander Republicans because 
Democrats want to deflect from their own documented history of 
corruption and weaponization by Democratic administrations.
  This is a history of targeting everyday Republicans, congressional 
opponents, Catholics, Christians, pro-life groups, gun owners, military 
officers that don't adhere to leftwing politics, parents standing up 
for their kids and challenging school boards, veterans working on their 
private property, farmers challenging our DC bureaucrats, and any 
American that fails to pay tribute to the tyrants of their 
administrative state.

[[Page S2883]]

  Therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Nevada.
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. President, the objection is truly a shame because 
people will suffer and people will be damaged by poor health and some 
may lose their life from lack of care.
  So my Washington Republican friends, they won't agree on funding SNAP 
and feeding those hungry children in Nevada for 15 or so years, funding 
Medicaid to help families again.
  Perhaps we could agree on giving this funding for the men and women 
of law enforcement. Surely, they must stand up for law enforcement and 
for public safety and for community safety because across America our 
police departments are facing staffing shortages, recruitment 
challenges, retention issues.
  Officers are being asked to do more with fewer resources. So the 
money from Trump's slush fund could fund more than 3 years of the COPS 
Hiring Program to help communities hire and retain more officers. It 
could fully fund more than 3 years of the Public Safety Officers' 
Benefits Program.
  What is this program? It helps support the families of officers who 
are killed or permanently disabled in the line of duty. Nothing could 
be more important than supporting those families. Surely, Republicans 
want to help families of fallen or disabled officers.
  And so the irony here is almost hard to believe, Republicans love to 
talk about how supportive they are of law enforcement, and yet Donald 
Trump wants to use your tax dollars to pay people who assaulted police 
officers right here in this Capitol in this room in this Chamber where 
we stand today on January 6.
  And I think, and I hope, surely we can all agree, that the funding 
would be put to better use to support our men and women in uniform, our 
police officers. So my third and final bill would permanently block the 
slush fund from being created. And if the Trump administration still 
forges ahead with it, my bill would redirect the funding to Federal law 
enforcement programs.
  So I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be 
discharged, and that the Senate now proceed to the immediate 
consideration of S. 4704; further, I ask consent that the bill be 
considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
  So it is interesting that, you know, my Democratic colleague cares 
about law enforcement. In the last, what, year and a half, in this last 
year and a half--what--the government has been shut down three times, 
so all the Federal Government wasn't paid.
  I never heard my Democratic colleagues that that didn't bother them 
then. Look at what we just finished. Federal law enforcement, ICE, and 
CBP weren't paid. They shut down the government this whole year. They 
had no interest in funding Homeland Security.
  So these bills are nothing more than a bad-faith attempt to slander 
Republicans because the Democrats want to deflect from their own 
documented history of Democrat administrations' corruption and 
weaponization.
  Let's remember: Democrat administrations have targeted everyday 
Republicans, congressional opponents, Catholics, Christians, pro-life 
groups, gun owners, military officers, parents standing up for their 
kids--I just can't imagine--parents standing up for their kids and 
challenging school boards, veterans working on their own private 
property, farmers challenging the power of DC bureaucrats, and any 
American that fails to pay tribute to the tyrants of the Democrat 
administrative state.
  Therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Nevada.
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. President, you know, this is truly a shame. It is 
extremely disappointing to me because by blocking these bills, 
Washington Republicans are paying tribute. They are paying tribute to 
the President, and they are saying that they approve of Donald Trump 
wasting 1.8 billion taxpayer dollars to pay his political allies and 
January 6 rioters.
  They may claim the slush fund is dead because Trump and his 
administration say it is. But does anybody believe them? I would say 
not too many.
  And so that is why I tried to pass these bills and create a fail-safe 
mechanism to redirect funding to food, to healthcare, to public safety, 
and so if Trump still tries to create this slush fund, we have a way to 
put it toward something good for our communities.
  Unfortunately, Washington Republicans blocked these commonsense 
efforts.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, first off, there is no fund. So 
we are talking about a fund that has never been created. And then we 
are talking about how the Democrats supposedly care about the cost of 
living when everything they do raises the cost of living--everything.
  Government is your problem. If you have a cost-of-living problem, 
government did it to you. If your education costs are high, government 
did that to you. When I went to school, junior college was 200 bucks a 
semester. I went there because college was $250; the university was 
$255. Government did that. Look at what it is now--thousands and 
thousands of dollars. People end up with debt. When I went to school, 
people didn't end up with debt.
  Government has done all this. Government has caused the cost of 
living to be high. There is no fund. We are talking about a fund that 
has never been created, and we are talking about the cost of living 
that is caused by Big Government.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.

                          ____________________