Mike Crapo

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. My colleague's proposal offers nothing new. The Senate has already rejected a so-called clean 3-year extension of the enhanced COVID credits in December. None of the reasons we rejected this measure then have changed. Perpetuating a fraudulent, failed system without reforms is not a solution. Declining to offer consumers more choice and control over their healthcare is not a solution. Handing insurers an additional $80 billion of taxpayer money is not a solution. Both sides agree that the costs of healthcare are too high. We knew that years ago when these credits were created and again when they were extended, but rather than fix that problem, the credits only exacerbated the underlying issues that are driving up the costs. We cannot continue to rely on the same broken policies to fix those systemic problems. In December, Senator Cassidy and I proposed to begin the process of true healthcare reform. Directing funds to HSAs controlled by patients instead of insurers would spur competition, prevent fraud, and reduce costs. Unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle rejected this proposal. Each side knows what the other side cannot accept. A real solution must respect those boundaries and chart a new path forward. Unfortunately, today's repetitive proposal fails to do so, and for those reasons, I object to the request. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I rise in opposition to S. 3229, the No Tariffs on Groceries Act of 2025. The reason groceries are so expensive is because during the last administration, inflation got totally out of control. We all know the grocery prices went up then. That is when the inflation rates were in double digits. I think at one point, they got over 20 percent. Where is the inflation rate today? My colleagues on the other side would like to try to duck the fact that the reason grocery prices are so high is because of the inflation that was caused under President Biden's administration when we blew the top off of growth and the prices. Today, the inflation rate is at 2.7 percent, close to the Federal Reserve's target for our economy. That is just a fact that we have to recognize and deal with. Now, this bill seeks to exempt articles of food from the President's IEEPA tariffs. I agree with my colleagues that tariffs generally should be targeted as much as possible to avoid harm to Americans. We also should consider more exemptions to harms arising from potential unintended consequences, including exemptions for unavailable natural resources. The administration agrees. In November, the administration excluded a number of food items from the reciprocal, India, and Brazil IEEPA tariffs. By all accounts, the administration is working to identify similar exemptions in other active trade negotiations. I strongly encourage the President to pursue productive courses of engagement with U.S. stakeholders in doing so, but voting for one-off exemptions on the Senate floor in isolation of a larger negotiating strategy and broader stakeholder concerns like this bill S. 3229 asks us to do now, does not facilitate a predictable process for our negotiators or for any broader segment of stakeholder engagement. Therefore, I object.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I have six requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, we spent a lot of time this week talking about the problems of our healthcare system: Premiums are rising; hospitals are struggling; and out-of-pocket costs are out of control. These problems are not new. And, frankly, notwithstanding all of the rhetoric of my colleagues from the other side, the fact is, these enhanced premium tax credits that we are debating today, if they were extended or not extended, are not going to change the fact that premiums are skyrocketing. They are skyrocketing because of the failure of our current healthcare system. These problems were used to justify ObamaCare in the first place, and ObamaCare has progressively made them worse. Americans did not keep their doctors, as was promised under ObamaCare; Americans did not keep their insurance plans; and their premiums did not go down. In fact, ObamaCare premiums have risen at roughly double the rate of employer- provided healthcare plans since their inception. Our Democrat colleagues have only had one response to these skyrocketing premiums: more spending, which they claim is going to stop premium increases. It, in fact, facilitates greater premium increases. Without ever winning a single Republican vote, they created the Obama premium tax credits, expanded them to all Americans--to Americans of all income levels--and then extended that expansion. These credits did not reduce costs and did not reduce premiums. All they did was shift the cost to taxpayers and help insurance companies to continue to hike premiums higher and higher. Democrats know that ObamaCare has failed. They themselves have said so on this floor. But with a deadline quickly approaching again--a deadline that was set by my own Democrat colleagues--they say we have no choice but to extend this failed policy one more time on these premium tax credits. This is a policy they could not even make permanent when they controlled the Presidency, the Senate, and the House. Even so, their only offer is more spending. They call their plan a clean extension. A 3-year extension of this program with no reforms, costing hard-working families $83 billion, with tens of billions of dollars going to insurance companies and fraudsters, is anything but clean. Twice on this floor this week Republicans have offered the Democrats a unanimous consent to have a temporary extension of these premium tax credits with needed reforms to address waste and fraud and abuse that is rampant, and twice this week that has been rejected. The Government Accountability Office recently uncovered how embarrassingly easy it is to game this ObamaCare subsidy system, with the Wall Street Journal calling it a ``Mecca for Fraud.'' Even the Washington Post recognized that ``ObamaCare subsidies make it too easy to scam the system.'' Fortunately, we have another option. Instead of the minority leader's $83 billion extension, which would do absolutely nothing to reduce fraud and would keep driving premiums higher, Senator Cassidy and I have offered a fiscally responsible proposal that will reduce premiums, save taxpayers money, and give Americans control over their healthcare. Our bill provides prefunded, patient-driven health savings accounts for Americans enrolled in qualified ObamaCare bronze and catastrophic plans. Importantly, low-income Americans will still receive subsidies for those ObamaCare plans through the permanent portion of the premium tax credits system. Americans who choose this option will have both insurance coverage and help paying for their remaining out-of-pocket costs--all without giving insurance companies a reason to enroll them in plans without their knowledge, as has occurred for years. Our bill also fixes an error in the original design of ObamaCare by funding the cost-sharing reductions that it mandated, reducing benchmark premiums by 11 percent. Let me point that out. That piece of our proposal will reduce premiums by 11 percent. The minority leader's plan is not going to pass. But if just a few of my Democrat colleagues will join us in voting for our bill, we can put this crisis behind us and lay the groundwork for true reforms. For instance, Senator Wyden and I remain intent on getting our bipartisan pharmacy benefit manager reform to the President's desk. We have many other bipartisan agreements on needed healthcare reforms that we need to move forward on. The choice before us is clear: We can continue with business as usual and extend the same policy that has brought our healthcare system to the point where every Member of this body admits that it is broken or we can try something different. We can change the incentives that ObamaCare gives insurers to drive premiums higher and put our confidence in Americans to make the best decisions about their own healthcare. If we fall off the Democrat-created subsidy cliff, it will not be because we did not have a different choice. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 5 minutes before the scheduled rollcall vote.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, tomorrow, this Chamber will have the opportunity to chart a new path forward on healthcare in this country. Senators will be given the choice to extend the Biden COVID bonuses for another 3 years or to support healthcare reforms that will actually expand options, reduce premiums, and give power to patients instead of insurance companies. Both sides agree that the cost of healthcare is too high, but we need to address the root causes of the explosive increase in healthcare costs rather than mask them with unsustainable spending. We are told that the expiration of the enhanced ObamaCare subsidies is a crisis and that there is no time left to do anything but extend them. If there is a crisis coming, it is entirely of the Democrats' making. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle created the premium tax credits as a part of the ObamaCare system because they did not trust their own policy to make healthcare insurance affordable without shifting the burden of paying for it from enrollees to taxpayers. When the original premium tax credits failed to bring down premiums, they enhanced the tax credits. Then, when that did not work, they extended the enhancements. They did all this without a single Republican vote. They also chose the current expiration date that they now say must be changed. They created the very cliff that they now oppose. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have had years to offer serious suggestions on how to reform the ObamaCare subsidies. Yet every time that deadline approaches, we are told there is no workable option except to extend them again. It seems that these subsidies were never truly meant to be temporary, but they should be. We do not have to go along with their last-minute extension this time at the cost of $83 billion. Even our Democratic colleagues recognize that our healthcare system needs reform. Leader Thune recently quoted many of them here on the Senate floor. They said: We did fail to bring down the cost of healthcare. They also said: Now, right now, we have a broken health care system. And it is not just the rising premiums that prove that ObamaCare is broken. We cannot ignore the pervasive fraud in this subsidy program. The rules governing eligibility for these credits are often flaunted. In September, the Wall Street Journal reported that the rule barring people who can access affordable insurance through their employers is ``barely enforced.'' Based on the Government Accountability Office's recent audit, income and citizenship verification rules are being ignored too. Of their 24 fake applications for enhanced tax credits, 22 are receiving subsidies despite submitting falsified paperwork or no paperwork at all. One of their applicants even received an email specifically confirming his income verification was approved even though he never submitted any proof of income in the first place. The law prohibiting dual enrollment in ObamaCare and Medicaid was broken 1.6 million times last year. Of course, unscrupulous insurance brokers have been signing people up for ObamaCare plans without their knowledge of them or their consent for them. Alarmingly, insurers make the most money through these fraudulent credits because they retain the money even if no payments are made on behalf of the patients. As just one example, more people are signed up for zero-dollar premium ObamaCare plans in Miami-Dade County than there are low-income people living there. One woman in Miami said she had been paid five times by brokers to enroll in ObamaCare plans. These are not isolated incidents. This year, 6.4 million Americans were improperly enrolled in enhanced ObamaCare subsidies at a cost of $27 billion. The true cost of fraud was likely even higher because the GAO also found in its report that tens of billions of dollars of subsidies in 2023 had not been reconciled to the enrollees' incomes, meaning they could have misrepresented their incomes to qualify for bigger subsidies. This is the program our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are prepared to extend without changes, without even changing the policies that are generating fraudulent abuse. We can't afford to do that. We cannot afford the $83 billion pricetag of their proposal, and we cannot afford to tacitly consent to this fraud nor can we afford to tell the hundreds of millions of Americans who are insured through means other than ObamaCare that we are not interested in their rising premiums. While Republicans did not create this crisis--we did not create ObamaCare; we did not create these subsidies; and we did not create this expiration date--we do have plans to address it. Senator Cassidy and I introduced a sound plan earlier this week. Our bill, the Health Care Freedom for Patients Act, is based on an idea endorsed by President Trump and many of our colleagues whereby Americans, not insurance companies, should control their own healthcare spending. Americans could use the permanent, original premium tax credits to purchase qualified bronze plans with a health savings account attached. They would then receive monthly contributions into that health savings account totaling $1,000 to $1,500 per person in the family annually. Instead of lining the pockets of big insurance companies, like these subsidies, our HSA contributions would help patients pay expenses not covered by their insurance plans. When patients can control their own care, they can seek the most appropriate treatment options for their individual circumstances, incentivizing care providers to compete for patients by improving prices and care outcomes. Our plan would also provide funding for cost-sharing reduction payments, which will reduce out-of-pocket costs for low-income patients, save taxpayers money, and--get this--reduce premiums for benchmark Marketplace plans by 11 percent. Additionally, our bill would ensure Federal health funding is spent for the benefit of Americans by strengthening citizenship verification requirements and discouraging States from providing taxpayer-funded healthcare to those who are not legally here and are not citizens of the United States. Some of our Republican colleagues have offered plans of their own this week which are also worth considering as we move to the future. We welcome bipartisan cooperation on these proposals as with the pharmacy benefit manager reforms I recently introduced with Senator Wyden and many of our Senate Finance Committee colleagues. But we must not simply kick the can down the road yet again. Every time we spend tens of billions of dollars for unsupervised and poorly designed subsidies, as our colleagues are asking us to do once again, we worsen the healthcare crisis that we all want to solve, and we do nothing to stop the explosive increase in premiums. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, this week, we are going to spend a lot of time discussing problems with our healthcare system. To do that, we need to understand just how we got here. Concerns about the rising healthcare costs are not new. In 2009, Democrats highlighted shortcomings in the American healthcare system as proof that the Federal Government had to intervene. President Obama told us how to judge his healthcare plan. He told us that Americans would be able to keep their insurance plans and their doctors, and he also told us that insurance premiums would go down. As everyone knows, these predictions did not come true. But there were signs from the start that ObamaCare would not work, which is why not one single Republican voted for it. That is also why the Democrats created the premium tax credits in the first place. They did not trust the one-size-fits-all nature of ObamaCare to lower costs and expand options. Instead of decreasing, over the last 15 years, ObamaCare premiums have increased over 220 percent. A family of four pays $10,000 more for coverage today than they did before ObamaCare, and their deductibles have doubled. Insurance providers have dried up, and rural hospitals are struggling. ObamaCare has undermined healthcare in America. In 2021, the Democrats again decided that premiums were too high and that a Federal response was necessary. But rather than fix the structural flaws in ObamaCare, they created an even bigger subsidy with fewer guardrails to entice more people into a broken program. Not only did they make the subsidy bigger, they made everyone eligible, regardless of their income. So families making $600,000 a year began to qualify. Democrats also temporarily eliminated reviews to confirm accurate payments and allowed individuals to continuously enroll throughout the year. Because those changes were made under the premise of responding to the pandemic, the enhancements were only supposed to last for 2 years. But before they expired, the Democrats extended them for 3 more years-- again, without a single Republican vote. With those expanded subsidies again about to expire--and by the way, on a date set by my Democrat colleagues--the pattern has become clear: Democrats respond to rising premiums by throwing taxpayer dollars at the problem. Their supposedly ``short-term'' fixes only drive premiums higher and make the problem harder to solve, leaving us with apparently no choice other than to do the same thing again and again and again. ObamaCare is broken, and throwing good taxpayer money after bad policy is not going to fix it. The enhanced premium tax credits account for only about 4 percentage points of next year's projected 20 percent increase in insurance premiums. Let me say that again. These enhanced premium tax credits that we are talking about only account for about 4 percentage points of next year's projected 20 percent increase in insurance premiums. Extending them will not solve the crisis. What it will do is cause tens of billions more dollars to be paid directly to insurance companies without improving patient care or choice. With taxpayers footing the bill, these subsidies give insurance companies every single reason they need to keep hiking premiums. Even the Washington Post just yesterday explained in their words that ``Obamacare subsidies make it too easy to scam the system.'' Last year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services found that 1.6 million Americans were enrolled in both Medicaid and ObamaCare plans. This year, 6.4 million Americans were improperly enrolled in the enhanced premium tax credits, at a cost of $27 billion. Another 12 million subsidized plans reported no claims in 2024, suggesting that many of them were opened on behalf of people who did not even know they were insured. Because insurance companies receive the subsidies regardless of whether a plan is used, there is no incentive on their part to check the enrollment status. In 2024, $35 billion was paid out for these unused plans. My colleagues in the House asked the Government Accountability Office to look into the fraud surrounding the ObamaCare tax credits. Their findings, the findings of the GAO, were shocking. The GAO created fake identities and attempted to enroll them in ObamaCare plans. All four of their fake applicants in 2024 received a subsidy. This year, 18 out of 20 fake applicants received subsidies. GAO also found tens of thousands of cases of apparent identity theft and hundreds of thousands of cases where insurers or brokers changed people's plans or enrolled them in new ones without their consent. Perhaps worst of all, they found that over $21 billion worth of subsidies--nearly one-third of all subsidies paid in 2023--had not been double-checked against enrollees' income. That means that there was nothing stopping these enrollees from misrepresenting their incomes to receive higher subsidies than those for which they were eligible. Ultimately, it is not just the taxpayers that are hurt by this fraud, although taxpayers should not be on the hook for it to begin with; the other Americans who rely on Federal health programs suffer as these program dollars go to waste. Republicans addressed some of these program integrity issues in the One Big Beautiful Bill--the Working Families Tax Cut Act--when we tightened eligibility and verification standards for Federal healthcare programs, but no degree of oversight and enforcement is as effective as addressing the basic incentives in the system that result in fraud. I appreciate that some of my Democratic colleagues have finally acknowledged these issues, but the fact remains they have not offered any ideas on how to solve them. Extending these expensive, fraud-ridden subsidies for another 3 years with no reforms--I repeat, no reforms--is a nonstarter. Continuing to pour billions of dollars more into the pockets of big insurance companies and fraudsters will not lower healthcare costs for American families, especially when you consider that the vast majority of Americans are not insured through the ObamaCare Marketplace and are therefore not even eligible for these subsidies in the first place. Senator Cassidy and I have a different plan. The motivating principle is simple: Patients should decide where their healthcare spending goes, not insurance companies. In line with President Trump's call to direct money to patients instead of insurance companies, this approach builds on the success of the Working Families Tax Cut Act, which expanded health savings accounts and their eligibility to be paired with more affordable insurance plans. These prefunded, patient-driven accounts will help Americans pay for the out-of-pocket costs that are making healthcare unaffordable. Our plan would take some of the money that otherwise would be spent on the COVID bonuses and direct it to health savings accounts attached to ObamaCare bronze or catastrophic plans as monthly deposits totaling $1,000 to $1,500 per year. Families can use that money to cover costs not handled by their insurance policies without waiting for insurance companies to approve their treatment decisions. Because families want the best value for their money, they will seek out the most appropriate treatment. Over time, this should result in lower healthcare costs as providers compete for patients. Our plan would also fund cost-sharing reduction subsidies, which mitigate out-of-pocket costs for low-income enrollees, reducing premiums by over 10 percent and saving taxpayers money. I will repeat that. Our plan will reduce premiums by 10 percent and save taxpayers money. These cost-sharing reductions would finally change the notion that Americans should simply accept ever-escalating premiums as the norm. In contrast, the Democrats' temporary COVID bonuses do not lower costs or premiums at all. They throw billions of dollars at insurance companies, up to 20 percent of which can go into profit and overhead. Our plan avoids that issue and empowers patients to control their own healthcare. We cannot transform our broken healthcare system overnight, but we can make real progress. We still have a chance to enact reforms that will do more than paper over the cracks in our healthcare system. We should take that opportunity instead of making the enhanced premium tax credit mistake all over once again. It is time to lay the groundwork for giving Americans more control over their healthcare choices and making quality healthcare more affordable. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch, Representative Mike Simpson, and Representative Russ Fulcher, we congratulate Dennis Miotla, who is retiring from his position as Chief Operating Officer and Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Infrastructure Programs for the U.S. Department of Energy's, DOE, Office of Nuclear Energy, after 35 years of service. Throughout his extensive career in nuclear energy, Dennis Miotla has served in a number of leadership positions as he has contributed significantly to guiding nuclear operations. Prior to his current position, Mr. Miotla was the Acting Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy. He previously served as the Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of Nuclear Energy. Mr. Miotla also served as the Deputy Director for Nuclear Facility Operations, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Operations, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Power Deployment. Additionally, he was the interim manager of the Department of Energy's Idaho Operations Office where he had full responsibility for DOE operations at Idaho National Laboratory, INL. Dennis has also worked for the National Nuclear Security Administration and at the Westinghouse Electric Corporation's Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory in West Mifflin, PA. As Dennis said about himself, ``About 50 years working in various positions in nuclear energy. I think I have pretty much seen it all and done it all.'' His extensive and remarkable work in the field of nuclear energy has understandably been recognized. He is a two-time recipient of the Presidential Rank Award for his outstanding performance in the advancement of nuclear energy programs. Dennis is generous with his time as he cares deeply about the legacy of Federal service and is invested in those who choose that path. He is known at DOE, the Lab, and the nuclear industry for his leadership, mentorship, and sarcastic humor. He has taught many the importance and intricacies of the Lab's research, and his patience and guidance are deeply appreciated by many who have worked with him. Dennis' years of service and dedication to nuclear energy and INL have helped support the current fleet of reactors and will help ensure continued research into advanced nuclear reactors, facilitating their commercialization and deployment in the private sector. His contributions are significant. Thank you, Dennis, for lending your knowledge, know-how, direction, and vast experience so extensively to advancing nuclear energy and shaping future leaders in this important field. We wish you all the best on your well-earned retirement.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Senator Welch, first of all, I appreciate your acknowledging that we do want to work together. I would hope that you would acknowledge that we are working together to try to find solutions. This notion that the fact that we haven't had a hearing--it is because we haven't gotten to the point where we have legislation before us to have that hearing on. But I just would like to make two points. No. 1, once again, open the government. No. 2, even if we agreed to your request today, all of those people you talk about who are going to get hit with premium increases are going to get hit with premium increases because this temporary COVID premium enhancement support was never intended to be and never was the foundation of what is driving--or did deal with the foundation of what is driving premium increases. Everybody in America is going to get hit with a massive premium increase, and it is not going to be changed if we give an extension for that 4 percent that goes to this enhancement. It could be like maybe a tiny bit different in some ways and in some places, but I doubt it would make a dollar's difference in most cases. Let's get the government open, and let's continue real negotiations to solve this problem. We mutually have talked. We mutually know that there are things we can work on to get this solved. I am just asking my colleagues on the other side to quit trying to blame Republicans for the premium increases that are coming and say: Let's get the government open, and let's get together working to solve our healthcare crisis.

Mr. CRAPO. Senator Welch, would you yield briefly to me?

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, one thing needs to be made really clear. We have all this talk about how we have an urgent crisis, and it can be totally fixed if we just accept the demand of my colleagues on the other side that we extend the temporary COVID tax healthcare premium enhancement that occurred during the COVID crisis. This is what needs to be made clear: Insurance premiums are skyrocketing, not because of a temporary small COVID premium support passed during the COVID crisis. They are skyrocketing because our healthcare system is broken and needs to be fixed. And we have been asking to negotiate about this for years, and intensely over the last few months. Let me give it some real specifics. This demand that my colleagues on the Democrat side are making, even if it were true that all of it was an impact--that letting it expire would be an impact on premium increases, which is not accurate--even if all of it were to be impacting premium increases, it is only 4 percent of the premium support. It is only 4 percent of the premium increases that are coming. So we have the entire U.S. Government shut down because we won't concede to a demand that we spend another $100 to $350 billion in premium supports because the premium expansions are coming, resulting from a broken healthcare system that we can get no engagement on in negotiating. Congress has a timely, bipartisan obligation to reopen the government. The proposal offered by my colleague on the other side of the aisle does not address that. The Senate has now voted 14 times--14 times--to end this shutdown. My Democrat colleagues claim to be taking a stand to make healthcare more affordable. While we may disagree on the merits of those individual policies, everyone in this Chamber shares that goal. In fact, as a part of the clean CR that we have voted on 14 times to extend critical Medicare and Medicaid programs, we would have increased payments to rural hospitals, we would have provided access to telehealth services for our seniors, and we would have offered our seniors the option to receive hospital-level services in their homes. But, no, not unless we agreed to spend $350 billion or $100 billion-- the current request is around $100 billion--not unless we agree to spend billions of dollars extending what were made temporary by my Democratic colleagues when they controlled the Senate. They were made temporary because they were intended to get us through the economic difficulties of the COVID crisis. And, again, they relate to only 4 percent of the premium increase that is coming. And yet it is said that we can solve the entire premium increase problem today by just doing this. Not true. Because Democrats will not join Republicans in reopening the government, these programs that I mentioned, just a moment ago, have lapsed. These programs have lapsed, disrupting care for millions of Americans. Premiums are going up dramatically for all Americans, and not just those enrolled in Obamacare. Despite the confusion that has been created here, the original ObamaCare subsidies don't expire. Let's make that very clear. The only thing expiring is temporary COVID-related enhancements that the Democrats themselves made temporary. The Democrats are the ones who set the expiration date that we are debating today. Even without extending these COVID enhancements, taxpayers will spend $1 trillion over the next 10 years subsidizing ObamaCare premiums. So let's not tell the American people that the American Government is going to stop subsidizing the failed ObamaCare premium system. Over $1 trillion is going to be spent subsidizing it. We need to address that problem. We cannot spend our way out of rising premiums. If my colleagues want to have a conversation about reforms that truly lower costs instead of masking the problems with a $100 to $350 billion taxpayer-funded patch, then Republicans are willing to have that conversation. Leader Thune has made this point clear. In his own words, he said: I am willing to sit down with the Democrats. And I join him. I am also willing to sit down with the Democrats to discuss the growing unaffordability and unsustainability of ObamaCare. It is a system they created, but I am happy to hear them out. I am still quoting Leader Thune: Heck, I am even willing to give them a vote, which we have offered and offered and offered. But there is one condition: End the Schumer shutdown. I will not negotiate under hostage conditions, nor will I pay a ransom. Period. That is the end of the quote from our leader, Leader Thune. For these reasons, I object to my colleague's request. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I rise in opposition to S. 3072, the No Coffee Tax Act. The bill seeks to exempt from the President's IEEPA tariffs only a single commodity--coffee. I agree with my colleagues that tariffs generally should be targeted as much as possible to avoid harm to Americans. We also should consider more exemptions to address the harms arising from potential unintended consequences, including exemptions for unavailable natural resources. The administration agrees. The very recent trade deals with Cambodia and Malaysia explicitly exempt coffee and some other mostly unavailable natural resources from the reciprocal tariffs. By all accounts, the administration is working to identify similar exemptions in other active trade negotiations. I strongly encourage the President to pursue productive courses of engagement with U.S. stakeholders in doing so. Voting for one-off exemptions on the Senate floor in isolation of a larger negotiation strategy and broader stakeholder concerns, like S. 3072 asks us to do so now, does not facilitate a predictable process for our negotiators or for any broader segment of the stakeholder engagement. Therefore, I object.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 88, which would terminate the trade deficit national emergency. I agree with my colleagues that tariffs should be more targeted to avoid harm to Americans. I made precisely that point at a Finance Committee hearing in May. We should consider more exemptions, whether for unavailable natural resources, capital equipment, or other key inputs. It is equally important that enforcement guidance provides the clarity that U.S. companies need to comply with the tariffs and make critical business decisions. Similarly, as the administration continues to negotiate with our trading partners, I appreciate that my colleagues, as well as our constituents, may be nervous about what comes next. However, at this juncture, this resolution is counterproductive to helping American families and businesses of all sizes. It is no secret that, for decades, countries around the globe have raised tariff and nontariff barriers against Americans and against American businesses and have raised the cost for Americans and American businesses without response by the United States. President Trump is now responding and saying these countries need to take down their tariff and their nontariff barriers and deal with us in fair and free trade. The President's negotiations are bearing fruit. President Trump already announced new trade deals. Just today, because of his negotiations, President Trump announced that China has agreed not to implement its rare earth export controls. China also agreed to address the flow of fentanyl and to purchase soybeans. Other deals are, hopefully, forthcoming. Consequently, S.J. Res. 88 is counterproductive to the progress already made by the President and the new gains he can still achieve in the ongoing trade negotiations. On April 30, the Senate rejected this same resolution for these reasons, and I urge my colleagues to reject the resolution for these same reasons again today. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO. And Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum call in relation to the Dunlap nomination.

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be permitted to speak prior to the scheduled rollcall votes: myself for 5 minutes and Senator Sullivan for 10 minutes.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 77, which would terminate the fentanyl national emergency declared with respect to Canada. I agree with my colleagues that tariffs should be more targeted to avoid harm to Americans. I made precisely that point at a hearing in the Finance Committee in May. We should consider more exemptions, whether for unavailable natural resources, capital equipment, or other key inputs. It is equally as important that enforcement guidance provides the clarity that U.S. companies need to comply with the tariffs and to make critical business decisions. Similarly, as the administration continues to negotiate with our trading partners, I appreciate that my colleagues, as well as our constituents, may be nervous about what comes next. However, at this juncture, this resolution is counterproductive to helping American families and businesses of all sizes. What my colleagues across the aisle have not discussed is the ubiquitous tariffs and nontariff trade barriers that our small businesses and large businesses alike face across this globe from countries that are not allowing fair trade to happen with the United States, and the cost of that is being borne by the American people-- small businesses and large businesses alike. The President's historic trade negotiations recognize that this cannot continue, and nations across the globe need to reduce their tariff barriers and their nontariff trade barriers to American companies and American citizens. The President's negotiations are bearing fruit. President Trump already announced new trade deals with major trading partners, including the United Kingdom, Japan, and the European Union. Other such announcements we expect to be forthcoming. And I urge other trading partners of the United States to reach similar deals. Consequently, S.J. Res. 77 is counterproductive to the progress already made by the President and to new gains he can still achieve in the ongoing negotiations with our trading partners. Let's truly get a balanced, fair playing field in trade. On April 30, the Senate rejected the joint resolution of disapproval of IEEPA-based reciprocal tariffs for the same reasons. I recommend we do the same thing today and reject this resolution. I yield the floor.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 81, which would terminate the rule of law national emergency declared with respect to Brazil. I agree with my colleagues that tariffs should be more targeted to avoid harm to Americans. I have made precisely that point at the Finance Committee meeting in May. We should consider more exemptions, whether for unavailable natural resources, capital equipment, or other key inputs. It is equally important that enforcement guidance provides the clarity U.S. companies need to comply with tariffs and make critical business decisions. Similarly, as the administration continues to negotiate with our trading partners, I appreciate that my colleagues, as well as our constituents, may be nervous about what comes next. However, at this juncture, this resolution is counterproductive--counterproductive to helping American families and businesses of all sizes. The President's historic trade negotiations are bearing fruit. President Trump already announced new deals--trade deals--with major trading partners, including, most recently, Cambodia and Malaysia. Other such announcements may still be forthcoming. I urge other trading partners to reach similar trading deals. Consequently, S.J. Res. 81 is counterproductive to the progress already made by President Trump and to new gains that he can still achieve in the ongoing negotiations with our trading partners. On April 30, the Senate rejected the joint resolution of disapproval on IEEPA-based reciprocal tariffs for the same reasons. And for these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I pay tribute to the Idaho Mountain Search and Rescue Unit, IMSARU, in Boise, as they mourn the unexpected loss of one of the unit's treasured K-9s, Stella Blue. Stella Blue was an instrumental part of this team. She faithfully served her community with honor and dedication in her role as a live find search and rescue K-9 team member. She committed thousands of hours and countless miles in search of lost and missing people, bringing comfort, light, and hope to her team and to the people of Idaho. Stella's life and the loss felt by her teammates is a reminder of the extraordinary dedication of the Idaho Mountain Search and Rescue Unit. These committed individuals voluntarily give incredible amounts of their time to not only helping their fellow Idahoans and others in distress, but also ensuring they and the K-9s entrusted to aid with their searches are effectively trained. Stella Blue's handler, Brian Marinelli, a Boise teacher and U.S. Air Force veteran, devoted innumerable hours to Stella Blue's training, while forging a bond cemented in trust. I also recognize the loss felt by the Marinelli family--Brian's wife Midori and their children Sara and Dante--as Stella Blue was a cherished member of their family in addition to her service to the people of Idaho. As I extend my condolences to Brian Marinelli and the entire Idaho Mountain Search and Rescue Unit, I also thank the team for its outstanding service. Stella Blue's days were too few but exceedingly well spent. And your remembrance of her as a trusted partner, teammate, and friend is a moving example of your devotion to those you search for and alongside. Thank you for your loyal and dedicated service.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, in acknowledgement of National POW/MIA Recognition Day this September 19, 2025, I honor Idaho's and all of America's prisoners of war, POWs, and missing in action, MIA, as I extend my support and gratitude to their loved ones. In February, the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, DPAA, the Agency primarily responsible for recovering America's servicemembers, unveiled its 2025 National POW/MIA Recognition Day poster. Each year, the Agency creates a poster commemorating the lives of U.S. servicemembers still unaccounted for from past conflicts and showcasing the DPAA's commitment to bringing them home. This year's poster features the statement, ``Delivering on the nation's promise.'' Fittingly, this year's poster was designed by a Gold Star Daughter, Jeanie Jacobs Huffman who, unfortunately, knows deeply and personally the price military families pay for our freedoms. Jeanie Jacobs Huffman's father, Navy Commander Edward J. Jacobs, Jr., remains unaccounted for after contact was lost with the aircraft he was piloting in the Gulf of Tonkin off the coast of North Vietnam in 1967. At the unveiling of the poster, Jeanie shared, ``I always felt a huge void in my life not having my father. I believe that each of our missing is still seeking their way home and they expect that our nation's promise will be kept.'' To help meet our Nation's promise to America's servicemembers and support the efforts of those who work tirelessly for their return, I continue to press for the enactment of the Bring Our Heroes Home Act. This legislation would help eliminate obstacles preventing families and caseworkers from accessing the records needed for recovering America's POWs and MIA. This POW/MIA Recognition Day, and every day, I remain deeply grateful for the committed individuals and groups, such as the POW*MIA Awareness Rally Corp. of Pocatello, ID, and others across our country who keep an unwavering spotlight on the need to bring every American servicemember home. With a heavy but hopeful heart, I continue to pray for all those who await answers about lost servicemembers and thank America's servicemembers, veterans, and their families for their extraordinary commitment to our country.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, the proposal that is sought to be adopted by unanimous consent on the floor today-- which means bypassing the committee of jurisdiction so that the committee of jurisdiction doesn't have the opportunity to work on the bill--is framed in the discussion today as an effort to try to reduce drug pricing. There is no disagreement between Republicans and Democrats on whether we need to reduce the cost of drugs in the United States. Both parties are working to do it in their own way. The battle here is over government price fixing. That is something that most of those on our side have resisted for a long time. That is something that is being pursued in the request in this legislation. The solution is not to have the government take over yet another part of our economy. The solution is to work on market-based solutions, like those we are working on. But there is another part of this bill that is being proposed on the floor today that just makes it even doubly objectionable, and that is, this bill has a price tag. And to pay for it, there are provisions in this bill that deal with provisions that repeal provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill that helped to start reforming our entitlement system. Over the past two decades, Medicaid spending has ballooned by over 200 percent, risking the program's financial sustainability for those who need it the most. This last July, Congress passed some commonsense Medicaid reforms--the first time any Congress of the United States has ever sought to do some serious, meaningful entitlement reform, which is the real cause of the debt and the deficit that we face. What we did there was to reduce wasteful and unnecessary spending and to remove disincentives to work. One of those specific reforms required some able-bodied adults--and I mean able-bodied adults who are at least over 100 percent over the poverty level--to require able-bodied adults to pay a small copay, $35, if they seek medical care under Medicaid. Asking certain Medicaid beneficiaries who have the resources to be able to do it and who are able-bodied adults who are not disabled, who are not children, and who do not even have to care for children in their home--many of them--to pay a very small, minimal amount, not only reduces unnecessary healthcare utilization, but it removes a benefit clip that discourages them from earning higher wages and moving out of poverty. These are those kinds of solutions I was talking about before that are based on work and markets and free economies, rather than on government price-fixing and government mandates. Unfortunately, the bill before us today eliminates this important reform and increases unnecessary spending by over $7 billion. More concerning, the bill also repeals a bipartisan policy supported by over 30 patient-advocacy groups to spur investment in the lifesaving cures for patients with rare diseases. This policy offers hope to the 95 percent of Americans living with a rare disease who lack an approved treatment. The Finance Committee has a deep history of bipartisan efforts to bolster patient access to care and to properly align market incentives to strengthen our Federal healthcare system. Today's bill falls short of those objectives, but I look forward to working with my colleagues on these types of issues and other priorities to achieve these goals. This bill should be reviewed by the Finance Committee, and I commit that we will continue to work on proper, meaningful entitlement reform and healthcare improvement across the United States. For those reasons, I object.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representative Mike Simpson, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of Region IV Development, doing business as Frontier Community Resources, that has been utilizing the work of professional staff to help create thriving, vibrant southern Idaho communities. Founded in 1975 in Twin Falls, the organization is rooted in supporting access to resources. It has evolved over the decades to become a comprehensive economic development organization providing small business loans, technical assistance, and community development services across southern Idaho. Frontier Community Resources works closely with city and county officials, small business owners, local organizations, and community leaders to provide collaborative economic development, empowering commendable support for Idaho communities, especially rural communities. Through the organization's technical assistance, it provides hands-on support for important community projects, including water and sewer improvements, fire station construction, and community planning and revitalization. Frontier supports local businesses in accessing capital and helps with community project administration, such as conducting meetings to receive public input and preparing funding applications. The breadth of Frontier Community Resources' 25-person board of directors is indicative of its capacity to bring all aspects of economic development to the literal table to help rural communities succeed. Members of its board include representatives of Blaine, Camas, Cassia, Gooding, Jerome, Lincoln, Minidoka, and Twin Falls County Commissions, municipal elected and appointed officials, and individuals representing the education community and diverse private and public organizations. Frontier Community Resources has been instrumental in leveraging Federal and State resources to assist with projects, such as the construction of the Gooding County Emergency Medical Services Station, the Lincoln County Youth Center, city park improvement projects in Murtaugh and Heyburn, downtown revitalization projects in Fairfield and Jerome, the expansion of Burley's industrial wastewater system, improvements to the Senior Connection in Hailey, and much more. Frontier regularly holds community workshops to inform the public about available resources and administers a South-Central Idaho Brownfield Revitalization Program, providing funding for environmental assessment and contamination cleanup. Frontier also houses the Rural Economic Development Services, REDS, Program, linking rural communities to economic development resources. This community asset has provided resources to support small, local businesses, such as Silver Creek Hotel in Bellevue, 2nd South Market in Twin Falls, and Miracle Hot Springs in Buhl. Frontier Community Resources has also deservedly been recognized for its work as a pillar of economic development in the region. For example, it is the recipient of three 2025 Aliceann Wohlbruck Awards from the National Association of Development Organizations for its involvement in community initiatives ranging from childcare to affordable housing. We recognize the considerable challenges Idaho communities, especially rural communities, face when trying to access needed resources to maintain and grow. Navigating the web of requirements, regulations, and paperwork takes considerable time, assets, and a workforce that many rural communities simply do not have. The assistance and know-how the team at Frontier Community Resources brings to Idaho's rural communities offers more than new opportunities but also hope and encouragement. As we celebrate Frontier Community Resources' 50 years of contributions to strengthening an essential part of our great State, we commend the community leaders and partners who have shaped southern Idaho over the past five decades.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representatives Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher, we celebrate a significant milestone for the College of Southern Idaho, CSI. This year marks the college's 60th anniversary, a testament to its enduring commitment to education and community. For six decades, the College of Southern Idaho has been a vital institution of higher education, serving the Magic Valley and beyond. It has provided affordable, accessible, and high-quality education to countless students, empowering them to build brighter futures. CSI's impact extends far beyond its campus; it is a key driver of our regional economy, supplying a skilled workforce for our local industries, from agriculture to healthcare to technology. From its humble beginnings, CSI has grown into a beacon of opportunity. The college's mission has always been about more than just academics; it is about providing pathways to success for people from all walks of life. Whether it is a high school student taking dual- credit courses, a veteran seeking to learn a new trade, or a parent returning to school to finish a degree, CSI meets the community where they are. This dedication to lifelong learning and workforce development is what makes it such a special place. This anniversary is not just a moment to look back, but an opportunity to look forward with optimism. The College of Southern Idaho continues to innovate, adapting its programs to meet the evolving needs of our State and our Nation. We are confident CSI will continue to be an engine of progress, shaping the next generation of leaders, entrepreneurs, and skilled professionals who will contribute to Idaho's bright future for the next 60 years and beyond. We are incredibly proud of the students, faculty, and staff of CSI, both past and present. Their dedication has built an institution that fosters innovation, serves as a cultural hub, and strengthens the fabric of our communities. We send our heartfelt congratulations to the entire College of Southern Idaho family on this special occasion. May its next 60 years be as impactful and inspiring as the last.