Chuck Grassley

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Happy news in the fight against fraud: This week, the White House Task Force to Eliminate Fraud took steps to stop fraud and to prevent bad actors from gaming ObamaCare. The administration is working to stop fraudulent and improper ObamaCare enrollment. Now, just think, over 600,000 consumers attested to unauthorized enrollment or plan switching. This task force has the potential to save billions in taxpayer dollars. This action will ensure resources are only going to those who are eligible and have signed up or authorized their enrollment. Too often, taxpayer money is lost to fraud, waste, and abuse. This not only wastes taxpayer dollars, but it also limits how effectively those dollars could be used to help the most vulnerable: those people that Medicaid and ObamaCare were intended to serve. The administration's action complements my work in the Senate and the work of Iowa's Representatives Hinson, Miller-Meeks, Nunn, and Feenstra in the House, accomplished when we passed the 2025 Working Families Tax Cut law. The tax cuts law not only prevented the largest tax increase in American history, but it also established program integrity reforms to stop fraud, waste, and abuse as well as preserve programs like Medicaid and ObamaCare. In the past year, I have come to this floor highlighting how my own oversight along with inspector general audits and Government Accountability Office reports have found taxpayer dollars being wasted on deceased enrollment and providers, enrollees participating in two different State Medicaid Programs and who are dually enrolled in Medicaid and ObamaCare, excess ObamaCare subsidies not being paid back, and consumers being fraudulently enrolled in ObamaCare. The Working Families Tax Cut Act put an end to much of this fraud, waste, and abuse in the Medicaid and Obama programs. To bolster these efforts, last month I introduced a bill with the title ``Healthcare Fraud Prevention and Improvement Act.'' This bill will improve and will invest in the Healthcare Fraud and Abuse Control Program. That program was created to combat fraud across Federal health programs. But that program needs improvement. Federal healthcare spending is expected to exceed $24 trillion over the next decade. Through the Working Families Tax Cut Act and by improving the Healthcare Fraud and Abuse Control Program, we can crack down on bad actors stealing the taxpayer's money and really protect resources for the most vulnerable Americans. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, last year, my Republican colleagues and I enacted the Working Families Tax Cut Act, which prevented the largest tax hike in our Nation's history. Not a single Democratic Senator voted for it. This bill made permanent tax reforms that were enacted in 2017 and expanded on that 2017 tax bill, allowing taxpayers to keep more of their hard-earned money. This included provisions that reduced tax bills of individuals and families as well as pro-growth tax policies critical to boosting domestic business and employee wages. Without the 2025 tax bill, we would have had the largest tax increase in the history of the country. Now, this Working Families Tax Cut Act also fulfilled President Trump's campaign promises to have no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and expanded tax relief for our senior citizens. It also increased and indexed the child tax credit, and it allowed for the deduction of interest on car loans. Truly, this is a working family tax bill cut. But a great new tax exemption was created to encourage savings and particularly to start at an early young age. The law has in it an innovative new savings tool for children under 18 called Trump Accounts. These new savings accounts opened for contributions on July 5 and, according to the White House, over the next 5 days, families invested $125 million in these new accounts for children. In addition to family contribution, there are over 50 companies committed to offer Trump Account contributions for children of their own employees. Moreover, a growing list of philanthropists and nonprofits are pledging to make donations to Trump Accounts. Just as one example, Michael and Susan Dell have pledged to contribute $250 to the first 25 million accounts established for children 10 and under. The Working Families Tax Cut is lowering tax bills. It is, at the same time, invigorating the economy and at the same time helping a new generation build financial security. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, my colleagues know that I come to the floor quite often to talk about the issue of ethanol and the benefits of E15 for the State of Iowa but also for the whole country. So I would remind my colleagues that year-round E15 does, in fact, benefit people across the country even though Iowans probably talk about it more than any other State in the Nation. It benefits not only consumers, who can see, at least sometimes, 40 cents per gallon in savings at the gas pump, but I want to also remind you that farmers in every State benefit because, you see, the only grain in the United States that grows in all 50 States is corn. Corn produces ethanol and is the key to American-grown fuel we call E15. America is the largest producer of corn in the world. While my home State of Iowa grows the most corn, farmers across the Midwest in this country benefit from permanent year-round E15. Economists have estimated that it would put $14 billion more in the economy through the increased price of corn. In addition, then, passing year-round E15 helps every State by adding $25.8 billion to the gross domestic product. It is good for consumers' pocketbooks, for our environment, for our rural communities, and for our national security. Now I am going to turn to something that I am asking President Trump to do because he has done similar things--from chips for China--or President Nixon 55 years ago did it for the consumers of America when he put embargoes on soybeans. Another key way to help farmers is lowering diesel prices. So along the lines of embargoes I just talked about, I encourage President Trump to put a temporary embargo on diesel exports through Executive action. It will help family farmers who feed and fuel the world. I have recently been reading some commentary, probably from Big Oil, where it is very difficult--because there are different kinds of diesel, that it might be difficult to separate it from exports and things of that nature. So another way Big Oil could handle this would be to just sell diesel in the United States at a cheaper price than you sell it overseas. I am going to continue pushing to give farmers and consumers across the country the stability they deserve by making year-round E15 permanent and finding ways to lower diesel prices. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today is Constitution Day. On September 17, 1787, 39 delegates signed the U.S. Constitution in Philadelphia. They set forth an experiment rooted in American exceptionalism: Government authority comes from ``We the People,'' the first words of the preamble to the Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is the only founding document of any country in the history of humankind that is meant to protect the people from the government. Other constitutions throughout history were written to give the government power over the people. That is why the United States is unique, and that is why we continue to say that the United States is an exceptional system of government. There are some in this country who want to fundamentally change the U.S. Constitution. In recent months, there is an organization within the Democrat Party that call themselves the Democratic Socialists of America. Their document wants to abolish the Senate. That document would uproot our system of checks and balances. That system would rip up our Constitution and draft a new one--particularly when some of them are saying they want a parliamentary system of government like other countries, particularly in Europe, have. Democratic socialism of America is antithetical to America's promise of prosperity and the founding principles enshrined in our great Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is now 239 years old this very day, and the principles that it embodies are timeless. On this Constitution Day, September 17, it is my hope that Americans of all ages will reflect upon the blessings of freedom handed down from one generation to the next. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, this past Friday, our Nation marked the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks. I will never forget that day. That morning, after my weekly interview with Iowa radio networks, the U.S. Capitol was evacuated, and I remember officers pounding on my door here in the Capitol office: You have got to get out of here. No one knew right then that nearly 3,000 lives would be lost in that morning's attack or that more than 8,000 people would die from post-9/ 11 illnesses. Now, a quarter of a century later, more than one-third of the U.S. population is too young to remember the terrorists' attacks. So we need to carry history forward so that we never forget and keep our country safe. We all know that, under the Constitution, national security is the No. 1 responsibility of the Federal Government. As a Federal policymaker, I have worked to ensure that we don't repeat the mistakes that led to the intelligence failures preceding 9/11 and that the missions of the intelligence community, the U.S. military, and Homeland Security are effectively and efficiently serving the American people. On this solemn 25th anniversary, let's recommit ourselves to the spirit of America and never forget the lives that were lost on 9/11 and in the years that followed. We honor the memory of those who have passed and carry forward the legacy and uncommon courage of the heroic first responders, survivors, servicemembers, and their loved ones. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I want to pay tribute to a friend and longtime supporter, who was a lifelong champion for the family farmer and highly respected leader for innovation and conservation that he put into practice on his own family farm in southwest Iowa. Today would have been his 74th birthday. On Saturday, September 5, Ray Gaesser passed away unexpectedly after a farming accident, a heartbreaking loss to his beloved family and a big loss to the farming community. Like many farmers across Iowa, Ray never stopped working. He started farming as a teenager alongside his dad in southern Indiana. When he married his wife Elaine, they began Gaesser Farms on a few hundred acres near Corning, the county seat of Adams County. With more than 50 years of farming under his belt, his farming operation eventually expanded to thousands of acres that he worked with Elaine and their son Chris. A lifelong steward of the soil, Ray practiced what he preached. Conservation was central to his farming operation, and he was a tireless pioneer for sustainability, clean energy, and water quality. Decades ago, he implemented terraces, grass waterways, turn areas, 100- percent no-till planting, and cover crops to conserve the land and strengthen Earth's natural resources. Ray was widely respected in his southwest Iowa farming community. To be sure, his voice and advocacy on behalf of American agriculture carried near and far, from podcasts to the policymaking table around the world and in Washington, DC. Throughout his 73 years, Ray burned the midnight oil on the tractor seat and extracted every minute out of the day. He traveled around the globe, sharing stories with farmers about feeding the world, participating at UN Climate meetings, and testifying before Congress on Capitol Hill. A dedicated member of the Iowa Soybean Association, serving as its president from 2006 to 2007, Ray went on to serve as president of the American Soybean Association from 2013 to 2014. His resume reflects his commitment to conservation and forging consensus to address challenges facing the future of farming. Among his many hats, Ray held leadership positions on the Iowa Soybean Promotion Board, the Iowa Economic Development Agriculture Advisory Board, the Iowa Conservative Energy Forum, the North American Climate Smart Agriculture Alliance, and the International Soybean Growers Alliance. He served as cochair of the Iowa Conservation Infrastructure Initiative and was named Iowa Master Farmer in 2012 and American Soybean Distinguished Leader in 2018. In 2014, Ray cofound Solutions from the Land and was a tireless crusader for renewable energy, including biomass, wind, solar, and hydropower. Ray understood that proper stewardship of God's natural resources can produce bountiful rewards for the Nation's food and energy security. Just like he never punted on hard work on the farm, he rolled up his sleeves to making things work when a solution seemed out of reach. From climate change to water quality and carbon sequestration, Ray didn't avoid political hot potatoes. He immersed himself and brought stakeholders together on transcendent issues of our time: feeding the world, conserving resources, providing clean water, and producing renewable energy takes a coalition of the willing. In his words, ``When we work together, we all benefit.'' In 2021, Ray was nominated by U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to serve on USDA's Agricultural Technical Advisory Committee for Trade in grains, feed, oilseeds, and planting seeds. In this role, Ray brought decades of farming experience and dirt underneath his fingernails to the ears of the Nation's top ag and trade leaders to ensure Iowa soybean farmers were heard during global trade negotiations. He served as a commissioner on the Iowa Department of Transportation since 2022. Ray was a gifted leader and communicator. He used his talents and work ethic to share a pragmatic vision for resiliency and sustainability in agriculture. A son of the soil, Ray wanted to ensure the land could feed the world and sustain livelihoods for generations of farmers yet to come. From my annual county meetings and policy discussions in my office in Washington, I appreciated Ray's enthusiasm and expertise. He was an impactful problem-solver who effectively leveraged levity and bone deep passion for farming that connected stakeholders and made a difference. Ray was a faith-filled servant leader, a family man, and a farmer who was called home to the Lord. I have no doubt he will continue doing the Lord's work among the angels, but as his friend, I will miss his advocacy for the family farmer, good-natured outlook on life, and warm, welcoming smile. Barbara and I extend our condolences to his wife Elaine and his two children Chris and Jennifer.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, later today, I hope the Senate will vote to confirm the nomination of Todd Blanche to be Attorney General. I support his nomination, and I urge my colleagues to vote for him. Mr. Blanche is nominated to one of the most important offices in our country, and he has shown that he is up to that task. His impressive background and the presentation at our hearing in the Judiciary Committee are proof that he has led the Justice Department with distinction and is well suited to continue doing that. During his hearing, Mr. Blanche answered questions for more than 5 hours. His testimony reinforced what we already knew about his proven record as Acting Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General. Mr. Blanche is a tough, fair prosecutor, dedicated to the rule of law, and his leadership instills that same zeal throughout the entire Justice Department. Mr. Blanche began his career clerking for two Federal judges, two Federal judges that were appointed by different political parties of the Presidency. He then spent nearly a decade as a Federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York. During that time, Mr. Blanche handled a wide array of criminal matters, including narcotic trafficking and violent crimes. Mr. Blanche eventually entered private practice, where he had a very successful career with many high-profile cases. But his love of country brought him back to the public service that he is in right now, repeating again serving as Deputy Attorney General and now as Acting Attorney General. Throughout his career, Mr. Blanche demonstrated an unwavering commitment to public service and the fair administration of justice. At his hearing and many times since, I have detailed the successes of the Justice Department under Mr. Blanche's leadership. Indeed, the statistics prove that Americans are safer with Mr. Blanche at the helm. So let's look at that picture. Under his leadership, fraud enforcement efforts have been ramped up; arrests of violent crimes and criminals engaged in child exploitation have increased; terrorist plots have been successfully thwarted; massive quantities of illegal firearms and harmful drugs, especially like fentanyl, have been seized. So, as a result, the United States has the lowest murder rate since 1900, and crime trends throughout the country have declined. According to the Council of Criminal Justice's 2026 midyear report, the reported rates for homicide have dropped 51 percent from its peak 9 years ago; carjacking dropped 73 percent; residential burglaries down 56 percent; motor vehicle thefts down 51 percent. Now, you could go on and on with a whole bunch of other statistics because, according to this report, every single violent crime category and nearly all property crime categories have dropped below prepandemic levels, and that didn't happen by accident. It happened, why? Because Mr. Blanche refocused the Justice Department on keeping Americans safe. That is the sort of impact we should want and should expect from the Justice Department and any Attorney General that heads that Department. And that is what Mr. Blanche has delivered. We heard about it at Mr. Blanche's hearing. The committee heard a heart-wrenching testimony from an Angel Mom, Jennifer Bos. She told us about her daughter's tragic and gruesome death. She explained the importance of Mr. Blanche's focus on keeping Americans safe. Ms. Bos stated: I couldn't save my daughter, but with Todd Blanche as Attorney General, he might save yours because next time it could be your child. It could be your family. It could be you. This sentiment was shared in the outpouring of support the committee received for Mr. Blanche's nomination. Three hundred Angel Moms wrote a letter thanking Mr. Blanche for prioritizing victims and focusing the Department's efforts on stopping illegal immigration, ending drug and human trafficking, and protecting America's communities from violent crime. The committee also received several letters from major law enforcement organizations that collectively represent hundreds of thousands of law enforcement officers all across our country. They praise Mr. Blanche's focus on public safety, the rule of law, and his unwavering support for law enforcement professionals, the people that risk their lives daily to protect our families and our communities. In total, the committee received more than 30 letters supporting Mr. Blanche's nomination. These include more than 100 former Justice Department attorneys, chiefs of staff, U.S. attorneys, and other senior officials. Mr. Blanche's nomination was also supported by multiple former Attorneys General, including John Ashcroft and Bill Barr. These former Attorneys General know what it takes to run the Justice Department. Now, between his proven track record, his presentations to our committee, and the support he has received from across the country, I am convinced Mr. Blanche is the right choice to lead the Justice Department. A vote for Todd Blanche is a vote for the safety of the American people. That is a vote the American people deserve, and that is a vote that I am proud to cast. So I urge all my colleagues to join me in voting to confirm Mr. Blanche as Attorney General.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am here to show my support for the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act. Before I do that, I want to express my support for the proposed continuing resolution and thank Senator Collins for her leadership to make sure government doesn't shut down if that continuing resolution gets to the President. Now, I do prefer passing 12 appropriations bills. And while I do that, I can say at the same time, it is my opportunity to tell my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work with us and get the job done to avoid a government shutdown. Funding the Federal Government is a core responsibility of Congress. The fiscal year begins October 1 each year. If appropriations bills are not signed into law by September 30, lawmakers and the President must agree on the temporary spending resolution that is known as a continuing resolution. That resolution keeps the government open for business. If that fails, the unfunded parts of government shut down. Now, with increasing frequency, the minority party has used the threat or reality of a government shutdown to try and advance partisan political priorities. Over the past 10 years, we have seen five government shutdowns. Three of them--one a full shutdown, and two partial shutdowns--have occurred in just the past 9 months. Unfortunately, it looks like we could be headed for a fourth before the end of the year. History has repeatedly shown that shutting down the government is not only bad policy; it is bad politics. It has also shown not to be a great bargaining tool. By a bargaining tool, I mean there is some group of Senators or sometimes an individual Senator will say: We are going to shut the government down until I get some policy, that that individual wants or that group of people want. And you know what? Eventually, government opens up and the bargaining tool instrument has not served the purpose of the Members that shut down the government. It is a simple fact it costs taxpayers money to shut down the government and even more to reopen it. And in a time of fiscal crisis like we have now, you shouldn't be wasting that kind of money. A government shutdown reduces essential services to the American people, erodes the trust of the American people in their government, and limits the ability of Congress to conduct oversight over Federal Government operations. I believe Congress needs to stop governing from crisis to crisis, respect the appropriations process, and fulfill its constitutional responsibilities to fund the government. For that reason--and the reason I am here today is to talk about the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act. That act is introduced by Senator Lankford and Senator Hassan. This bill would make government shutdowns a thing of the past by providing an automatic continuing resolution should Congress fail to complete its job of passing appropriations bills on time. Moreover, it would implement rules designed to enforce the commonsense principle that if Congress doesn't do its job, Congress doesn't go home. Congress needs to work through regular order to fund the government Agencies to avoid our ``Groundhog Day'' approach to spending each year. Americans deserve better. They should not be asked to pay a price for congressional dysfunction. It is past time that we put an end to the recurring political sideshow of government shutdowns, so that is why I say: Let's enact the Prevent Government Shutdowns Act by Senator Lankford and Senator Hassan. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, in a bipartisan approach, about 5 years ago, we passed legislation to correct the wrongs in our organ transplant program. So, in my two decades spent fighting for U.S. organ donation reforms, I have heard far too many stories of patients who have lost their lives due to the negligence and abuse of that transplant system. Recently, I requested the Government Accountability Office--GAO for short--to study and to report back to me about the challenges and the opportunities to improve pediatric organ allocation and transplantation, and that is a particularly difficult operation for the people that are involved in distributing organs. We have about 2,000 kids on a waiting list for organ transplants, and 25 percent of that 2,000 are under the age of 5. Pediatric patients have limited time and opportunity to receive an organ transplant, as organ size is critical to successful transplantation. And this is especially true for kids waiting for liver transplants. Sadly, 1 in 10 infants listed for liver transplants never get a second chance at life. The organ procurement and transplantation system could do a better job of serving kids. We know that if a child can get an organ transplant in a timely manner, their chances of living a healthy, longer life increase. I am hopeful that GAO's findings will inform better oversight of the current organ system, and I am also hopeful that these same GAO findings will inform data-driven policymaking to improve the system for children and their families. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I come to the floor today as a member of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over Social Security, and to remind everybody--because everybody knows or better know--that the Social Security primary trust fund will be depleted in just 6 years. As a result, come late 2032, the program will only have enough income from the payroll taxes to pay 78 percent of benefits due. That surplus was built up since a Republican, President Reagan, and a Democrat, then-Speaker Tip O'Neill, sat down and said: We can't let anything bad happen to Social Security. So they put a plan together that passed almost unanimously in this U.S. Senate. I presume those two gentlemen--bipartisan they were--they thought it may only extend the program for 20 years or something. But as we see now, they had a plan that built up the surplus for the next 50 years, and that runs out in 2032. In other words, to emphasize, unless Congress acts quickly, retirees will see a 22-percent cut in their benefits, about the same as what Reagan and O'Neill saw happening in 1983. So this statistic alone should motivate the Congress to act expeditiously to ensure no disruption of benefits occur. Unfortunately, Congress has a tendency to put off action until too late and at the last moment. This is never the best approach. But with respect to addressing the Social Security funding shortfall, it poses a serious risk not only to the tens of millions of retirees but also a risk to the national economy. As a recent Mercatus Center paper documents, waiting until the last minute to act on Social Security puts this vital program on a collision course with the Nation's growing fiscal crisis. The longer Congress waits to act, the more likely it is that any solution to Social Security will lean heavily on debt financing to bridge the funding gap. And that is how it is tied to the entire national economy. So come 2032, the Nation will already have outstanding debt larger than at any time in the Nation's history relative to the size of our economy. Flooding the bond market with trillions of dollars in new debt, in short order, then risks setting off a chain of events leading to a fiscal crisis. Bond markets are likely to demand higher interest rates to absorb all the national debt. In other words, Congress needs to act in the same way that Reagan and Tip O'Neill acted in a bipartisan fashion, in 1983, to preserve Social Security. A bigger problem faces us today, and we should have a bipartisan agreement in this town, including a President who wants to get Social Security on a financially sound basis. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today at the U.S. Capitol and the National Cathedral, at those places, we honored the life of Senator Lindsey Graham. Over the past few weeks, we have mourned Senator Graham's untimely passing. Here on the Senate floor and in committees, I and my colleagues have spent time honoring his life and recalling fond memories. Senator Graham loved this country. His forceful and quick-witted presence continues to be missed. Barbara and I continue praying for Senator Graham's family and newly appointed Senator Darline Graham. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, all Americans--but I can't speak for all Americans. But I want to thank President Trump for his efforts to release Pastor Ezra Jin after 266 days in Chinese captivity. Pastor Jin started Zion Church in 2007 to share his love of God, to serve others, and to worship peacefully. Following the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, his church and its community were among the first responders. They even hosted blood drives in Beijing to help those who were impacted by the earthquake. But on October 10, last year, Pastor Jin was detained with other leaders in the Zion Church. Now, you might find yourself asking: Why was he arrested? In communist governments, any belief system that places moral authority and fosters independent communities beyond government control is a challenge to the regime in power. This Senator does not see how preaching the love of Jesus Christ is a threat to any communist government, but they do. That is why the Chinese Communist Party seeks to control religion through state-run religious organizations. Today, authorities suppress independent churches and target any individuals who worship outside of the state-sanctioned controlled institutions. Many Christians seeking to practice their faith free of government control have to fear their identity being discovered and then facing punishment or even imprisonment. This is precisely what happened to Pastor Jin. His only offense was leading an independent Christian congregation and exercising his fundamental freedom to worship without Chinese Government interference. In November of 2025, the Senate passed a bipartisan resolution that condemned the Chinese Communist Party's persecution of religious groups, including Pastor Jin and the leaders of the Zion Church. In March of this year, I joined a congressional letter to President Trump asking that he advocate for Pastor Jin's release in a meeting that he recently had with the Chinese President. Today, we can celebrate that Pastor Jin is finally free. But our work is not finished. We must continue to speak out for those who cannot speak for themselves and stand firmly in defense of religious freedom. Along this same line--not in China but someplace in Africa--I heard yesterday, in my attendance at the 105th Cedar Falls, IA, Bible Conference, that there has been a pastor in Africa that has been kidnapped, and they wanted us to pray for him. And, hopefully, our government is helping, to some extent, to free him as well. I don't know his name. They didn't want to give out the name. But this stuff that happens in China and around the world, you can't understand how it can happen because it seems to me the peaceful approach of Christians is something that shouldn't be challenged or feared by any type of government anyplace on this globe. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, Iowans are fed up with their taxpayers' dollars being lost every year to waste, fraud, and abuse. As a watchdog for those taxpayers, I have helped lead the charge to stop brazen criminals from stealing Americans' hard-earned dollars. So that is why I am proud to be a cosponsor of my colleague from Iowa Senator Ernst's bill. That bill is entitled the ``Protecting American Taxpayers Act.'' I thank Senator Ernst so much for her hard work putting this piece of legislation together, and I also thank her for her hard work chairing the Small Business Committee of the Senate. Now to the purpose of this legislation: According to the Government Accountability Office--GAO for short--the Federal Government loses annually anywhere between $233 billion to $521 billion to fraud. This comprehensive legislation cracks down on the fraudsters, protects the taxpayers' dollars, and curbs wasteful spending. The bill includes 16 bipartisan initiatives. And I think when you talk about 16 bipartisan initiatives, that ought to tell some of our constituents that think Republicans never talk to Democrats and vice versa that that is the wrong information permeating our great country. So the 16 bipartisan initiatives, 1 of them is my bill that I entitled ``Expanding Whistleblower Protection for Contractors Act,'' which then expands whistleblower protections for government contractors and grantees--just like we give whistleblower protection to people that are employees of the Federal Government. It is obvious we need all eyes and ears within the Federal bureaucracy to stay wide open and remove the muzzle that Federal Agencies use to intimidate patriotic whistleblowers from reporting wrongdoing. The bill that I am sponsoring--1 of these 16 bipartisan initiatives-- is in there to solve that problem. The U.S. Treasury is not a piggy bank for fraudsters to exploit and drain public assistance programs for their own profit. This anti-fraud package will stop fraud and return money to the taxpayers. Thanks again to Senator Ernst. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, once again, I am here to educate my colleagues about the necessity for passing the ethanol issue of E15 in this Congress. As Iowa families are going on their summer vacations and people visit or pass through my home State, we are seeing the evidence in Iowa that drivers are demanding E15 with their pocketbooks. New data from the Iowa Department of Revenue shows Iowa drivers purchased 47 million gallons of E15 in May. This is a new monthly record. That puts E15 on track to be about 50 percent of all gasoline sales in Iowa in 2026, up from 27 percent last year. Drivers know that E15 delivers lower costs for families, saving them up to 40 cents per gallon. This can be hundreds of dollars per year, giving working families more money for groceries, housing, and necessities. When Iowans are allowed to make choices at the pump, more are choosing E15. The growth of E15 in Iowa shows that American consumers want this chance to save money. This is another reason why the Senate must pass year-round E15, putting $14 billion more in the pockets of farmers with the increased price of corn.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, on a second matter, I want to talk about Caitlin Clark, a native of West Des Moines, IA. Caitlin Clark played basketball at the University of Iowa. She changed women's college basketball but also inspired athletes of all ages across all sports. She plays professionally for the Indiana Fever. Since joining the professional ranks 3 years ago, Caitlin has been the subject of very unfair treatment on the basketball court, and the referees are not doing their job. Recently, she got a fist to her throat by a player. Yet, the refs at the time did not call a foul. I am glad that the WNBA corrected this matter a few days later by charging a foul and suspending the player, but the unfair treatment of Caitlin and others in the WNBA has got to stop. Officials are human, but we have seen time after time where Caitlin has suffered physically--beyond what you would expect in competitive professional sports--with little accountability from the people that run the WNBA or from the referees. So I hope for Caitlin--and for the growth of women's basketball-- things improve quickly in the WNBA. Caitlin is a generational talent. Her hard work and dedication should be rewarded, not penalized. She has revolutionized WNBA. Attendance has shot up since she has been with the Indiana Fever, and income has shot up for the league and their teams. Salaries for players went from five figures to six figures, all because of her playing. So every player of all teams are better off. They should be thanking Caitlin as opposed to mistreating her on the floor. Someday I would like to meet Caitlin Clark. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

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

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I come to the floor once again, as I have before, to discuss misleading reporting in the New York Times. The New York Times has a global reputation. They work hard to maintain that. So I don't understand why their journalists can miss so many important facts. This time the misleading article was written by Devlin Barrett and a second one was written by Charlie Savage. Barrett's article discusses the White House's release of government records about an alleged scheme by China to meddle in the 2020 election. The records at issue showed that FBI personnel suppressed intelligence of that alleged Chinese interference. Barrett's article said, in part: Mr. Grassley and others have cited the Albany memo as evidence that F.B.I. leaders covered up evidence that China might be taking aggressive steps to interfere with the U.S. election results in 2020, because admitting it might contradict prior testimony to Congress from then-F.B.I. Director Wray. That is not what I said when I made those records public. That is what the FBI said 6 years ago. The Albany memo, as the New York Times called it, is actually an FBI memo. It contained information from an FBI Confidential Human Source and was titled by the FBI. The titles by the FBI: Chinese Government Production and Export of Fraudulent U.S. Driver's Licenses to Chinese Sympathizers in the United States, in Order to Create Tens of Thousands of Fraudulent Mail-in Votes for US Presidential Candidate Joe Biden, in late August 2020. End of the FBI title. Let me emphasize what I said. The memo was an FBI memo based on an FBI Confidential Human Source. It was not a Chuck Grassley-created memo. The FBI analyst involved said the FBI memo ``was coordinated and disseminated in textbook fashion.'' But based on the records the FBI provided to me, the allegations weren't fully investigated at the time because the FBI decided to recall its own memo. The FBI also described the FBI's sources as competent and authentic with reporting. So let the FBI do their job and investigate. An FBI analyst said in an email--and when I quote this email, the words ``me'' and ``I'' refer to the FBI analyst. Most concerning to me, is stating the reporting would contradict Director Wray's testimony. I found this troubling because it implied to me that one of the reasons we weren't putting this out is for a political reason, which goes directly against our organization's mission to remain apolitical and simply state what we know. . . . My concern is that I think it gets dangerous if we cite potential political implications as reasons for not putting out our information. This FBI analyst raises legitimate concerns. Is the New York Times digging into those concerns? In other words, is the New York Times journalist doing what journalists should be doing? They ought to be good investigators, get all the facts. And guess who was involved in recalling the FBI memo: That person was then-Deputy Assistant Director Nikki Floris. She was also the main briefer for the fake briefing Senator Johnson and I received in August of 2020 from the now-disbanded Foreign Influence Task Force. You will remember, that was the briefing that was used to attack the Grassley- Johnson Biden family investigation. So I ask, Is the New York Times investigating that material connection? By the way, my and Senator Johnson's investigation was based on authentic bank records, authentic Treasury records, authentic Obama administration records, and transcribed interviews. In other words, it was not Russian disinformation, as the partisan media tried and failed to argue. Here, with this FBI memo, I released records last year because the facts and evidence ought to breathe. Let the American people see what is happening on their watch. I also issued the records as support to those FBI agents and analysts who were just trying to do their job under extreme pressure from inside the FBI. I don't know why people in the FBI care if the truth gets out, but a lot of people at the FBI get pressured not to let the truth out. And I want you to know that I will continue to make records public because that is what the taxpayers need and deserve and expect. As I said last July about this same FBI memo: One way or the other, intelligence must be fully investigated to determine whether it's true, or if it's just smoke and mirrors. End of this Senator's quote from last July. That is a quote, by the way, that the New York Times failed to mention. Now, turning to the Savage article from the New York Times, Charlie Savage wrote in part: Since President Trump returned to office last year, the senator-- Referring to Chuck Grassley-- has released a flood of internal law enforcement files that normally would be off limits to disclosure, sometimes attributing them to ``whistle-blowers'' or not saying who gave them to him. The New York Times seems to be very obsessed with how I have obtained government records, maybe because they haven't been able to or maybe they haven't even tried to get these records. For too many years, the executive branch, under both Republicans and Democrats, has failed to produce certain records to the Congress of the United States. The fact that the Trump administration has produced what the New York Times believes wouldn't be normally produced ought to be good news to the American people and good news to the New York Times. You see, these records are exactly the type that should be produced to Congress just as a matter of course, and the Trump administration understands that, and I thank them for their cooperation. Now, I am still not fully satisfied. There are many more records that ought to be public. For many years, whistleblowers have been hard at work to expose those and many other records. As difficult as it may be for the partisan media to understand this, I have made public thousands of pages of records to this Congress pursuant to lawful whistleblower disclosures. True whistleblowers stick their neck out just for telling the truth, and they do it no matter the risk to them. And a lot of these whistleblowers ruin themselves professionally by just doing what the law requires. So when I do get records, I owe it to the whistleblowers to make those records public. That is called congressional oversight, and it is my constitutional responsibility to get the job of congressional oversight done as the Constitution requires. This Senator's work will continue. I encourage the Trump administration to continue making records public for transparency, and hopefully the New York Times will get future stories right. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, it is the responsibility of Congress every year to pass appropriations bills to fund the government. Failure to enact the 12 annual appropriations bills by the end of the fiscal year of September 30 has, with increasing frequency, resulted in major government shutdowns. Last year, Senator Collins, as chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, worked with strong bipartisan support to report funding bills to the floor. Unfortunately, that is where the minority party's cooperation ended. They refused to work with the majority party to get these appropriations bills across the finishing line, even refusing to pass a short-term, clean continuing resolution to keep government open while funding negotiations continued. Rather than prioritizing ordinary Americans, the other side of the aisle decided to hold government funding hostage to support and score political points with their activist base. The end result was the famous 43-day government shutdown, which was the longest government shutdown in U.S. history. Only then did the minority party agree to enact a short-term, clean continuing resolution. Eventually, Congress passed 11 of 12 appropriations bills in their entirety. However, the minority mischief was far from over. For 36 days, the Department of Homeland Security was shuttered due to their refusal to fund Federal law enforcement and border security. Ultimately, the majority had to take matters into their own hands. So through the reconciliation process, the bill called the Secure America Act funded Federal law enforcement officers, border security, and protecting American communities from violent criminals, illicit drugs, and contraband. Obviously, it was a choice from the other side of the aisle to not fund these critical priorities. You would think that the minority would have learned that government shutdowns never accomplished anything. After all, they achieved none of their policy objectives, although their costly government shutdown compromised our Nation's security and, at the same time, inflicted pain on the American public. Yet, this year, the minority party is refusing to work in a bipartisan manner and cooperate even to get the appropriations process started in the U.S. Senate. The Appropriations Committee has not been able to report a single appropriations bill to the Senate floor. Now we are less than 3 months from a new fiscal year and, once again, the minority party is prioritizing a government shutdown over cooperation. They want to play politics at the expense of the American family and our Nation's welfare. Lurching from one deadline to the next is the wrong way to run Washington and ought to be avoided. The majority, led by Senator Collins, is working and willing to do the hard work of passing 12 annual appropriations bills on time. It is time for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work with us and get the job done to avoid a government shutdown or, better yet, follow the advice of Senator Lankford of Oklahoma, who has been working on a continuing resolution bill that automatically carries from September 30 into the new fiscal year without having to shut down government. We would never have to go through that again.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, with recent political victories in Democrat primaries in Colorado, New York, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere by socialists, I wanted to spend some time with my colleagues sharing the failed results that we have witnessed throughout history under socialism regimes. And if any of my colleagues consider themselves democratic socialists, I would like their attention. The expansion of candidates and people who want to institute socialism in the United States is very concerning. What they desire is going to destroy everything America has stood for. The recent trend toward socialism in the Democratic Party frankly surprises me. It ought to make every traditional Democrat worry about the trend of their party and be a warning for all of us. I am glad some Democrats share this concern, as Democrat pollster Mark Penn wrote in the Wall Street Journal. Democrats could take a playbook out of the 1947 effort by Eleanor Roosevelt and Hubert Humphrey, as recently reported in the Washington Post. Socialism is a failed ideology and experiment. It claims to focus on the good of society as a whole over the rights of individuals. This is in contrast to America's founding principles. Socialism, whether it is the revolutionary kind or the democratic kind, is aimed at government ownership of industry and the elimination of private property. Countries that have adopted socialism have found themselves less prosperous, even witnessing starvation and economic ruin followed by lawlessness and corruption. The only people that benefit from it are the people in the political system. Socialist countries have also seen private property confiscated and constitutional rights taken away from the people. Recently, there is a group of socialists called Democratic Socialists that have won Democrat Party primaries. Where I sit, socialism is still socialism. They may think that calling themselves democratic somehow would cancel out all of the negatives of socialism, but they want to bring about the same negative outcomes that will produce less prosperity and less freedom. Example after example in history backs up my point. In 2021, I spoke here on the Senate floor about Sweden's experiment with socialism. I encourage my colleagues to go back and read that speech. In case they don't have time, I will summarize it right now. In the 1950s, Sweden gained newfound wealth and economic freedom. Then it started to adopt socialist policies. During Sweden's experiment with socialism between the 1960s and the 1980s, it experienced short- lived prosperity, massive government spending and taxation, and a highly regulated economy that eventually came crashing down. During that time, not a single net job was created in Sweden's private sector, and inflation took away almost all of the value of any wage increases. Sweden's socialist policies killed off its wealth creation that was needed to fund all of that government spending. By the 1990s, Sweden realized its mistake and reversed course, and its leftwing Swedish Social Democrats recognized their mistake as well. According to a White House Council of Economic Advisers report, if the United States had moved toward Nordic country-style policies in the 1970s, by 2018, America's GDP would be at least 19 percent smaller, coming out to about 11,000 fewer dollars of wealth per person here in the United States. We can learn a lot from Sweden so we don't go down the dead-end road called socialism. We can also learn a lot from Cuba's experience moving from freedom to socialism. That happened in 1959. Cuba's standard of living over the past 50 years has been destroyed. In 1959, after Fidel Castro came to power, the Cuban Government took away private property and established price controls. This led to food shortages, and you can see that on our own televisions being a problem today in Cuba. Castro's regime even killed political opposition. Decades of socialism meant that by the 2000s, Cuba lacked basic infrastructure and reliable energy. A 2005 report found: Instead of blackouts, Cubans jokingly refer to periods when electricity was available as ``lights-in.'' That energy crisis continues today, and you see it reported on American television. Cuba's story under socialism can be summed up by Margaret Thatcher's words. When she was Prime Minister of Great Britain, she said: The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. Not everyone in Cuba has suffered. Its dictators have taken care of themselves. If Sweden and Cuba aren't enough reasons why socialism has failed as an idea, let's take a look at Venezuela. In 1998, socialist Hugo Chavez became President of Venezuela. At the time, Venezuela was the richest country in South America, and now it is one of the poorest. One of Chavez's first actions was to nationalize the agriculture sector and rob landowners of their property. Food production fell 75 percent over two decades. Chavez went on to nationalize other parts of the economy, including electricity, water, oil, banks, supermarkets, construction, and other parts. He did this all while also expanding the welfare state with money that the country didn't have. Not only is the country poor, but it has also been ruled by brutal dictators, under Chavez and Nicolas Maduro, and riddled with corruption. One analysis about Venezuela's experience with socialism put it this way: So, what are the results of socialism in Venezuela? Well, we have experienced hyperinflation. We have people eating garbage, schools that do not teach, hospitals that do not heal, long and humiliating lines to buy flour, bread, and basic medicines. So history is very clear: Economic freedom is a ticket to broad prosperity. Today's American socialists espouse more than just economic ruin and fewer freedoms. They want less law and order by abolishing ICE, defunding the police, and emptying out our prisons. Don't take my word for it; just look at the agenda of some of the recent people who have won Democratic primaries in New York City. The Democratic socialist platform also wants to defund the Department of Defense, get rid of the U.S. Senate, and draft a new Constitution. Other countries that tried socialism have failed. Socialists' ideas and candidates offer failed ideas. We should not forget what history has taught us or, as George Santayana once said almost 100 years ago: If you don't learn from history, you are going to repeat the same mistakes. The United States was founded on principles of individual liberty and on unalienable natural rights, with the government's primary function being to preserve those rights and prevent fellow citizens or attacks by foreign powers from violating our constitutional rights. Americans have been reluctant to grant too much power to the government since the very beginning. Ultimately, free markets have helped America become the richest country in the world and have lifted more people from poverty than anything else in human history. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, as the Senate and House are currently working on the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, it is important--very important--that Congress pass this bill. We need a very strong and capable military, and we need to hold the Pentagon accountable for taxpayer dollars. For 240 years, the No. 1 responsibility of the Federal Government has been national security. A nonnegotiable tenet of America's national security is ``peace through strength.'' In preventing war, a strong Department of War is also an instrument of peace. So, to achieve peace through strength, we must invest in our Nation's defense and modernize military capabilities to be best prepared for any threat. Our military ought to be strong enough to deter any aggressor. We have learned from our history that preventing conflicts is less costly and spares more lives. I support the $1.1 trillion authorization put forth by our Senate Armed Services Committee. The fiscal year 2027 Defense bill supports our servicemembers, boosts our national industrial defense base and allows for historic investment in our national security. This legislation also includes important provisions that I back to hold defense contractors accountable. This includes a requirement that contractors provide notification when the price of a product or service increases beyond a predetermined threshold. While our investments in defense increase, ensuring accountability and fiscal responsibility is very paramount. Companies that work for the government should not be ripping the taxpayers off. I am also pleased that a provision I worked on is included in the bill that reinforces the notion that Russia's aggression toward Ukraine is unacceptable. This provision prohibits funds being used to recognize Russia's control over any Ukrainian territory that has been forcibly seized by Russia. I have offered several amendments to this Defense bill to combat crime and support law enforcement, strengthen security provisions and cooperation in the Baltics, and condemn very strongly Russia's abduction of Ukrainian children, which has been in the amounts of tens of thousands of children. If the Defense bill is passed this year, it will be the 66th consecutive year that Congress has passed this important annual Defense legislation. So I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to pass a Defense bill that strengthens our national security and best supports our military readiness. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, it is a sad day for all of us in the Senate and particularly those that are very, very close to Lindsey Graham, and that would be most Senators and, obviously, his staff. So I would like to take a moment to honor the life of our fellow Senator Lindsey Graham. We were shocked by the sad news yesterday of his untimely death. Senator Graham was a devoted public servant, through his military service as a colonel in the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard, as well as being elected to office continually since 1992. Senator Graham was a very forceful and quick-witted presence in every room that he entered. His warm nature made everyone his friend, and I feel blessed to be one of them. A few feet from right here is the Senate cloakroom. Frequently, Senator Graham would hold court there, and in holding court, he was making every Senator laugh, no matter what the challenge we were dealing with on that particular day. He was infectious in the way he told a story, and, of course, there was always a punch line. I was no stranger to being the butt of his jokes. Senator Graham loved to tell people how frugal I was and that if I were ever to open my billfold, dust and moss would come out of it. I don't know how many times I have heard that. Senator Graham always brought a smile to your face and levity to the Halls of Congress. Senator Graham was no stranger to my home State of Iowa, as it is first in the Nation for Presidential elections. And in the year 2016, when he announced he was going to run for President, I had the privilege of showing him around a time or two during his campaign for President. He was a fan of the good people of my State of Iowa, identifying with our shared values of hard work, of faith, and genuine care for one another. I also worked closely with Senator Graham on the Senate Budget and Judiciary Committees, and we worked together for decades. He was a coveted ally on legislation, and, as chairman of those Committees, he was always fair, and he was always productive. From Supreme Court confirmations to criminal justice reform and border security, having Senator Graham in your corner was a great asset. He will be remembered for his many accomplishments as a national figure for the Republican Party. Senator Graham deeply loved his country. He was a bold leader, an impassioned national security hawk. He spoke his mind, as we all know, and we all know that he had the capability and the desire to work across the aisle. He was at the center of some of the most famous deal- making groups in the past 30 years. He loved the Senate as an institution, and his hard-working staff was like family to him. Most importantly, he dutifully served the people of South Carolina, and his roots ran strong through him every day of his life. Barbara and I are praying for Senator Graham's family as we all grapple with the loss of a great man. And I think we should show our appreciation for the hard work, as just 2 days before he passed, he was in Ukraine, meeting with Zelenskyy, and he was announcing that he was going to move forward with some very important legislation putting additional sanctions on Russia because of their invasion of Ukraine. And I think we can show our gratitude and appreciation of Senator Graham by moving that legislation forward. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am here once again like I have done at least once a week every week since the House passed year-round E15. I do it to communicate the importance of the Senate passing year-round E15. I have talked about the importance of year-round E15 to agriculture in my previous speeches. I have also spoke about how E15 will lower gas prices in previous remarks. I will repeat again--and I have made it clear--that E15 is not a mandate as opponents charge because E15 gives consumers a choice at the gasoline pump. And I have shown how E15 supports America's rural economy. I would like to highlight today another reason why we need to pass year-round E15, and it is because of our national security. This was recently a point of discussion when Agriculture Secretary Rollins was before the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee and she said this at a hearing in response to my question about year-round E15. She said: There is no national security without farm security. I agree with the Secretary. E15 protects national security by supporting American farmers and expanding homegrown fuels. When the Congress established the Renewable Fuel Standard, it was intended in part to diversify our Nation's renewable fuels to ensure that we didn't rely on imported oil. Expanding access to clean, American-grown fuel reduces our reliance on international sources of energy. Passing E15 is common sense for our pocketbooks, for our environment, and for our national security. I will continue to communicate with my colleagues about why E15 is good, good, good. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, many times, I and Senator Ernst and Senator Fischer and maybe many other Senators have come to the floor to implore the Senate to pass E15 legislation. E15 is an additive to gasoline that comes from ethanol which comes from corn. So I am going to cite to you something that I have got off of the web of iowarfa.org, Renewable Fuels Association, in other words. They have this chart that I am going to refer to. I am sorry I don't have a big one to put on an easel here. It starts out with saying these six refining companies are trying to kill the year-round E15 legislative deal. These companies made more money than 3.3 million family farmers will make combined in 2026. These six companies are: Delek US, HF Sinclair, Cenovus, Suncor, CVR Energy, and Par Pacific. They have made $171.7 billion compared to 3.3 million family farmers, estimated to make in 2026 $153.4 million. So I think about the Members of Congress that are representing these interests. They also have tens of thousands of family farmers as well in their districts. So why would they put the prosperity of these six companies ahead of 3.3 million family farmers? When I bring that issue up, their answer is: We need to find a solution. Yes, we do need to find a solution. But if we don't find a solution, these six companies are still going to be making their $171 billion, and these 3.3 million family farmers are going to be making $20 billion less. So that is the employees and the management and the stockholders of these six companies are going to make out better than the 3.3 million family farmers, which is only 2 percent of the population of the United States feeding the other 98 percent. I think we have got to give more consideration to the family farmers by passing E15. That is not the main reason I came to the floor.

Mr. GRASSLEY

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am here today to condemn another attack by Vladimir Putin's regime on Ukraine's religious and cultural heritage. On June 15, Russian strikes set fire to and damaged the Dormition Cathedral in Kyiv. This cathedral is part of a monastic complex whose history stretches back over 1,000 years. Generations of worshippers have walked its grounds, prayed within its walls, and looked to it as a symbol of continuity through war, through empire, and through upheaval. It is one of the most sacred sites in Eastern Christianity and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. And right now, that same cathedral stands scarred by fire by the very regime that claims to defend the traditions and heritage of Eastern Orthodoxy. So let's be clear what this means. This attack is part of a broader pattern of targeting Ukraine's cultural and spiritual landmarks because Putin wants to erase the identity, undermine morale, and rewrite the history of Ukraine. This senseless attack exposes the real hypocrisy at the heart of Putin's propaganda. Putin claims that Ukraine is persecuting Russian Orthodox Christians, but that is not what happened. In fact, it is Russia who is doing exactly what Russia falsely accuses others of doing because Russia is targeting churches, damaging sacred sites, and now has set fire to one of the holiest places in Eastern Christianity--a site that predates even the city of Moscow, a site that belongs not to one nation, but to the shared spiritual heritage of millions. So let's set the record straight. Russia is not the victim of religious persecution in Ukraine; Russia is carrying out this persecution and so ought to be condemned. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.