Alex Padilla

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Health Investment Zones Act of 2026. This legislation would designate health investment zones for 10 years in areas with large health disparities based on income, life expectancy, provider shortages, and align tax, grant, loan-repayment, and Medicare incentives to expand services where they are needed most. This bill would establish health investment zones, HIZs, in areas with significant health disparities, offering incentives like expanded tax credits for employers and workers, grants for health projects, and loan repayment for healthcare professionals serving in these zones. It supports initiatives such as mobile clinics and wellness programs and provides Medicare bonuses for services delivered in HIZs. The bill focuses on improving outcomes for conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and maternal health, with a 10-year report to measure progress in health, access, and cost reductions. Many communities face preventable gaps in health care access that lead to higher emergency room use, more hospital admissions, and rising costs. Establishing 10-year health investment zones will help close these gaps and ensure that underserved areas receive the consistent, affordable, and high-quality care they need.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Health Investment Zones Act of 2026. This legislation would designate health investment zones for 10 years in areas with large health disparities based on income, life expectancy, provider shortages, and align tax, grant, loan-repayment, and Medicare incentives to expand services where they are needed most. This bill would establish health investment zones, HIZs, in areas with significant health disparities, offering incentives like expanded tax credits for employers and workers, grants for health projects, and loan repayment for healthcare professionals serving in these zones. It supports initiatives such as mobile clinics and wellness programs and provides Medicare bonuses for services delivered in HIZs. The bill focuses on improving outcomes for conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and maternal health, with a 10-year report to measure progress in health, access, and cost reductions. Many communities face preventable gaps in health care access that lead to higher emergency room use, more hospital admissions, and rising costs. Establishing 10-year health investment zones will help close these gaps and ensure that underserved areas receive the consistent, affordable, and high-quality care they need.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Mental Health Career Promotion Act. This legislation would expand opportunities for students to learn about and pursue careers in mental health. The Mental Health Career Promotion Act would bolster the behavioral and mental health workforce pipeline by providing students with educational opportunities in the mental health field. Specifically, this bill would establish the Behavioral and Mental Health Career Promotion Grant Program, administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, SAMHSA, which would provide funding to schools to create opportunities for students to interact with and shadow mental health care professionals, coordinate internship and externship opportunities for students who are interested in mental health, and provide educational presentations to students that increase exposure to and knowledge of the mental health field. Poor mental health impacts millions of students, with two in five reporting persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness in the last 30 days and one in five reporting that they have seriously considered attempting suicide in 2023. Unfortunately, most students go untreated because they do not know where to turn for help. According to the most recent data from SAMHSA, more than half of all Americans live in a mental health professional shortage area. Unfortunately, between 2021 and 2026, the total number of mental health professionals in the United States is projected to decline by 13 percent while demand for these professionals is expected to increase by over 50 percent. One of the most important steps that Congress can take to address this shortage is to expand opportunities for students to learn about and pursue careers in mental health. As our Nation continues to confront an unfolding mental health crisis, this critical legislation works to support the next generation of mental health professionals and reinforces the timeless message that there is zero shame in asking for help and that seeking support is a sign of strength. I would like to thank Representative Balint for leading this legislation in the House, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact the Mental Health Career Promotion Act as soon as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Mental Health Career Promotion Act. This legislation would expand opportunities for students to learn about and pursue careers in mental health. The Mental Health Career Promotion Act would bolster the behavioral and mental health workforce pipeline by providing students with educational opportunities in the mental health field. Specifically, this bill would establish the Behavioral and Mental Health Career Promotion Grant Program, administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, SAMHSA, which would provide funding to schools to create opportunities for students to interact with and shadow mental health care professionals, coordinate internship and externship opportunities for students who are interested in mental health, and provide educational presentations to students that increase exposure to and knowledge of the mental health field. Poor mental health impacts millions of students, with two in five reporting persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness in the last 30 days and one in five reporting that they have seriously considered attempting suicide in 2023. Unfortunately, most students go untreated because they do not know where to turn for help. According to the most recent data from SAMHSA, more than half of all Americans live in a mental health professional shortage area. Unfortunately, between 2021 and 2026, the total number of mental health professionals in the United States is projected to decline by 13 percent while demand for these professionals is expected to increase by over 50 percent. One of the most important steps that Congress can take to address this shortage is to expand opportunities for students to learn about and pursue careers in mental health. As our Nation continues to confront an unfolding mental health crisis, this critical legislation works to support the next generation of mental health professionals and reinforces the timeless message that there is zero shame in asking for help and that seeking support is a sign of strength. I would like to thank Representative Balint for leading this legislation in the House, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact the Mental Health Career Promotion Act as soon as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I join my colleagues who have spoken. I say that, really, my heart goes out to my colleagues from Minnesota-- the senior and junior Senators from Minnesota--and the people of Minnesota for what they have been through in these last few weeks and how they have responded in these last few weeks as they have mourned and as the country has been watching. January 7 feels like so long ago now, but just a few weeks ago is the day that I never would have imagined. That day, Renee Nicole Good--a mother, a daughter, a poet--was out in her community, observing, helping to document, as allowed by the law, what was happening when she was alerted about these ongoing, indiscriminate raids in her community. As several of my colleagues have said, the administration's response to the Federal agent's killing of Renee Good was not one of ``well, hold on; let's really assess what has happened here.'' It was one of blaming her. The response was so faulty by the administration. Forget the investigations that should have taken place--I will talk about that in a minute--but the President of the United States and the Vice President of the United States responded to an incident like that by messaging to Federal agents: Don't worry. You have complete immunity. First of all, that is not true. Second of all, it is the opposite of the message that we should be sending if we are trying to deescalate tensions and make sure that law enforcement abides by the law. I remind us of that because, sadly, it is not shocking when we reflect on what happened on January 24. This time, Alex Jeffrey Pretti--a son and an ICU nurse at the local Veterans' Administration hospital--was out, lawfully and peacefully observing and helping to document more of this ICE and CBP activity in Minneapolis when he was shot in the back and killed--two U.S. citizens dead at the hands of Federal law enforcement in the span of 2\1/2\ weeks. They are dead because ICE and the CBP have been encouraged by the White House to act with impunity. Colleagues, it was about 7 months ago that I stood here on the floor to warn all of you and the American people that the Trump administration, at the time--so this goes back to last June--that the Trump administration was using Los Angeles as a test case. It was testing how far Federal agents could go in this indiscriminate, increasingly violent, and cruel mass detention and deportation agenda; how far they could go before exporting this model throughout the country. I never in my life have wanted to say more than I do today that I wish I were wrong, but for the better part of the last year, communities across the country have been subjected to this relentless aggression--Los Angeles; Washington, DC; Chicago; Portland; Charlotte; others; and now Minneapolis. You have seen the videos. I have seen the videos. We have all seen the videos. How dare this administration slander the names of the dead and tell the American people not to believe what we can all see so clearly with our own eyes? How dare this administration act as if the laws passed by this body do not apply to them? So, yes, colleagues, it is time to say: Enough. This is not just about immigrant families and immigrant communities now living in fear. This is about all of us. No one in this country--immigrant, citizen, veteran--should fear for their lives for exercising their constitutional rights, for standing up for their neighbors. This is not a political or a policy disagreement about immigration. This is about decency. This is about humanity. And this is about the rule of law. Instead of pursuing independent investigations and seeking to hold officers accountable as warranted, this administration has doubled down. Let's take a moment on this because our colleague Senator Kaine from Virginia talked a little bit about his experience as Governor and mayor and what normally happens after an officer-involved shooting--normal practice, standard practice, best practices after an officer-involved shooting in a local agency, in a State agency. It is not just the officer's being placed on leave. Initially, there is an administrative review of what happened. Was it not just consistent with policy but with the law and the Constitution? And, if not, what is the consequence? Absent that, under normal circumstances, we have the Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice that can conduct an independent investigation and bring forth accountability as and when warranted. Sadly, that is not the case with this administration--not the objective, internal review; not the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice review. Instead, they tell officers, ``You have complete immunity,'' and they double down. So the abuse has continued. By the way, it is not just on the streets. The videos you have not seen are of the abuse and inhumane treatment that continue inside some appalling and inhumane private detention facilities, where, colleagues, if you haven't heard, 32 detainees died last year--the most deadly year for those in ICE detention facilities in a long, long time. An additional six this month alone are already on track to exceed last year's most deadly number. I am talking about the people held in detention centers like the one that Senator Schiff and I visited just last week in California City. Many there are being denied basic medical care, even urgent medical care. People are being denied easy access to legal counsel, to due process, to fundamental dignity. And how has the Republican majority in Congress responded to this cruel and vindictive mass deportation campaign? With silence-- inexcusable or unacceptable silence. And for those who have not been silent, I have heard a cheering on of what the administration is doing. Colleagues, since last July, there have been dozens of incidents involving excessive force by Federal agents, including at least 17 shootings. Instead of asking questions and demanding accountability, our Republican colleagues here have applauded the administration and chosen to give the Department of Homeland Security billions more dollars, and now they are suggesting that DHS needs even more. How much more must our communities and our country endure before our Republican colleagues join us in saying ``Enough''? How much more, colleagues, before you agree to impose the real guardrails on a DHS that chooses to investigate itself, that stonewalls oversight, that even fights court orders to preserve evidence in the killing of an American citizen? Not destroying evidence should go without saying. It shouldn't be compelled by a Federal judge. It is just like having true, objective, independent investigations after incidents like this should go without saying. But we are not living in normal times. We continue to see ICE and CBP behave as though they are above the law because this administration has told them they are and because Republicans in Congress have not told them that they are not. But we have an opportunity to change that; to collectively, on a bipartisan and a bicameral basis, let those agents know that no one is above the law. It is not just an opportunity but an obligation that we have in this moment. Public safety depends on legitimacy, and legitimacy depends on accountability and speaking the truth. Our laws mean nothing if those who are assigned to enforce the laws believe that the laws don't apply to them. So, colleagues, let's realize that we are not powerless in this conversation. Congress is an equal branch of government in the United States of America, and it is about time we acted like it. That is why I support imposing serious reforms and real oversight and accountability on ICE and the CBP before this body provides them any more taxpayer dollars. I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Kelly and many of our colleagues who spoke just yesterday afternoon to highlight the enduring damage done to our democracy, nearly 16 years ago, when a single decision handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States gave corporations and billionaires in our country unlimited spending power to influence our elections. The case is referred to as Citizens United, and the ruling didn't just change campaign finance law. It fundamentally altered our democracy. It truly was a turning point. It was a moment where the voices of everyday Americans began to be drowned out every election cycle by a small and powerful few, armed with unlimited money and unprecedented access. We see the consequences of it to this day. Just one example--this may shock you: a billionaire like Elon Musk, who was not shy nor discreet about spending nearly $300 million to support President Trump's candidacy in 2024. Others were similarly involved, but he was not shy about it. So it wasn't a surprise, it was not a coincidence, when early in the Trump administration, he was basically given the keys to the Federal Government and allowed to run roughshod through Federal Departments and Agencies and budgets through this experiment called DOGE. That is just one of many, many examples of how those with a lot of money--corporations and individuals--can now influence elections and the election outcomes and then take folks into offices that were their preference to reap benefits, all while this administration continues to ignore the needs of America's working families, who are facing increasing electric bills, grocery bills, and certainly health insurance costs, among so much more. Senator Kelly and others spoke to this eloquently yesterday afternoon. I wanted to add to that conversation and add to the picture of what is happening with campaign finance in America at this moment. The American people are increasingly concerned with the influence of money in politics because they also see fewer efforts and resources being committed to enforcing what is left of campaign finance oversight and accountability on this administration. What is left of campaign finance systems and accountability is also under further attack. President Trump has completely silenced our country's top campaign finance watchdog, the Federal Election Commission. Just last year, President Trump fired one of the Commissioners, Ellen Weintraub, without cause or without justification. It was clear retaliation for her attempts to hold him accountable during his first term as President. Removing an FEC Commissioner like this was not only unlawful and without precedent, but it was soon followed by Republican members of the Commission also leaving voluntarily to pursue other jobs. Under normal circumstances, when there is a vacancy or vacancies to the FEC, an administration would consult with the Senate on nominations to fill these vacancies quickly and on a bipartisan basis--but not with this administration. Now there are just two Commissioners who remain, and the Agency has lacked a quorum for 260 days and counting, with no end in sight. It is not an oversight. It is clearly intentional by the White House. President Trump is purposely leaving these vacancies open, refusing to send bipartisan nominees to the Senate for consideration and confirmation. The reason it is so critical and the reason it is so urgent is that we are quickly entering the midterm election season. So imagine that. We are entering a midterm election--a very consequential midterm election--that will undoubtedly be met with unlimited spending not just by candidates but through super PACs and other dark forces without our having the tools of campaign finance oversight, regulation, and accountability. That should concern all of us as it concerns the American people. Colleagues, we have the power to fix this. We can legislatively fix the wrongs of the Citizens United case by the Supreme Court, and we must immediately restore a quorum to the FEC so they can do their critical and important job in the months ahead. I will continue to be a leading voice in this fight, and I look forward to working with all of you on both sides of the aisle to do what is right. Tribute to Tess Oswald Mr. President, I rise today with the bittersweet task of saying goodbye and paying tribute to my communications director Tess Oswald. Tess has done such outstanding work not just for me but on behalf of the people of California. She has been alongside me since my first days here in the Senate 5 years ago. I know I speak for our entire team when I say that we are honored to have had the privilege of working alongside her and that we are going to miss her. She is a proud daughter of California and of parents who served the public as Federal prosecutors, so public service is in her blood. She has brought remarkable drive and passion to every facet of her work. She has both led the communications team and has mentored so many of the communications team members with her heart and her presence of mind, which is not surprising to me given her tremendous past experience both in serving multiple Members of Congress but also in working on political campaigns--to include a Presidential campaign many years ago--of the Members she has worked for in the past, to include that of my now colleague's, Senator Adam Schiff, who also represents California. I could go on and on about her resume and on and on about her contributions to different issues and to different engagements with the people of California--speaking engagements, speeches, et cetera--but of the many, many moments that were so impactful, I think the best example of her insights and value of her advice was in the aftermath of what has become known as an infamous incident at a Department of Homeland Security press conference that I attended last year in Los Angeles. With the visuals of that incident that shook some across California and across the country, Tess, in her wisdom, took the worst of circumstances and both properly and successfully pivoted the attention and the message to where it rightfully belonged--in highlighting the cruelty of this administration and how it was terrorizing communities throughout the Los Angeles region and, soon, elsewhere around the country. This administration has been targeting indiscriminately and in an increasingly cruel fashion immigrants and not just the worst of the worst--the dangerous, violent criminals that the administration likes to talk about so often. What we have seen in reality is so many of the immigrants being arrested, detained, and even deported without due process. The undocumented or otherwise hard-working people who contribute to our country are the vast majority of the victims of this administration's mass deportation efforts. Tess has helped to correct that narrative and to emphasize and highlight that narrative as part of her public service. On a personal note, as a husband and as a father myself, I know--and I share it very frequently--that public service is not without personal sacrifice. Tess's family has seen nothing different. I have seen her in some of her personal milestones over the last few years--from an engagement, to marriage, to becoming a mother. So I thank Quinn, her daughter; Justin, her husband; and her entire family for sharing Tess with us over these last 4 years and certainly throughout her career. Quinn may not appreciate it today, but I hope she one day learns to appreciate not just the value of that sacrifice but the importance of Tess's work to me, to our office, to the people of California, and to the Nation. To Tess and her entire family, I just want to say that we thank you. We appreciate everything that you have done for me, for Angela, for our office, for California, and for our Nation. It is with a heavy heart that we both say thank you and send you off into your next chapter knowing that you won't be that far away. We will have to call you back into action from time to time as life needs it, but we just so truly, truly appreciate everything you have done and how you have done it. I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Barbara Monrroy be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I want to thank Senators Merkley and Tillis for their bipartisan cooperation in honoring the law enforcement officers who responded on January 6, 5 years ago. I also want to thank them both for their comments on Tuesday, 2 days ago, recognizing the fifth anniversary of the attack on the Capitol. As Senator Merkley mentioned, I am the ranking member on the Rules Committee, which has jurisdiction on this issue, and I can attest, having been here for the votes on the original action, that there was bipartisan and bicameral agreement on this plaque and bipartisan, bicameral agreement on its intended location following the enactment of the law. Now, for the last several years, many people have been confused by the delay in mounting it as planned and directed by Congress. Many even believe that the Speaker of the House never intended to follow the law and honor these law enforcement officers who bravely defended the Capitol and our democracy that day. I know that sounds a little cynical, but as Senator Merkley mentioned, you have to understand that part of the context here is the White House's new website that says that the Capitol Police were the ones who deliberately escalated the situation on January 6, in their attempt to rewrite the history of that day. That dishonors the officers--not just the members of the Capitol Police but all the law enforcement agencies--that responded on that eventful day. So I am more than just personally pleased to see this resolution move forward and that the Senate's bipartisan commitment to real history is strong. I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the bipartisan Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Act. This crucial piece of legislation would help local communities defend themselves from the growing and pressing danger of wildfires. This bill would empower communities to implement science-based methods for mitigating wildfire damage and provide funding to design and implement new Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Plans with community members, first responders, and relevant State agencies. Today, is the 1-year anniversary of the devastating Eaton and Palisades fires in Los Angeles that taught us all that not all wildfires are forest fires and as such Federal preparedness efforts need to be improved and streamlined to ensure that we better prepared when the next natural disaster strikes. We increasingly see wildfires in the wildland urban interface, and we must do more to prepare and harden our communities. As the countless fires in my State and across the West have shown us, we need to increase Federal support for communities to mitigate the risk of catastrophic wildfires. The Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Act would work towards this goal by establishing guidelines for communities to conceptualize new Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Plans, CPWRP, that are developed in coordination with community members, first responders, and relevant State agencies. This bill will achieve this through improving early detection technology, public outreach and education, alerts and warnings, evacuation planning, evacuation execution, and access for first responders; addressing vulnerable populations, including the elderly and those with disabilities; hardening critical infrastructure and homes; applying community-scale defensible space across contiguous areas; building local capacity to implement and oversee the plan; deploying distributed energy resources; implementing strategic land use planning; educating community members; and coordinating with existing wildfire plans like a Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Aside from this, the bill will provide grants for at-risk communities, complete a report on existing programs to protect communities from wildfires, and it will allow for structure hardening that will help build more fire resilient communities. I would like to thank my colleague Senator Sheehy for being a great partner here in the Senate to advance and put forth commonsense wildfire legislation that will help Western States and the country become better equipped to respond to increasing wildfires. I also want to express my appreciation to Representatives Huffman and Obernolte for leading this effort on the House side. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this bill this Congress to ensure that communities are better equipped to meet the growing threat of fires.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the bipartisan Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Act. This crucial piece of legislation would help local communities defend themselves from the growing and pressing danger of wildfires. This bill would empower communities to implement science-based methods for mitigating wildfire damage and provide funding to design and implement new Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Plans with community members, first responders, and relevant State agencies. Today, is the 1-year anniversary of the devastating Eaton and Palisades fires in Los Angeles that taught us all that not all wildfires are forest fires and as such Federal preparedness efforts need to be improved and streamlined to ensure that we better prepared when the next natural disaster strikes. We increasingly see wildfires in the wildland urban interface, and we must do more to prepare and harden our communities. As the countless fires in my State and across the West have shown us, we need to increase Federal support for communities to mitigate the risk of catastrophic wildfires. The Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Act would work towards this goal by establishing guidelines for communities to conceptualize new Community Protection and Wildfire Resilience Plans, CPWRP, that are developed in coordination with community members, first responders, and relevant State agencies. This bill will achieve this through improving early detection technology, public outreach and education, alerts and warnings, evacuation planning, evacuation execution, and access for first responders; addressing vulnerable populations, including the elderly and those with disabilities; hardening critical infrastructure and homes; applying community-scale defensible space across contiguous areas; building local capacity to implement and oversee the plan; deploying distributed energy resources; implementing strategic land use planning; educating community members; and coordinating with existing wildfire plans like a Community Wildfire Protection Plan. Aside from this, the bill will provide grants for at-risk communities, complete a report on existing programs to protect communities from wildfires, and it will allow for structure hardening that will help build more fire resilient communities. I would like to thank my colleague Senator Sheehy for being a great partner here in the Senate to advance and put forth commonsense wildfire legislation that will help Western States and the country become better equipped to respond to increasing wildfires. I also want to express my appreciation to Representatives Huffman and Obernolte for leading this effort on the House side. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this bill this Congress to ensure that communities are better equipped to meet the growing threat of fires.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, before starting the series of speeches that are scheduled for this afternoon, I have a resolution observing the fifth anniversary of the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol at the desk, and I would like to call up for a passage by unanimous consent. The resolution is straightforward. It simply says that the January 6 Capitol attack was an assault on democracy, that the U.S. Capitol Police and other law enforcement personnel who defended the Capitol were heroes, and that we, as a body, express our gratitude to all the dedicated personnel of the U.S. Capitol for their service that day. I believe, in a bipartisan spirit, it would be a great symbol of our congressional unity to pass this today on the fifth anniversary of January 6. So as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 574; that the resolution be agreed to; that the preamble be agreed to; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today joined by Democratic Leader Schumer and so many of our colleagues in raising our voices on this fifth anniversary of a dark day in American history. Yes, it has been 5 years, and some on the other side of the aisle may ask, Why are we still talking about this? I think we just witnessed why it is important to keep talking about this--because the lies continue, the conspiracy theories continue, and the truth must be told. We will not let history be rewritten. The truth is that 5 years ago today, insurrectionists stormed the Capitol in an unprecedented attempt to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. The truth is police were beaten as a violent crowd surged forward. The truth is there were Members of Congress literally running for their lives, rushed out of this very Chamber and told to hide and barricade themselves. It was an attack instigated and fueled by lies, a coordinated campaign by President Trump to overturn the outcome of the 2020 Presidential election. Now, even on that day, as rioters threatened to hang Vice President Pence, Trump tweeted a message to them that the election had been stolen; that they were ``patriots''--his words, not mine--that he ``loved them'' as the violence erupted. Special Counsel Jack Smith recently testified that President Trump was the ``most culpable and most responsible person'' in this January 6 conspiracy. He continued, ``These crimes were committed for his benefit. The attack that happened at the Capitol does not happen without him.'' Now, despite the President's attempts to rewrite history, today, for the sake of our democracy and for the sake of future generations, we remember and highlight the truth. See, we all vividly remember where we were 5 years ago. Unlike most of my colleagues who will speak out, I was not in this Chamber 5 years ago. I was still serving as California Secretary of State at the time, where I had spent years working to keep our elections, not just accessible for all eligible voters, but safe and secure, which they have always been despite the claims of the President. On November 3, 2020, it was my privilege to serve as the chief elections officer in the Nation's most populous and diverse State. I assure you that, even under the best of circumstances, election administrations are complex operations, but in 2020, our election workers faced the additional and unprecedented challenge of a global health crisis. Those election workers stepped up. They rose to the occasion. As a result, California election officials and volunteers administered an extremely accessible, secure, and safe election that drew an historic turnout, and we saw similar electoral performances across the country. By every objective measure, the 2020 election was a success. But, furious at his loss, none of that mattered to President Trump. He didn't just refuse to concede the election; he filed and lost more than 60 frivolous lawsuits that challenged the election. He personally called State elections officials, including, as I know the Presiding Officer will remember, the Georgia secretary of state, asking him to find more votes. He also called State legislature leaders in Michigan, in Arizona, and in Pennsylvania, trying to pressure them to change the official vote results; and he lied to the American people, denying his loss. He lied to them again just this morning, to a roomful of House Republicans, calling the 2020 Presidential election rigged. Online and across the country, President Trump's Big Lie caught fire, and, clearly, it is still burning. Sadly, many Republicans participated in fanning the flames by spreading false claims of voter fraud for political gain. Others stood by silently as President Trump radicalized his supporters with these lies. They chose loyalty to Trump over the truth, and our Nation paid the price. On January 6, we saw, we witnessed, we lived through what was once unthinkable--an unprecedented attack on this Capitol by violent extremists who were incited by the President. He told a crowd that was gathered outside the White House to ``fight like hell'' or ``you're not going to have a country anymore.'' Then he pointed them directly at the Capitol. Armed rioters brutally beat police officers and stormed this building. For the first time in our Nation's history, the Confederate flag flew inside the Halls of this Capitol. Members of militarized hate groups searched the hallways with the intent to kill Democratic- and Republican-elected leaders. They found their way to the House floor and to this very Chamber to try and stop the certification of the Presidential election. The deadly January 6 attack will forever remain an ugly stain on American history. But, yes, thanks to the bravery of the U.S. Capitol Police and other law enforcement officers who risked their lives, including five officers who tragically lost their lives, the assault on our democracy failed. Still, Speaker Johnson refuses to install a plaque--required by law--honoring the police officers who defended the Capitol that day. Even this morning, the President is shamefully blaming officers for, as he said, deliberately escalating the violence that day. But thanks to the strength of the American people and our institutions, our democracy has survived. It continues to be tested, but it has survived. In the aftermath, Congress enacted meaningful changes through the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act. Despite this action, we are still not out of the woods. Clearly, President Trump's attacks on the right to vote and the very foundation of our democracy have continued. In one of his first acts in his second term, Trump issued a blanket pardon of more than 1,500 of the defendants charged with attacking the Capitol, including more than 1,200 who were convicted--1,200 convicted. Upon hearing the news of the pardon, one of the Capitol Police officers injured that day who testified against the rioters felt Trump was ``trying to erase what [he] did.'' Not satisfied with that, the January 6 convicts are now seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in payouts of taxpayer money. Mr. President, I would like to share with all of you that Senator Whitehouse and I are introducing new legislation today to bar these payouts. But this is about more than just payouts and pardons. Trump doesn't believe he has done anything wrong. The President continues to work to undermine the midterm elections in a desperate attempt to hold onto power. Five years after January 6, Trump continues to double down on the Big Lie conspiracy. He has already issued an Executive order that threatens to seize authority over State elections administration. Thankfully, much of it has been blocked by Federal courts, but he is threatening more of the same or even a phony national emergency while he tries to disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. He has staffed the White House, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security with known election deniers. In 2020, he was trying to make calls to Georgia, demanding 11,000 more votes, but now Trump is pressuring States to redraw congressional districts to tilt the scales before the upcoming midterm elections. I refuse to stay silent while Trump tries to rig the next election and continue to lie about the last election. We will fight for the future of our free and fair elections in this country. Mr. President, Senator Whitehouse and I are also leading the No Rewards for January 6 Rioters Act to forbid payouts to January 6 rioters. I will continue to press the Office of Special Counsel to investigate the many brazen Hatch Act violations related to partisan political campaigns being waged from the current Oval Office and the current Department of Justice. We must defend bipartisan State election administrations in this country and take to the floor to warn Americans about the Trump administration's efforts to rig election rules ahead of this year's midterm elections. American democracy was here long before Trump came into power, and it will be here long after he is gone because we will continue to fight every anti-voter, undemocratic action this White House rolls out. I thank my coalition for participating in the floor block this afternoon. I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Reserving the right to object, as we know, the Commemorative Works Act restricts new museums and memorials from being built on the National Mall without an act of Congress. It is one of the ways Congress likes to try to maintain and be mindful of the evolution of the National Mall and monuments and museums that meet our collective bipartisan standard for placement there. Since I first arrived in the Senate, I have been working across the aisle to support the building of two important museums on the National Mall--one being the Smithsonian National Museum of the American Latino and the other being the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum. Both of these efforts are longstanding bipartisan. In fact, Senator Cruz and I, along with Senator Moreno and others, have a bipartisan bill that would adopt the necessary language for placement on the Mall. Meanwhile, Senators Klobuchar and Lummis have a bipartisan bill to do the same for the women's museum. So let me be clear. I wholeheartedly agree that the sacrifices made by Medal of Honor recipients should have a place of recognition for all Americans to see in our Nation's Capital. I also supported the Senator from West Virginia's bill when it came before the Energy and Natural Resources Committee just yesterday morning. As ranking member of the Rules Committee, let me also offer to the Senator from West Virginia and his constituents some good news. I am happy to share that the committee is working as we speak to approve the installation of a statue in the Capitol for national Medal of Honor recipient Herschel ``Woody'' Williams, the individual whom the placement legislation is named after. But as I shared in committee yesterday morning, I also believe that the story of the American Latino and the fight for equality by American women should also be enshrined on the National Mall. So we have an amendment that would add the text of those bills to S. 858 to also allow the Latino and women's museums to build on the National Mall. My colleague from West Virginia was very eloquent, very passionate, and I share his conviction. The effort to approve the placement language, the location language for the Latino museum and the women's museum has been held up far too long. So I hope the Senator from West Virginia will join me in trying to do away with--what was it that he said?--the ``silly, silly politics'' because when you look at the history of Latinos in America, it includes 60 Medal of Honor recipients, beginning with Phil Bazaar and John Ortega for their service in the Civil War. Latino contributions, including paying the ultimate sacrifice, is nothing new. And it includes, by the way, David M. Gonzales from my hometown of Pacoima for his bravery during World War II. The history of women in America includes the story of Dr. Mary Edwards Walker, also a Medal of Honor recipient. All these stories deserve to be told in a location of prominence. As I said yesterday morning when the Energy and Natural Resources Committee marked up and approved S. 858--I made remarks at the time clearly announcing my intention to offer this amendment when the Medal of Honor bill came up for consideration on the floor of the Senate, so here I am. It shouldn't be a surprise to anybody. I would urge my colleagues to agree to include my amendment so that all three of these bills can finally move forward after years and years of hard work and bipartisan support. Therefore, I would ask the Senator to modify his request so my amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; that the Justice substitute amendment, as amended, be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. PADILLA. Reserving the right to object, I want to set the record straight. The museum efforts that I talked about have gone through all the proper steps. There have been committee hearings. They have been approved by committee. They have been approved in prior Congresses separately by both Chambers, so they are ready to move. I am disappointed, frankly--not surprised--that the amendment is not accepted. Therefore, I object and would look forward to working with my colleague from West Virginia and anybody else to advance all three of these proposals as expeditiously as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, at the beginning of every year, the White House, on behalf of the President of the United States, and the Department of Defense come to Congress with a request. They come to Congress as a coequal branch of government to ask that we, Congress, authorize and appropriate the funding they need to defend our Nation and to protect our national interests on the world stage. And that request traditionally includes a justification and a rationale for the proposed plan. For over 60 years, Congress has met its responsibilities, not by rubberstamping the Department of Defense's requests but by, yes, identifying areas of agreement, identifying and negotiating or saying no to areas of disagreement, and, ultimately, passing, on a bipartisan basis, what we refer to as the National Defense Authorization Act, the final product reflecting the priorities of both Congress and the White House for protecting our Nation. That is how it normally works. But make no mistake, this year is anything but normal. What we have seen just 1 year into this second Trump administration is the destruction of eight decades of bipartisan foreign policy consensus and the destruction of postwar alliances that have kept Americans safe for generations. And we have seen growing abuses of power meant to enrich Donald Trump and his allies. And as best as I can tell, the Trump doctrine in his second term is a transactional national security and foreign policy, not of values but to the highest bidder. Under Trump, the United States has pulled away from NATO and grown closer to authoritarian dictators like Xi, Kim, and Putin, who Trump idolizes. He has engaged in repeated hostilities against our closest European democratic allies and cozied up to anyone who will shower him with gifts or praise or both. He is enabling Russia's plans to carve up Ukraine, a catastrophic decision that will only encourage future aggression and pain for innocent civilians. He has even threatened to forcibly annex Greenland from our ally Denmark. And, earlier this month, the Trump administration released its new National Security Strategy. And some folks may wonder: What is the National Security Strategy document? It is a blueprint that provides strategic guidance for the administration. It sets priorities and articulates a vision for achieving them--or at least it should. Trump's strategy rejects leading with democratic values in favor of making short-term, transactional alliances. It is a complete abandonment of the idea that democracies should stand together against authoritarian governments. And while it is foolish and shortsighted, it is also not surprising to hear Defense Secretary Hegseth recently declare, at the Reagan Defense Forum, an end to what he calls ``idealistic utopianism,'' while calling for a renewed focus on the Western Hemisphere. So what exactly does a renewed focus on the Western Hemisphere look like for the Trump administration? So far it has meant bombing alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean and Pacific, on shaky legal grounds--so shaky they won't release the legal opinion that they are using to try to justify it. Now, just this week, we heard the White House Chief of Staff--the White House Chief of Staff--admit on the record that Donald Trump ``wants to keep on blowing boats up until Maduro cries uncle.'' Folks, the fact of the matter is, Congress has not declared war, nor has Congress authorized the use of military force in Latin America. Do you want to have that debate? Let's have that debate. Let's put that up for a vote if you agree, but that has not happened yet. And we know the American people overwhelmingly oppose a military campaign there as well. But every week--it doesn't matter--Donald Trump keeps testing us to see just how much he can get away with, threatening now a land invasion of Venezuela and even seizing an oil tanker off its coast. Now, if this were solely about stopping drug traffickers, I don't think there would be disagreement or objection here to a law enforcement-based approach to do exactly that. Of course, we want to stop drug trafficking. But the Trump administration seemingly can't decide if it wants to be crime fighters or warmongers, and they have decided to use the U.S. military to bomb their way through the Caribbean either way. And that is the larger point here. Donald Trump wants unchallenged use of the military to achieve his every whim and every grievance--even when it means violating our international norms, betraying our allies, and violating the Constitution. How is that going to make us any safer? If we can't be trusted in Europe and if we are manufacturing conflicts in Central or South America, who would want to work with us in the future? And if the United States won't respect international law, why should we expect other countries to do so? But somehow, even more shocking, is what is happening domestically. Donald Trump is politicizing our servicemembers both by word and by deed. He has diverted military resources away from numerous--numerous-- critical missions for his chaotic and violent mass deportation campaign. He has federalized and deployed National Guard troops in American cities against our own citizens in violation of the law. That is why just last Friday the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered National Guard troops off the streets of Los Angeles, ruling the deployment was unlawful. But that won't stop Trump from targeting States and cities led by Democratic Governors and mayors for speaking out against his power grabs. Now, just imagine if President Biden would have federalized and deployed troops into Florida or Texas to combat gun violence. Republicans would be beside themselves. They would be apoplectic. Finally, when six of our colleagues published a video reminding servicemembers of their oath to the Constitution of the United States and reminding servicemembers about their obligation to refuse unlawful orders, Trump called that ``seditious behavior, punishable by death.'' And he demanded that the FBI and top Defense officials investigate them and intimidate them. This President is trying to corrupt the military for his own personal gain and to silence all opposition. He is pushing the legal limits of his authority. But through all those unprecedented and dangerous decisions, what has been the response from the Republican majority in Congress--both the House and the Senate? ``Sir. Yes, sir.'' Maybe not quite, but their silence has equaled acquiescence. Congress, under this Republican majority, is nowhere near acting like the ``equal branch of government'' that it is. Let's just look at the record from this past year. Congress, not just once but twice, failed to pass a War Powers Resolution and assert its constitutional authority in response to the escalating attacks in the Caribbean. In reaction to the controversial double-tap strike against survivors in the Caribbean, the Defense Department has refused to release videos so the American people can see for themselves what played out. And if it is too sensitive to release to the American public, then at least show it to all Members of the Senate, even if it is in a secure classified setting. But the Defense Department refuses to do even that. Meanwhile, congressional committees have failed to conduct our oversight responsibility and to demand it from the administration. With each passing day, Donald Trump continues to use the Department of Defense as an extension of his administration's border enforcement apparatus. Republicans have cheered him on the whole way, abdicating their responsibility to this institution, to their constituents, and to their oath of office. And even with a majority party bending to his will, the Trump administration is still floating proposals to blow up the bipartisan Defense appropriations process altogether and pursue a party-line reconciliation bill instead. Colleagues, this is the President doing everything he can to build unquestioned power over our military and a Republican Party that refuses to challenge him. At a time when the Trump administration is abusing its power, destroying our standing in the world, deploying troops against our own people, the annual Defense authorization bill offers an important opportunity. It is an opportunity to hold this administration accountable, not just out of responsibility to our constituents but to the Constitution and to this coequal branch of government. Mr. President, $900 billion is a lot to rubberstamp, and I refuse to hand this administration any more tools to enrich themselves and undermine our national security and our standing in the world. So for these reasons, I will be voting no on this year's NDAA and encourage all of you to do the same. I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Protecting Unique and Beautiful Landscapes by Investing in California, PUBLIC, Lands Act. This comprehensive bill would permanently protect over 900,000 acres of public lands and promote restoration on another 871,000 acres throughout northwest California, the central coast, and Los Angeles County. This bill includes protections for nearly 600,000 acres of new and proposed wilderness and nearly 700 miles of new wild and scenic rivers. This legislation would preserve our public lands for the benefit of current and future generations and help protect California communities from impacts of the climate crisis. The PUBLIC Lands Act is grounded in the best conservation principles: it expands access to the outdoors for all, addresses disparities in access to nature, supports locally led efforts, and is based in science. In northwest California, this bill would designate new wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, special management areas, and forest and watershed restoration areas. Importantly, it would increase wildfire resiliency in northwest California, where the impacts of the climate crisis have resulted in more frequent and severe wildfires. Along the central coast, the bill would designate nearly 250,000 acres of public land in the Los Padres National Forest and Carrizo Plain National Monument as wilderness and study the feasibility of creating a 400-mile long condor national recreation trail, stretching from Los Angeles to Monterey County. The designations in the bill would protect the abundant biodiversity that make the central coast so special. In Los Angeles County, this bill would designate nearly 30,000 acres of new wilderness, helping provide permanent protections so that future generations can enjoy the limited wild and untouched spaces in Southern California. The bill would also provide outdoor recreation opportunities for park-poor communities. This bill enjoys the support of hundreds of local municipalities and elected officials, community groups, businesses, and local outfitters. It is the product of significant public engagement in the legislative process spanning decades. I want to highlight that this legislation protects existing water rights, property rights, and land-use authorities. The bill also does not create any new public lands, rather, it protects existing public lands through wilderness designations in order to keep these lands as pristine as possible. The science is increasingly clear that we must conserve 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030 as part of ongoing efforts to solve the climate crisis, protect nature, and save America's wildlife. I am proud that the State of California has made significant strides to achieve this goal, and I am determined to do my part to protect our public lands and waters at the Federal level. I would like to thank my colleagues and conservation champions, Representatives Jared Huffman, Salud Carbajal, and Judy Chu, for championing these bills in the House. I also want to thank Senator Schiff for cosponsoring this bill and working toward our shared goal of promoting restoration, recreation, and conservation throughout California. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the PUBLIC Lands Act as quickly as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the Protecting Unique and Beautiful Landscapes by Investing in California, PUBLIC, Lands Act. This comprehensive bill would permanently protect over 900,000 acres of public lands and promote restoration on another 871,000 acres throughout northwest California, the central coast, and Los Angeles County. This bill includes protections for nearly 600,000 acres of new and proposed wilderness and nearly 700 miles of new wild and scenic rivers. This legislation would preserve our public lands for the benefit of current and future generations and help protect California communities from impacts of the climate crisis. The PUBLIC Lands Act is grounded in the best conservation principles: it expands access to the outdoors for all, addresses disparities in access to nature, supports locally led efforts, and is based in science. In northwest California, this bill would designate new wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, special management areas, and forest and watershed restoration areas. Importantly, it would increase wildfire resiliency in northwest California, where the impacts of the climate crisis have resulted in more frequent and severe wildfires. Along the central coast, the bill would designate nearly 250,000 acres of public land in the Los Padres National Forest and Carrizo Plain National Monument as wilderness and study the feasibility of creating a 400-mile long condor national recreation trail, stretching from Los Angeles to Monterey County. The designations in the bill would protect the abundant biodiversity that make the central coast so special. In Los Angeles County, this bill would designate nearly 30,000 acres of new wilderness, helping provide permanent protections so that future generations can enjoy the limited wild and untouched spaces in Southern California. The bill would also provide outdoor recreation opportunities for park-poor communities. This bill enjoys the support of hundreds of local municipalities and elected officials, community groups, businesses, and local outfitters. It is the product of significant public engagement in the legislative process spanning decades. I want to highlight that this legislation protects existing water rights, property rights, and land-use authorities. The bill also does not create any new public lands, rather, it protects existing public lands through wilderness designations in order to keep these lands as pristine as possible. The science is increasingly clear that we must conserve 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030 as part of ongoing efforts to solve the climate crisis, protect nature, and save America's wildlife. I am proud that the State of California has made significant strides to achieve this goal, and I am determined to do my part to protect our public lands and waters at the Federal level. I would like to thank my colleagues and conservation champions, Representatives Jared Huffman, Salud Carbajal, and Judy Chu, for championing these bills in the House. I also want to thank Senator Schiff for cosponsoring this bill and working toward our shared goal of promoting restoration, recreation, and conservation throughout California. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the PUBLIC Lands Act as quickly as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, as the Senator from Alaska, the Senator from Utah, and others know, I have been down here many times as we tried to work through a better way of ensuring that we have a fair and bipartisan and bicameral approach to passing these public lands bills. The Senator from Maine just articulated one of the concerns about the Senate passing House bills or the House passing the Senate bills. Let me be a little bit more blunt and direct, because I don't think we are quite there yet, but I do think we are seeing the beginning of a more equitable process developing. I was encouraged to see that, just earlier today, a Senate Republican bill and a Senate Democratic bill were packaged together as a single bill and sent over to the House. I think this approach is critical to ensuring that neither the House of Representatives nor the White House can discriminate against our Democratic priorities. So I hope that we are now going to see action on the House side on that bill and other Senate Democratic bills, like that of my colleague from Maine, that we have sent over. Therefore, as a gesture of good faith, I will not object to the passage of these four bills today, but I want to be very clear--I want to be clear with my colleagues in this body and our colleagues in the House of Representatives--that I will not consent to any additional House Republican public lands bills passing the Senate until the House passes and the White House signs into law these Senate Democratic bills. Good faith must go both ways. I think it is critical that all interested Senators have an opportunity to sit down, when we return in January, with the leadership of both the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the House Natural Resources Committee to finally hammer out what that fair, bipartisan, and bicameral approach to passing public lands bills will be. Now, I also acknowledge--and this may be a little insight for folks watching from home--that this year we have welcomed a new chair, in the Senate, of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, along with a new ranking member. On the House side, in the House Natural Resources Committee--which, Mr. President, you are very familiar with--the chairman there is not new, but as I understand it, given the rules of the Republican conference in the House, he is in his last session as chair, and there will soon be a new chair in the years ahead. There is a new ranking member of that committee in the House as well. So as there has been this transition of leadership in both Chambers in these two very important committees, I think it is even more timely to bring the leadership together with interested Senators to hammer out what the understanding will be to establish a fair, bipartisan, and bicameral approach to the consideration and approval of public lands bills. In that effort, I would appeal to our colleague from Alaska to help facilitate such a convening and the development of such an understanding and plan for going forward. So with my concerns being articulated and my request and suggested path forward being on the record now, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to reintroduce the Accountability for Federal Law Enforcement Act, legislation that would ensure that individuals whose constitutional or civil rights are violated by Federal law enforcement officers have access to justice. This legislation would amend 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 to include Federal law enforcement Agencies--defined as ``public employers''--alongside State and local actors. It would create a statutory right of action allowing individuals, regardless of citizenship, to seek damages for civil rights violations committed by Federal law enforcement officers. The bill would also allow suits against Federal Agencies when their employees violate constitutional rights, regardless of whether an Agency policy caused the harm, and would waive sovereign immunity for these claims to ensure that victims have access to redress in Federal court. Importantly, the bill preserves existing defenses for individual officers, leaving the qualified immunity doctrine unchanged. In recent months, Federal law enforcement Agencies have carried out high-profile raids and operations in communities across the country, including in California, where officers have been documented using violent and excessive tactics against immigrants, citizens, journalists, and bystanders. These incidents are not isolated; they reflect a broader pattern of unaccountable conduct that erodes public trust and undermines the legitimacy of Federal authority. When officers violate constitutional rights without consequence, the damage extends far beyond any single case. It deepens fear in already vulnerable communities and weakens faith in equal justice under law. Under current law, individuals may sue State and local officers for civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, but there is no statutory right to sue Federal officers for comparable violations. The only available remedy--the Bivens doctrine--has been sharply limited by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 1971, the Court recognized a damages remedy for certain Fourth Amendment violations by Federal officers. Subsequent decisions extended Bivens to a Fifth Amendment gender discrimination claim and an Eighth Amendment claim for inadequate medical care. However, the Court has since restricted Bivens to just those three limited contexts, foreclosing other types of violations and leaving victims of Federal misconduct without a remedy. The absence of accountability for Federal law enforcement misconduct cannot stand. Every person, citizen or not, should be able to seek redress when their constitutional rights are violated by those sworn to uphold them. The Accountability for Federal Law Enforcement Act would close this gap and reaffirm a fundamental principle: that the rule of law applies equally to all, including those who enforce it.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to reintroduce the Accountability for Federal Law Enforcement Act, legislation that would ensure that individuals whose constitutional or civil rights are violated by Federal law enforcement officers have access to justice. This legislation would amend 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 to include Federal law enforcement Agencies--defined as ``public employers''--alongside State and local actors. It would create a statutory right of action allowing individuals, regardless of citizenship, to seek damages for civil rights violations committed by Federal law enforcement officers. The bill would also allow suits against Federal Agencies when their employees violate constitutional rights, regardless of whether an Agency policy caused the harm, and would waive sovereign immunity for these claims to ensure that victims have access to redress in Federal court. Importantly, the bill preserves existing defenses for individual officers, leaving the qualified immunity doctrine unchanged. In recent months, Federal law enforcement Agencies have carried out high-profile raids and operations in communities across the country, including in California, where officers have been documented using violent and excessive tactics against immigrants, citizens, journalists, and bystanders. These incidents are not isolated; they reflect a broader pattern of unaccountable conduct that erodes public trust and undermines the legitimacy of Federal authority. When officers violate constitutional rights without consequence, the damage extends far beyond any single case. It deepens fear in already vulnerable communities and weakens faith in equal justice under law. Under current law, individuals may sue State and local officers for civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983, but there is no statutory right to sue Federal officers for comparable violations. The only available remedy--the Bivens doctrine--has been sharply limited by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 1971, the Court recognized a damages remedy for certain Fourth Amendment violations by Federal officers. Subsequent decisions extended Bivens to a Fifth Amendment gender discrimination claim and an Eighth Amendment claim for inadequate medical care. However, the Court has since restricted Bivens to just those three limited contexts, foreclosing other types of violations and leaving victims of Federal misconduct without a remedy. The absence of accountability for Federal law enforcement misconduct cannot stand. Every person, citizen or not, should be able to seek redress when their constitutional rights are violated by those sworn to uphold them. The Accountability for Federal Law Enforcement Act would close this gap and reaffirm a fundamental principle: that the rule of law applies equally to all, including those who enforce it.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to celebrate the life of Bob Foster, an enterprising business leader, clean energy visionary, and former mayor of the city of Long Beach, CA. Born on January 1, 1947, in Brooklyn, NY, Robert ``Bob'' Foster learned the value of hard work early by laying flooring with his father, a trade that eventually helped him pay his way through college at San Jose State University, where he graduated in 1969. In 1971, Bob was hired by the California State Senate Energy Committee, where his hard work and intellect earned him the position of chief of staff just a year later. Early on, Bob worked on legislation that would help lead to the creation of the California Energy Commission and establish statewide energy efficiency standards. In 1984, Bob was hired by Southern California Edison to serve as principal liaison to the California Legislature. After working his way up and helping SCE build up a pioneering renewable energy portfolio, in 2002, Bob became president of the company. But many Californians remember Bob best for his leadership in public office. In 2006, Bob was elected mayor of the city of Long Beach, a position he would hold for two terms. Not long into his first term, California and the Nation were plunged into the depths of the Great Recession. But even at a time of great economic uncertainty, as mayor, Bob's disciplined leadership and steady hand helped Long Beach weather the storm, stabilizing the city's finances and creating the first budget surplus in 14 years, making significant environmental investments in the Port of Long Beach, and bringing violent crime numbers down to the lowest point in over four decades. As longtime Long Beach City prosecutor Doug Haubert said: ``He was the kind of leader who knew it was up to him to make tough decisions. He had to lead us during the recession, and he did just that.'' Today, Bob's legacy lives on through the students of the ACE Academy at Jordan High School, learning construction and engineering; through the student-athletes at Long Beach State who are fortunate to receive the James Foster Endowed Scholarship, named after Bob's late son; and with all those who pass through the ``Bob Foster Civic Chambers.'' Angela and I send our love to Bob's wife Nancy and his entire family.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Office of Fusion Act. This bipartisan piece of legislation would establish an Office of Fusion at the Department of Energy to advance fusion energy, in partnership with the private sector, to accelerate research, development, demonstration, deployment, and market adoption of fusion technologies. Fusion has the potential to harness the power of the Sun--to manufacture near limitless energy for our homes, our economy, and our future. It is also a carbon-free source of power that can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and save the planet. My home State of California is home to more fusion companies than any other country in the world, and it is the energy of the future. The Lawrence Livermore National Lab in California has achieved ignition over five times, which highlights the exciting progress and potential of these technologies. We need to capitalize on this momentum to ensure that the United States remains the leader in fusion energy. This office will ensure that there are concentrated efforts to continue advancing this energy source. As we have heard this administration talk about repeatedly, energy dominance is one of their top priorities. To achieve this goal, we need to continue investing in fusion technologies to ensure that we can scale up these technologies to reach commercialization. I want to thank my good friend and colleague Senator Cornyn for leading this effort with me, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this necessary piece of legislation.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Office of Fusion Act. This bipartisan piece of legislation would establish an Office of Fusion at the Department of Energy to advance fusion energy, in partnership with the private sector, to accelerate research, development, demonstration, deployment, and market adoption of fusion technologies. Fusion has the potential to harness the power of the Sun--to manufacture near limitless energy for our homes, our economy, and our future. It is also a carbon-free source of power that can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and save the planet. My home State of California is home to more fusion companies than any other country in the world, and it is the energy of the future. The Lawrence Livermore National Lab in California has achieved ignition over five times, which highlights the exciting progress and potential of these technologies. We need to capitalize on this momentum to ensure that the United States remains the leader in fusion energy. This office will ensure that there are concentrated efforts to continue advancing this energy source. As we have heard this administration talk about repeatedly, energy dominance is one of their top priorities. To achieve this goal, we need to continue investing in fusion technologies to ensure that we can scale up these technologies to reach commercialization. I want to thank my good friend and colleague Senator Cornyn for leading this effort with me, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this necessary piece of legislation.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I am so proud to have Senator Schiff as a partner in representing our home State of California. As you have heard me say many, many times before, California is not just home to nearly 40 million people; we are not just the most populous State in the Nation; we are also proud to be the most diverse State in the Nation and are proud to represent the largest economy of any State in the Nation. California has become the fourth largest economy in the world. It is a true honor and responsibility for each of us to represent our respective States, and I think it is especially so for the great State of California. While it can be complex at times and does require a lot of work all of the time, I have no doubt that Senator Schiff is doing and will continue to do a tremendous job. Now, a lot of us, as Members of the Senate, have already begun to know Senator Schiff through his remarks here today, through his participation in our caucus meetings and lunches, and through his participation in committee hearings or even in just one-on-one sessions. But as the country learned just a little bit more today, it is no surprise that, given his life journey and that of his family, and his professional experience, which included as assistant U.S. attorney, prior to elected office; his State of California service in the legislature, prior to his coming to Congress, a couple of decades ago-- combined with the commitment and clear passion, along with his professionalism and his work ethic and his integrity, it is no surprise that he is a true champion for so many things, including for a grower and farm worker alike, for reproductive rights, for labor rights, for so many issues and values that we hold dear. And they include speaking truth to power--not just, but especially, to the President of the United States--when it is called for, and it is being called for so often in these times that we are living in. One of the things that so many of us admire about Senator Schiff is his willingness to do so without hesitation, despite being a constant target of threats and attacks by the President of United States. So, folks, it has been about a year. A lot more time, a lot more work, a lot more impact to come from Senator Schiff, not just for the benefit of the State of California but for the United States of America and the longevity of our Constitution. I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, we are here today just about a month after the longest shutdown in American history. You all remember the 43 days that we went without a fully functioning Federal Government. Let's remember why that happened. Plain and simple, it was because our Republican colleagues refused to take steps to save healthcare for millions of Americans. In large part--I don't know if it was an individual choice or simply because there was no direction from the White House to come in and do so. All I know is that our Republican colleagues in Congress refused to come to the table, refused to negotiate with Democrats, refused to acknowledge that we were literally weeks away from a crisis that will kick millions of people--millions of Americans--off their health insurance unless Congress acts. That is the point Democrats are trying to make, and that is the issue we were trying to address during the shutdown because the appropriations process is the opportunity to address a crisis that is right around the corner. Now, eventually, yes, a handful of my Democratic colleagues took the Republican majority at their word that after voting to reopen government, addressing this spike in healthcare costs was the next order of business. At the time, I expressed my skepticism to go along with a promise to fix something later from a party that earlier this year enacted the biggest cuts in history to Medicaid. I find it hard to take the word of the Republican majority that they are committed to addressing healthcare costs and to expanding coverage to more Americans when they just kicked 15 million Americans off their insurance. So, yes, just about a month after this longest shutdown in American history, we now find ourselves 3 weeks away from the expiration of the Affordable Care Act tax credits that so many of us are talking about. Now, have hope because Democrats are here with a plan. We will ask this body to vote on a straightforward, 3-year extension of these lifesaving subsidies that we all support. The question will be, Are there enough Republicans that will join us in doing so? Keep people on their healthcare, and we can do the policy work and negotiation to address some of the genuine concerns that we have heard about over these last couple of months. But don't let health coverage lapse for millions of Americans. This isn't a game. We are 3 weeks away from the catastrophic spike of costs in health insurance for so many. Over 20 million Americans are on the verge of seeing their monthly premiums not just increase but skyrocket. Four million Americans could be forced to give up their insurance altogether, including 400,000 in California, my home State. The increase in premiums mean hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars more monthly--not annually but monthly--for working families, working families who are already having a tough time making ends meet as costs are rising all around them: cost of groceries, cost of energy bills, cost of housing, and now cost of healthcare too? It is to the point that Americans are having to make these tough-- tough--choices: Do I pay the rent? Do I pay the water bill? Do I pay the light bill? Can I even afford health insurance next year for my family? That is a truly heartbreaking decision that is happening all across the country. I know you are hearing from your constituents, and I am hearing from mine. I hear from people like Lisa, a single mom from Meadow Valley, CA, who was diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease in 1996. Thank God today Lisa is cancer-free, in no small part thanks to her regular checkups and the affordable healthcare plan that she can participate in because of these tax credits. But in 2026, Lisa isn't just looking after herself and her own health, she is looking after her son. She is a single parent. She is looking after her parents as they are aging. They are now in their eighties, and she is wondering whether this lapse in tax credits might put her necessary treatments out of reach. So I am here not just speaking up, I am here fighting for her. I hear from people like Lana, a small business owner in Oakland, CA, who has two kids in college--and college isn't cheap--and she says: It is tough to be in the middle class right now. Lana is so determined to give her kids a good education, but with less financial aid available--right, don't get me started on what else has been cut by this Republican majority in Congress--for her, it fundamentally means redirecting money that would otherwise go to her retirement plan. So imagine that, having to choose between investing in your future retirement or your kids' education or your access to healthcare. While the subsidies for the ACA premiums still exist, she is able to make it work. Without those subsidies, she doesn't know what is going to have to go. Do you give up your healthcare? Do you have to start dipping into your retirement, putting your future financial security at risk, or do you give up your kid's dreams of higher education? Again, that painful choice is the reality for so many families right now, and so I am fighting for them too. But I can go on and on with story after story, example after example. It doesn't have to be this way. That is why Democrats have put forward this serious, tangible plan to avoid this fiscal crisis, this healthcare cost crisis for families across the country. And the fact of the matter is, our Republican colleagues don't have a serious plan. Look no further than to the fact that it is the eleventh hour now, and they have put forward a proposal that wouldn't lower premiums for a single American. In fact, it would make the problem worse. It would allow the tax credits to expire. It would increase premiums and deductibles for tens of millions of Americans. It will push many people into what may be referred to as the ``bronze plan'' or, in reality, a catastrophic plan, the least comprehensive coverage on the market with sky-high deductibles. And some of these plans you get a thousand-dollar coupon. That doesn't do a hell of a lot when these drug plans are forcing families to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket before the insurance even kicks in, and it certainly won't protect people from financial ruin when they get truly, truly sick. But, sadly, it is not surprising. It is not shocking. This is an eleventh-hour proposal idea coming from a party that for 15 years has been talking about repeal and replace--not just attacking the ACA. They vow to repeal and replace. Repeal and replace. No shortage of efforts to repeal the ACA, but in 15 years, they haven't come up with a plan to replace it, certainly not a better plan to replace the ACA. So let's get real. We know that this will cause hardship, and the hardship and the pain that is so tragic is made worse because we know it is preventable. So let's vote tomorrow and pass this clean 3-year extension of the ACA tax credits if we are to improve upon the policy and the plans that are in place. It is not controversial, folks. The overwhelming majority of American people support extending the ACA tax credits and not just supportive of what we are doing, Americans are demanding that we do something about the cost of healthcare and the cost of living overall. You have seen Trump's approval ratings on the economy, haven't you? I know you are well aware of the election results from last month when an overwhelming majority of Americans cast their ballots rejecting Trump and Republican policies that are putting billionaires over the needs of working families. They are fed up. They are demanding that their government do something to help them get by; to help them survive, in many cases; to address the affordability crunch, a true crisis that Donald Trump dismisses as a ``con job'' and as a ``hoax.'' So here we are on the eve of a truly consequential vote to prevent costs from rising for the American people, to prevent healthcare from becoming out of reach for too many families. Here is our chance as a body to truly do something about that. So I urge everybody to vote yes, and let's help millions of Americans keep their healthcare come the new year because we know that a ``no'' vote will only rip that care away from millions of families. The choice, the conscience, couldn't be any more clear. I yield the floor.