Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today the Senate will vote to confirm Jennifer Lee Mascott, nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Ms. Mascott is a nominee who was selected for her loyalty to President Trump and her extreme view on expansive Presidential power, which she has advocated for many years. At a Federalist Society event in 2018, she agreed with John Eastman, President Trump's disgraced and disbarred lawyer, in stating that any independence of independent Agencies is ``too much.'' And just days before she joined the White House Counsel's Office, she stated that the Supreme Court should overrule Humphrey's Executor, the landmark 90-year precedent establishing the constitutionality of laws protecting the heads of independent Agencies from being fired. She claimed that ``the President needs to be able to . . . get rid of folks who don't follow his instructions'' at independent Agencies. If Ms. Mascott's arguments carry the day, President Trump will be free to continue his holy war against bipartisan independent Agencies entrusted with protecting the rights and safety of Americans like the Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Product Safety Commission. If he succeeds, something as important as consumer protection will be based on the whims of the political party in power, not the valued expertise of subject matter experts. Just last year, Ms. Mascott told this committee that the Supreme Court's outrageous decision granting sweeping immunity to President Trump was ``modest.'' I am also troubled by Ms. Mascott's selection process for this Delaware seat. Nominees are required to provide details about how they were selected, but Ms. Mascott failed to provide the dates when she was interviewed by the White House Counsel's Office. Notably, the Delaware Senators suggested to the White House several well-qualified conservative jurists who had strong ties to the Delaware legal community. Ms. Mascott was selected although she has never lived in Delaware nor any State in the Third Circuit; she is not licensed to practice in Delaware; and she was only admitted to the Third Circuit this May. For all these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose her nomination.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I came to the floor a few minutes after Senator Thune, the Republican leader, spoke, and I missed part of his statement, but I think I heard most of it. I listened carefully to the statement by the Senator from Wyoming. Let me say at the outset that I consider them both to be friends. We disagree on many things politically, but over the years, I have come to work with both of them and look forward to doing that again someday. I was disappointed in both of their statements because of what was not said. How can you talk about the government shutdown without ever mentioning healthcare costs to American families? How can you do that? I mean, it is a situation where we understand, I hope, that the Democrats are not in this position for any reason other than to stop the dramatic increase in healthcare premiums that American families will face unless we do something and do it now. In State after State, the notices are going out that the cost of health insurance for working families in America is going to go up dramatically--in some cases, more than 100 percent. That is going to be hurtful to many. They will have to look for different health insurance plans that they can afford, which means more money out of pocket, or they are going to drop their health insurance coverage altogether. How can the Republican leader stand before us and even refuse to acknowledge that that is the issue that drives this government shutdown? The Republicans are insisting on their approach to the budget because they don't want to see American families protected when it comes to these health insurance increases. And the increases are already being announced. Ten States so far have announced them. October 27 is the magic date, if you will, for the announcement in my State of Illinois. I know what is going to happen. I am going to hear from hundreds, if not thousands, of families across my State that increasing the cost for families is creating a hardship they never anticipated. We believe on the Democratic side that this is the time to act, now, to move together to stop these increases from taking place because these increases were part of the big beautiful Republican budget--the Trump budget, voted for by every Republican Senator and no Democratic Senators; the Trump budget, which, of course, he signed into law. That is what is leading to these increases, because the Affordable Care Act insurance plans are no longer going to enjoy a subsidy, a tax credit, to help families pay the premiums, and that is why the cost is going to go up so dramatically. We can change it. We can do it, but we have to do it quickly. We ought to move on it this week. I wish the House of Representatives were in session. They haven't shown up for 2 weeks. Speaker Johnson happens to believe that being AWOL is the right thing for his Republican Members. I don't think it is the right thing for America. Democrats and Republicans should be in this Capitol negotiating, sitting at a table together, and the first item on the agenda has to be healthcare costs for American families. All this talk about a dangerous game and radical-left policies and management--it is not a radical-left idea that a working family ought to have affordable health insurance; it is basic in America. As flawed as our health system is in this country and as great as it is in many respects, if people cannot afford to have coverage for their family, then hardship follows. That is the real reason. They say: Well, what about the cost? Remember, this is an administration that wants to give $20 billion to Argentina. Twenty billion dollars this President is planning to give. I am worried more about 20 million Americans who will lose their health insurance if we don't do something and do it quickly. The American people get it. This issue has gone from the beltway to the backyards of America. People know that this is coming, and they are worried about it, and they should be. They want us to do something, and they want it done now. We are making the fight on this continuing resolution because it is timely, and we need bipartisan support to pass it. So let's do something positive in a bipartisan way, and dealing with the cost of health insurance is my approach that I would suggest. Illinois Mr. President, let me take this to another issue that is near and dear to my heart, and that is what is happening in my home State of Illinois. We all know the popular quote: When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. Or, in President Trump's case, if a person shows you who they are a million times over, believe them. President Trump has shown us his unlawful and inhumane priorities over and over again, city after city. He continues to deploy militarized immigration agents and National Guard troops to more American cities purely for political theater. He wants America to talk about the Texas National Guard in Illinois, not about healthcare costs facing American families. But it is not going to work. Unfortunately, the men and women of the Texas National Guard who are in the State of Illinois, as of yesterday, have been sent off on a political assignment, political theater. Instead of working to find a bipartisan way to reopen the government, lower the cost of healthcare, President Trump is focused on scoring points against his perceived enemies. Just yesterday, 200 or 300 members of the Texas National Guard joined Federal law enforcement officers in Chicago, along with President Trump's loyal FBI Director Kash Patel. The truth is that the arrival of the Texas National Guard and the FBI Director will not make Chicago safer; it will only escalate the unnecessary and dangerous situation this President himself has created. I still can't get the image out of my mind from 2 weeks ago, when the ICE officials, in full combat gear, carrying long rifles, were marching down Michigan Avenue. It was a hateful effort that was used to provoke people into strong emotional feelings. This administration's unlawful use of military resources to police American cities makes our country less safe, and it is a mistake that will be remembered in the history books. I pray that the court system will respond accordingly as they did in the case of Oregon and Illinois when the hearing tomorrow is brought before the Federal judge. Deploying the Texas National Guard without the consent of Illinois elected officials is, in my estimation, unnecessary and unlawful. The Posse Comitatus Act expressly forbids the use of our Nation's military for civilian law enforcement unless expressly authorized by statute or the Constitution. National Guard personnel do not deserve to be used by the President's political pawns. Let me say and make it clear: As much as I regret the decision by the Texas Governor to send his National Guard troops into Illinois and as much as I want them to leave immediately, I do not make those statements at the expense of the individuals who are in the Guard and volunteered to serve their State and Nation. The same thing is true with the federalized Illinois National Guard. They are doing what they were ordered to do according to the military standards. But the bottom line is, we all know they are not fighting crime. If the Trump administration truly wants to help Chicago--and I don't believe they do--and Illinois, it won't defy our elected leaders; it will work with us. It will restore millions of dollars the Trump administration suspended in crime prevention and public safety grants. Instead, this administration has chosen to use America's military to create chaos and sow fear in our cities. We all agree on the importance of reducing crime and making our communities safer. The President claims his aggressive immigration raids and threats to deploy troops are to help get violent criminals off the streets. I have come to the floor 2 straight days, and this is the third, to condemn what happened last week in the city of Chicago on Tuesday. A South Shore apartment building was raided in the middle of the night. Doors were crashed down, families were rousted out of their bedrooms, many of them brought out to the street and questioned as to whether they were in America legally. Some were American citizens. We don't know how many. We certainly don't know if there were any criminals found as a result of that. No report. But we do know this: What happened on that street on that night was not the way America does business and shouldn't be. It was to terrorize these families, with no warrant for their arrest and no suspicion that they committed crimes, simply because they looked Hispanic and maybe looked like foreigners--I am not sure. This action was taken against them. These attacks are part of Stephen Miller's personal agenda for mass deportation at any cost. They pulled FBI, DEA, and ATF agents from their assignments, important assignments, to stop narcotics and other things to carry out the President's immigration agenda. They stopped working on fighting crimes like terrorism, gun violence, human trafficking, and drug smuggling to land a helicopter near a building in Chicago and to bring 30 families out into the street in the middle of the night. I have fought for humane reforms to our immigration system and evidence-based ways to reduce crimes in our cities. If the President is serious about fixing our immigration system or lowering crime in our communities, I will join in on that effort. But sending in militarized Federal immigration agents and National Guard troops to our communities is not the way to do it. These actions have accomplished what I believe is the President's true intention: sowing fear in the hearts of our communities, especially our immigrant communities, and consolidating the President's power in Washington. The actions taken by this administration undermine the very fabric of America, a nation that was founded on the belief that all people should be free from tyranny. I remember a time when every Member of Congress would have risen in outrage if an administration attempted to use the military unlawfully against cities and communities and States that they represent. Unfortunately, this time has passed. There is nothing but silence from the other side of the aisle. Congressional Republicans are content to stand aside in abject servility to this President as he tramples the Constitution. But Americans should not stay silent. People across Illinois are peacefully making their voices heard and letting this administration know the attacks on our city will not go unchallenged. As a Senator from Illinois, I will do everything in my power to hold this administration accountable for their unlawful actions. They may think this is a diversion of attention from the basic issue of controlling healthcare costs and helping working American families afford their health insurance. I think it is much more. It is a threat to our Republic and our Constitution, and I hope that others will join me in condemning this activity. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Gallego) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today, for the first time since her confirmation earlier this year, Attorney General Pam Bondi appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to answer for her tenure in the Office of the Attorney General for this calendar year. From the outset, the Attorney General was not, apparently, happy to be there. She ducked many questions, and I think she believed we wouldn't notice. We did. In her opening statement, the Attorney General said that ``playing politics with law enforcement powers,'' as she claims previous administrations have, ``will go down as a historic betrayal of public trust'' and that ``this is the kind of conduct that shatters the American people's faith in our law enforcement system.'' That is interesting coming from an Attorney General who, over the course of 8 very long months, has presided over exactly such a betrayal of public trust. The Attorney General has systematically weaponized the Department of Justice, turning it into a shield to protect President Trump and his allies and a sword to attack his opponents. She has made clear that her loyalties lie first and foremost with the President, not with the Constitution. In doing so, she effectively shut down justice at the Department of Justice, even before the party controlling the White House, Senate, and the House of Representatives shut down the government. Last week, on the Senate floor and in the wake of the Federal indictment against former FBI Director James Comey that was ordered by President Trump expressly, I warned of the dangers posed by weaponizing the Justice Department in a political fashion. A President, enabled by people like this Attorney General, who can warp the Department of Justice and FBI into a personal police force to target his enemies, can turn it against ordinary Americans too. Unfortunately, the city of Chicago, which I am proud to represent, is feeling that today. In an especially egregious instance in the city's South Shore neighborhood last Tuesday night, hundreds of armed Federal agents rappelled from Black Hawk helicopters and swarmed an apartment building in the South Shore area. This made-for-movies entrance was into a building, which apparently the ICE agents knew little about the occupants. ICE rampaged through the building, breaking down doors, rousting people out of bed, rounding up the residents without cause, detaining many with zip ties, including women and children. When one of the ICE agents was confronted with the children, he said, ``F---- them kids.'' Detaining not just immigrants but U.S. citizens for hours on end, with no justification, isn't fighting crime; it is cruel, and it is un- American. Attorney General Bondi's Justice Department has defended this dubious legal basis for Federal deployments to Illinois and diverted Department of Justice personnel and their components to assist with these efforts. So, today, many of us pushed her for answers. I asked her if anyone at the White House consulted her about the National Guard deployments to Chicago and other cities. She refused to answer that she even had a conversation with the White House about their justification for sending hundreds of National Guard troops into the city of Chicago. I asked what secret the Attorney General was trying to hide from the American people who deserve to know the legitimate legal rationale for deploying American military to our cities. She responded by attempting to blame Democrats for the Republican shutdown and attacking me for not ``loving Chicago as much as [I] hate President Trump.'' That was a quote. I have been a member of the Judiciary Committee for 20 years-plus. Never have I encountered a witness from any other administration of either political party responding to legitimate questions with personal attacks. She had a personal attack crafted for each one of the Senators and thought she was getting the best of us. But that kind of unserious response is what we have come to expect from Trump administration officials whose priority is loyalty, not the rule of law. If DOJ is serious about reducing crimes, then they would work in conjunction with State and local leaders to implement evidence-based policies that do drive down violence. The fact is, this administration actually cares more about spreading fear into the hearts of our communities and catering to the vengeful whims of President Trump and Stephen Miller. It is political theater with an immense human pricetag. I also asked the Attorney General about the Epstein client list. She wouldn't touch it. She said in February, publicly, that the client list was ``sitting on her desk.'' Well, it is October, and the American people are still waiting for answers on this. She refused today to provide any information about this list, and we know why. A few months ago, a credible whistleblower told my office that FBI agents were instructed to flag any mention of President Trump from the files of Mr. Epstein. If true, that is not law enforcement; that is political protection. So I pressed her again today for more information to be made public. She refused. Mr. President, what we saw in today's hearing was an Attorney General unwilling and maybe unable to defend what is happening in her Department. Whether it is the Epstein files, Chicago immigration raids, sweetheart deals for Trump allies, or the mass purging of career law enforcement, her silence tells a story. Saying ``I'm not going to discuss this with you'' may have worked today, but one day, she will need to answer for her conduct in this role, and she will need to defend her record--one that saw the dismantling of the Department of Justice for political purposes on her watch. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, on Friday, in the midst of a Republican- led government shutdown, President Trump revealed his priorities. It isn't to protect the healthcare, the health insurance of millions of Americans who are about to lose their insurance or see premiums skyrocket. No, that is not it. The President's priority is to deploy militarized immigration agents and National Guard troops to more American cities. Why? Purely for political theater and to advance his extreme agenda. In the early morning hours of Tuesday last week, while this government barreled toward a shutdown, President Donald Trump launched a military law enforcement assault on the city of Chicago. In the city's Southside neighborhood, hundreds--hundreds--of Federal agents, many hiding their faces with masks, rappelled from Black Hawk helicopters, darted out of disguised moving trucks, armed with military-grade weapons, to descend on a targeted apartment building in the city of Chicago. They swarmed through the building, knocking down doors, tearing up homes. It appears these agents knew nothing in advance about the residents whose homes they were destroying. In fact, in the dead of night, Federal agents reportedly started checking on the residents as they brought them out of the building, residents that included American citizens and children. They checked on them to see if maybe they had an outstanding warrant for their arrest or were undocumented. Picture this, if you will: You are with your family in an apartment building, a helicopter lands on the roof, Federal agents with masks on batter down your doors, drag you and your children out of their beds into the street, and start an interrogation as to whether there is any undocumented person present. America. Many were yanked from their homes and their beds and detained shirtless and without clothing. Some were detained using zip ties, including children. Here is what one witness of the events said: Kids were crying. People were screaming. They looked very distraught. I was out there crying when I saw the little girl coming around the corner, because they were bringing the kids down, too. [They] had them zip tied [together]. In the middle of the night in the city of Chicago, an assault on an apartment building in America. The witness continued: One of [the agents] laughed [out loud]. He said ``f*** them kids.'' Four U.S. citizen kids with undocumented parents were separated from their parents who were taken into custody. Secretary Kristi Noem's Department of Homeland Security posted to social media a highly produced video of the raid--her version of the story--because that is all this is to them, a promotional video, political theater. But the human toll has been immense. What if it were your child yanked out of his bed in the middle of the night, hands zip-tied behind him, brought down with few, if any, clothes on, standing in the street, while all this is happening, watching his parents be arrested in America? In another case, ICE agents fired a pepper ball into CBS Chicago reporter Asal Rezaei's car. What was her crime? Driving by the Broadview ICE facility to report on the protests there. It is known in the Constitution as freedom of the press. It doesn't seem to impress Kristi Noem. I have long fought for humane reforms on our immigration system on a bipartisan basis and evidence-based ways to reduce crimes in our city. If the President is serious about fixing our immigration system or lowering crime in our communities, I am all in. But sending in militarized Federal immigration agents and National Guard troops to terrorize Chicago or any American community in any State is not the American way. These actions have accomplished, I believe, the President's true intention here: spreading fear in America, especially among immigrant communities. And he has been very successful. I go to these communities virtually every weekend when I return to Illinois. I meet with the people who live there. They are scared to death, people who have been here for years, no criminal record, no reason to be removed, working and paying taxes are afraid to shop and afraid to go to church. Last week, on the floor, I warned about this, and I have for some time now. The President's decision to unleash military personnel against the city of Chicago and American communities is another pillar in his master plan to weaponize the Federal Government against those he views as ``the enemy within.'' Where did that phrase come from? From the mouth of the President of the United States speaking to the military leaders of the United States. He told them to be fearful of ``the enemy within'' and to use American cities as their training ground. Think of that. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller ranted to law enforcement agents on the eve of their Memphis deployment that they were, ``unleashed.'' Stephen Miller's word, ``unleashed.'' Does that sound like law and order? Does that sound like the rule of law? ``Unleashed.'' In addition to Memphis and Chicago, this President has targeted cities like Los Angeles and Portland, reckless immigration raids, unnecessary deployment of military power over the objection of State and local officials. I fear these disturbing developments are the latest indicators that we are on a slippery slope into control by the Trump regime. The President is attempting to overturn the Department of Justice, the FBI, ICE, and the military into his own personal police force. This not only erodes trust between communities and the people tasked with protecting them, it is an existential threat to civil liberty, the rule of law, and the core of values of who we are as Americans. This is what is at stake. This is a defining moment we are in. In times like these, you have a choice. You can stand up and speak out or you can be silent or maybe you can cheer. It is your choice as Americans. But think about if it were your family in the middle of the night, people crashing through the doors yanking you and your children out of bed into the street, arresting people. Remember what the goal was when we got started with this? The President made it very clear. We were after undocumented people, illegal people in the United States who were rapists, murderers, terrorists, criminally insane, and child predators. The President was very explicit. These are the people we are going after. We will tell you their names as we arrest them. So what percentage of those that have been arrested with this mass deportation detained by ICE, what percentage of them have a criminal record? Fewer than 30 percent. By a 2-to-1 margin, innocent people are being dragged into this in the middle of the night in the city of Chicago in an apartment building. Children are being treated like pawns in the Trump political game. Today, Illinois attorney general Kwame Raoul filed a lawsuit to block the administration's unconstitutional attempt to deploy troops in Illinois. I join with all of my Democratic colleagues in the Illinois delegation who are calling on the President to immediately rescind this unnecessary and dangerous deployment of the military to Illinois. I have spoken personally to the Governor of our State, JB Pritzker, several times this weekend amidst this development. He did not ask for the National Guard troops to be sent in from Texas or anyplace. There is no need for it to either protect Federal facilities or to protect the people living in the city of Chicago. I am going to continue speaking out as the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I appeal to my Republican colleagues who are watching this in silence: It could be you. You could have an opportunity soon for the President to send in troops. It is not likely as much from the Republican side, as very few of their communities have been targeted, but if you happen to live in a State that didn't vote for Donald Trump, buckle up. He is coming down on you, whether it is California, Oregon, or Illinois. I will close with this: At that Tuesday morning raid, videos taken at the scene showed detained immigrants being held in an adjacent parking lot across the street. A woman is seen and heard calling out in broken Spanish: I will always love you. Where is the humanity in tearing families apart? If there is a dangerous person, for God's sake, put him in a separate category, but families who are doing their best to get by and struggle, who work and pay taxes, and who have children who are citizens of the United States should never be treated like this in America. In an interview recently, Secretary Noem was quoted as saying: This country is a country of laws. If you don't like the laws, go change them. We are enforcing them. She said: That is sending a message to the whole world. The Secretary is right. The administration certainly sent a message in Chicago on Tuesday night--a shameful message and one that shouldn't be part of American history. Terrorizing families with midnight raids and troops in our streets is writing a shameful chapter in our Nation's history. This is going to make America great again? President Trump is not intent on fighting crime; he is intent on spreading fear. In doing so, he is destroying the values which define us as Americans. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), and the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Rosen), are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) and the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Rosen) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) and the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am sure that you can agree, having been involved in public service for a large part of your life, that sometimes it takes a long time to make an idea a reality. That has happened many times to me in my public career and, certainly, in my home State. In 1969, 56 years ago, former Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley proposed extending the Red Line of the Chicago Transit Authority, and yet, still, to this day, residents of the Far South Side of Chicago don't have that transit option, at least not as they should. Transportation can make or break not only employment but attending school, even making it to a doctor's appointment. For decades, residents of the Far South Side viewed this extension as just politicians talking. That changed this past January, when the Federal Transit Administration officially obligated $1.9 billion in Federal funding for this crucial extension. After waiting over 50 years, it was finally going to be a reality. This project will expand transit access to 100,000 people. It will be an economic boost for the city and create tens of thousands of jobs for working families. However, guess what: today, a news flash from the Trump administration. We received news that the OMB Director, Russell Vought, and the U.S. Department of Transportation have decided to illegally freeze $2 billion in grants for Chicago, including the obligated grant for the expansion, and risk decades worth of effort. This is in addition to the $7.5 billion in Department of Energy grants Director Vought canceled yesterday, including 33 projects totaling almost $700 million in Illinois. So why would this administration decide to target thousands of working families when it comes to their electric bills and when it comes to transportation? Because President Donald Trump wants to punish States like Illinois and the people who live there because they didn't vote for him in the last election. This is petty. It is unfair. It is wrong. These vindictive actions will cost Illinoisans jobs. Many of them will lose their employment. And it is going to raise the cost of electricity across the country. Freezing funds for these projects is a blatant abuse of power by a President and an administration that would rather settle petty personal scores than actually help people. OMB should immediately release any freeze on these funds, and I will do anything I can, with Senator Duckworth, to hold this administration accountable for its decisions, which continue to hurt working families. Nomination of Stanley Woodward, Jr. Mr. President, on a separate subject, the upcoming vote on more than 100 nominees is exactly what I feared would happen when Senate Republicans violated Senate rules to fast-track nominees. This has opened the door to rushing through more extreme nominees who have one qualification for office: They are blindly loyal to President Trump. That extends to a man named Stanley Woodward, the nominee to be the No. 3 official at the Department of Justice. Let me make this clear: Mr. Woodward is not even close to qualified. He has never--never--worked at the Justice Department before this administration. What he has done is show his loyalty to Donald Trump by representing Trump associates for their roles in thwarting investigations into the President. As Associate Attorney General, Mr. Woodward would oversee some of DOJ's most critical programs, including the Office of Justice Programs and the Civil Rights Division. As senior adviser to Attorney General Bondi, Mr. Woodward has already been involved in gutting these offices. The Trump administration has terminated hundreds of millions of dollars in grants administered by the Office of Justice Programs that support State and local law enforcement. The Trump administration also has gutted the Civil Rights Division, which has been known for years as the ``crown jewel'' of the Justice Department. About 70 percent of the Division's attorneys have been forced out--70 percent--and many, many staff have been diverted away from crucial efforts to protect the civil rights of all Americans, so long as they sign up for the mass deportations of the President. Mr. Woodward also overruled Antitrust Division officials to personally negotiate a settlement with lobbyists in DOJ's challenge to Hewlett Packard's $14 billion acquisition of Juniper Networks. The acquisition resulted in two firms controlling more than 70 percent of the wireless network market, a market duopoly. To Trump administration political appointees in the Antitrust Division who objected to this settlement, what happened to them? They were forced out of office. One of them said of the settlement: [C]orrupt lobbyists with no relevant expertise are perverting actual law enforcement through money, power, relationships, and influence. . . . Stanley Woodward perverted justice and acted inconsistent with the rule of law [in this deal]. I asked Attorney General Bondi about Mr. Woodward's involvement in the scandal. Crickets. No response. Nothing to say. It is wrong to fast-track unqualified, unfit nominees whose only goal is to advance a political agenda at the expense of the American people. Previous Associate Attorney General nominees have received a rollcall vote on the floor of the Senate and committee, of course. Take President Biden's nominee for this position, Vanita Gupta. In 2021, Republicans tried to filibuster her nomination in committee and then tried to shut down committee business before we voted. On the floor, Republicans forced extra procedural votes to slow down our confirmation. Despite my frustration at the time with Republican colleagues for obstructing a highly qualified and experienced nominee to serve as Associate Attorney General, I never sought to short-circuit the constitutional responsibility of Members in the Senate of advice and consent. Now when the shoe is on the other foot, Republicans are intent on taking away yet another core duty of the Senate in deference to President Trump. I hope they remember this moment when they resume their minority positions in the future. I urge my colleagues to vote no on these nominations. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), and the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, last night, the Republicans--despite controlling the White House and Congress--shut the government down to avoid addressing their self-inflicted healthcare crisis. It is another blow to ordinary Americans across this country. In July, Republicans used their majority to jam through Congress the President's so-called ``Big, Beautiful Bill.'' That cruel bill cuts nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid and will rip health insurance away from 10 million Americans. And for what? So the wealthiest Americans can continue to line their pockets. Now, Republicans seem poised to allow premiums and out-of-pocket costs to skyrocket. That is the Republican agenda: Billionaires win. You lose. If Republicans allow the Affordable Care Act enhanced tax credits to expire, more than 20 million Americans will see their premiums go up and 4 million more will lose coverage altogether. Republicans seem to be fine with ballooning the national debt for tax cuts for the rich, but they draw the line at extending healthcare to millions of American families. And already, the President is playing the blame game. In the Oval Office yesterday, the President said, ``Well, Democrats want to shut it down.'' We don't. And the American people see right through this. They know Republicans control government and refuse to negotiate. When lines are longer at the airport, when farmers cannot receive their loans, or servicemembers miss a paycheck, that is the fault of Republicans entirely. Yesterday, too, the President said, ``A lot of good can come from government shutdowns, we can get rid of a lot of things.'' The President is wrong. No good can come from a shutdown. That is why Democrats continue to ask Republicans to negotiate and save healthcare for the American people. Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing entitled: ``Blue City Chaos and Tragedy: How the Trump Administration is Addressing the Human Cost of Soft On Crime Policies.'' Unfortunately, as the title makes clear, this hearing was a partisan attempt to politicize what should be a bipartisan issue: how best to protect the safety of all American communities. Every American deserves to feel safe, no matter where they live. We must reject these acts of political theater and look at the facts. Over the last two decades, the murder rate in my home State of Illinois has been lower than the murder rates in Missouri, Louisiana, and Alabama-- all States led by Republicans. Ignoring these facts and the tangible success of the crime prevention programs working in cities like Chicago does nothing to make our Nation safer. Unfortunately, President Trump has done everything he can to undermine efforts that have been effective at fighting crime, like canceling hundreds of millions of dollars in Federal grants. These critical programs, which have long been supported by members on both sides of the aisle, include: $72 million in funding for State and local law enforcement; $158 million in gun violence prevention grants to cities like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, DC, and Baltimore; and $169 million of community safety funding authorized by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. If President Trump were serious about combating crime, he would restore these funds for ongoing joint Federal, State, and local law enforcement operations and crime prevention efforts. Instead, President Trump is deploying and threatening to deploy the National Guard to stroke his ego while falsely claiming he is restoring so-called order in Chicago, Portland, Memphis, and elsewhere. For months now, President Trump has been looking for any excuse to send troops into American communities to flex his power over cities and States he doesn't like. Just this week, after months of threatening to deploy the Guard to Chicago, the Department of Homeland Security announced that 100 National Guard troops would be deployed there, despite the objections of Governor Pritzker and Mayor Johnson. Let's be clear: This deployment is a dangerous, illegal, and unconstitutional abuse of power by this President. If anyone has any doubts about just how dangerous this is, they should listen to the speech Trump delivered yesterday to our most senior military leaders. He told them that, ``America is under invasion from within,'' and he joked that he told Secretary Hegseth they ``should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military.'' Trump went on to say that this ``invasion from within'' is ``more difficult in many ways because they don't wear uniforms.'' This is not about reducing crime or fixing our immigration system. This is about targeting those the President deems enemies--including those who exercise their First Amendment right to protest, question his authority when he flouts the law, or come to this country seeking a better life. Instead of keeping our communities safe, Federal agents in camouflage are masquerading as military in the streets of Chicago, targeting immigrants with no criminal convictions. They are arresting families at Millenium Park. They are reportedly locking families with toddlers in rooms at O'Hare Airport. My constituents do not feel safer. They are afraid to take their children to school, to report crimes, or to go to church. In Illinois, we have always known that immigrants are our neighbors. And as our neighbors, they deserve better from us than the terror and chaos of this administration. I hope that moving forward, we can come together to discuss and support bipartisan solutions to keep all American communities safe.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, we are just hours away from the deadline to fund the Federal Government. This task of funding our government is one of the most important responsibilities vested in Congress. This is not my first rodeo. I have been through shutdowns before. The last one and one of the longest was in President Trump's first term. So here in the second term comes another government shutdown just 9 months into his Presidency. Accomplishing this funding of our government requires bipartisan compromise. Do the math. To pass anything of substance in the U.S. Senate, you need 60 votes. There are 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats. You need at least seven Democratic votes to join all the Republicans if you want to have a bipartisan rollcall that passes. So that would suggest to any President and any Member of the majority party that it is a good idea to sit down with the Senators from the other side of the aisle before you reach the shutdown phase of this conversation. If we fail to fund this government, farmers won't receive their payments and loans they need to stay afloat facing President Trump's tariffs, medical breakthroughs and research will be put on hold, and American servicemembers and thousands of Federal employees across the country will be forced to work without pay. But unfortunately, we have seen little interest on the other side to sit down and talk about it and to reach a compromise. The Republicans control the White House, they control the Senate, they control the House of Representatives, and they have decided the best approach is: Don't negotiate with the Democrats. Give them a ``take it or leave it'' and let's see what happens. Despite knowing since March that government funding was going to run out tonight, President Donald Trump waited until yesterday--yesterday-- to meet with Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer and House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries. What was he waiting for? He understands the President bears major responsibility if a shutdown takes place. Think about it. He waited until the day before the government funding deadline to finally sit down and talk to both political parties. Republican Majority Leader Thune said he is committed to passing appropriations bills through regular order. I agree. I am on the Appropriations Committee. I think we are doing a pretty good job, and we can do better. We also want to pass government spending bills, but we refuse to rubberstamp President Trump's harmful cuts and reckless actions. Yet, instead of being here to do the work of funding our government, the Republicans in the House are gone. They left Washington last week and don't plan to return until next week. That doesn't help at all. The House must stop playing political games and come to work so we can actually avoid this shutdown. Republicans must take responsibility for the government they control--the government they control. White House Republicans are on vacation. Their refusal to prevent a shutdown will ruin millions of Americans' travel plans. During a shutdown, air traffic controllers and TSA employees work without pay. That is not reassuring. This means delays and longer wait times for travelers at airports across the country, just like the last time President Donald Trump shut down the government in 2018 for 35 long days. It took pressure from the air traffic controllers to finally end that Trump shutdown. Our aviation system will continue to bear the effects because a shutdown would pause hiring and training programs for air traffic controllers at a time when we should be improving safety. Does it make you feel more confident to take a flight and realize that that air traffic controller is working without pay or that the testing and training of the air traffic controllers have been delayed because of a shutdown? So the next time you are sitting in an airport and you see your flight delayed, you can thank those who didn't want to sit down and talk before the shutdown faced us. Unfortunately, the Trump administration is preparing to weaponize the shutdown and continue their attacks on the Federal workforce. Without any rhyme or reason, they have been chopping off thousands and thousands of Federal employees. Sometimes employees are doing essential work, and they beg them to come back to work. Some do; some don't. Last week, the Director of the OMB, Russell Vought, sent out a memo stating that any government employee who seeks funding for their role lapse because of a shutdown would be fired if their work does not align with the President's objectives. They are promising a big shutdown of the Federal workforce. These firings jeopardize progress in Federal Agencies--Agencies already indiscriminately gutted by the Trump administration. The Trump administration has begged fired employees to return to work at Agencies like the National Weather Service and the Department of Energy. Even Republican Senators--some--agree that government employees are not pawns to be played with during the debate on government funding. These employees and their families deserve a better boss. But the Trump administration apparently doesn't care. They are content to cause continual chaos across the government to score cheap points. The American people know who is making the government work and who is trying to destroy it. For months, Democrats have been ready and willing to work with Republicans to avoid the awful effects of a shutdown. Why should the average American care about a shutdown? What import does it have to you and your life and your family? It is basic. It is healthcare. That is what this is about on the Democratic side. We think this is a battle worth fighting. We face a prospect of some 24 million Americans either losing their health insurance in the next several weeks or seeing dramatic increases in their premium payments. Some will have to get a different insurance policy with higher deductibles. Some won't be able to afford health insurance at all. Take a look at what the cutback in Medicaid is going to do to hospitals across our country. Illinois is a great State--very diverse, with the beautiful, big city of Chicago and a lot of smaller, rural area towns as well. These rural areas count on hospitals like no other place in our State. They are literally the lifeline. If these hospitals start to close, it not only presents a hardship when it comes to medical care, it hurts the economy of the region. Imagine trying to keep or attract a company to bring their business to your town when you have just lost your hospital. This cutback in the big, beautiful budget bill of the Trump administration of paying into Medicaid is exactly the wrong thing to do for my home State of Illinois and for most other States. We want to make sure that doesn't happen. We want to stop this cutback in healthcare quality and availability across this country. That is what we are holding out for. It isn't some big, beautiful border wall; it is what American families have to pay for health insurance each month. You ought to see the numbers if we don't do anything. The so-called ACA tax credits means there is a helping hand for families in income situations where they are eligible to pay for health insurance. The Republicans eliminated this helping hand, and now that the premiums are going to go up, we have already received notice in Illinois of several insurance companies that have gone out of business. It is a problem--a really serious problem--in terms of the cost of premiums for families. So that is what this is about. Bringing down the government is not a good policy by and large, but neither is cutting the healthcare for 25 million Americans. So that is what we are bringing this issue together on. Can we have a sitdown with Democrats and Republicans and reach an agreement? Yes, we can. We can start tonight. There is no reason why we shouldn't. So I hope that my friends on the other side of the aisle will understand that uninsured Americans and Americans with health insurance that they can't afford is a serious hardship for working families. I hope my Republican colleagues will join us in a bipartisan conversation. It is long overdue. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the Senator from Wyoming is a friend of mine, really. And though we may disagree on some political issues, I greatly respect him and am glad to call him a colleague. But we do disagree on this point that he just made, and it is a very important disagreement because it affects every family in America. The decision was made, in the big beautiful budget bill by Donald Trump, to cut $1 trillion out of Medicaid. Medicaid is a program which helps people who have limited income have health insurance. It also takes care of your mother and grandmother when they are in the nursing home. It is a critical element of funding healthcare in America, and the Republicans cut $1 trillion out of it. If you go to the hospitals in Illinois, some of them are great hospitals, others do great things, but you will find that the hospitals that struggle to survive are ones that have more Medicaid patients than paying insurance patients. It is a tougher margin, and many of them worry about it. And the notion of cutting $1 trillion out of this program worries me. Don't take my word for it. Ask the Illinois Health and Hospital Association or even, if there is one--I am sure there is--the Wyoming Hospital Association what the impact of cutting $1 trillion out of Medicaid reimbursement is going to be: not good, particularly in rural areas. Senator Barrasso made reference to his situation in Wyoming. In the State of Illinois, we have plenty of these rural hospitals, and if one closes, it means your pregnant wife who goes into labor now has to drive 70 miles instead of 20 for that delivery. I would hate to have to go through that. Yet that is what is going to happen. So the position we are taking is that that kind of cut from Medicaid is going to hurt hospitals and hurt people across America. Secondly, there is a tax credit available for people in middle-income categories to buy health insurance. It is part of the Affordable Care Act, which was the Barack Obama plan that extended more health insurance coverage to America than we had ever had in our history. How important is health insurance to you? I had a personal experience as a law student at Georgetown. I had decided I couldn't wait, and I asked a young lady to marry me, and she did. And my second year in law school, we learned that God was sending us a little baby, and we were so happy about it. And she arrived with her share of difficulties. I had no health insurance--none. What do you do--as a student with a wife and a baby, and the baby is sick--when you have no health insurance? Well, Children's Hospital here in Washington, DC, brought us into the so-called charity ward, and we waited to see who would walk through the door with the name ``Doctor So-and-so'' to take care of my daughter. I never felt more inadequate in my life, as a father and a husband, than not having health insurance. We got through it. She got through it too and lived a good life. But the point was there were moments when I worried that I couldn't provide the basics for my baby because I didn't have health insurance, and 15 million Americans will lose their health insurance because of this Republican budget that I just referred to, the big beautiful budget. Fifteen million will lose health insurance. I wouldn't wish that on anybody. So when the Democrats say there are healthcare issues that are part of this debate on funding the government, that is what we are talking about, keeping these hospitals open--critical hospitals in the inner city, as well as in rural areas--making sure that people have their health insurance. And there is one third element I would add that I don't think will be able to be negotiated: medical research. Did you ever hear of the National Institutes of Health? Why, sure you have. It is the best medical research Agency of any government in the world. I went to the NIH about 12 years ago and met with Dr. Francis Collins, an amazing man, who was head of the NIH, and I said to him: I really believe in what you do. Your research in cancer and heart disease and so many other things makes a difference. What can I do to help? Well, he said, thank you for asking. There have been some people who have done remarkable things. I said: Oh, I remember. There was a bipartisan coalition, a few years back, that doubled the budget in medical research for NIH. I said: I wish I could say I could do that again, but I don't think I can. What can I do? He said: Give me and this Agency 5 percent real growth each year in medical research, and we will light up the scoreboard. We are so close--so close--to finding cures and new drugs in so many areas that if you can give us consistent research, it will make a difference. I came back to the Senate. I sat down with my friends on both sides of the aisle. Roy Blunt, a Republican Senator from Missouri, was a leader in this effort. Lamar Alexander, a Republican Senator from Tennessee, was another leader. And Patty Murray is still serving as head of the Appropriations Committee and is one of the best when it comes to medical research. We put our heads together, and over the span of 10 years, the budget for NIH medical research went from $30 billion to $48 billion. We got the 5 percent coming every single year. It was quite an achievement: a 60 percent increase in that budget. Things were happening--good news, good developments when it came to cures and treatments. I was so proud of that effort and glad that it was bipartisan from the start. So what did the Trump budget suggest we do with medical research? Cut it back from $48 billion to $30 billion, where we started 10 years ago. Do you know what happens when you cut back on research that basic? You know what happens, and I do too. When that terrible diagnosis happens at the doctor's office, it breaks your heart. And you finally stop crying, and you say to the doctor: Is there anything you can do? Is there a surgery, a medicine, anything you can do for someone I love very much? And they say: Well, there is a clinical trial. There is medical research underway. It is a longshot, but you have a chance. It is hope. Medical research is hope, and it is one of the areas where I think Donald Trump's cuts are the most heartless cuts of all. Democrats care about this. I do. I am willing to fight over it. I am not willing to say: We will just go on with business as usual. Let's accept this. Let's cut back a trillion dollars out of Medicaid. Let's take 15 million Americans and take away their health insurance. Let's cut back $18 billion of medical research each year. And we will say it is just a clean continuing resolution bill. That is what we are fighting over. Is it important? For me, it is one of the most important things we can do in terms of helping families across America. And let me tell you something that is going on, and you should know about it. You will soon, if you are covered by it. Health insurance has tax treatment that helps you pay the premiums. It makes a dramatic difference. And now, in a matter of days--days--health insurance companies are going to announce what the new premiums are going to be because of the budget bill--the big beautiful budget bill--of President Trump. They are going to go up dramatically. And as these premiums go up, some people won't be able to pay for them, and they will be without health insurance. And others will see their family budget explode with an increased health insurance premium. That is the reality of this debate. It is not about who gets bragging rights and gets to beat on their chest--Democrat or Republican. In my mind, it is a question of whether families across this country can count on us for the basics, and making sure that healthcare is there for America is one of the basics, as far as I am concerned. Department of Justice Mr. President, there is another issue I want to raise that relates to the administration, and you have to go back in history to appreciate it. Richard Nixon--students of history, of course, know that name--was former Vice President of the United States, former Senator. He was a Senator and a Congressman, Vice President under President Eisenhower, and then President of the United States. He went through a period we know as Watergate. It was controversial. Some people broke into the Democratic national headquarters. They were caught. They were prosecuted. When it was all over, we had the Watergate investigation, and, ultimately, President Nixon resigned. But before he resigned, he instructed his staff to give him background information on his enemies list, the people that he considered to be his political enemies. And the word was out that they were going to be treated harshly by his administration, whether it was the Department of Justice or the Internal Revenue Service. Well, we went through that chapter. He resigned. And then Congress came together--Democrats and Republicans--and said: We can never let this happen again. We can't let a President put his finger on somebody and say: That is a political enemy. Go prosecute them. Try to find them guilty of a crime. Make sure they pay a fine. Give them bad publicity. We agreed, on a bipartisan basis, for standards--between the White House, the Department of Justice, and Congress--when it came to these political decisions that could ultimately result in prosecution. Well, under President Trump, we are back into the Nixon conversation about the ``enemies list,'' except President Trump's enemies list is longer than anything Richard Nixon ever dreamed of, and that is what we are looking at now. On September 20, the acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Erik Siebert, announced his resignation. The acting U.S. attorney, appointed by Trump, resigned. Mr. Siebert resisted President Trump's demands to bring charges without sufficient evidence against New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey. Mr. Siebert, a Republican appointed by Donald Trump just a few weeks ago, stayed true to his oath to the Constitution and his commitment to following the facts and the law, and for that, he was forced to resign his office. In his place, President Trump installed his personal attorney--an attorney with no experience as a prosecutor; never did it before--to indict James Comey in a politically motivated case considered by career prosecutors in that office too weak to bring charges. This indictment represents the latest step in President Trump's long crusade to weaponize the Federal Government against his perceived political enemies--a return to the days of Richard Nixon. We remember when the President was initially impeached in the first of his historic two impeachments after he attempted to pressure a foreign ally to dig up dirt against Joe Biden and his family. We remember when President Trump turned a mob of insurrections loose on our Capitol, where they violently attempted to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, leading to his second impeachment. I will never forget that day as long as I live--January 6. It has been my honor to serve in this Chamber 29 years. I have seen a lot. I am honored to represent a great State like Illinois. But I will never forget that moment when we were sitting here counting the electoral college votes as to what the American people had decided of the next President. Vice President Pence was presiding. We were seated in our chairs. I noticed something unusual: Those two doors opened, and four or five people walked in, up to the Vice President, and literally yanked him out of his chair and took him out the door. We knew there was a political demonstration outside, but all of a sudden, it turned bad and scary and dangerous. Capitol Police came in and announced to us seated in this Chamber: Stay at your desks. We are going to make this a safe Chamber here in the Capitol. Don't worry about those people demonstrating outside. They are not going to get close to the Chamber. Just stay where you are. We looked at one another and thought, what is next? Well, what was next was, 10 minutes later, the same policeman came in and said: Leave immediately. Don't take anything with you; just get out of the Chamber. It is too dangerous for you to stay here. We all--Democrats and Republicans--filed out those doors. You know what happened next: The insurrections took over this building. It was one of the most embarrassing moments in the history of the U.S. Capitol Building. Imagine, if you will, for a moment if you heard the news that the House of Commons in Parliament had its door broken down and people raided the chamber. You would say to yourself: What is going on in England, for goodness' sake? The House of Commons taken over by people in the street? That is exactly what happened here, and it happened on January 6. So this President, embarrassed by that moment, maybe--who knows if he is ever embarrassed--decided he would go after the people who prosecuted the insurrections, the people who were prosecuted for crimes like beating up policemen. You all came here today, and we welcome you to this Chamber. The reason you are safe in this building today is a lot of women and men in uniform who are guarding you and me and all of our staff so we can do the people's business. Those people were under attack by the January 6 insurrections. These were not curious tourists who came here. They ended up beating on these police, and 140 of them were seriously injured. If you believe it, in his second administration, the President has gone further than Richard Nixon and what he has done before. His political appointees have fired FBI agents and Federal prosecutors who were called on to prosecute the insurrections. He has installed loyalists whose chief qualification is their loyalty to him, not their loyalty to the law or the Constitution. We recently learned that a top Federal prosecutor in Sacramento was fired after she advised the Border Patrol to comply with a court order. Yes, the Trump administration fired a career prosecutor for following a court order. Never in the history of our country has a President so brazenly demanded the baseless prosecution of his rivals, and he doesn't even try to conceal it or hide it. He glories in this constitutional outrage. In a social media post, President Trump issued a command to Attorney General Bondi: They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5times!), OVER

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, millions of Americans better check their mailbox over the next week or two. There is some bad news. Letters are being sent by health insurance companies that are trying to give some kind of a warning to these families about what is going to happen to their health insurance premiums because of the big beautiful Trump budget bill. One family in Illinois tells the story, Leighanne Safford and her husband Lorry. Right now, Leighanne and Lorry pay $278 a month for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. But starting January 1, their monthly premiums--now get this--jump from $278 a month to $1,800 a month, a 550-percent increase--$1,500 more coming out of the paychecks of Lorry and Leighanne. Why is this happening? Because we have a system, or had a system, that provided subsidies and tax credits to working families so that they could afford their health insurance. However, in the big beautiful budget bill of Donald Trump--passed with every Republican voting for it, every Democrat voting against it--these subsidies and credits started to disappear. Thanks to President Biden and a Democratic Congress, those credits were there for families that they could count on. Because of the Republican decision with President Trump to give tax breaks to the wealthiest people in America, they cut back on the premium assistance that was available to the Safford family. These credits had opened the door to millions of working and middle- class Americans like Leighanne and Lorry to be able to afford quality health insurance. Now they have got to make a choice. This is a lot of money--$1,500 a month. Millions of Americans will decide: Are we going to cut back on essentials like food and dental or switch to a higher deductible plan, more money out-of-pocket if anybody gets sick? Leighanne said: Right now, we're making a decision based on . . . being relatively healthy. But, as we all know, with health, it can change any day. That is the same bind that millions of Americans are going to face because of the Republican decision to give a tax break to the wealthiest people in America. According to the Congressional Budget Office, more than 4 million American families are going to lose their health insurance if Congressional Republicans allow these subsidies to expire, and that is what is going to happen if we don't change, including more than 100,000 in my State of Illinois. It doesn't have to be this way. We can extend these tax credits and still fund government. I remember a time in this Chamber when Democrats and Republicans came together on a bipartisan basis when real family challenges existed and tried to solve the problem. We just don't have that spirit here anymore. They have decided on the Republican side, we are going to give tax breaks to these wealthy people, even at the expense of working families. And we have a President hell-bent on abusing his power and a Republican Congress that refuses to disagree with him. Earlier this year, President Trump and Republicans in Congress signed into law this Big Beautiful Bill. It cuts nearly a trillion dollars from programs like Medicaid. What is Medicaid important for? Limited- income families and retired individuals. This big beautiful Republican budget bill cuts nearly a trillion dollars from Medicaid and $300 billion from the Food Stamp Program, now known as SNAP. As a result of their bill, the Republican bill, more than 10 million Americans will lose their health coverage. Ever had a child who was sick and no health insurance? I have. You will never forget it as long as you live. This is separate from 4 million others who stand to lose their health coverage if the Republicans continue to block our efforts with the ACA tax credits. It seems Republicans in Congress are fine adding more than 3 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years to pay for those tax cuts, but they draw the line at extending healthcare to millions of hard-working Americans. The math is clear. Republicans don't have the votes to force this extreme agenda. Government requires input from both sides. We are taking a stand for this family and millions more just like them. When they get the jolt of the news of where their health insurance premium is going to go, where do they turn? I hope they can turn to Congress and Members of the Senate who actually care for working families. If we refuse to do the job, Leighanne and Lorry are going to pay the price. Let's be clear, Democrats stand ready to negotiate on a fair bipartisan basis. The only reason we are staring at this shutdown is because Republicans have refused to come to the table. There was a meeting at the White House today. Don't let it be the last one. Let's come together and fix this healthcare problem for working families. The President on FOX News said last week: Don't even bother dealing with the Democrats. Well, the President is wrong. We are in this together. We need to solve this problem together. If the government shuts down, it will be because of President Trump walking away from a major challenge facing working families. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Paul Harvey was a radio commentator. He used to say ``And now for the rest of the story.'' I would like to respond to my friend from Wyoming's comments he just made on the floor of the Senate. One of the proposals Democrats stand by is to reestablish the tax credit for Americans who are buying their health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. It could be up to 15 million Americans stand to lose their health insurance coverage because of changes in the law on the big beautiful Trump budget bill. Among those who stand to feel hardship, at least, or maybe lose their insurance, are some 60,000 residents of the State of Wyoming. Last night, Senators came to the floor to discuss this issue of the cost of health insurance, which is going to go up dramatically for many Americans as of the 1st of October. The example was given by Senator Welch of Vermont of an individual making $80,000 a year in the State of Wyoming, which he would see his ACA health insurance premiums go up $3,000, $3,000 a month--$3,000. I doubt that many of us could put that sum on the table without some sacrifice. Many people would end up giving up their health insurance entirely. This was referred to as a liberal radical idea to protect that tax credit which was taken away by the Republicans in their big beautiful Trump budget bill. I don't think it is radical. If you have ever lived without health insurance and had a sick child in your family, you will never forget it. I have been through that experience. So this notion that this is a radical idea is wrong. The Senator from Wyoming goes on to say that we are cutting out $50 billion in a special program for hospitals across America. What he doesn't tell you is that that $50 billion was a small lifesaver put in the Big Beautiful Bill because the Republicans voted to eliminate $1 trillion in Medicaid spending, an essential program for small town and rural hospitals. So we restore--in addition to the ACA tax credit, we restored the $1 trillion which was in the Medicaid Program, which will spare many of these hospitals from closing. So when you look at the specifics of the situation when it comes to healthcare, this really makes a difference. I also want to tell you that the policy, healthcare policy that we currently see with this administration is frightening. Let me tell you a story. When I was growing up as a little boy in East St. Louis, IL, we were afraid of polio. One of our classmates would go to school healthy in the morning and would be paralyzed before dinner. When I was in the first grade, my friend disappeared for weeks. When I asked where she went, they just shook their heads and said ``Polio.'' When she finally returned, she couldn't walk without leg braces. I will never forget the agony I saw on her face. For decades, polio ravaged America, killing and paralyzing thousands of people a year and then--and then--a vaccine was discovered. The Salk vaccine was a miracle. By 1979, polio was eradicated in the United States. A disease that struck fear in the heart of everyone soon became--thank God--a distant memory. We repeated that success early this century with diseases like measles and rubella. Unfortunately, those vaccine victories are now under attack by the Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy, Jr. His actions threaten to reverse 50 years of progress in infectious disease treatment and prevention. Let me tell you about the chaos that has occurred at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention since Secretary Kennedy was confirmed. In February, Secretary Kennedy moved to fire--dismiss--more than 1,000 CDC staff members. That is 10 percent of the workforce. This included key members of the Agency's pandemic prevention and laboratory safety staff. In August, he fired Dr. Susan Monarez from her position as Director of the CDC, despite the fact that she had been nominated by President Trump and confirmed by every Senate Republican just weeks before. Yesterday Dr. Monarez testified before the Senate HELP Committee about the circumstances surrounding her firing, and the revelations in her testimony were deeply, deeply troubling. Dr. Monarez told the committee that Secretary Kennedy plans to upend our Nation's vaccine recommendation schedules this month. You see, the CDC's vaccine advisory committee meets regularly to make recommendations based on science on what vaccines Americans should receive at various points in their life. States use these recommendations, professional medical recommendations, to develop guidelines for what vaccines our children should receive. Health insurance companies are required to cover the full cost of the recommended vaccines from this panel. Unfortunately, Secretary Kennedy unilaterally fired all of the members of the CDC Vaccine Advisory Committee, many of whom were infectious disease and vaccine experts. He fired them all. He replaced them with people who have espoused anti-vaccine views and aligned with extreme health- related conspiracy theories. This new panel is set to meet today, and I fear they are about to upend decades of progress in preventing unnecessary illness by wiping out recommendations and access to childhood vaccines. Dr. Monarez testified yesterday that she was fired from not preemptively agreeing to rubberstamp these new vaccine formulas absent scientific evidence that changes would warrant. Think about that. Secretary Kennedy fired President Trump's pick to head the CDC because she insisted that the Agency's vaccine recommendations be actually backed by science. Many States who see this anti-vaccine movement at the highest levels of our government are taking things to an even further extreme. Florida announced it would end most of its vaccine requirements, and other Republican States are likely to follow suit. The rising vaccine skepticism promoted by Secretary Kennedy and the Trump administration will cause a resurgence in preventable disease across America. In Texas, two unvaccinated children died from measles earlier this year, the first such deaths in America in 10 years. Louisiana is experiencing its worse whooping cough outbreak in 35 years. More than 30 infants have been hospitalized, and many were not vaccinated with the DTaP vaccine that could have protected them. Tragically, two of these infants have already died. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., will be the first Secretary of HHS with a body count. He is a danger to the children of America. Kennedy's onslaught has targeted more than just vaccines; he and President Trump have spearheaded a historic level of dysfunction at the National Institutes of Health. They have frozen medical research funding and fired scientists and researchers. Think about that. This is going to make America great again--firing medical researchers? I have been a supporter of the NIH in all the time I have served in Congress. The research gives people hope when they are faced with devastating diagnoses. For 10 years, I have been part of a bipartisan task force to raise the NIH research budget. In those 10 years, we increased the budget by more than 60 percent, raising it from $30 billion to $48 billion today. But Trump and Kennedy's proposed budgets for next year eliminates this $18 billion increase in medical research. Every penny of the increase I fought for for the last 10 years is gone with this Trump budget. It will mean fewer novel cures and treatments for patients who need them. It will dramatically reduce research into Alzheimer's, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. They have been suspended because of the Trump- Kennedy cuts. Does anybody believe that America is greater as a nation with less cancer research? I don't. Patients desperate for cures for horrible conditions like glioblastoma are in agony today because President Trump and Secretary Kennedy canceled the research funding they depend on. Secretary Kennedy's cuts will stifle a generation of researchers and jeopardize our medical research infrastructure. We will feel the effects of this rash decision for decades to come. I call on my Republican colleagues to stand up to this public health massacre. Some of the Members are doctors or parents themselves who have vaccinated their kids or spent their careers trying to improve our healthcare system. My colleagues know that Secretary Kennedy is unqualified, unhinged, and dangerous, and I hope they will find the courage to join me and speak out against the terrible decisions he has fostered. If they don't, I fear there will be dire consequences if we allow Secretary Kennedy to continue to serve in a role where lives are on the line, and he is clearly unqualified. I yield the floor.