John Thune

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Iowa (Ms. Ernst), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan).

Mr. THUNE

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Well, Mr. President, it is about time for Democrats' weekly exercise in election-year politics. Later today, we will take up another bill intended to provide a talking point for Democrat candidates, and the Democrat leader hopes to put Republicans in a tight spot. But if he thinks to see Republicans quaking in their boots over being asked to take these votes, he should think again, because we welcome the chance to talk about the Democrat agenda. Take this afternoon's exercise. Under the guise of protecting access to contraception--something that is not under threat--the Democrat leader is bringing up legislation that would not only funnel money to Democrats' allies at Planned Parenthood but would wipe out--wipe out-- conscience protections for healthcare providers. The bill specifically targets the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was bipartisan legislation passed in 1993--back, I might add, when Democrats actually believed in protecting our First Amendment freedoms. And this is not the first time Democrats have attempted to carve out sweeping exceptions to this once widely supported legislation. Apparently, Americans are free to live out their deeply held moral and religious beliefs when they don't conflict with Democrats' policy positions. It is deeply disturbing that the Democrat leader has gone from sponsoring--sponsoring--the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to attempting to decide when and how Americans can exercise one of their fundamental First Amendment rights. If the Democrat leader thinks that Republicans are intimidated to cast a vote against legislation that would seriously imperil Americans' ability to live according to their consciences, well, as I said, he should think again. I suspect there are few Americans who don't recognize the Democrat leader's politicking for exactly what it is, just as I suspect there are few Americans who bought Democrats' border legislation ploy 2 weeks ago. The Democrat leader apparently thought that he could erase Americans' memories of 3-plus years of chaos at the southern border under President Biden by bringing up a vote on a border bill that he knew would not be able to pass the Senate, but I think he will find that Americans' memories are more retentive than that. Three years of national security crisis were not wiped out by a show vote intended to provide electoral cover for Democrats, just as they won't be wiped out by President Biden's latest election-year ploy--an Executive order to implement border restrictions the likes of which he should have implemented years ago. If anything, any improvements at the border stemming from the President's latest measure will only serve to highlight the President's failure to address this crisis earlier and the needless danger to which he has subjected Americans. I mentioned that the Democrat leader knew his border show vote would fail, just as he knows his Planned Parenthood subsidy, anti-religious freedom legislation will fail this afternoon. That, of course, points to the fundamental unseriousness of what the Democrat leader is doing. If the Democrat leader had any real interest in legislating on these issues, he would be working with Republicans to bring up legislation that actually has a chance of receiving the support from both Democrats and Republicans. Senator Joni Ernst, for example, has legislation to promote access to contraception, but that is not the legislation Senator Schumer is bringing up because these votes have nothing to do with legislating and everything to do with boosting Democrats' electoral chances--he hopes-- in this fall's elections. I suspect the exercises in election politics will continue. Look for this to be the summer of show votes here in the U.S. Senate. As I said, Republicans are ready for it. We are happy to talk about the Democrat agenda, whether that is the President's disastrous border policies--or lack thereof--or Democrats' never-ending inflation crisis, or another attempt by the Democrat leader to force through legislation to legalize abortion up until the moment of birth. All the show votes in the world won't erase Democrats' record, as Democrats may discover, to their cost. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun), the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun), the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Johnson), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun), the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Kennedy), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Romney), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, a couple of weeks ago at a White House press briefing, the President's Press Secretary was asked why the President isn't doing anything on the border, given the fact that he has the authority to act unilaterally. And the White House Press Secretary responded: But why should he have to do it unilaterally? Why should he have to do it unilaterally? It was, perhaps, a typical response from a White House that would like to portray itself as the victim of the border crisis rather than the cause, a White House that would prefer Congress take action on the border rather than run the risk of taking action itself and annoying some Democratic voters. But it was an outrageous statement, nonetheless. Why should he have to do it unilaterally? Well, for starters, because President Biden is the President and thus bears a special responsibility for our national security and because, as President, he has the authority to take a number of measures to help secure our Nation's border. For a President not to do anything in the face of the kind of crisis we are dealing with is unconscionable. But most of all, President Biden should be taking action because he is responsible for this border crisis. Why should he have to take action unilaterally? Because he created this border crisis unilaterally. On the day he took office, the President began dismantling the border security policies of his predecessor, and illegal immigration began surging in response. It has never stopped. The President has presided over not 1, not 2, but 3 successive years of recordbreaking illegal immigration. With more than a million and a half illegal crossings so far this year, it is entirely possible he could end up presiding over a fourth. Those recordbreaking immigration numbers I mentioned don't even convey the full magnitude of the problem. In addition to the staggering 7.8 million-plus illegal border encounters recorded under President Biden, we have also seen huge numbers of ``got-aways,'' and those are individuals that the Border Patrol saw but was unable to apprehend. Of course we have no idea how many unknown ``got-aways'' there have been, and that is a serious national security problem. When turning yourself in to the Border Patrol with a claim for asylum is likely to result in years of essentially legal permanent residence or, as we discovered this weekend, de facto amnesty, it is especially concerning that we have hundreds of thousands of individuals choosing not to turn themselves in and escaping into the interior of the country. Some of them may simply be in search of a better life, but it is highly likely that others may have more malign intentions. U.S. Border Patrol Chief Jason Owens, in a March interview with CBS News, said the number of known ``got-aways'' is keeping him up at night. This is his quote: That is a national security threat. Border security is a big piece of national security. And if we don't know who is coming into our country and we don't know what their intent is, that is a threat. And they're exploiting a vulnerability that's on our border right now. That same month, FBI Director Christopher Wray told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: We are seeing a wide array of very dangerous threats that emanate from the border. Let me repeat that. From the FBI Director: ``We are seeing a wide array of very dangerous threats that emanate from the border.'' He also noted, alarmingly: There is a particular network that has--where some of the overseas facilitators of the smuggling network have ISIS ties that we're very concerned about. There is a particular network that has--where some of the overseas facilitators of the smuggling network have ISIS ties that we're very concerned about. As I said, it would be unconscionable for any President to stand by and watch a crisis like the one we are facing at our southern border without taking action. The fact that President Biden has allowed this national security crisis to rage for 3-plus years unchecked is a betrayal of his responsibilities as President. While protecting our national security may not have motivated this President, protecting his election prospects apparently does. With polls showing immigration as a top issue, Democrats have been rushing to give the impression that they are serious about border security. Now we are hearing that President Biden may be announcing measures to secure the border, possibly as soon as today. I will believe it when I see it, especially given this weekend's report that the Biden administration has been offering mass amnesty to hundreds of thousands of individuals whose asylum cases have been closed without a decision. It does sound like the President will be announcing something, and I hope it will involve some real reforms. But it is disturbing that it is taking the fear of losing an election to motivate the President to take action on a national security crisis that has raged for more than 3 years, and it raises serious questions about how long the President's interest in border security will last. If he wins another term, will he still care about the border, or does it take an election to keep him motivated about his national security responsibilities? At any rate, if concern for our national security won't do it, let's hope that his fear of defeat in November will indeed motivate the President to actually get the situation at our southern border under control. Given his record so far, though, I am not holding my breath. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Hoeven), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. McConnell), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch), and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, let me just say a word of welcome today to Pastor Adam Weber. You heard him offer the opening prayer today. I am very privileged to have him here, and Adam is someone whose family I have known for a long time. I sort of watched him grow up, if you will. He is a Milbank, SD, native, a graduate of Augustana College, and at the young age of 24, started a church called Embrace Church in Sioux Falls, SD. And at that time, I think their first service had 32 people. His office was a Chevy Cavalier, and a decade later, it was one of the fastest growing churches, literally, in this entire country. They have continued to grow through the years and they will do it the same way they always have and that is one person at a time. Embrace's heart is to relentlessly reach the next person for Jesus. It is something that Adam lives out. He seeks out strangers. He goes for what he calls ``nonfluff'' conversations, and he reaches people, lots and lots of people, with the good news of the Gospel. And I have had the opportunity to attend services at Embrace along with my wife. Adam also has a podcast which reaches literally thousands and thousands of people that I have listened to. He interviews people from all walks of life and talks to them about their spiritual formation, and it is very meaningful to his listeners and certainly has been important in my life, too, as we try to apply the truth of the Scriptures at a time when we face enormous challenges as a country and in a lot of our communities across the country. So I am delighted to have Adam here, thankful for his ministry, and grateful to Chaplain Black for making it possible for him to be Chaplain for the day. And I would tell my colleagues what I have said many times before, and that is that we do have a Bible study the Chaplain leads on a weekly basis, Thursday at noon, and encourage all of my colleagues to attend. It has been enormously important to me through the years in keeping me anchored and grounded on the solid rock at times when things can be very uncertain and sometimes tumultuous around us. So I am grateful for the Chaplain for his leadership here and delighted to have Pastor Adam Weber from Sioux Falls, SD, and Embrace Church with us here today in the U.S. Senate.

Mr. THUNE

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

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, May is a month dedicated to honoring our military. We have Armed Forces Day, which we celebrated this past Saturday; Memorial Day, which will be observed on Monday; and the entire month is observed as Military Appreciation Month. Ronald Reagan is reported to have said: Some people live an entire lifetime and wonder if they have ever made a difference in the world. The Marines don't have that problem. I would just expand on that a little bit and say that our military members don't have to ask that question and don't have that problem. If you want to see people living a life of purpose, just look to the men and women of the U.S. military--the men and women who get up every day ready to defend our freedom, to the point of laying down their lives if necessary. Many of our military members enter right after high school or college. At an age when their counterparts are thinking about graduations and internships and taking the first steps toward careers, these men and women take a different path. They embrace a life of regimentation and rollcalls, of tough physical and mental demands, a life that asks them to forgo comfort for sacrifice, up to and including the sacrifice of their lives, and they do it willingly. Most of us don't often see the sacrifices our military men and women make, so it can be easy for us to forget, as we go about our daily lives, that those lives are only possible because these men and women spend their lives working to defend our country. During this Military Appreciation Month, my thoughts turn to those South Dakotans serving in our Armed Forces and particularly to the men and women of the South Dakota National Guard and our airmen at Ellsworth Air Force Base. Our South Dakota military members represent the very best of our State, and I am grateful every day for their service and sacrifice. I am proud to report that the 28th Bomb Wing at Ellsworth Air Force Base was named the best bomb wing in Air Force Global Strike Command during the past year. I am excited that Ellsworth broke ground this spring on a new weapons generation facility--part of the construction to prepare the base to become the first home of the B-21 Raider. I am also proud that the Black Hills region, home to Ellsworth and the South Dakota National Guard's Camp Rapid, was named to the 2024 Class of Great American Defense Communities. South Dakotans know and value the sacrifices made by our military men and women, and I am tremendously proud of how the Black Hills region has worked to support our airmen and National Guard members. A discussion of Military Appreciation Month would not be complete without mentioning our military families. It is not just our men and women in uniform who serve and sacrifice; it is their families as well. Life as a military spouse or as a son or daughter of a military member is often challenging. There are frequent moves and deployments, and most of all, there is the knowledge that one day your husband or wife, your mom or your dad could be asked to give up their life for their country. So, as we honor our military members this month, it is right that we honor and remember the sacrifices of their families as well. In his 1941 proclamation of Bill of Rights Day, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said: Those who have long enjoyed such privileges as we enjoy forget in time that men have died to win them. Those who have long enjoyed such privileges as we enjoy forget in time that men have died to win them. As we go about our lives in peace and safety, it can be all too easy to forget that that peace and safety have been purchased at a price, that they have been purchased with the blood of the men and women who have laid down their lives to secure them. On this Monday above all, on Memorial Day, we should resolve to remember--to remember and to recommit ourselves to living lives worthy of their sacrifice. May God take to Himself all those who have fallen in the service of our country, and may He comfort their families, and may He bless and protect the men and women of the U.S. military. I yield the floor.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Ricketts), and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Scott).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, last month, President Biden announced yet another student loan giveaway. Among other things, this latest scheme would waive accrued and capitalized interest for certain borrowers and, staggeringly, provide significant loan forgiveness for three-quarters of a million borrowers with an average household income--get this--of $312,976. That is right. President Biden's latest reckless expenditure of taxpayer dollars would go, in part, to providing loan forgiveness to three-quarters of a million borrowers with an average household income above $300,000. All told, the President's latest student loan giveaway will cost nearly $150 billion. That is on top of the $475 billion in loan forgiveness the President announced last summer. That scheme, which the administration dubbed the Saving on a Valuable Education Plan, will implement de facto loan forgiveness on a massive scale by creating a system in which the majority of future Federal borrowers will never fully repay their student loans. The Department of Education estimated that borrowers with only undergraduate debt enrolled in the SAVE Program can, on average, expect to pay back just $6,121 for each $10,000 that they borrow. That amounts to the Federal Government taking on, on average, almost 40 percent of the cost of these borrowers' student loans. There are so many problems with the President's plan it is difficult to even know where to begin. First, there is the staggering cost of these and other Biden administration student loan programs. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, where the President's own Treasury Secretary used to sit on the board, had this to say: Including the Biden administration's new student debt cancellation plan, we estimate all recent student debt cancellation policies will cost a combined $870 billion to $1.4 trillion. That's more than all federal spending on higher education over the nation's entire history. That, again, is a quote from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Let me just repeat that last line: That's more than all federal spending on higher education over the nation's entire history. And ``the vast majority of this debt cancellation,'' the committee goes on, ``was put in place through executive actions under President Biden.'' So the staggering cost of President Biden's giveaways is one major problem, especially when you consider another major problem, which is that the President's giveaways will do nothing to fix the actual problem, which is the cost of higher education. In fact, they could very well make things worse. For one, there is reason to fear that his student loan giveaways could actually encourage colleges to raise their prices. And, of course, the President's giveaways will do nothing to encourage students to only borrow what they can afford. Indeed, there is a good chance students will increase their borrowing as a result of the President's plans. President Biden's student loan schemes will cost a massive amount of money, while doing nothing to solve higher education costs. But the problems don't end there. To start with, there is the question of whether or not what the President is doing is even lawful. Last summer, the Supreme Court struck down the President's original student loan forgiveness plan because the President lacked the statutory authority to forgive student loans, and there is reason to wonder whether his SAVE Plan or these latest measures could be struck down in the courts as well. Of course, on top of all of these issues, there is also the fundamental issue, and that is the unfairness of asking taxpayers who never went to college or worked hard to pay off the full balance of their student loans or who worked their way through school to avoid a heavy loan burden or who covered the costs of their education by enlisting in the military and risking their lives for their country to shoulder the massive cost of all this loan forgiveness. Why should someone who never went to college be taking on the burden of loan forgiveness for borrowers making in excess of $300,000 a year? Then, of course, there is the troubling message sent to students when we teach them that they can expect to be bailed out for the debt they take on, even though they agreed to repay it. I could go on. The President announced his first student loan forgiveness scheme 2 months before the 2022 congressional elections. I don't think there is a coincidence about that, and I suspect it is no coincidence that he expects to implement his latest student loan giveaway this fall before the 2024 election. Last week, I joined Senator Cassidy and Congresswoman Foxx on a bicameral letter to the Secretary of Education, urging him to withdraw this latest plan. But, unfortunately, I suspect that the President and his administration won't be withdrawing anything that they think could win them a few votes in November. So the American people will, once again, have to endure yet another disastrous Biden administration spending plan. I yield the floor.

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley), and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley), and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley), and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley), and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty) and the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley).

Mr. THUNE

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

Mr. THUNE

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, April border numbers came out last week, bringing us up to more than 1\1/2\ million migrant encounters at the southern border so far in fiscal year 2024--1\1/2\ million in just 7 months. Between official U.S. Customs and Border Protection encounters and known ``got-aways''--which are individuals the Border Patrol saw but were unable to apprehend--we are closing in on a staggering 10 million migrant encounters at our southern border under President Biden. That is substantially more than the population of New York City. In fact, it is more than the population of all but the largest U.S. States, if you can believe that. And there are still 8 more months in the President's term. After 3 years of half measures, deflections, and outright ignoring the raging crisis at our Nation's border, the President and Democrats appear to have finally woken up to the fact that their border crisis might be a major political liability for them in the upcoming election. Fear for their election prospects is doing what 3 years of chaos at the southern border could not, and that is get them focused on illegal immigration--sort of, because the vote on border legislation the Democrat leaders announced for this week isn't really about addressing illegal immigration; it is about giving the American people the impression that Democrats care about illegal immigration. If the Democrat leader were serious about addressing the crisis at our southern border, he would be bringing up legislation that actually stood a chance of making it out of both Houses of Congress and to the President's desk, but he is not. Instead he is bringing up a vote that he knows will fail in the hope of giving political cover to vulnerable Democrats and with the side benefit, he hopes, of putting Republicans in a difficult spot--political theater at its finest. If the Democrat leader goes through with this vote this week, he should expect some difficult conversations. Perhaps he would like to explain why, if Democrats are so concerned about illegal immigration and securing the border, they have repeatedly banded together this year to oppose--to oppose--commonsense amendments that came to the floor. You would think that if Democrats were really worried about addressing the illegal immigration crisis, they might have supported Senator Blackburn's motion to allow State and local law enforcement to detain criminal illegal aliens for ICE to deport them. Or Senator Lankford's amendment to prohibit funding from being used to release special-interest aliens--those are individuals who may pose a threat to the United States--during legal proceedings. Or Senator Hagerty's amendments to prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to fly illegal immigrants into the United States or to have them count in the census. The list goes on. It is hard to understand why anyone would oppose such commonsense measures, and yet all Democrats did. So it is just a little hard to swallow their newfound enthusiasm for border security. Needless to say, it is not just Democrats in Congress scrambling for political cover. The President is also desperately trying to make himself appear serious on the border. Two weeks ago, the Department of Homeland Security proposed a rule to expedite the deportation of criminals and terrorists. But if the President thought this would make him look serious on border security, he was wrong because the President's new order is a reversal of his own policy, which was established earlier in his administration. That is right. The only reason the President had to finally allow for the immediate deportation of criminals and terrorists is because his administration had created a situation that allowed these individuals to stay in the country in the first place. Look, I am glad President Biden is making a small attempt to clear up part of the mess he has made, but I am afraid the ``Vote for me; I am cleaning up the historic disaster I have created'' may not be the most convincing election slogan. Let's be very clear. We are here today with 3 successive years of recordbreaking illegal immigration at our southern border because of President Biden. On the day he took office, the President began dismantling the border security policies of his predecessor that, I might add, had been working. Illegal immigration began surging in response, and it has never stopped. So while I appreciate that my Democratic colleagues would like to make it seem like this is a congressional matter in order to take the President off the hook and put Republicans on it, the truth is, we don't need congressional action to fix the crisis at our southern border. President Biden created this border crisis, and he can end it today using the very same authority he used to dismantle so many border security policies when he became President. We have 5 more months until election day, and I suspect this won't be the last attempt by Democrats to try to convince people that they want to address illegal immigration. But after 3-plus years of a Democrat- created border crisis, will the American people really believe--really believe--that the arsonists who started the fire are really serious about putting it out? I yield the floor.