Bill Cassidy

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Madam President, I have given this speech two times in the last, probably, 16 hours, but it is going to be like a TV commercial, wherein I want to say it over and over again, hoping that someone actually hears it because the soul of education is repetition, and I want to have a very different tone than some of the speeches that have been heard. I want this to be nonpartisan. I want this to be, if you will, a plea for moving beyond our kind of camps we have been in and into something that can end the shutdown and actually benefit patients. So, to open the government, if we need to talk about healthcare, then, by golly, let's talk about healthcare. We have an affordability crisis. Families are being pounded by the cost of everything, including insurance. So how can we make it more affordable? By the way, I am a doctor. I have practiced in a public hospital for the uninsured for 20 years. Many of my patients were middle income, but they could not afford either the insurance or the healthcare they were receiving. I know the impact this has on a family's budget, but if we are going to solve this, we have to put down the ways that we have kind of become entrenched. It is just like trench warfare. We are going to win. We are going to make them do the white flag. We are going to continue to take our same tired arguments and fight each other until we wear the other one down. Well, the people who are casualties--the collateral damage, if you will--are the American people. We need to have creative thinking but in a way in which people are willing to move beyond the way they have ordinarily thought. The Affordable Care Act attempted to make healthcare affordable by throwing more money at insurance companies. The enhanced premium tax credit is the latest example. Next year, if it is restarted, it will send $26 billion to insurers to not lower the cost of healthcare but to paper over the premium increases that are part of the increased cost of healthcare. That doesn't make healthcare cheaper. In fact, if you don't have one of these policies, it could contribute to inflation, and if you are not getting the subsidy and you are buying individual insurance, your policies are definitely higher. This is actually working against the financial interests of many American families. Oh, yes, if you are getting it, it papers over the increase. I would argue, though, there is a better way to do it. Instead of paying insurance companies to manage our money, why don't we trust the American family with a prefunded Federal flexible spending account? First, let me make clear: This is Bill Cassidy speaking. I am not advocating for the President, although I will note that he now supports this, nor am I advocating for John Thune. I am the chairman of the HELP Committee, and we will be having a hearing soon on these issues. I will make that announcement right now. I am not speaking for anyone but myself, in a nonpartisan way, trying to convey to colleagues on the other side of the aisle, there is another way to get to a solution that gets us out of this shutdown and actually lowers costs as opposed to just papering them over. Here is the problem: Under the enhanced premium tax credit, it doesn't matter how much healthcare costs because, if it costs more, the insurance company just increases the premium and passes that increased premium bill to the Federal taxpayer. It actually is almost inflationary. There is no incentive for the provider to keep the cost lower because the cost is just passed on to the subsidy, which is increased to meet the higher cost. It is like putting a bandaid on a broken bone. You are not fixing the fracture. You are just covering it up so no one can see that fracture. So we are not dealing with healthcare costs. We are just covering it with higher subsidies. Let's actually fix the fracture. Let's fix the broken bone. Of course, the way to do that is to support the patient, not the insurance company. By the way, insurance companies are important--I am not going to join the bashing--but I do think it is better if we give the money to the family as opposed to the insurance company. I will say, though, many of my colleagues want the status quo. They are so entrenched on their side that they refuse to discuss alternative ideas that will actually lower costs, and we get all the same ObamaCare debates. People in America, right now, don't care about those debates. What they want is to make their family's healthcare more affordable. So the way to do that is to be creative. Let's think differently. Imagine a different kind of health. There is a misprint on here, but I will get to it. Under the enhanced premium tax credit, the money goes to the insurance company, and 20 percent of that money goes for administrative overhead and profit for the insurance company. That should read ``80 percent.'' That 80 percent goes to healthcare. What if we do something different? Let's just imagine that we have the creativity and the guts to do something that isn't really different but is different for this program. Let's establish a prefunded flexible spending account, taking the money that would go to the insurance company and giving it, instead, to the family in a prefunded flexible spending account. One hundred percent of the healthcare dollars would go toward their care, and we would trust the mother, the wife--occasionally, a guy, but women make most of these decisions--to pick her doctor, her dentist, and the best value for prescription drugs and services. So this would be 100 percent going to real healthcare as opposed to only 80 percent going to real healthcare. You might say this is a radical idea. No. We already do this. I would not be surprised if some of the people up here--my family does--already have a flexible spending account. Now, the flexible spending account takes money that I could have put toward a premium, but, instead, puts it into this account, and I pay for my services. I already do this. I pay for my services. The difference between what I do and what this does is that this would be prefunded with money that would otherwise be spent on the enhanced premium tax credit. I am pleased to say that, this morning, the President posted on Truth Social that he is calling on Congress to redirect subsidies from insurance companies directly to Americans so that they can purchase their own healthcare. Now, there are a lot of words there, but just start at the top: Donald J. Trump is recommending to Senate Republicans that the hundreds of billions of dollars being sent to insurance companies go directly to the people. Why is that important beyond the President's support? A lot of my Democratic colleagues have been saying they don't know that Mike Johnson would bring this up for a vote in the House of Representatives. They want a guarantee that, if we pass something on the floor, Mike Johnson will put it on the floor in the House. I am from Louisiana. I have a great deal of respect and regard for Mike Johnson, and we are good friends. But I do know, if the President supports this concept, that Mike is more likely to put it on the floor of the House. If what you want is a guarantee to get a vote on the floor of the House, the President's support for this concept makes it more likely that that happens. I thank the President for his support. By the way, I will also say, after the President spoke to this and after I spoke to this last night, we got immediate criticism from people saying: Oh, you want to give everything that we are giving to the insurance companies to the American people. Not a bad idea. But let's just say, this is not the total premium going to the insurance company. The insurance companies still provide the basis for things like a car wreck or if you have got kidney failure or heart failure. This is that portion that would go to an enhanced premium tax credit and instead would go to the family to make their choices as opposed to the insurance company to make their choice for them. If this still seems too complicated, I am going to tell you why you can trust it. Seventy-two percent of Americans who work for a Federal entity or a State government or a local government have this as one of their choices of a healthcare plan. Forty-seven percent of people who work for a commercial employer--47 percent of those folks have access to a flexible spending plan. If it was so complicated--if it was so complicated--why do 72 percent of government employees and 47 percent of people in the private sector have access to this plan? It works. We know how to do it. There are established mechanisms. In fact, I have my plan through what is called the small business exchange--about an ObamaCare exchange--through the Federal Government. I get my FSA through this small business exchange. It is just a little bit ported over from the small business exchange to the individual exchange to allow an individual to get the same thing. This is so incredibly workable. This is not so complicated that I just kind of scratch my head when people say that it is too complicated. Now, it may take the Federal Government some time to--it may take them some effort to make sure it can go from one exchange to the other, but we have a President that can make things happen--just his track record. Operation Warp Speed--some people said it would take 10 years to develop a vaccine for COVID; others, at least 18 months. President Trump got it done in 10 to 11 months. President Trump can make the bureaucracy work. If he did it for Operation Warp Speed, we could do it for this. We can have this ready for the beginning of next year, and that would be President Trump's effort. There is not a stronger force to get the bureaucracy to do what it should do than President Trump. Let's talk about some key differences between enhanced premium tax credits and what I am calling federally prefunded flexible savings accounts. Who gets the money? With enhanced premium tax credits, the insurance company gets the money. But in the prefunded flexible spending account, the patient--the family--gets the money. What can it be used for? Under the enhanced premium tax credit, insurance premiums; under the prefunded flexible spending account, real care. It can be your doctor, your physician, your dentist, your glasses, your prescriptions. By the way, oftentimes, these policies don't cover dental work. They don't cover orthodontia. Under this, you can use your flexible spending account to get your teeth cleaned. You can use it to have your child's orthodontic work done. Who makes the decision? Here, you go through a preauthorization process with the insurance company. There, the patient makes the decision for herself and for her family. Does it lower costs? No. There is evidence that the way this works, it actually drives up premium costs. Here, under the prefunded flexible spending account, it empowers a patient to shop--driving competition, driving down costs. By the way, if the patient finds that it is cheaper to pay cash with their flexible spending account than to pay the deductible--and that sometimes happens--then she could pay less by paying cash. The point is, if you give the patient the power, good things happen. The prefunded flexible spending account does not treat the individual as a ward of the State. It treats them like a capable consumer who can decide where to go in a way which is best for them and their family. Some ask: Won't this cost money? Yes, about the same as the enhanced premium tax credits for the first year. My Democratic colleagues should like that. An individual, though, would be getting a better value. But instead of only 80 percent of the money going for healthcare, under the prefunded flexible spending account, 100 percent of the money that we are putting up is going to pay for real healthcare: your dentist, your physician, your prescription drugs, et cetera--100 percent. And over here, only 80 percent. And she makes the choice; the choice is not made for her. As I conclude, let me point out a real irony. I have not wanted this to be partisan at all. I am asking for Democrats and Republicans to come together and find a solution to reopen the government, to pay the people who have been working, and to make sure that those people traveling over Thanksgiving actually have an airport that is open that they can go to. Let's just move beyond our trench line, and let's actually think creatively. And can we give just a little bit to find something which benefits the patient but may also get us out of this situation? I think the American people are mad as hell, and they are not going to put up with it anymore. We have to be responsive to that. It is the right thing to do. Let me conclude by pointing out the irony. These enhanced premium tax credits are a direct result of a workaround to a portion of ObamaCare that was not fully implemented. Democrats are fighting to keep something which is a workaround for something that Republicans formerly objected to. And, frankly, Republicans are kind of supporting something that is in line with what ObamaCare tried to do. The roles have been flipped. But because one side proposes it, the other side reflexively objects. Let's just stop that. Why don't we just say right now that we are actually going to listen as opposed to automatically objecting because the other side puts it up? So the choice is before us: We can keep on paying insurance companies to hide the cost of the healthcare by confusing bills and rising premiums in a system which actually raises the cost of premiums for some, or we can trust Americans with the tools to pay for the care directly at fair prices with total transparency. If we can, it puts patients first, not insurers. It encourages competition, smart choices, and it begins to make healthcare truly affordable, not by inflating subsidies but by unleashing the power of an informed consumer. I will finish by saying we have got to open the government. I can't even write this legislation unless we have the government open. But you have got this chairman's commitment that we are going to have a hearing in the HELP Committee in November on how we address the issue that is before us right now. I will finish by saying, as a physician who used to work in the hospital for the working uninsured, who saw middle-income families who could not afford their insurance and could not afford their healthcare, I am personally--I am personally--deeply invested in not just reopening the government but making healthcare affordable again. I just ask that my Democratic colleagues not oppose this idea just because it is a Republican proposal. And I will say that, as a Republican, I will do my best to listen to them. I yield the floor.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Madam President, I am going to try and envision a way forward for Democrats, Republicans, and Americans out of our current situation, with a different proposal than people have already thought of. Now, the government has been shut down for 38 days, and tomorrow we are going to vote again, and tomorrow the vote will again fail. But Americans and Congress are frustrated. We need to open the government. So if to open the government we need to talk about healthcare, let's talk about healthcare. Let's have a conversation in the family. We have an affordability crisis, and health insurance is part of it. Now, this is personal to me. I am a doctor. I practiced in a hospital for the uninsured and the poorly insured for 20 years, and many of those people that came to see me were middle-income Americans who could not afford their medical bills and could not afford insurance. I want to see this solved. But if we are going to solve it now, in this present circumstance, we need to move beyond entrenched ways of thinking that have settled us in our camps and refused to allow us to listen to the other person. And I thank some of my Democratic colleagues for being here. We have got to be creative. Now, the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare--whatever you want to call it--tried to make healthcare affordable by giving insurance companies more money. The enhanced premium tax credit, EPTC, is the latest example. Next year, it would send $26 billion to insurers hoping families would see smaller bills. But that doesn't actually make healthcare less expensive, and for some, it actually makes the health insurance more expensive if you are not getting subsidized care on the exchange. So we can do better than just papering over the costs for subsidies. Instead of paying insurance companies to manage your money, let's trust Americans with a prefunded flexible savings account worth as much as the enhanced premium tax credit that they would receive. Let me repeat that: a prefunded--not out of their salary but prefunded for the Federal taxpayer--equivalent in value to the enhanced premium tax credit that they would receive. Now, let me make it clear. I am not speaking for the Republican caucus. I am not speaking for President Trump. I am not even speaking as the HELP Committee chairman. I am speaking as a Senator and as an American that sees us at an impasse and is trying to think differently about how we can move forward. So I am going to present to my fellow Americans an idea that, hopefully, will move us out of this stalemate and go forward. And I want to try and speak as if I am speaking to the Americans back home. Here is the problem. Under the enhanced premium tax credit, if your insurance premium goes up, if the insurance company decides to pay more, they just get more subsidy from the taxpayer. Now, insurance companies get paid no matter what, and it doesn't matter how expensive the tab is. There is absolutely no incentive to bring the cost down. There is no transparency as to what the care really costs, and there is absolutely no reward for the family that goes to a place which is less expensive. It is like putting a bandaid on a broken bone. You are hiding the fracture, but you are not fixing the broken bone. Let's fix the broken bone, which is high healthcare costs. So put simply, the enhanced premium tax credit does not empower patients. It enriches insurance companies. By the way, they are important. We need them. But if I have a choice of empowering you, the American, or enriching an insurance company, I and we should pick our fellow American. Now, imagine a different type of help, not paying the insurance company another subsidy but putting money, prefunded, not out of your salary, but roughly equal to the enhanced premium tax credit--put that into an account that you control. Every eligible American citizen on the exchange would receive this federally prefunded flexible spending account, and it would work like the prepaid health account you use for real world health expenses. It would actually have more flexibility than your current insurance proposal. You go to the dentist; it can pay for dental care. You go to the orthodontist; it can pay for your orthodontal care. It can pay for eyeglasses, which typically insurance does not pay for. Prescriptions, drugs, medical supplies, your deductible, your copays--it can pay for it all. Now, it wouldn't pay for insurance premiums. This is about you spending directly for your healthcare costs, not about enriching insurance companies. It would pay for the care that families actually use. That is what a prefunded flexible spending account actually does. I keep emphasizing ``pre'' because I mentioned this to people, and they say: Wait a second. This has to come out of my salary. No, this would be the money that would go to an enhanced premium tax credit, and instead, it goes into this account that you control. Now, it seems complicated for some. I go and I mention it to them, and they say: Oh, boy, this is something different, Bill. This is a great idea, but it is kind of like, it is just too different. Seventy-two percent of Americans getting their healthcare through some government entity are offered flexible savings accounts. Forty- seven percent of people getting insurance through their employer are offered FSAs. This is something that is used by millions of Americans already. So what I am proposing is just to give this option to people on the exchanges. And, by the way, the Federal Government already offers flexible savings accounts to people on the small business exchanges. Members of Congress, we are on the ObamaCare small business exchange. We have the option of choosing an FSA. My family has one. And the Department of Treasury already has an office through which they funnel money to pay for these flexible spending accounts that I, as an individual, choose to get. So what we are speaking of is just offering to people on the exchanges--on the individual exchange--that which is already offered to people on the small business exchange and paying for it by the same mechanism in which it is already done through that exchange. Now, still, there is going to be some bureaucracy involved, but if there is any President that can overcome the inertia of the bureaucracy to make it happen by January 1, 2026, it is Donald J. Trump. Donald Trump is the man who, when it was told to him it would take 18 years, 10 years, 18 months to come up with a vaccine and a program to prevent COVID transmission, he did it in 10 to 11 months. This President can overcome the inertia, and we have a running start because the Federal Government is already doing this. Now, let me make clear the key differences between enhanced premium tax credits and federally funded flexible spending accounts. First, who gets the money? Under the enhanced premium tax credit, insurance companies; under this, it is patients and families. What can it be used for? Here, the premium tax credit goes for insurance premiums--period, stop, full stop. The money goes to the insurance company. Here, real care, your doctor visit, your deductible, your copay, your dentist, your glasses, your prescriptions, that sort of thing. Who makes the decision? The insurance company. Just wait and fight with them about a preauthorization. Under the flexible spending account, you make the decision. You have the power. And, lastly, does it lower costs? No. It is pretty clear. If we continue to fund insurance companies no matter what they pay, it drives up the costs. In contrast, if you empower the patient, that mother is going to find the most affordable option. It has been studied. If you give people something that they perceive as their own money, they hunt for that bargain. By the way, if they go and they find out that the cash price is cheaper than what the insurance company would charge them, they will have the option of using this for the cash price. So we have reforms in here that give the patient even more power. The good thing about that, as the patient saves money, so does the taxpayer, and that is a good thing. So the prefunded--prefunded, prefunded--flexible spending account doesn't treat people like dependents of the government, as do the enhanced premium tax credits. It treats you like a capable consumer who knows what is best for your family. You decide where to go for dental work. You decide your pharmacy. You decide whether to pay the cash price or the negotiated price that the insurance company offers you, and instead of Washington paying insurance companies to manage your day-to-day care, you manage it with fairness, transparency, and flexibility. Now, some will ask: Won't this cost money? Of course. In the first year, it will be about the same amount as the enhanced premium tax credit, and my Democratic colleagues should like that. But the individual would be getting better value through the federally prefunded FSA because she is spending it on that which she actually needs, as opposed to up to 20 percent of it going for overhead profit and administrative costs. It isn't just fiscally responsible. It is common sense. Who wouldn't rather have their money in their own pocket than for the insurance company to dictate how they spend it? So here is the choice before us: In conclusion, we can keep paying insurance companies to pay for over the higher costs, behind confusing bills, in a system which actually raises the cost for some, or we can give Americans the tools--we can trust our fellow Americans to pay for their care directly, at fair prices, with transparency. If you will, it puts patients first, not insurers. It encourages competition. It rewards smart choices, and it begins to make healthcare truly affordable, not by inflating subsidies but by unleashing the power of the consumer. Let's stop writing blank checks to insurance companies. Let's invest in our fellow Americans. I say this: We have to first open the government. This takes writing some legislation. We have to open the government. But we have to be willing to take a risk to solve a problem and not be afraid to do something different. I have seen in our Chamber right now a hunkering down. We have not been able to solve it. So we are not going to try anything different. We are just going to wear the other side down until they wave the white flag. Now is the time to be creative. I am a rock-ribbed Republican, but I will just say what I just offered is not a Republican solution; it is not a Democratic solution. It is an American solution. Let's open the government. Let's work together. Let's fix healthcare and give the American more power than the insurance company.

Mr. CASSIDY. Absolutely.

Mr. CASSIDY. That is the goal, to have this ready for next year.

Mr. CASSIDY. One other question first, this is a flexible savings account, not a health savings account. There is a legal distinction, and I want to make that. When the enhanced premium tax credits are not renewed--we know the insurance companies have already set up their rates--and so the consumer, our fellow American, will be choosing from the offerings that have been made by the insurance company for them to choose from. The difference would be--and they will see, by the way, that the policy for someone at 400 percent of Federal poverty levels costs about $2,500 more a year than it otherwise would have with the enhanced premium tax credit. This would be supplemental. We would say to that individual: You are at 400 percent of Federal poverty level. Your policy is $2,500 more a year. You will get a flexible spending account prefunded to offset the cost of this. Now, if it is my family, I would say: Hmm, I have got $2,500. Maybe, instead of going for a silver plan, I will go for a bronze plan, because now I can offset the higher deductible with my flexible savings account. And because I am going for a bronze plan, my premium will be lower. But that is trust in the American people. We are plugging into the current insurance market. We are actually not changing at all how it functions.

Mr. CASSIDY. That is a wonderful question. No. The Federal Government knows--or put it this way. Many States have calculated what the insurance rate would be with an enhanced premium tax credit and what will the insurance rate be without the enhanced premium tax credit. It has been calculated for our fellow Americans what the value of enhanced premium tax credits would be if they signed up for a certain policy in their State, given their age and their health condition. They know that. The question is whether they get the credit or not. Well, they are not going to get it, so their policy is going to be higher. And this, under the plan--if we could agree to it--they would then get the FSA in an amount equivalent to that which they did not receive as a payment to the insurance company. Instead, it would be a payment to the flexible savings account they would have and that they would then use it for these services.

Mr. CASSIDY. That is correct.

Mr. CASSIDY. Thank you for the questions, and let me just respond very quickly. I think the beauty of what I am proposing is it fits in very nicely with the insurance markets as they currently are. It doesn't require anything to change between now and January 1. It is too late to change those plans and those rates. It is just too late. This does not require those rates to change. This would be something which could benefit our fellow Americans next year and could be implemented by then. Yes, the bureaucracy is going to have to work hard. President Trump can get them to work hard. You mentioned several other reforms. I am in total agreement. We should be working together--Democrats and Republicans, that is what we need do to get something done--in order to come together for a set of proposals that will lower healthcare costs. And both as a member of the Committee on Finance as well as the chairman of the HELP Committee, it is my intent do that. We have got to do that. But this can work this year for Americans who are going to be on the exchanges, and that is my hope. I yield the floor.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Donna Jeanne Gunckel Villere, who is celebrating her birthday on December 1, 2025. She has dedicated her life to family and community service. Donna was raised in Harahan, LA, and now resides in Metairie. She has been married to Roger Villere for 56 years and is the proud mother of three sons, four granddaughters, two great-grandsons, and two great- granddaughters. Donna and Roger have two more great-grandchildren on the way, one expected in November and another in February. Few things bring her more joy than babysitting her great-grandchildren. Besides caring for her family, Donna has spent decades mentoring young people. She coached volleyball for nearly 30 years at Lakeshore Playground in Metairie, sharing her love for the game and teaching lessons in teamwork, perseverance, and leadership. She also served as a den leader in the Cub Scouts, where she helped instill the values of integrity and service. Donna's commitment to her family and community is inspiring. On behalf of the people of Louisiana and all Americans, I wish Donna Villere a happy birthday. May her birthday celebration be filled with love, joy, and appreciation.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to retired 9th Armored Division soldier Prigeon Fontenot, who is celebrating his 100th birthday on November 23, 2025. Born on November 23, 1925, in Rayne, LA, he grew up on his family's farm, speaking Cajun French. He attended Indian Bayou High School until his enlistment into the U.S. Army during his senior year. Upon completion of basic training at Fort Hood, he was inducted into the Army on July 27, 1944, in New Orleans, LA. He was then assigned to Fort Meade, where he boarded a ship to Europe. Following his voyage across the Atlantic, he landed in France in January 1945. He remained in France for 2 weeks and was then attached to the 9th Armored Division. A proud Cajun who was later nicknamed Frenchie, PFC Fontenot used his fluency in Cajun French to communicate with local French-speaking allies. He and his fellow Frenchies, or French-speaking soldiers, served as interpreters for U.S. troops stationed in Europe. The 9th Armored Division was the first Allied unit to cross the Rhine River into Germany on March 7, 1945. PFC Fontenot was later discharged on April 28, 1946. Due to his brave service, he was awarded the Combat Infantry Badge, the European African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, the Good Conduct Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal. Upon completion of his service, he returned to Louisiana and worked on his family farm until 1950. He then opened his own farm and began working at Rayne Wholesale. He married Betty Ann Trahan in 1956, and they celebrated 60 years of marriage before her passing in 2017. Mr. Fontenot has 5 children, 8 grandchildren, as well as multiple great- grandchildren. He currently resides at Southwind Assisted Living Facility in Crowley, LA. He is the longest living Frenchie and an active member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Post 9822, and the American Legion, Post 77. His story highlights how the war revived pride in Cajun heritage and identity in so many Americans. I invite all Americans to join me in thanking Prigeon Fontenot for his work to defend freedom and to build and bring pride to his community.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, the government has been shut down for nearly a month--the longest full government shutdown in American history. It all began with the Democratic leader's desire to play politics with people's lives and paychecks. Americans, including those in Louisiana, are paying the price. Nationwide, 1.4 million Federal employees--many of whom, of course, are living paycheck to paycheck--are furloughed or working without pay, and 13,000 air traffic controllers have already missed 1 paycheck and will miss another soon. SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and food stamps--these benefits run out November 1 in many States, like mine, and that is just 2 days away. In Louisiana alone, that is 804,000 individuals, including 312,000 children, who rely on SNAP. Now, this is not an abstract ideological issue; we are literally talking about food on the table. SNAP can be the difference between a child having a full belly, going to sleep, waking up the next morning, and going to school happy and that same child asking their mom when is the next time they will eat a meal, going to bed hungry, and doing poorly the next day. Republicans are working to extend the program. I want a bill to fund SNAP, but it looks like we will not have Democratic support to pass. There are a lot of empty dinner tables and a lot of children going to bed hungry. Democrats have voted against reopening our government 13 times. Thirteen times they have voted to deny children food, sending families to food banks instead. I am told that food banks will not be able to keep up. Federal workers, single parents with young children, walking into empty food banks. That is coming from a party that regularly claims that they are the party of children, families, and vulnerable communities. Republicans and the Trump administration are working hard to mitigate the worst parts of the shutdown. President Trump found the money to pay our troops through the generosity of a patriotic American. Senate Republicans voted for a bill to pay all Federal employees, including air traffic controllers who are working without pay now. Democrats blocked it. They are the party of ``no.'' And the bizarre part is no one is quite sure why, until one of their leaders said the quiet part out loud. The House Democratic whip acknowledged that Democrats are allowing people to suffer because of the shutdown but said: There will be families that are going to suffer . . . but it is one of the few leverage times that we have. This is the second highest ranking House Democrat openly confirming that working families are being used as political leverage. This is all about politics, not what is best for the people of our country. Now, they will tell you it is about healthcare, but their position crumbles under scrutiny. If it were about healthcare costs, why would they make people suffer more in order to change healthcare policy rather than reopen the government and negotiate with Republicans on solutions which actually lower healthcare costs? Republicans have repeatedly said we will negotiate to lower healthcare costs, just not while Americans suffer. Our position is clear: End the shutdown, and then let's talk about healthcare. It seems reasonable. You might ask why they are still voting against reopening the government. It is because they know that their proposals on healthcare won't actually lower healthcare costs. Under Democrats' current plan, premiums still go up next year, not to mention their proposed solution is just aimed at papering over the mess that ObamaCare created because the facts are clear: The Affordable Care Act did not make care affordable. All of this seems like one elaborate attempt to save face. Well, it is not working, and, more importantly, Americans are suffering. I repeat: Reopen the government, then let's have a conversation about the areas in healthcare we can address to actually lower premium costs and out-of-pocket costs for middle-income Americans. By the way, the Democrats' current plan will only affect 7 percent of the people on ObamaCare. Their plan ignores 93 percent of Americans who will also see costs go up. We need to help all Americans by fixing our healthcare system, not just paper over the failures of ObamaCare to help a few. I will add, for as much as they talk about healthcare, the Democrat shutdown is defunding important healthcare programs. As chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, I led a bipartisan effort to protect Americans' access to affordable over-the-counter drugs. The members of my committees worked together to remodify the Over-the-counter Monograph Drug User Fee Program, sometimes referred to as OMUFA. This funds the review process to bring over-the-counter drugs to market. Because of the shutdown, because of my Democratic colleagues refusing to vote to open the government, for the first time in history, a user fee program has expired, meaning patient access to new over-the-counter treatments for common ailments is in jeopardy. I am a doctor. I want to tackle the numerous issues facing our healthcare system. I spent my whole career fighting for patients. Let's have a conversation about lowering costs for all Americans like those on Medicare, those with employer-sponsored insurance, and small business owners who provide insurance to their workers. If Democrats are interested in lowering healthcare costs, as they say they are, reopen the government, pay our troops, and stop taking food from children. I am tired of hearing people say there is no off-ramp or way out of the shutdown. Here it is, the way forward: Open the government. National Flood Insurance Program Mr. President, I spoke on this floor a month ago about the consequences of a government shutdown on our country and upon Louisiana, particularly the half million Louisianans enrolled in the National Flood Insurance Program or the NFIP. I called on Senate Democrats to join me and Republican colleagues in keeping the government open and Congress working. Unfortunately, the Senate minority leader shut the government down nearly a month ago to appease a radical base. That is nearly a month that many people in Louisiana on the NFIP that have gone without the trust, certainty, and stability that the program is designed to provide. Families are unable to close on a new house because they can't purchase a new flood insurance policy. Homeowners are vulnerable during hurricane season because they cannot renew existing policies, and that raises a question the American people are asking every day: How can they trust a government that isn't even open? Now, by the way, NFIP is not perfect. It faces financial challenges. Some reforms are needed. But shutting it down makes the problem worse, not better. The Democratic leader said that every day the shutdown gets better for them. Well, I can tell you every day the government is shut down, it gets worse for the Americans in my State who are worried about flooding and losing everything. The American people want solutions. They want a government that works. They want flood insurance that protects their homes, families, and livelihoods. That is why I am working on legislation that would automatically reauthorize the NFIP if there is any lapse in government funding; in other words, prevent any future shutdown from interrupting the NFIP. It fixes the damage caused by the Schumer shutdown and ensures stability going forward. My colleague John Kennedy from Louisiana and I have introduced two bills, one to extend NFIP in the short term, another to provide a full year of coverage. We are also working toward broader reforms that keep premiums affordable and the program sustainable for generations to come. We must reopen the government immediately. Democrats have voted against doing so 13 times. Thirteen opportunities they have been given to end their shutdown, and they have thrown it back in the face of all Americans. Government services might be on pause, but hurricane season is not. Reopen the government, restore certainty to the American people, protect homes, protect families, protect livelihoods. Republicans are working to prevent the worst effects of the Schumer shutdown from taking place, but Democrats keep blocking our efforts. We want to pay the troops. We want to fund SNAP. We want to extend NFIP. The American people deserve better. They deserve more than the Democratic Party is willing to give. I yield the floor.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I have eight 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 foltowing committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions which are at the desk: S. Res. 474 and S. Res. 475.

Mr. CASSIDY. I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Thursday, October 30, and that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, and notwithstanding rule XXII, at 11:45 a.m., the Senate execute the order of October 28 in relation to S.J. Res. 80, and following disposition of the joint resolution, the Senate execute the order of October 22 in relation to S.J. Res. 88, and that all time be expired and the Senate vote on the joint resolution; finally, at 1:45 p.m., the Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 370, Joshua D. Dunlap.

Mr. CASSIDY. For the information of my colleagues, Senators should expect two votes at 11:45 a.m., and one vote at 1:45 p.m.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I am about to list several things which are all kind of unique. A 102-year-old woman--kind of unique--who is a naval veteran, a female naval veteran, who is now 102 and she is a Louisianan and she exemplifies the best of our State: hard work, service, and faith. She turned--Mary Hajek Nugent--turned 102 years young this month. Born on a farm near Libuse, LA, Mary has always been a hard worker. She grew up tending vegetable gardens, a fruit orchard, and farm animals before enlisting in the U.S. Navy, building planes at a bomber plant, and serving as a parachute rigger. For some reason, if I were a guy using a parachute, I would rather have a woman rigging it for me rather than some guy. I don't know why. But I think she would have been more attuned to the detail of making sure that when that ripcord was pulled, the guy using it landed slowly and softly and not (motioning). After World War II, she returned to central Louisiana and devoted her time and talents to the tuberculosis unit at Pineville Veterans Hospital. She later worked at the downtown Alexandria Veterans Affairs office, where she met her husband Robert Nugent. I am told Mrs. Nugent still greets people with a warm smile and has a deep appreciation for nature. Perhaps her habit of looking for the good in everything and in everyone is the secret to a long life, something we in Washington should adopt. As a longtime member of Calvary Baptist Church, Mary's faith is strong, and she still wakes up every day with a smile and words of thanksgiving. Mary, thank you for your service to our country and State. You have made Louisiana and our country a better place for 102 years. You inspire; you bless; you make Louisiana proud. Happy birthday. I yield the floor.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, on Monday evening, a tragedy occurred at the courthouse building in Plaquemine, LA. Captain Brett Stassi, Jr., of the Iberville Parish Sheriff's Office, the son of the Parish Sheriff, Sheriff Stassi, and Deputy Charles Riley were shot by a suspect they were booking in connection with a sexual assault case. Here, you see their pictures. The two officers were taken to the hospital. Deputy Riley, a 6-year veteran of the Iberville Sheriff's Office, husband and father, died. Captain Stassi, I am told, has undergone several surgeries and is in critical but stable condition. A tragedy like this reminds us that law enforcement officers put their lives on the line for us every single day. We can never take that for granted. Deputy Riley gave his life protecting our community booking somebody for sexual assault, a horrific crime--booking him, and he himself was killed, an even more horrific crime. We pray for the close friends of both, the loved ones of both, those who grieve the loss of someone they looked up to and will deeply miss. Our hearts are with the fellow deputies who are hurting and the whole Plaquemine and Iberville Parish community. We pray and hope for Captain Stassi's strength and full recovery and, of course, for his wife and family. The support we get from law enforcement, their willingness to put themselves in harm's way, can never be repaid. We take it for granted until it no longer can be done so. We support law enforcement. We support those suffering in the wake of this tragedy. I yield the floor.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, hurricane season ends November 30--2 months left to go. Last week marked the first anniversary of Hurricane Helene, and I see from reports that the area of North Carolina most affected is still terribly affected. It was such a severe storm that people in Louisiana went from Louisiana to help North Carolina and other States with their emergency operations on the ground. This weekend saw two category 4 storms churning in the western Atlantic. Thankfully, they do not appear that they will hit our coast. Still, the storms remind people in Louisiana and other States that flooding is not a matter of if but, rather, when. Now, Democrats, as we know, are pushing us toward a government shutdown. What does that mean for the National Flood Insurance Program? Imagine you are about to close on a house in 2 days and the bank requires you to have flood insurance. If you are in a special flood hazard area--by the way, over half of Louisiana is a special flood hazard area--and you are purchasing a house with help from a federally backed loan, you will not be closing on that house, nor will you be able to renew your existing policy, all because Democrats have rejected a clean continuing resolution to keep the government open. Let me repeat: They are walking away from a bill that simply extends the existing budget for 7 weeks to allow for further negotiation. Instead, they demand a highly partisan bill which would add more than $1 trillion to our Nation's debt. They want taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal immigrants, transgender surgery for minors, and to cut $50 billion from the rural hospital fund Republicans created as part of our working families tax cuts bill. Now, back to flood insurance, Americans are left wondering how a shutdown will affect them. While Democrats are writing checks to the far left, folks are wondering if they can close on their house. Now, I will tell you what the American people care about. They want the government to do its job. They want disaster recovery when needed. They want flood insurance that works. They want rural hospitals to stay open. They want energy security and a balanced budget--not trillion- dollar add-ons that only serve a political agenda. The American people deserve accountability. They expect Congress to put their needs before partisan politics. If this shutdown happens, it means that the National Flood Insurance Program cannot renew policies. That is 500,000 people in Louisiana and millions across the country unable to renew policies while we are still in hurricane season. It will mean delays in disaster aid and emergency response coordination. It means uncertainty for families still recovering from Hurricane Helene and other past storms. Now, this is personal for folks in my State. If Democrats would stop trying to please the fringe of their party and start focusing on the real, immediate needs of the American people--like keeping the government open, maintaining flood insurance, and protecting access to rural healthcare--we could solve this today. So I ask my fellow Senators who are Democrats: Who are you working for? Are you working for the American families watching the weather, hoping the next storm doesn't wipe out everything they have built? Are you working for veterans waiting on care, the seniors relying on Social Security checks, or the communities who count on rural hospitals in a crisis? Or are you working for political activists and special interest groups that have nothing to do with the lives of the people you were elected to serve? Mr. President, the path forward is simple: Pass a clean bill to keep the government open. The Economy Mr. President, middle-class Americans are taking it on the chin. If you ask anybody buying groceries and you start talking about high grocery prices, their heads just start to nod. American farmers can't hire workers to pick their crops. Foreign products are being tariffed. Beef and coffee prices are through the roof. For the first time ever since it has been tracked, ground beef is over $6 a pound, and it keeps rising. To put that into perspective, it was under $4 when President Trump left office in 2021. People can't afford to live. If you combine the cost of the things they absolutely need--their healthcare, their flood insurance, property and casualty or homeowners insurance, car insurance, mortgages, car payments--after that, they are sitting around an empty kitchen table, worried as to whether there is enough left in their pocketbook to buy the groceries to feed their family. Now, with 67 percent of Americans saying they are living paycheck to paycheck, you can imagine how many empty kitchen tables there are. Last week, I got a message from a woman in my State who lives on the north shore of Lake Pontchartrain. She told me this is the problem she is facing: She can't afford to live and to pay for her groceries. By the way, she is a teacher--a good job--and has been for 26 years. But she can't afford to live and pay for groceries? The middle class is taking it on the chin, and a lot of Americans are in the same situation as she is. No matter how hard they work, no matter how many jobs they work--sometimes two or three--they can't keep up. Now, since 2000, housing demand has grown more than housing supply. Roughly 46 percent of Americans let their credit card payments roll over month to month because they cannot afford to pay in full. That is almost 50 percent of people in the United States who are not paying their credit card bills, and that is with 21 percent to 26 percent interest rates on them. Almost a quarter of Americans don't think they will ever pay off their credit card debt. And the hole keeps getting deeper. Now, Republicans are trying to address this. In the working families tax cuts bill, we increased wages by eliminating taxes on tips and taxes on overtime. Most seniors will not pay taxes on their Social Security payments. We increased the child tax credit. We incentivized companies to start building in the United States now, instead of waiting for 10 years. We attract private investment into low-income communities by giving investors a tax break in exchange for developing economically distressed communities. Our goal is to create jobs--better paying jobs--as we spur this revitalization. We can increase affordable housing for families and workers by expanding and strengthening the low-income housing tax credit, which will help build more than 1.6 million affordable homes nationwide over the next decade. Again, we give tax incentives now for those better paying manufacturing and construction jobs, while working to decrease the high cost of healthcare with, if you will, programs to incentivize the education of more nurses, to lower the cost of prescription drugs, and to lower the cost of health insurance. We have proposed ways to lower the cost of the National Flood Insurance Program, which in my State is one thing that just saps from people's pocketbooks. Now, the government shutdown will not help. It creates unnecessary worry and puts a strain on working families, veterans, and folks living on a fixed income. The American middle class is taking it on the chin. Republicans are working to give the American people hope instead of one more body blow. I yield the floor.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I want to start by thanking Senator Hassan so much and Representative Brett Guthrie and other colleagues for their work to pass the SUPPORT Act. It is part of, as a doctor, I would say, a pro-patient--we would say pro-family--agenda that we wish to deliver for the American people. About a month and a half ago, President Trump had a signing ceremony for the HALT Fentanyl Act at the White House. That was my bill, so I was privileged to be there. Behind him were families holding the pictures of their children who had died from fentanyl overdose. Incredibly moving. I had a similar ceremony in Baton Rouge where, across Louisiana, people came and held a picture of their child who had died. In one case, the young man had a hard time sleeping, and somebody at his church gave him a pill to take. He took the pill. It was laced with fentanyl, and he died of an overdose. This is an incredibly powerful addictant, an incredibly powerful, ability-to-kill drug. The HALT Fentanyl Act is one part of it. It gives support to law enforcement as they attempt to combat this scourge. The SUPPORT Act is supporting those who are delivering that primary care, that first responder care, that care of a family for a loved one who might be addicted, that care to the patient herself or himself. Just this morning, I was on a radio program with Ted Dumas out of Louisiana. We were talking--as we talked about the HALT Fentanyl Act-- that there is somebody listening to this program who is addicted to fentanyl and is looking for a way out; there is some family member listening who knows they have a family member with a fentanyl addiction or some other addiction who needs a way out. The SUPPORT Act is giving them the tools they need to either come out of addiction or to help someone come out of addiction. Let me just give a shout-out to President Trump. Since he has taken office, we have seen a control of the southern border, we have seen the Mexican Army going after cartels who have been manufacturing and bringing in the fentanyl, and we have seen the chemical companies in China--which Senator Hassan and I, when we went to China last year, specifically asked the leadership of China to control. President Trump is going after those chemical companies and after the Government of China in order to control those chemical companies. This is a full-court press our government is making. Giving credit to President Trump where credit is due but also to the Congress for passing the HALT Fentanyl Act and now the SUPPORT Act. We are working to control this scourge. I look forward to this being signed into law. I look forward to continuing to work with congressional colleagues and the President to enact a pro-family, pro-patient agenda that addresses this. I look forward to people coming out of addiction. One death from overdose is one death too many. I yield the floor.

Mr. CASSIDY

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise today to welcome to America His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, the spiritual leader of the world's second-largest Christian Church--Orthodox Christianity-- which encompasses over 250 million faithful worldwide. We in Louisiana take particular pride in welcoming His All-Holiness, given that the very first Greek Orthodox Church in America, Holy Trinity Church, was established in 1864 by Greek merchants in New Orleans. This historic church welcomed Orthodox Christians of various nationalities and backgrounds. To this day, Orthodox Christians throughout Louisiana who worship in churches across our State are held in high regard by their fellow citizens. We are pleased that during this visit to America, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew will, as he has during previous trips, meet with our President at the White House and with the leadership of both Houses of Congress from both parties. We recognize that His All-Holiness is among the very few world leaders who commands such high-level access to the leadership of our Nation. The U.S. Congress expressed its profound respect and admiration for His All-Holiness in 1997 when it awarded him the Congressional Gold Medal, Congress' highest honor. This distinguished award has been bestowed upon such luminaries as George Washington and Winston Churchill. Remarkably, the legislation for His All-Holiness's Gold Medal attracted more of the Members of Congress as cosponsors than any other bill introduced during that entire congressional session. This Gold Medal also recognized the significant international and historical role the Ecumenical Patriarch has played throughout his lifetime. Historic international figures who received the Congressional Gold Medal immediately before and after His All-Holiness were Mother Teresa and Nelson Mandela. We also acknowledge the extraordinary historic role His All-Holiness has served as the longest tenured Ecumenical Patriarch in history. It is significant that Jesus Christ's first Apostle Andrew and his brother Peter each established distinct spheres of Christian influence. The Apostle Andrew established his ministry in the region that encompasses present-day Turkey, and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew stands as the 269th direct successor of the Apostle Andrew. Similarly, the Apostle Andrew's brother the Apostle Peter traveled to what is today the Vatican, and Pope Leo XIV serves as the 267th successor of the Apostle Peter.