Chris Van Hollen

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise to honor the memory of the late Terrance Taylor, a treasured Marylander and true public servant who served in Congressman Steny Hoyer's office for over two decades, including as his district director. Terrance's expertise and unwavering commitment to service touched countless lives across Maryland's Fifth Congressional District. He embodied the very best of public service: compassionate, dependable, and driven by a tireless dedication to ensuring that Marylanders received the assistance and benefits they deserved. Whether it was a veteran seeking benefits, a senior navigating bureaucratic redtape, or a community rebuilding after hardship, Terrance was always there as a steadfast, patient, and kind advocate. Beyond his outstanding professional contributions, Terrance will also be remembered as a devoted husband to his wife Candace and as a loving father to his son Simon. Terrance leaves a legacy of leadership, compassion, and good humor. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing appreciation for and paying respects to Terrance's legacy and memory, with gratitude for his impact on the people of Maryland and our Nation.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I call up my amendment No. 2585 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I know it has been a long day's journey into the night, but I think Senators were surprised to learn that this bill has a $100 million slush fund directed to OMB. So that would be on top of its existing budget. This is at a time when FEMA grants to many of our States have been canceled; grants for law enforcement have been frozen; grants for victims of crimes are on hold. That is not efficiency. That is creating chaos and uncertainty, and I ask my colleagues: Why in the world would we want to send another $100 million to OMB? They are currently before the Appropriations Committee with their current request for fiscal year 2026. They want a 13-percent increase there; we will consider their request. They, of course, are telling everybody else to do more with less, but they want more. We should get rid of this wasteful spending. They don't need $100 million. And so I am proposing to strike the $100 million, reduce the deficit at least by $100 million. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I would say the best way to save taxpayer money is right now--

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague and the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, Senator Merkley. I just want to start by reading a statement. This is a quote: Anyone that says current policy baseline [is the right way to go] is engaging in intellectual and economic fraud . . . it's intellectually lazy. My basic mission in life is just to try to create some honest math. That wasn't from Senator Van Hollen or anyone on this floor; that is from a Republican Member of the House, Congressman Schweikert from Arizona, talking about exactly the issue we are debating here in the U.S. Senate. Let me read you another quote--a little more colorful--again about this Republican accounting fraud: This is fairy dust, and they're [just] full of crap. And I'm gonna call them out on it. That is Republican Congressman Chip Roy of Texas. They are right. This is a fraud. This is a fraud that would make the Enron scammers blush. I quote those House Members for a reason, because we can disagree with what they did in their bill--and I strongly disagree with it--but at least they used honest math, and at least they used the math that is required by the rules here in the Senate, the honest math that Republicans here in the Senate want to dodge because it will both tell the American people just how big the deficits are but also because it will screw up their whole entire plan. Just so people listening have some sense of how these Senate numbers are designed to disguise the real impact of their deficits, look at, for example, the basic individual tax rates in the House bill. When they extended those tax rates from the Trump 2017 bill, it cost $2.2 trillion under what we call the current law baseline, which is the reality baseline because that is what it will cost when you understand that they sunset at the end of this year, and that is what it will cost to renew them. So under honest accounting, it is $2.2 trillion. Under the Senate fraudulent accounting, that $2.2 trillion deficit miraculously becomes an $83 billion deficit. Let's look at the House permanent extension of key deductions for businesses. That would cost--honest accounting--$821 billion; under the Senate accounting scam, $6 billion. So what we are seeing here is this blatant, deliberate effort to mislead the American people about the true costs of this bill, about the deficit impacts of this bill, about how it will impact the debt. We all know that when the debt goes up and we have to put more of our costs on Uncle Sam's credit card, it puts upward pressure on interest rates. That means Americans will pay higher interest rates on their mortgages, on their car loans, and everything else. So when you try to hide the deficit impact, you really are trying to fool the American people, and we are here to blow the whistle. Now, I just want to show our colleagues something that was put together by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. If you look at the blue, you can see that for each year, starting this year--2025, 2026--the blue is what Senate Republicans claim their bill will add to the deficit. The red is how much more it will actually add to the deficit. So at the end of this 10-year period, what you see is that Senate Republicans are claiming that their bill will add $441 billion, which is still a big number, but the real number, when you do honest accounting, when you add up all of these, is $4.2 trillion--a much bigger number. I do want to point something out on this chart that I think everybody watching should understand. If you look at these orange parts--these are the additional deficits from tax cuts--starting here, in year 2029, 2030, you will see that they actually do start going down. Why is that? It is because the tax cut that President Trump promised for no tax on tips--they phase those out. This is all just a make-believe ruse: Yes, we start providing no tax on tips, but those disappear. The tax breaks for wealthy people--they go on, and they go on not just for this 10-year period. But the reason they violate all the rules of reconciliation is because they keep going on after that. As Senator Merkley said, if you look at the entire history of the Byrd rule--that is Senator Byrd--it was designed to make sure that 51 Senators, through a vote, could not make these kinds of permanent changes in any area, but specifically they were worried about areas that would increase the national deficit and debt. So what Republican Senators are doing is not only misleading the American people, but they are violating the entire structure that carved out this special procedure that we call reconciliation for the budget, which was intended to lower deficits and debts, not have them go on forever. As Senator Merkley has pointed out, I think if you look over a 30- year period, we are talking about $35 trillion-plus additional to the debt, and Republicans want to hide that from the American people. That is budget fraud, pure and simple, and it is a violation of the rules of the U.S. Senate, this whole special structure that was created not to blow bigger holes in the debt and deficits but to actually try to constrain them. So shame on everybody who is part of this fraud on the American people. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I will.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. So they are simply saying--their current policy baseline that they want us to make believe about would say that this wouldn't cost them; in other words, if they extended this, it wouldn't cost anything. It is interesting to note--and not only does that expose the fraud behind the current policy baseline, but they made a very deliberate choice. Even though they now say that they can make these tax cuts permanent and still comply with the rules, they decided to make the tax cuts for very rich people permanent. But even though they say it is not going to cost anything anymore to provide tax cuts with no tax on tips, they are phasing those out. And all of these areas are where President Trump made promises that he was going to take care of some working people. Well, those go away fast. The tax cuts for the rich, they go on for not just a full 10 years, but they keep going, which is why this is a violation of the entire reconciliation process.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Clearly, they are not. I mean, this is literally magical thinking. This is why Republican Congressman Chip Roy called this ``fairy dust'' and why the Congressman from Arizona said this was pure intellectual and economic fraud. That is what it is. That is the bottom line.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Well, the Senator is right. It was right down this hall, actually, that President Trump was sworn in, and he said it was going to be a new golden age for working people. Well, as you are pointing out and this chart clearly shows and their own budget reveals, it is clearly a golden age for billionaires and people who make a lot of money. And, in this bill, they make sure that that golden age for very rich people goes on forever. They had a few little crumbs that they were throwing for a little while, we can see, to others, but just for a little while and just small amounts compared to the golden age for the billionaires.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I just want to say, to answer the question from the Senator from Rhode Island and pick up on what my colleagues have said, that when I was the senior Democrat, the ranking member of the House Budget Committee, Paul Ryan was the chairman of the committee. And, look, we disagreed on many things; we agreed on many things. We both agreed that we should get our deficits and debt under control. We had different ideas on how to do it. He wanted to privatize Medicare. We wanted to close tax breaks for the rich. But the reality is that the Holy Grail--the only guiding North Star for Republicans at that time-- was: We have got to bring down deficits and debt. This is not that Republican Party--not in any way, shape, or form. They clearly don't give a damn. In fact, they are worried, as we can see, that the American people still care, which is why they want to engage in this fraudulent scheme. But I will just close on this: I remember one of those years--I believe it was the 2012 Republican convention--they even put up a debt clock. They put up a debt clock at the convention.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Right? I am looking under my desk for the debt clock here because the Republicans seem to have hidden it away forever. They want to wish it away. That is what they are telling us.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my colleagues. And I think, as Senator Merkley said, if you care about the deficit and debt and you don't want working families to have to pay for these tax cuts for billionaires and the rich, vote no on the bill.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, Donald Trump likes to call the bill that Republicans are trying to rush through this Senate the Big Beautiful Bill. Well, it is big all right. It took the Senate clerks nearly 16 hours to speed read through it. But it is only beautiful if you are a billionaire or otherwise very wealthy in America. For everybody else, this is a big ugly betrayal of a bill--betrayal because tax cuts for billionaires are coming at the expense of virtually everyone else. I agree with many of the things my colleague from North Carolina, Senator Tillis, just said. But I have also read the bill. If you look at the bill, the tax benefits overwhelmingly go to the very highest income earners in the United States of America. Fifty percent of those tax benefits go to just the top 5 percent. So this is a choice that is being made by Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress to give to billionaires additional tax handouts at the expense of the rest of the country. They are choosing to engage in a huge transfer of wealth from people who are working paycheck-to- paycheck to those who are living off their huge inheritances or gigantic stock portfolios. Americans are going to have to pay for the tax cuts for billionaires in many, many ways. Millions will lose access to healthcare. Others will no longer be able to put food on the table. Others will not be able to afford to pay heating bills on freezing nights. Virtually, every American will see their energy bills increase and their health insurance premiums go up. And every American is likely to face higher borrowing costs for their home mortgages or car loans--again, all so billionaires and very wealthy people can get big tax cuts. Let's look at some of the real hits to American families, starting with the attack on healthcare. Donald Trump said he would ``love and cherish'' Medicaid. He said the people won't be affected. That is a lie. What he loves are tax cuts for his billionaire buddies. Let's just take a look. This bill pays for over a trillion dollars in tax giveaways to people who make over $500,000 every year by cutting a trillion dollars of health benefits from those who rely on Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. Think about that tradeoff. Indeed, because of the cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act in this bill, 12 million Americans will lose access to healthcare coverage. On top of that, another 5 million Americans will lose access to health coverage because Republicans refuse to extend the tax credits that millions of middle-class Americans use to purchase coverage through the Affordable Care Act. So while extending tax cuts for the very wealthy, they are not extending the healthcare tax credits that middle-class Americans use to help afford health insurance. The result of these cuts and the refusal to extend those tax credits means that nearly 17 million of our fellow Americans will lose access to healthcare coverage. In my State of Maryland, that is 229,000 of my fellow Marylanders. And who are these Americans? Who are these Marylanders? They are babies and children. Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program cover 38 million children in America, 700,000 children in Maryland. Medicaid covers 40 percent of births in America, over 40 percent of births in Maryland. More mothers will die as a result of pregnancy- related deaths if this bill passes. I think we will also know Medicaid is especially important to helping people through the vulnerable stages of their lives. It covers one in four people with mental health or substance use disorders. It is the primary payer for long-term health services, covering 60 percent of nursing home residents. If even a fraction of those residents lose coverage, entire nursing homes can close, and those families will have to figure out how to care for their expelled loved ones. An analysis that was done estimates that as many as 500 nursing homes could close because they are on the cusp. Rural hospitals are also especially vulnerable. It is estimated that up to 300 rural hospitals could close if this bill passes. Americans with disabilities, Medicaid is absolutely essential to their lives. It helps them receive home and community-based care so they don't have to choose between getting the care they need and being separated from their loved ones. A study by Yale University and the University of Pennsylvania predicts that this bill before the Senate will result in over 51,000 preventable deaths each year--preventable deaths. So, officially, the death certificates will say that somebody passed away because they had late-stage cancer. It was detected too late because they couldn't get the preventive care they needed or an accident occurred at a nursing home because there were not enough nurses on site. But those reasons, those conditions will have been set because this bill passed. And, again, making millions of Americans more vulnerable to pay for tax cuts for the ultrawealthy is unconscionable, but it is the choice being made in this bill. Now, 17 million people who will lose their health coverage is a very big number to wrap our heads around. So I want to read just a few stories of Marylanders who rely on Medicaid and who have been watching closely this whole effort that has unfolded on the floor of the U.S. Senate. I had a call from one of my constituents who has a son. Her son takes chemotherapy, and he relies on those chemotherapy treatments to sustain his life. She wrote to me that if he loses access to his health insurance, that it would be ``a death sentence.'' Another Marylander wrote to me about his autistic son who is still able to work but who depends entirely on Medicaid for support. He also said: Please don't let the Senate pass this bill. And the stories go on and on and on. Just the other day, Senator Alsobrooks and I had a telephone townhall. We had 12,000 Marylanders joining us. After that call, we received many more stories about people who would really be in desperate shape if they lost access to their health coverage. Now, on top of the 17 million Americans who stand to lose their health coverage, all other Americans are likely to see higher premiums because what happens when you have uncompensated care is more people go to the emergency rooms at the hospitals. Those hospitals can't just eat all of those additional costs, and at the end of the day, those additional costs cycle through the system in the form of higher premiums for others. We are already seeing that impact in Maryland as insurance companies today look at the possible liability they will have going forward as a result of this legislation. Beyond the 17 million who will lose access to affordable healthcare, you also have millions of Americans who are going to be hit as a result of the cuts to the food and nutrition programs, to the SNAP program. We are going to see a whopping 20 percent cut--$200 billion--to the SNAP program. Over 40 million Americans get some kind of help from that food and nutrition program, and over 3 million of them will lose their SNAP benefits entirely. Others will see rising costs. In Maryland, it is going to impact 684,000 people, most of whom are families with kids. In addition to 17 million Americans losing access to healthcare coverage and in addition to the 40 million Americans who will be impacted by cuts to food and nutrition programs, I want to just focus for a moment on another hit to American households. Some of us have discussed this on this Senate floor before, but it hasn't gotten as much attention, and it relates to the energy bills Americans pay, including their electric bills, because this bill will drive them up. It directly attacks the production of more clean energy, and less energy with rising demand means higher costs for households. I don't know if folks remember about a year ago when Donald Trump had a state dinner at Mar-a-Lago, where he begged 20 fossil fuel CEOs for campaign cash. It was reported on at the time. Well, he succeeded in raking in hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign donations. Now we see the payoff in this bill to those powerful special interests, and that payoff comes in two forms. First, this bill gives big oil companies a new $1 billion tax break. As a result, some of the fossil fuel companies will pay zero dollars-- zero dollars--in Federal income tax. Second, this bill--and the Senator from North Carolina referred to some of the provisions that will have this impact. This bill sabotages the production of more clean energy. It does so by slashing production and investment tax credits for clean energy and scuttling new clean energy projects. It continues the Trump administration's baseless attacks on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which is a program we established that will be a win, win, win for our environment, for our economy, and for family pocketbooks. By cutting these clean energy incentives and initiatives, this bill will reduce the overall amount of energy added to our electric grids by at least 50 percent by 2035. Think about that. So this bill is going to result in a dramatic reduction in the amount of new energy produced that goes on the electric grids. With less energy generated and higher demand, household energy costs and bills are going to go up. In fact, it is predicted that household electricity bills will go up by $110 on average as soon as next year and by up to $400 per year for families over the next decade. This will serve the interests of big oil and gas producers and utility companies that benefit from the higher prices that consumers will have to shell out. This will also do something else. It will surrender entirely the clean energy playing field to China, which already has a big head start on us in the area of clean energy deployment. So this is not America first; this is very much America in retreat. I don't often agree with Elon Musk, but he is absolutely right when he said just a few days ago that the latest Senate draft bill will ``destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country--utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.'' That is the Republican Senate bill--looking in the rearview mirror rather than ahead. Again, what is the driving purpose? What is the North Star of this bill? It is to give very, very wealthy people tax cuts at the expense of everybody else. Everything else is sacrificed. As a result of those tax cuts, the top one-tenth of 1 percent of the highest income earners will get an average tax break of $255,000. The top one-tenth of 1 percent will get a tax break of $255,000. Individuals making over $1 million a year will get a $35,000 tax break. As I said earlier, almost 50 percent of all of the tax benefits, all of the tax moneys, will go to the top 5 percent of income earners. To make that happen, as I have said, everything else gets sacrificed--cuts to Medicaid, cuts to food and nutrition programs, cuts to clean energy that result in higher costs for consumers. But even after making all of those cuts and imposing all of that pain on so many Americans, this Republican bill is still going to add over $4 trillion to our deficit over the next 10 years and an estimated $35 trillion over the next 30 years. So despite paying for part of those additional costs through cuts to Medicaid and food and nutrition programs, they are going to blow the roof off of our deficits and debt. Make no mistake, when you do that, you cost every American because it will generate upward pressure on interest rates, which raises costs for Americans who want to take out a mortgage to buy a home or want to get a car loan or for small businesses. In fact, the Yale Budget Lab projects that the House-passed bill would add over $1,000 a year to the cost of a mortgage and over $800 a year to the cost of a small business loan. That is the House- passed bill. The Senate bill will be worse because the Senate bill adds about $1 trillion more to the deficit over 10 years than the House bill. I do want to just focus on a final aspect of the deficit and debt impact of the Senate Republican bill, and that is this very deliberate effort to use fraudulent accounting to hide the deficit impact of this bill from the American people. Let me give you an example. Let's say you sign a contract to rent an apartment for $2,000 a month. You know that is going to cost you $24,000 for the full year. Now, at the end of the year, if you want to keep renting that apartment at that rate, any normal person would say: Well, that is going to cost them another $24,000. Senate Republicans want to tell the American people that the cost of continuing to rent that apartment for another year is zero--zero--because the amount of rent they have to pay in year 2 is the same rent they had to pay in year 1. In other words, Republicans want to say that because they have been giving billionaires and wealthy people tax cuts for 10 years, it will cost nothing to extend them for another 10 years. That is the so-called current policy baseline. In other words, if you just keep in place for another 10 years those same tax breaks for billionaires and others, we don't have to count the lost revenue, and we don't have to count the amount the deficit will increase as a result of that lost revenue. A third grader can see that this is bogus math. Let me read a colleague's statement, made this year by somebody. Here is what he said: Anybody that says current policy baseline [is the way to go] is engaging in intellectual and economic fraud. I wanted to make sure I got that quote correct because it was made by a Republican Congressman from Arizona, Congressman Schweikert. Here is another quote: This is fairy dust, and they're full of crap. And I'm gonna call them out on it. Who said that? Congressman Chip Roy, a Republican from Texas. I think it is worth quoting those Republican Members of Congress because while I dramatically disagree with what they did in their House bill, at least they used honest accounting. At least they didn't try to perpetrate this budget fraud that we are witnessing here in the U.S. Senate--a budget fraud that would, I dare say, make the Enron scammers blush. If you go through the numbers, it is dramatic. For example, an honest scoring of the bill shows that extending the individual tax rates from Trump 2017 will cost $2.2 trillion. That is what the House of Representatives said--$2.2 trillion. When you use the fraudulent budget math that Senate Republicans want to use, all of a sudden, that is $83 billion. If you look at the cost of extending key deductions for businesses, the House used accurate accounting; it comes to $820 billion over 10 years. Under the Senate plan, it is $6 billion. So I am not going to spend a ton of time going over this chart, but I do want to put it up here. This is from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The blue shade in each of these years shows what Senate Republicans say their bill will cost in each of those years. There is the so-called current policy baseline. This is what those House Republican Members called fraudulent accounting, and it is. If you add up all of those blue deficits over those 10 years, they claim it is $441 billion additional debt over 10 years. But if you use the honest accounting that we have always used in the U.S. Senate for the purposes of budget reconciliation, you get the full bar, including the orange numbers, which is $4.2 trillion in debt over those 10 years. I do want to point out to my colleagues something interesting because they have these dashed orange lines. What this is representing is that some of these costs from lost revenue in some of these out-years go down. That is because under this House Republican plan, the tax cuts for people with the no tax on tips--they go away. They vanish. They vanish right here in 2029. But the tax cuts for very wealthy people, for billionaires and others--they go on for the 10 years. In fact, they go on forever. The last point I want to make is, by letting them go on forever--the tax cuts for very wealthy people--Senate Republicans are violating the entire structure of the budget reconciliation process because when it was first devised, the entire purpose of it was to reduce our deficits and reduce the debt. Republican Senators are perverting the entire purpose of that special procedure that allows things to pass in the U.S. Senate with 51 votes and not having to secure the 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster. They are violating that entire structure. Again, why? Because they are hell-bent on making sure those tax cuts for very wealthy people go on forever--again, at the expense of everybody else. I will just close by pointing out that it wasn't that long ago that just down the hall here, in the Senate Rotunda, Donald Trump took the oath of office. He looked at the cameras, and he said he wanted a new golden age for America. But this is not a golden age for America. It is a gilded age for the wealthiest people in America, and those are the people he was really speaking to because they are the ones who were sitting behind him on Inauguration Day: Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Zuckerberg, the tech titans, the billionaire Cabinet--more billionaires than any Cabinet, by far, in American history. That is who this bill serves. It serves very wealthy and powerful people, and it does so at the expense of everybody else in America, in one form or another. And I hope--I hope--our Senate, on a bipartisan basis, will give it a big thumbs down. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I rise today in support of Senator Kaine's War Powers Resolution to make crystal clear that, as required by the Constitution of the United States, the President may not take offensive military action against Iran or any other country without congressional approval. Last Saturday, the world learned through a social media post by Donald Trump that he had ordered an attack on three of Iran's nuclear enrichment sites, the first-ever direct U.S. military assault on Iranian territory. We all agree that Iran must not obtain a nuclear weapon, but bombing is not the best, most sustainable way of achieving that goal, and nothing--nothing--I heard yesterday at the intelligence briefing changes that assessment. The bombing attack was also a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution, which reserves to the Congress the power to declare war. And make no mistake, initiating a bombing attack against another country is not only a matter of foreign policy, it is an act of war. For anyone who claims otherwise, I ask them to consider this: What would we have said if Iran or any other country had flown bombers over our country and struck our facilities? We would rightly call it what it was, an act of war. While the President has the authority to defend the United States when attacked, article I of the Constitution vests the responsibility to go to war explicitly and exclusively in the Congress, not in one person in the Oval Office. James Madison put it best in 1793 when he wrote: [I]n no part of the Constitution is more wisdom to be found than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive. . . . The trust and temptation would be too great for any one man. That is why the Framers of the Constitution designed a system of checks and balances to stop the government from ignoring the will of the American people, and the American people absolutely do not want the United States to be dragged into war, unnecessary wars. So beyond the debate over the particular politics or policy of President Trump's decision to attack Iran, this debate is about the rule of law. And no President--past, present, or future--is above the law. Those strikes violated American law, and prominent legal experts have said they also violated international law. The fact that there is now a cease-fire in place does not obviate the need to pass this resolution. President Trump has already shown that he is willing to initiate hostilities on his own, and, indeed, as Senator Kaine just mentioned, President Trump just said a few hours ago that he would ``absolutely'' consider bombing Iran again. And just last month, when asked whether he needs to uphold the Constitution of the United States, President Trump answered: ``I don't know.'' We, the U.S. Senate and the House, should make clear that compliance with our Constitution is not optional. Now, President Trump did not just attack another country in violation of the Constitution, he did so in spite of the facts presented by our own U.S. intelligence Agencies. Just 3 months ago, the U.S. intelligence community noted that they ``continue to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.'' That assessment has been reaffirmed year after year since at least 2007 that Iran was not producing a nuclear weapon and had not made a decision to do so. You would think that the facts and intelligence assessments would matter when a President chooses to attack another country. Apparently, not in this case. Indeed, when President Trump was confronted with the U.S. intelligence community's assessment just days before he launched the attack, he dismissed it. It was an inconvenient fact. It was inconvenient because it showed there was more time for diplomacy to work, time to get a negotiated solution. Secretary Rubio was asked about this intelligence assessment after the United States bombed Iran. His answer, very revealing, he said: ``Forget about the intelligence'' and then went on to try to justify the timing of the attack. Now, as I said earlier, most, if not all of us, agree that Iran must not have a nuclear weapon, which would pose an existential threat to Israel, threaten America's interests in the region by further emboldening Iran's malign actions, and increase the risk of nuclear proliferation throughout the Middle East. So the question is, How do we best accomplish that goal in a durable way that doesn't unleash unintended consequences and put Americans and others at greater risk? President Obama answered that question. That is exactly what he accomplished through the agreement his administration negotiated with Iran 10 years ago this July. President Obama made a deal with Iran to prevent it from building a nuclear weapon, and the agreement was working. Iran was subject to round-the-clock, 24-hour inspections from the International Atomic Energy Agency. That agreement made the whole world a safer place. But in his very first term, Donald Trump ripped up that deal. Not surprisingly, Iran began to enrich uranium at higher levels, though still not at the 90 percent level needed for bomb-grade material. Now, by the time Donald Trump returned to the White House this year, even he and his administration had come to understand that the best way to ensure that Iran does not decide to develop a nuclear weapon is through negotiation. That is why, earlier this year, he dispatched his special envoy, Steve Witkoff, to open negotiations with Iran, and those negotiations were ongoing. Indeed, the sixth round of discussions were scheduled to take place on Sunday, June 15, just 2 days before the Netanyahu government launched its attacks on Iran. Not surprisingly, that Israeli attack derailed the ongoing United States-Iran negotiations. It is important to remember that a decade earlier, Prime Minister Netanyahu worked very hard to derail President Obama's ongoing negotiations with Iran. Indeed, Prime Minister Netanyahu even addressed a joint session of Congress, urging the Congress not to proceed with those negotiations. Prime Minister Netanyahu did not succeed in derailing President Obama's JCPOA. That agreement went into effect, and it did make the world and our country and Israel a safer place. But unlike then, Prime Minister Netanyahu succeeded this time. He outmaneuvered Donald Trump. That story is well-documented in a June 17 New York Times piece entitled ``How Trump Shifted on Iran Under Pressure from Israel'' and a June 23 Washington Post story entitled ``Netanyahu decided on Iran war last year, then sought to recruit Trump.'' Simply put, Prime Minister Netanyahu accomplished that goal. President Trump joined his war of choice against Iran. And in doing so, President Trump put our men and women in uniform in the region in grave danger and unnecessary risk. Following the attack, Iran fired 14 missiles at a major U.S. air base in Qatar. Fortunately, Iran gave the United States and Qatar advance warning, and there were no casualties. But the full extent of Iranian retaliation could play out throughout the region and other places around the world over a long period of time. And what was accomplished? What was accomplished? To hear President Trump tell it, the Iranian nuclear program was ``obliterated.'' That is flatout untrue--untrue. We know from public reporting that a Defense Intelligence Agency assessment found that the strikes only set back Iran's nuclear program by ``a few months.'' Whether it is a few months or somewhat longer, the point is this: The strikes did not obliterate Iran's nuclear program. Before the attacks, U.S. intelligence assessed that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon, and in the aftermath of the attacks, Iran may well change its mind and move forward. So President Trump disregarded a politically inconvenient U.S. intelligence assessment when he launched the attacks, and he is now making up his own politically convenient narrative about the results. What has been particularly cowardly is the Trump administration's efforts to escape their own failures by hiding behind the amazing men and women of the U.S. military. To hear President Trump and Secretary of Defense Hegseth tell it, any criticism of their decision to attack Iran is somehow a criticism of the American military. This is garbage, and they know it. Our service men and women performed their mission flawlessly, and they did it with courage and with resolve. It is especially rich to see Donald Trump, who has so often insulted and belittled our military heroes, now try to hide his own failings behind them. So let's be clear, while we owe our servicemembers a debt of gratitude, we do not owe that debt of gratitude to President Trump or members of his Cabinet for their decisions or for their current efforts to manipulate the narrative about the results of the attack. I have to say, as my colleague Senator Kaine mentioned, that the spectacle of President Trump and Secretary Hegseth berating the press for questioning their claims that the Iranian nuclear program had been ``obliterated'' only revealed their manic desperation to hide the truth. Remember when President George Bush declared, with respect to Iraq, ``Mission accomplished''? What President Trump and Secretary Hegseth are communicating is that it is somehow treasonous to ask about intelligence reporting that casts doubts on their claims. This is not only an effort to intimidate and silence the press. It also sends a terrible message to all the intelligence analysts in the U.S. Government. It says that anybody who presents facts that don't fit President Trump's political narrative is trying to, as Secretary Hegseth said, ``make the President look bad'' or ``undermining the success of our pilots'' or ``trying to manipulate the public mind.'' That is ridiculous. We have already seen the dangers of manipulating intelligence to fit the President's narrative, rather than fidelity to the facts. The United States went to war in Iraq under false pretenses. Remember when the Bush administration told America that Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction? Remember when Vice President Cheney warned, in March 2003, that ``if there's a mushroom cloud in New York, you will know that Saddam Hussein is behind it.'' And, of course, there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So false intelligence and false narratives that fan the flames of unnecessary wars cost us dearly. The Iraq war cost the lives of over 4,000 American soldiers and hundreds of billions of dollars of American taxpayer money. The war upended the region, killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, strengthened Iran, and unleashed ISIS on the world. It was the worst U.S. foreign policy blunder in a generation. The Trump administration has now created a culture of fear and retribution throughout the Federal Government. We have already seen patriotic Federal employees be fired for telling the truth. A whistleblower just filed a complaint the other day. He had been at the Justice Department. He said: I didn't sign up to lie. So the real challenge is this: The President has not obliterated the Iran nuclear program, but he is doing everything he can to obliterate the credibility of the U.S. intelligence community so he can invent his own reality without contradiction. That is why it is more important than ever that Congress stand up for the Constitution and insist that the President cannot initiate hostilities without approval from Congress. That is what this resolution asks. It asks: Do you support the Constitution and the role it gives to Congress to declare war? Do you believe that the people's representatives should have a voice in whether American lives and, specifically, the lives of our Nation's Armed Forces, are put at grave risk? We owe it to our troops, and we owe it to the American people to ensure that no President--not this President or any other--can unilaterally commit our Nation to go to war. The Constitution does entrust that responsibility to us. Let's not abdicate it. Colleagues, I urge you to vote yes on the Kaine War Powers Resolution. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of the late Deacon Martin Prosper. Deacon Prosper was a kind and active member of the Prince George's County and Greater Washington community. His life embodied faith, perseverance, and community service. Deacon Prosper immigrated to the United States from Haiti in 1979 and settled in Capitol Heights, MD, where he quickly established a warm and inviting presence in the community. Affectionally known as ``25,'' his deep connection to the Haitian and African-American communities allowed him to bridge the gap between generations and positively impact countless lives. Above all, Deacon Prosper's life was rooted in his faith and ministry. In his role as deacon at Holy Temple Church of Christ, he ministered with humility and love and regularly opened his home as a safe haven to family and friends. Deacon Prosper's humility, professionalism, and compassion served him well in his hospitality career at the Holiday Inn Washington Capitol and Gaylord National Resort in National Harbor. He was also a proud member of UNITE HERE Local 25, where he championed worker dignity and solidarity. His exceptional hospitality earned him the Regional Apple of the Year Award in 1992. I ask my colleagues to join me in expressing our appreciation and gratitude to the late Deacon Martin Prosper and his family for his enduring contributions to the hospitality industry and organized labor and his unwavering faith-based service.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, yesterday I voted against final passage of the GENIUS Act. I think the majority of my colleagues agree that we need sensible regulation of cryptocurrency and stablecoins to protect consumers, safeguard our financial system, and close down their use in illicit finance of criminal activities that jeopardize our security. But this bill missed the mark and was pushed through without the opportunity to vote on several amendments that would have strengthened it. Stablecoins have been called ``the new kingpin of illicit activity'' as a tool of money laundering, payment in ransomware attacks, and financing for criminal and terrorist activity. The bill purports to bring stablecoins into the Anti-Money Laundering regulatory regime, but does not adequately enforce those requirements at a time when the Trump administration is rapidly dismantling crypto investigation and enforcement units at the Department of Justice and SEC. It fails to address crypto ``mixers,'' which make it more difficult to trace illicit transactions; instead, it calls for further study of the issue. And it includes a loophole to allow Tether, a foreign stablecoin issuer that has been used to help Russians evade U.S. sanctions, to have access to U.S. markets. Several Senators put forward amendments to address these national security risks, including Senator Peters, who offered a change that would create a system for tracing stablecoin transactions that is similar to the way we track other financial transactions. The majority leader did not allow consideration of any of these amendments. The GENIUS Act fails to adequately protect consumers or our financial system, allowing risky assets to provide the required 1:1 peg for stablecoins, limiting the number of issuers subject to financial audit, and failing to give the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau clear authority to offer the same protections from fraud a consumer has when using a bank account. There were amendments to fix these issues; they did not get a vote. But perhaps most egregiously, this GENIUS Act does nothing to constrain President Trump's rampant crypto corruption. It does not address the meme coin the President marketed in exchange for access to an exclusive dinner. And it doesn't address the President's family stablecoin, which has already been used by a state-owned Emirati company to execute a $2 billion transaction. It is clear that anyone who invests enough in the President's crypto schemes--including foreign governments--will have access to the highest levels of our government. Senator Merkley offered an amendment to ensure that no government official--not the President, not Members of Congress--can issue stablecoins or other cryptocurrencies. The majority leader blocked its consideration. We have experienced the dangers that weak regulatory structures have posed to consumers, investors, and our financial system. We have paid to bail out industry after those systems have failed. We had an opportunity to strengthen the GENIUS Act, build safeguards around a growing sector, and stamp out its use in corrupt and criminal activities. Instead, we barreled forward without even a vote on those amendments. Because we could not make those critical improvements, I voted against the bill.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I thank my friend and colleague from New Jersey. It is hard to contain my emotion appropriately on the Senate floor. This is a moment that every American should be outraged about, and every American should be angry, and not only angry about what happened to Senator Padilla but fearful for our democracy because we are at a crossroads when it comes to the rule of law and respect for our democracy and our Constitution in the United States of America. I felt compelled to cancel the rest of my meetings this evening to come right here to the floor to join my colleagues in speaking out, not just for a fellow Senator but for the future of the rule of law and due process in the United States of America. I had to rewind that video three or four times to see if this was really happening. And I saw the earlier video come out of him being, essentially, dragged out of the room, roughed up, and then the other video of him lying on his stomach, handcuffed with people standing around him. Then the lies went out that the Senator from New Jersey just mentioned. I am reading this statement from the Department of Homeland Security: Senator Padilla chose disrespectful political theatre and interrupted a live press conference without identifying himself. That is a lie. Just look at the video. You can see him coming in and saying: I am Senator Padilla, the senior Senator from California. He wanted to ask a question. We all have a lot of questions. He is a U.S. Senator, he should be able to ask a question about what is happening in his State of California. You know, we had the President of the United States, just a few weeks ago in response to a question, saying he wasn't sure if he had to comply with the Constitution of the United States. The President of the United States who is sworn to take an oath to uphold the Constitution said he wasn't sure if he had to comply with the Constitution. You have senior administration officials like Steve Miller talking about suspending habeas corpus in the United States of America. Habeas corpus is the core to due process that makes sure that people cannot be deprived of their liberty without a fair trial and a fair hearing. And here we have Alex Padilla going in to ask a question, and he is tackled; he is roughed up; he is dragged out of the room; he is put on the floor and handcuffed. This is a President who also the other day, when asked if he would arrest the Governor of California or whether his people should arrest the Governor of California, he said: Yeah, I think maybe they should. Think about that. This is an administration that arrested the mayor of a major city. This is lawless behavior from this administration. This is what a dictatorship looks like. This is what happens when one person tries to grab all the power, when they say: I don't know if I have to comply with the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution of the United States is designed to have checks and balances. It is designed to make sure that our liberties are protected. The Bill of Rights protects all of us. And yet you see the President of the United States and his henchmen and his henchwomen trampling over due process, trampling over the First Amendment in the country, and trampling on a U.S. Senator from California who said: Madam Secretary, I have a question. I am looking forward to hearing about what question Senator Padilla wanted to ask because I know Senator Padilla, and I know he had a good question to ask of the Secretary of Homeland Security, but he didn't get a chance. This is a press conference. The Secretary of Homeland Security is taking questions. The U.S. Senator representing the people of that State elected to represent the people of that State had a question. He didn't get to ask it because he was dragged out of the room and thrown on the floor and arrested. I want to know what that question was going to be, and I know that Senator Padilla will tell us. We will probably find out then why the Secretary of Homeland Security didn't want to hear the question, because this administration wants to shut down questions except from the journalists that they like. They belittle journalists who ask them any question that they see as critical. That is also what authoritarian leaders do; they push aside people who ask hard but meaningful questions and just call on the people who will ask them the slowball question. You have already seen this at play at the Oval Office during press conferences, the President will say: Oh, I like that reporter. Oh, that is a terrible question. What he means is, it is a question that he doesn't like. And, usually, the question he doesn't like are questions that are right on target and go to the heart of what is happening in our country. So Senator Padilla had a question. He didn't get a chance to ask it. I want to build on another point my colleagues have made, and that is a real appeal to our Senate Republican colleagues, because in these first months--4 or 5 months--of the Trump administration, we have seen the actions of a lawless President. You know, it is unprecedented in the United States to have over 260 lawsuits filed in Federal courts. Right? This doesn't happen normally. It is because of the massive lawbreaking that we have seen going on-- attacks on civil liberties, attacks on due process is part of that, attacks on the First Amendment, the illegal withholding of funds that have been appropriated by the Congress. The courts didn't do it alone, colleagues. Every Member of this body is sworn to uphold the Constitution--the Constitution the President of the United States now says he is not sure if he has to comply with. I believe Senators here want to take those constitutional responsibilities seriously. But if we are going to do that, we have to stand up at moments like this--not Democratic Senators alone but Republican Senators too--because if you let the executive do this to Alex Padilla today, some other executive, some other President can do it to somebody else tomorrow. If you can do this to Alex Padilla, imagine how vulnerable other citizens and others in this country are to this kind of tyranny and abuse. So I hope this will be a moment where people come together and stand up and say: Regardless of policy differences on different issues, we are all here to debate those issues and disagree, but there are some things we should consider fundamental and sacrosanct, and that is the idea of rule of law and due process. What we witnessed here was the outrage that we have come to see in countries with authoritarian leaders. That is what we witnessed, and it is a pattern. But today was the most graphic example to date where a U.S. Senator was, essentially, taken down as he introduced himself and said ``I have a question.'' So I have a question for all of our colleagues: What are we going to do about it? Who are we? What do we stand for? Are we going to uphold the Constitution? I am looking forward to hearing the question Senator Padilla wanted to ask, but I also ask all of us a question, and that is, Are we going to use this moment to stand up for decency and to stand up for the fair treatment of every American? I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I want to start by thanking my friend and colleague Senator Murphy for shining a light on this issue of corruption because the corruption that we are seeing from President Trump is unprecedented in scale and scope in our Nation's history. It is infecting our democracy here at home, and it is corrupting our foreign policy around the world. We will soon be debating here in the U.S. Senate what President Trump calls his Big Beautiful Bill. Well, it is a big bill, but it is only beautiful if you are a billionaire or a very wealthy American because he gives those big tax breaks to very wealthy people at the expense of everybody else in America. We have heard of the cuts to the Medicaid and the food and nutrition programs and the fact that, even after that, it will drive a huge upward hole in our deficit. But there is one billionaire that President Trump is especially focused on making sure does well, and that is himself and his family and his family's business. And we have seen a great example of that corruption here at home with the meme coin, right? This is the coin that Trump put together, and he said that he is going to reward the people who buy the most of this meme coin by meeting with them personally at his golf course in Virginia. And so people all over the world scurried to purchase that meme coin in order to get an audience with the President because having an audience with the President means you get a chance to influence the President. And many people from around the world, including China, purchased those meme coins to buy that influence. And people should understand that the President's business makes money whether the value of that meme coin goes up or whether it goes down. Every time there is a transaction to buy or sell that meme coin, the Trump business makes money. So other people can get totally hosed, but it is a win-win for President Trump and his family. In fact, it is estimated that in the early days of launching this, they made about $350 million. So that is the meme coin here at home. What brings us to the floor today is how this personal corruption is infecting the foreign policy of the United States--because all of us hope and expect that, when the President of the United States goes overseas to conduct American foreign policy, they have the interests of America first. Donald Trump says it himself: America first. That is not what President Trump has foremost in his mind when he travels overseas. What he has foremost in his mind right now is the bottom line for his personal profit--literally selling the office of the Presidency. He might as well open the White House and make it an Airbnb. So let's talk about the details of how this is unfolding and how it is hurting the United States of America. On his first major overseas trip, Donald Trump went to three countries in the Middle East, Gulf countries. He went to Saudi Arabia; he went to the United Arab Emirates, the UAE; and he went to Qatar. Now, normally, before the President of the United States takes one of these important overseas trips, they send out the diplomats to help work out important U.S. foreign policy objectives and goals with these countries to make sure that the interests of the United States of America are put first. In the case of this trip to these three Gulf countries--again, the first major overseas trip that President Trump took--it was his son Eric Trump who went out to the region 2 weeks in advance. And what did Eric Trump do when he was there? Was he talking about foreign policy? No. He was talking about doing deals for the Trump family business. So let's zero in on some of the deals that he worked on. Let's start by what happened in Qatar, because it was about 2 weeks before President Trump arrived there that Eric Trump worked with Qatar to partner the Trump Organization on a $5.5 billion Trump-branded golf course and real estate development deal. It should be pointed out that Qatar has also invested over $1 billion in a private equity fund for Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner in a deal announced in 2024 after Donald Trump's most recent election victory. And now, as Senator Murphy pointed out, then Trump asked Qatar to give him, as a gift, this jumbo jet plane to use as Air Force One and potentially to keep for later on as part of his Presidential library. And so Qatar, for the reasons that Senator Murphy indicated, felt apparently compelled to comply with this wish from the President of the United States. The President of the United States has a lot of influence in the region, and Qatar has been on the losing end of that influence in the first Trump administration. And so Qatar gave Donald Trump, at Donald Trump's request, a $400 million jumbo jet, what the President calls the palace in the sky. It is complete with a 55-inch TV, leather sofas, wood paneling--the works. And during this whole period of time, Qatar has also wanted to make sure it establishes a solid relationship with the United States and, specifically, with the Trump administration, and the Trump administration had noticed a major arms sale to Qatar, a $1.9 billion weapon package, complete with Predator drones, 500-pound bombs, and Hellfire 2 missiles. So all of this gets caught up together in the major corrupt deals that are being put forth in order to enrich the Trump family, not advance the national security interests of the United States. Now let me turn to the United Arab Emirates, the UAE, because in this case, the corruption is at least as bad--probably more so. So, once again, in the case of the UAE, before President Trump went to the region, it wasn't the State Department emissaries that went out. It was Eric Trump on behalf of the Trump family businesses. In this case, it was a new cryptocurrency stablecoin enterprise launched by the Trump family called World Liberty Financial. Now, World Liberty Financial is 60 percent owned by the Trump family. As Senator Murphy pointed out, one of the cofounders is actually Zach Witkoff--a last name that you might know because his dad Steve Witkoff is Donald Trump's--President Trump's--major Middle East envoy, going to places like Qatar as part of the Middle East negotiations with both respect to Iran and Gaza. So 2 weeks before Donald Trump goes to the region, his son, Eric Trump, goes on behalf of the family business along with Zach Witkoff, the son of the President's Middle East Special Envoy. So what happens when Eric Trump, the President's son, goes to the UAE? Well they soon after announced that MGX, which is a UAE Government-backed investment firm, would use Trump's new stablecoin-- his new stablecoin--called USD1, dollar one, to close a new $2 billion investment in the cryptocurrency exchange Binance. So by putting $2 billion into the Trump stablecoin enterprise-- putting that into circulation--the UAE turned an unknown stablecoin company into one of the biggest players in the world overnight. Overnight, the value of that company shot up with the action that the UAE took with the $2 billion. And the Trump family stands to make tens of millions of dollars every year from that deal alone. Now, I doubt that the Emirati investment firm went with a Trump- branded cryptocurrency for its $2 billion investment because Eric Trump put together the best slide deck for the pitch meeting. Somehow, I think it is because he was the son of the President of the United States who was going to be arriving in the UAE 2 weeks later. So I want everybody to hold that deal in their head, just put a pin in it for a minute. Eric Trump, the President's son, goes to the UAE 2 weeks before President Trump arrives and does this crypto deal--$2 billion crypto deal. So 2 weeks later, the President of the United States arrives in the UAE. And what happens? President Trump gives away some of the most sensitive advanced American technology--in fact, the crown jewels of American AI technology in semiconductors. The previous administration, President Biden, had restricted the flow of this very sensitive AI technology to places like the UAE because of the fear of what is known as diversion; that that technology would not be safe in the hands of the UAE without really important safeguards in place because the UAE has a partnership with the United States, but it also has very close relations with China, the PRC. So there has been well-documented concern about the real risk that very sensitive American AI technology would go to China. I would also point out that the UAE has made it its ambition to become one of the AI leaders in the world. So they obviously will benefit greatly from getting the very best technology, the highest compute power that the United States can provide them. Now, interestingly, it was the day before President Trump departed to the UAE and Qatar and Saudi Arabia that the Trump administration rolled back the important safeguards the Biden administration had placed on the transfer of this very sensitive AI technology. They rolled it back as the President was about to take off to go visit the UAE. Now, this deal--this deal--that was cut where the United States agreed to lift its limitations on the transfer of this technology really does compromise the national security interests of the United States. A group of us wrote a letter led by Senator Warren. It was signed by Leader Schumer, also by the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee Senator Reed, the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee Senator Warner, Senator Coons, and others. Here is what we wrote: These deals greenlight the sale of sensitive U.S. technology in exchange for illusory promises of foreign investment. If completed, they will present an immediate threat to U.S. national security, and over the long term, may irreversibly erode U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence (AI) by offshoring American jobs. So that is what the President did just 2 weeks after the UAE said it would invest $2 billion in the Trump family business crypto exchange, letting that skyrocket to very valuable levels. I will point out that it wasn't only Democrats who have expressed concern about the risks of transferring this sensitive AI technology to the UAE. In fact, during the Biden administration, the Republican chairman of the House Select Committee on China wrote to the President--actually wrote to the President's then-National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan expressing exactly these kinds of concerns. It was a letter dated July 10, 2024. It is a short letter. (Mr. MULLIN assumed the Chair.) Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, here is an important thing for everybody to understand. When Eric Trump went 2 weeks before Donald Trump's trip and when he did that deal where a UAE-owned company put $2 billion into the Trump family stablecoin business, that was with a company called MGX. The chairman of that company is a member of the royal family. His name is Sheikh Tahnoun. He is also known as TBZ. He is a real entrepreneur, and he does look out for the interests of the UAE. So he does this deal with Eric Trump, but guess what else he is the chairman of. He is the chairman of G42, which is the, again, Emirati state-owned business that cut the AI deal with the Trump administration. So the guy who is the chairman of the company that put $2 billion into the Trump family stablecoin business is also the chairman of the company G42 that was the beneficiary of Donald Trump's giveaway of very sensitive U.S. AI technology. Now look, when it comes to Sheikh Tahnoun, you know, I have met him. He is a good businessman. He was looking out for the interests of the UAE when he got that deal when the U.S. Government will give the UAE all this AI technology. So he was looking out for the interests of the UAE. The problem is that it was President Trump who wasn't looking out for the interests of the United States of America. He was looking out for the interest of his family business and literally gave away the sensitive technology 2 weeks after the UAE invested $2 billion in the Trump family's newly launched stablecoin. At the same time, like in the Qatar situation, this was accompanied by a request from President Trump for a $1.3 billion dollar arms sale to the UAE. Now, that arms sale is part of the overall corrupt bargain that the Trump administration struck with the UAE. It also ignores what the UAE is doing right now, as we speak, with respect to the terrible war and conflict in Sudan because the UAE has been sending weapons to an organization--a murderous organization-- called the Rapid Support Forces. The Rapid Support Forces have been engaged in all sorts of atrocities. And during the Biden administration, President Biden met with the UAE leaders and asked for assurances that they would no longer be providing weapons to this murderous group and thought he received those assurances. But the reality is, right at the end of the Biden administration, at my request, I asked for a briefing. And it turns out the United States has determined that the UAE is continuing to provide weapons to this murderous group, which the U.S. Government has found is committing genocide in Darfur, as we speak. So on top of all the corruption that is part of this deal, we have the Trump administration green-lighting an arms transfer to the UAE. At the same time, the UAE is transferring weapons to a murderous group in Sudan that is committing genocide. Here is what the State Department's own assessment says: The [Rapid Support Forces] and allied militias have systematically murdered men and boys--even infants--on an ethnic basis, and deliberately targeted women and girls from certain ethnic groups for rape and other forms of brutal sexual violence. Those same militias have targeted fleeing civilians, murdering innocent people escaping conflict, and prevented remaining civilians from accessing lifesaving supplies. So there are lots of reasons we shouldn't go forward with this arms sale--partly because it is part of an overall corrupt deal with the Trump administration but also because of the UAE's ongoing actions. Let me close with this. We do expect the President of the United States, when he travels overseas, to be looking out for American interests. In this case, it is very clear President Trump was going out to look out for his own interests. In the case of the Middle East, it doesn't even seem that he raised the issue of the genocide in Sudan during his trip to the UAE while he was following up on the corrupt deals. And the President also--I think people remember--said he was going to end the war in Gaza on day one, that he was going to bring back the hostages, and end the absolutely awful humanitarian disaster we are witnessing right now with literally hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent Palestinians dying of starvation--civilians. But instead of looking at working the Gaza issue or these other foreign policy priorities, the President was there for himself. And it is sending a terrible message. Other countries are getting that message. Reports say that Vietnam is making way for a Trump golf complex to get lower tariffs and that Serbia is demolishing a historic building to fast-track a Trump hotel in Belgrade. We cannot allow our foreign policy to be corrupted in this way. And the one way we can send that signal and that message right now is by voting yes on these joint resolutions of disapproval on these arms sales because they are part of the overall corrupt package. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote yes, and I now yield the floor to my friend the Senator from Vermont.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a dedicated public servant Dr. Anson H. ``Tuck'' Hines, director of the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center SERC. Dr. Hines has served SERC for over 45 years, including as its director since 2005. He has dedicated himself to addressing our world's most pressing ecological challenges, championed conservation efforts, and inspired the next generation of scientists. Dr. Hines' impact on SERC is remarkable. Under his leadership, SERC has spearheaded groundbreaking research, grown its research footprint to four continents, and strengthened public engagement through citizen science programs. He also oversaw the restoration of the historic Woodlawn House as a public museum and education center and expanded SERC's landholdings in the Rhode River watershed by 1,100 acres. This growth protected critical habitats for research, conservation, and education. As a marine ecologist and zoologist, Dr. Hines is an expert in his field. He has published over 150 articles in technical journals and books, contributing to our understanding of long-term ecological change in the Chesapeake Bay, aquaculture, fishery restoration, and countless additional areas of research. I would be remiss to not mention that he has been critical to the conservation efforts to restore my home State's famous blue crabs. Dr. Hines' unwavering dedication to teaching and inspiring the next generation of scientists is truly admirable. He grew the capacity of SERC's housing capacity to accommodate additional interns and visiting scientists, strengthening the center's ability to attract top talent. As an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland, College Park, Dr. Hines has motivated countless students. He has guided 20 postdoctoral fellows as a major adviser, supported countless Ph.D. and master of science students, and mentored more than 165 undergraduate interns. I commend Dr. Hines for his dedication to our environment, his scientific expertise, and his commitment to fostering tomorrow's scientists. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking him and wishing him a well-earned, enjoyable, and fulfilling retirement.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a tremendous public servant Tina Cappetta, superintendent of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park. Ms. Cappetta has served our National Park Service for over 35 years. She has dedicated herself to preserving our Nation's natural beauty and history at parks around the country for generations of families to enjoy. In 2020, Ms. Cappetta returned as superintendent of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park, where she served earlier in her career as the chief of resources management. During her tenure as superintendent, she has overseen the celebration of the park's 50th anniversary, managed the relocation of the Park's headquarters to Williamsport, MD, and renewed the Great Falls Canal Boat Program. Her thoughtful stewardship of one of our Nation's most cherished historical and recreational resources has inspired scores of visitors from around the world. Ms. Cappetta's work to preserve the C&O Canal's history and breathtaking scenery is truly remarkable. The park is home to the largest collection of 19th-century canal features and buildings and is one of the most biologically diverse natural areas in our national park system. It provides recreational and educational activities in rural and urban settings, spanning from Washington, DC, to Cumberland, MD. Ms. Cappetta's tireless commitment to the park has touched countless lives, from visitors experiencing the canal for the first time, to locals enjoying a weekend bike trip or walk on the towpath. I commend Ms. Cappetta for her extraordinary devotion to our National Park Service here in Maryland and around the country. Her legacy is one of leadership and unwavering dedication to the preservation of one of our region's gems and one of our Nation's most historically significant landscapes. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking her and wishing her a well-earned, enjoyable, and fulfilling retirement.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, first, I want to thank my friend and colleague the Senator from Vermont Mr. Welch for offering this resolution. I just want to focus on the resolution itself for a moment because you would think this is something we could all agree on. I am just reading the resolved clause here: Resolved, That the Senate--(1) is gravely concerned with-- (A) the humanitarian crisis and acute suffering of the Palestinian civilians in Gaza; and (B) the suffering of the hostages and hostage families. That is section 1 of the resolved clause. Senator Welch has said and I think we all acknowledge the terrible humanitarian disaster that Palestinian civilians are suffering under right now. Trump just acknowledged it the other day. He said that a lot of people are starving. Cindy McCain said: Families in Gaza are starving while the food they need is sitting at the border. Fifty-seven children have already died from malnutrition, and the reports are that 14,000 Palestinian children in Gaza are at imminent risk of death if they don't get more food. Just yesterday, after 78 days of a total siege and blockade on any food coming into Gaza, a trickle of food began to get in, primarily because European countries began to say very loudly that what was happening was unacceptable, that it was a violation of international law. We are also hearing from the hostage families the urgency of putting an end to this conflict and resolving this to make sure their loved ones can come home. I was very glad to see Steve Witkoff be able to bring home Edan Alexander. Now we have to bring back the rest of the hostages. The hostage families overwhelmingly have been calling on Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government to end the conflict, end the suffering on all sides, and bring their loved ones home. I want to just read the second part of this resolution because it does what I understand so many of the hostages' families have been saying we should do. [C]alls on the White House, Department of State, and other relevant United States Government agencies to urgently use all available diplomatic tools to bring about the release of the hostages, an immediate cessation of the blockade on food and humanitarian aid for Palestinian civilians, and a durable end to the conflict in Gaza. Those are part 1 and part 2 of the resolved clause that I just read. I want to thank Senator Welch because he has written this in a way that you would think not a single Senator would object to the words in this resolution. So I do urge my colleagues to support it. Let's put an end to the suffering and starvation of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Let's get the hostages home. Let's work to end this conflict in a way that ensures no more October 7ths and ensures security and dignity for both Israelis and Palestinians alike. I yield back to the Senator from Vermont.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I want to start by thanking my friend and colleague Senator Kaine for his longtime leadership and support of human rights and the rule of law. It is an honor to team up with him in introducing this resolution. As he indicated, this is designed to expose the truth about a scheme that is threatening the constitutional rights of everybody who lives in the United States of America. As we speak, President Trump is paying American taxpayer dollars to the Government of El Salvador, which has been a notorious violator of human rights. He is paying them American taxpayer dollars to lock up American residents without due process of law. The Constitution is clear in the 5th Amendment and, by application to the States, the 14th Amendment, but the 5th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees due process. As Senator Kaine indicated, when President Trump was recently asked whether he had to comply with the Constitution of the United States, despite the fact that he put his hand on the Bible and took the oath of office right down the hall here not that long ago, the President's response was: I don't know. That should concern every single Member of the U.S. Senate, regardless of party. The principle of not depriving somebody of their liberty without the due process of law is a fundamental core American value. That is why it is in the Constitution of the United States. This is not a liberal issue. It is not a conservative issue. It is not an issue that belongs to any one party. This is a fundamental American issue in the Constitution of the United States. I know that Donald Trump wants to continue to change the subject when it comes to this matter, but the subject could not be more clear, and that is to protect the constitutional rights of people who reside in the United States. One person who was caught up in this unconstitutional scheme was Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who is a constituent of mine in Maryland, as are his wife Jennifer and their children. Federal agents illegally abducted Kilmar Abrego Garcia while he was driving with his 5-year-old son, who has autism. They took him to Baltimore, then Texas, and then they shackled him and handcuffed him and put him on a plane. He didn't know where he was going. The next thing he knows, he ends up in El Salvador at this notorious prison called CECOT, which is the gulag of Latin America. The Trump administration admitted in a Federal court that they had wrongfully detained Mr. Abrego Garcia. They admitted it. They said it was an ``administrative error'' that landed him in CECOT. But what did they do? Instead of fixing that egregious error, they fired the lawyer who told the truth to the court. That is what they did. Since then, they have been ignoring the orders of the district court, the Fourth Circuit, and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in a 9- to-0 decision--we don't see many of those--ordered the Trump administration to facilitate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia in accordance with his right to due process. If President Trump can ignore the courts, that is a very short road to tyranny. I have made very clear from the start that I am not vouching for the man, Mr. Abrego Garcia; I am vouching for his rights because if you deny his rights, you put in jeopardy the rights of everybody who resides in the United States of America. So that is why I did travel to El Salvador, both to meet with Kilmar Abrego Garcia to find out whether he was dead or alive and report back to his family but also to ask the Government of El Salvador to stop being complicit in this scheme with President Trump to deny residents of the United States their constitutional rights. When I met with the Vice President of El Salvador, my worst fears were reinforced. I asked the Vice President of El Salvador: Why are you holding Mr. Abrego Garcia? Do you have any criminal complaint against him? No. No, not at all. Why? Because the U.S. Government, the Trump administration, is paying us to do so. That is why. I ultimately got to see Mr. Abrego Garcia--at first, I was stonewalled by the Government of El Salvador--and he has been totally unable to contact anybody in the outside world before I met with him and since. He is not only in a total news blackout, but nobody can call him--not his lawyers, not his wife, not his mother, not his brother. That is a violation of international law, and that is one of the hallmarks of this El Salvadoran gulag, is people go into CECOT or these other prisons and you never hear from them again. The State Department's 2023 human rights report on El Salvador--the most recent one we have--reported ``credible reports'' of ``cruel, inhuman, or degrading torture'' in El Salvadoran prisons, including beatings with batons and rifles, overcrowding, underfeeding, and life- threatening medical neglect; reports that guards fire stun guns on wet floors to deliver electric shock to the entire cell at once. That is where we are sending people like Abrego Garcia without any due process of law, and that is why it is so important that we adopt this resolution, which Senator Kaine has so well described. I would urge my Republican colleagues to stand back and think of the moment we are in because not only did the President of the United States say he wasn't sure if he had to comply with the Constitution of the United States, which should set off alarm bells all over the country, regardless of party, but Steve Miller, one of his top policy advisers, publicly talked about suspending habeas corpus, suspending the Constitution of the United States. That is a very dangerous idea, and all of us--all of us, regardless of party--should stand up to protect the Constitution, protect due process, and make it clear that the President of the United States cannot ignore a nine-to-nothing Supreme Court order, which he is doing as we speak, because if he can do it with one person or do it to two people, he can do it to anybody in the United States of America, and that is un-American. I yield the floor.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise in strong opposition to today's resolution to overturn an FCC rule that provides greater flexibility to ensure that every student has the access to the internet that they need. We have known for a long time that internet access is critical for education. Students need Wi-Fi to connect with classmates and teachers, work on group projects, do research, and even just hit the ``submit'' button on some assignments. Yet too many Americans can't access reliable internet at home. It is called the ``homework gap,'' and it is leaving thousands of kids behind. This disparity only worsened during the pandemic, when the homework gap became a full learning gap for thousands of students. Many kids without internet at home had to sit in McDonald's parking lots so they could Zoom into class. As part of the American Rescue Plan, I worked with my colleague from Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey and former FCC Chairwoman Rosenworcel to launch the Emergency Educational Connectivity Fund, or ECF. This $7 billion program provided nearly 18 million students at over 10,000 schools and libraries with hotspots, routers, and other equipment for students and educators to connect to the internet at home. Maryland schools and libraries received over $145 million through this program to help bridge the homework gap in my State. Even as we worked to provide support for students on an emergency basis, we worked with the FCC on modernization of the E-Rate program to ensure it meets student needs. The new FCC rule allows schools and libraries to loan out Wi-Fi hotspots to students and educators at home so we can continue to address the homework gap. But now, the Republicans want to repeal this commonsense reform and take away hotspots from low-income and rural families. This is a backwards step at a time when access to the internet is more important than ever. And because the new rule simply allowed the use of existing E-Rate funds more flexibly, the repeal of this rule does not save a dime. A vote to repeal this rule is a vote to limit the FCC's ability to address a critical need for students and to put a stop to good work being done by schools and libraries to support learning. This was an issue before the pandemic and remains an issue today. We all know that access to the internet is essential. We have worked on a bipartisan basis to expand broadband access, but we have a long way to go. The FCC modernized E-Rate to ensure that students are not disadvantaged by lack of access to broadband at home, whether that is because they are in a rural area with no connection or because it is unaffordable for their parents. This is a commonsense measure, and I urge my colleagues to vote against its repeal today.