Ron Wyden

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I object.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, just very briefly, because my friend is on the floor, I think we both agree that this position needs to be filled. What I am so troubled by is, on issue after issue, where we needed to see experience and savvy in concrete areas to do what Ben Franklin said--Ben Franklin said we need security and liberty, and smart policies will give you both. And, unfortunately, in the questions that I and others asked of this nominee, he simply had no involvement in the past in these questions. For that reason, I continue to believe that this nomination is a mistake, and it is why I am opposing the nomination tonight. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today, I want to recognize and honor the life of Kurt Paul Pfotenhauer, an extraordinary public servant and three-decade friend who passed away on January 21. Kurt was, first and foremost, a man of deep Christian faith. He was guided in his public service not only by his conservative political beliefs but by that faith, his integrity, his humility, and his sense of responsibility for others. When I first met Kurt, he had been named Senator Gordon Smith's chief of staff. Gordon and I were brand new Senators, and we had a Mount Hood-sized mountain to climb. That is because we were to fill the giant shoes of two retiring, very powerful U.S. Senators from Oregon. Kurt and my chief of staff executed an agreement between Gordon and I to set aside our political differences whenever possible and go to bat for the State of Oregon. That included making sure that our respective congressional and political staffs abided by that agreement. That last bit, as Senators know, sometimes can be easier said than done. We quickly learned that Kurt's word really meant something. Trust can be awfully difficult to make happen in politics, even with those in your own political party, but we came to see that Kurt's word, in fact, was his bond. Our staffs learned to work together--occasionally through gritted teeth--and Kurt and Gordon always upheld their end of the agreement. Those years of the Oregon bipartisan partnership with Gordon and Kurt were extraordinarily, extraordinarily important to me. I believe they were fruitful years, and we owe so much of that credit for all the collaboration to the leadership and decency of Kurt. After Kurt left the Congress and Gordon's office, he went on to a very successful career in the financial services sector. He culminated his years there as executive vice president and vice chairman of First American Title Insurance. I know his colleagues there feel an enormous loss, too, because Kurt was the kind of individual who conducted himself professionally and lived his life daily in a way that served as an example, particularly to young people around him. Kurt was generous with his time, his financial resources, and especially with his heart. He believed in the communities that he was a part of and he was beloved by the communities that he touched. His commitment to service was reflected in a lifelong dedication to always trying to help others. For decades, Kurt and his wonderful wife, Nancy, were sole supporters of The Children's Light Home orphanage in India. He served on the board of directors for the Opens Doors Foundation, and he helped provide mortgage and rental assistance to the many families that had disabled kids. His support for those in need continued even in his final days. He extended help at that time to a chemo patient from out of town who lived out of the cab of his truck on his chemo days at the Mayo Clinic. Kurt helped his fellow patient with lodging. That, Mr. President--and I say this on behalf of all Oregonians who got to know Kurt--tells you what Kurt Pfotenhauer was always about, the Kurt we knew and the Kurt we loved. He fought an incredibly courageous 18-month-long battle against cancer. Kurt used that time creating special memories with his beloved wife Nancy and their five kids and grandchildren. Family was everything to Kurt. I want to extend a special thank-you to all of them for sharing Kurt with all of us here in the Senate, and I want to extend a heartfelt thank-you to Kurt's family on behalf of Oregonians and our Nation for all that he did to make our country and the great State of Oregon a better place. Kurt's many wise and kind deeds on Earth are going to continue to create opportunity, and opportunity is what our country is all about. Opportunity is when we are at our best, and, my God, Kurt Pfotenhauer created a lot of opportunity for generations, in Oregon and in our country, to have a better life in the days ahead. Kurt served as a trusted adviser and confidant to me, and that will be something I will always miss. My former chief of staff and I are always going to remember and love our friend Kurt Pfotenhauer. May his memory be a blessing to all who knew him and to all who have studied what he has done to make a difference. May people reflect on that in the days ahead and may it be a comfort. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, late last week, when I first scheduled this consent request that is relating to Jeffrey Epstein's bank records, I was not expecting it to be set against the backdrop of Donald Trump dragging America into yet another war in the Middle East. I will address the horrific crimes and worldwide financial network of Mr. Epstein in a minute. Right at the outset, I need to address the actions of the Trump administration this past weekend. This is a war the American people do not want, a war that has already cost American lives, a war the President and his scheming advisers have not even tried to justify, a war Donald Trump kicked off at his private club minutes before stepping out to celebrate at a glitzy fundraiser where attendees spent $1 million per plate. Now, I remember the debate about the Iraq war 20 years ago, including the bad faith attacks against those of us who opposed it from the start. No doubt there will be a replay of that debate. There will be some who say: War is on. It is time for everybody to line up behind the President and every other issue has got to go by the wayside. That is wrong. It has been clear from the beginning that the core principle for this administration is that Donald Trump gets to do what he wants, no matter the cost, when he wants to. It doesn't matter to him how many American soldiers die as a result of the war. It doesn't matter how many people lose their health insurance or their livelihoods as a result of his policies. And in the case of Mr. Epstein, it doesn't matter how many pedophiles and sex traffickers continue to walk the streets and prey on the vulnerable while the Trump administration hides essential Epstein files from the public. The position of this administration is that Donald Trump can't do anything wrong. He gets to do what he wants, and everybody else has to obey. Ultimately, the American people aren't going to have it. I won't either, and that was the message in my town meetings this past weekend. The last thing that I am going to do is to slow down or walk away from our 4-year investigation into Epstein's trafficking network because Donald Trump decided to kick off another open-ended war in the Middle East. So I am going to take just a few minutes to lay out why the Senate needs to pass my legislation demanding the release of the Epstein bank records that are at the Treasury Department. Here is what Americans needs to know. Four years ago, my investigators on the Finance Committee began digging into the so-called tax planning that Jeffrey Epstein performed for one of the titans of Wall Street. That man was Leon Black. That relationship spawned sprawling financial ties, and Black had a curious story about their relationship. Here was a guy worth billions and billions of dollars, really a money-making machine. He already employed the best tax and estate planning experts in the Nation. But over the course of several years, Mr. Black paid Jeffrey Epstein $170 million for what he claimed was tax and estate planning advice. Keep in mind that Jeffrey Epstein wasn't a tax lawyer or an accountant. The rates Black paid him were astronomical compared to what he was paying the experts that he already employed. So my investigators kept digging. What we found and what has been confirmed in more recent Epstein reports is that this story is a sham. Jeffrey Epstein wasn't really doing serious tax and estate work, and Black's lawyers had to keep tabs on the advice he did give, which was often shoddy. Our investigation grew. In late 2023, we reached out to the Biden Treasury Department and sought copies of the bank records that it had on Mr. Epstein. The Biden Treasury Department wouldn't give us the files, but they allowed my investigators to review them in-person and to take notes. That is how I am aware today that there is a massive file of Epstein records at the Treasury Department. These are detailed bank records, a roadmap of Epstein's financial history. In fact, they are filings made by banks specifically to alert Federal law enforcement to suspicious payments--evidence of possible financial crimes. They are designed to help the Treasury investigators in the Justice Department root out crimes like money laundering and trafficking. My investigators reviewed a large portion of them on Valentine's Day 2024. We learned that Jeffrey Epstein made 4,725 wire transfers adding up to more than $1 billion in and out of his JPMorgan bank accounts in the decade after 2003. We learned that he moved hundreds of millions of dollars more through accounts at Bank of New York Mellon and Deutsche Bank. We learned that he used Russian correspondent bank accounts to process hundreds of millions in payments associated with trafficking in Russia and Eastern Europe. In the portion of the Epstein bank records that my investigators saw, there could be more than $1.5 billion in suspicious Epstein transactions laid out for law enforcement to review. Mr. President and colleagues, this is a staggering amount, and it is inexplicably high based on what is currently known about Epstein's sources of income. These Epstein records are not among the files the Justice Department has released over the last few months. The bill Congress passed requiring the release of the DOJ Epstein files doesn't affect the records at the Treasury Department at all. And the kicker, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is hiding these bank records from Senate investigators. The Secretary refused repeatedly to turn them over, and he has refused to let us see what we already know is there. The administration came in with a whole lot of bluster about whether they were going to release the Epstein files. So I wanted to give them a chance to make good on their word. I requested the complete set of files from the Treasury multiple times last spring and summer. Both times, I got denials. Secretary Bessent has even gone out in public and downplayed their significance. He has denied the Treasury has any investigative role with the Epstein files at all. At an appearance last summer, he said the Epstein files were ``sitting there'' at the Treasury Department and that the Department's job was only to ``collect them.'' He said ``there were no files, per se, just hundreds and thousands of reports'' and ``our job is simply to collect the reports.'' Let me be clear on this: Secretary Bessent is not telling the American people the truth. A person with his background in finance absolutely knows perfectly well what the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is all about. That is the law enforcement office within the Treasury Department that collects the bank records. And the Secretary hasn't shied away from getting involved in other investigations. He has the Treasury Department launching all kinds of efforts to help the Trump administration's deportation campaign in Minnesota. So the Secretary wants to have it both ways. When it comes to investigating people in communities the Trump administration considers to be adversaries, the Treasury Department and Mr. Bessent are totally aggressive. When it comes to investigating pedophiles with connections to Donald Trump, the files remain locked away. So let me explain why it is important to break the Bessent hold on these documents. They would help investigators learn who funded and who enabled Epstein. They would help us see where his payments went. They would help us identify any connections to organized crime. They would help us learn more about Epstein's patterns, for example, how he controlled women and girls by controlling their accounts. They would help reveal how Epstein's henchmen, including those who still control his estate, assisted in his crimes. That is the kind of information the Treasury Secretary's stranglehold on these documents is hiding from investigators. We have waited long enough. But a week ago, there was a stunning news report that prompted my decision to come to the Senate floor with the unanimous consent request I will make today. CBS News reported on the existence of a mystery Epstein investigation going back to 2010, an investigation the public knew nothing about until now. It was spearheaded by the Drug Enforcement Administration, and its targets were Epstein and 14 others. It dealt with drug trafficking and money laundering in New York and the Virgin Islands. The existence of this probe was revealed by a long memorandum prepared by one of the law enforcement agencies involved. That is an agency that specialized in breaking up transnational organized crime. Most of the 69-page memo was redacted, but the outlines are there. This was a major investigation that began in 2010 and ran at least into 2015. So now, I am working on obtaining an unredacted copy of this memorandum from the Drug Enforcement Administration. There is no reason for the Trump administration to withhold it. It literally says ``unclassified'' at the top of every page. I have got several other questions about the investigation's conclusion and its findings. One obvious takeaway is that the Senate cannot allow the Treasury Secretary to keep the Epstein bank records hidden any longer. The evidence out in public is clear. This wasn't some small-time operation run by Epstein and Maxwell. It is a miscarriage of justice that they are the only two persons who face prosecution in the United States. Epstein's network spanned the globe. It involved extraordinarily powerful and wealthy people. It involved serious financial crimes and huge flows of money. And now, based on the revelation of a Drug Enforcement Administration investigation, we now know as we stand here today it may have involved drugs and drug cartels. The Treasury Secretary in an administration that was interested in justice would have a team of highly skilled investigators digging through the Epstein bank records to assist with prosecutions. Instead, Mr. Bessent, Pam Bondi, the entire Trump group in Congress, and the administration is covering up for pedophiles, sex traffickers, and, quite possibly, drug cartels. If they are not going to do any investigating, the Senate ought to be able to step in. That is what my bill is all about. It mandates that the Treasury turn over these Epstein bank records to Senate investigators. We will do the job the Trump administration should have started on day one. And there is an important new reason to pass the bill. There is a lot of Epstein-related news that breaks nearly every day. I would wager that a lot of banks where Epstein and his network did business are following the news, maybe following this discussion, and taking a second look at his transactions. It is entirely possible that there are new bank filings coming in today, and they are flagging a new set of suspicious transactions that deserve investigation. The Treasury Secretary is blocking that investigation from happening. Before I wrap up, I just want to note this: I first sought these documents in 2023, and that was under a Democratic administration. I requested copies of them again in 2024 after my investigators reviewed a portion of them in-person at the Treasury Department. I am still frustrated that the Biden administration didn't provide them. So nobody has a right to claim that we didn't come out on this issue in a bipartisan way. My investigation will move forward in other directions as well. I continue to believe that some of the biggest banks on Wall Street were among Epstein's biggest enablers. JPMorgan, BNY Mellon, Deutsche Bank, and others had opportunity after opportunity to blow the whistle, and they just kept looking the other way. These aren't itty-bitty banks in Utah or Oregon. These were big Wall Street banks, and they looked the other way. And particularly in the case of JPMorganChase, the evidence shows they knew what Epstein was up to, and they looked the other way because he brought in mountains of cash. They waited until after he died to flag more than 99 percent of his suspicious payments. By then, it was too late to do any good in terms of stopping him. So now, Congress must change the rules, and I intend to push this to make sure that this kind of bank reporting to prevent this kind of horrendous situation where so many young women and families were hurt-- I am going to make sure that this situation doesn't happen again. There is a lot more to come from my investigation. From the beginning, I have welcomed participation from both sides, and that still stands. And my colleagues here in the Senate, Democrats and Republicans, know that my door is open to all of them. We are going to stay at it until we have all the facts because they are not blue and red. And then I am going to have a major reform effort so the Wall Street banks can never, never, never hurt the American people the way they have by handling the Epstein investigation. I strongly hope my colleagues will support my request to pass my bill, the Produce Epstein Treasury Records Act. There is no excuse for the Secretary of the Treasury to continue blocking our access to the Epstein bank records. So, therefore, Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of S. 2746 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; that the Wyden substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am going to be very brief. First of all, as my colleague knows, we are talking about a different set of files. I am concerned about the Treasury Department. What my colleague is talking about is essentially the Justice Department. And what is needed here is more investigations rather than less, and nobody has the expertise that we have on the Senate Finance Committee. The Treasury Secretary knows that, and that is why his strategy is just to slow-walk this. He is just hoping this disappears. Well, I have said it at home, and I have said it again at a townhall meeting: I want everybody to know that we are not going anywhere on this. We are going to stay at it until all the information comes out. We are going to have a bank reform proposal. My colleague is on the Banking Committee. I look forward to him seeing my bank reform proposal because these Wall Street banks behaved abominably. They saw what was going on. I happen to think one of the reasons they did it is because they liked the fact that Epstein was giving them referrals. So my colleague and I agree on a number of issues. Pharmaceutical benefit managers would be one. But we couldn't disagree more on this. And until the slow-walking ends, the investigation that I have launched and has taken place over 4 years and has blown the whistle on a lot of important steps, it is a beginning. We will stay at it until we have got real reform. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, we will make this really brief. I have made a number of requests specifically for the information that my colleague has now described as something that is going to come out. I will believe it when I see it. What I do know is the Treasury Department has stonewalled us every single day through the Trump administration. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, this legislation prohibits any individual--senior citizens, people with disabilities, our veterans, refugees, and the poorest of the poor--from sending money to friends or family overseas for any reason. That prohibition includes American citizens as well. So if you are a veteran who served our country and who counts on your VA benefits, you had better not provide any financial support to your grandmother living abroad or, under this legislation, you could be fined $100,000. The legislation comes straight from a very cruel playbook: First, target public programs that provide a lifeline to low- and middle- income people; second, smear the recipients of this help by characterizing them as fraudsters; and third, use the exaggerated claims as a pretext to slash funding. That was the playbook at the heart of the Republicans' major legislation, which made the biggest ever cuts to healthcare and food assistance in the history of America. Why were those awful cuts made that are causing hospitals to shutter their labor and delivery units and slash staff? To fund the ICE surge that has led to untrained Federal agents roaming the streets of America's communities, committing violence with impunity. That major legislation also lavished tax breaks onto the ultrawealthy while doing nothing to crack down on the billions that wealthy tax cheats don't pay their fair share with each year. This legislation represents a dark heart--a dark heart of the Republican agenda: Scapegoat those who don't have a voice while letting the wealthy and well connected get off the hook. If my colleagues on the other side really were worried about money leaving the United States, I can tell you, as the ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, they can look at their own tax laws that encourage giant corporations to ship jobs and factories overseas. They ought to figure out why the Trump economy is driving investors and their dollars away from America and into foreign markets. It would be an understatement to say this legislation is a solution in search of a problem. This legislation is obviously some kind of messaging bill that would challenge the very foundations of what draws people from all over the world to America--the chance to imagine and create a better life for themselves and their families. For those reasons, I object. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. Since my colleague is talking about my family's background, you might be interested to know that my parents fled the Nazis in the thirties. Not all got out. And we were especially proud of my two parents, who weren't at all interested in coming to America for any benefits, as my colleague is suggesting; they persuaded themselves that they should be in our Army. My dad was one of the famous Ritchie Boys, renowned for their service to the country, writing the propaganda pamphlets we dropped on the Nazis. So my colleague is way off base with his comments about my family. Finally, you might want to do some checking. When I first read this, I thought maybe my colleague and his staff just didn't get the text written correctly because the people who are really upset now are the veterans, people who wore the uniform of the United States, who my colleague is putting in a hardship situation, according to staff. I just wanted to make sure the record was correct. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I oppose the nomination of Joshua Rudd to be Director of the NSA. His responses to questions posed to him at his confirmation hearing, as well as to written questions, reveal a lack of familiarity with basic constitutional rights that is incompatible with the position for which he has been nominated. The NSA's surveillance authorities are vast and, if anything, underappreciated by the American people. The Agency plays a central role in executing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act , but also conducts extensive operations outside of FISA and pursuant only to Executive order. The potential for abuse is enormous, as we saw when the Agency secretly conducted an illegal, warrantless surveillance program that it hid not only from the public but from Congress. Our country faces a dangerous moment in which constitutional rights are under attack. For example, we recently learned that the administration secretly decided that the government doesn't need a judicial warrant to break into a private home. In other words, the administration is trying to invalidate the Fourth Amendment. It was in that context that I asked General Rudd what he would do if directed to target people in the United States for surveillance without a judicial warrant. I offered him the opportunity to answer with a yes or a no. I didn't get an answer. I proposed that he offer general thoughts on the matter, but got nothing of substance. I did everything in my power to allow him to demonstrate some understanding of the basic guardrails of NSA's authorities and got nothing but vague assurances about following the law. There were other topics on which General Rudd's responses were disappointing. He wouldn't associate himself with NSA's previous commitment not to buy and use Americans' location data. He also refused to say whether the government should be allowed to mandate backdoors into encryption used by Americans. His responses related to transparency were also troubling. In addition to statutes and the Constitution, NSA is bound by numerous procedures and guardrails which are publicly available. So I asked General Rudd whether, if the NSA were to operate in violation of those procedures and guardrails, he would inform the American people. He refused to make that commitment. He even refused to promise to inform the Senate Intelligence Committee. The Director of NSA has another job, that of Commander of U.S. Cyber Command. The demands of this job are mind-boggling. The cyber threat to the United States cannot be overstated. And, as SALT TYPHOON demonstrated, our adversaries have succeeded in inflicting serious damage to U.S. national security. The Commander of CYBERCOM needs to have a sophisticated understanding of this threat and how it has evolved over time. He or she needs to be able to see this threat in its geopolitical context and to fully grasp both the technical capabilities and the policy options that might help counter the threat. General Rudd, despite his service, does not have the background that would allow him to immediately step into this role. He is not qualified for this job. And, when it comes to the cybersecurity of this country, there is simply no time for on-the-job learning. The threat is just too urgent for that. For these reasons, I oppose the nomination.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, this month marks the 15th year since the people of Bahrain took to the streets to peacefully protest oppressive practices by the Bahraini Government and champion democratic reform in their homeland. As protestors engaged in civil disobedience, the Kingdom of Bahrain brutally repressed its citizens, claiming the lives of dozens, and injuring hundreds. Despite 15 years passing since Bahrainis demanded their leaders enact reform, the country continues to engage in systematic human rights abuses against its citizens. I will continue to stand in solidarity with the Bahraini people for as long as it takes to achieve accountability and ensure the fundamental rights of Bahrainis are upheld. The Government of Bahrain continues to impose restrictions on expression, assembly, and association. During the first 6 months of 2025, there were 37 documented violations against activists, writers, and internet users. Even after 15 years, Bahraini elections are neither free nor fair, and authorities systematically exclude and repress opposition voices. The government continues to bar former members of the opposition parties from running for Parliament or sitting on boards of governors of civil society organizations. The Bahraini Government restricts religious freedom, resorting to state violence against its Shia population. In July 2025, during an Ashura commemoration, Bahraini authorities launched a campaign of arrests and summonses, violently targeting 60 citizens. Despite significant releases of political prisoners since 2024, many continue to be arbitrarily detained, including those with a connection to the 2011 protests. Twenty-six individuals remain on death row despite credible allegations of torture during their interrogations and unfair trials. In April 2025, authorities detained 22 citizens. Several were linked to peaceful activism or suspected of intending to organize demonstrations. They were forcefully taken during raids at their homes, workplaces, or in public spaces. This sharp increase in detentions appears to be a preemptive effort to silence dissent, sending a chilling message to citizens engaged in peaceful opposition. During the United Nations' periodic review, the United Nations Committee Against Torture stated it remained concerned about consistent reports indicating people in detention are subject to torture and ill treatment. The Government of Bahrain continues to block internationally recognized human rights organizations from visiting the country, leading to a lack of oversight that enables abuses to be carried out with impunity. The Bahraini Government has had 15 years to enact real change to ensure the fundamental rights guaranteed by its constitution and international agreements are upheld. Still, after all these years, the Government of Bahrain has yet to fulfill its promises of reform. The United States must hold Bahrain accountable and to a high standard of human rights and rule of the law, as we should do with all of our allies. Security cooperation must go hand-in-hand with respect for human rights and democratic reform. The United States-Bahrain relationship is strongest when we champion shared values of good governance and fundamental rights. I renew my call for the Government of Bahrain to end its efforts to silence peaceful opposition, to stop its persecution of citizens, and to release all political prisoners who are serving unjust sentences for their defense of human rights. And I call on the Trump administration and, in particular, Secretary Rubio to take these human rights concerns seriously and demand substantive reform and greater accountability from Bahrain.

Mr. WYDEN

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

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, in a little bit, the Senate is going to decide whether or not to interfere with the tax policy decisions made by the elected representatives of the 700,000 people who live in the Nation's Capital. My view is, leave DC alone. There are a lot of very good reasons to oppose this resolution. For one, anybody who listens to debates here in the Congress hears an awful lot of talk from the other side about States' rights--the importance of making policy decisions at the State and local level. This resolution is just another example of my Republican colleagues totally junking that proposition altogether to trample on the rights and priorities of people they don't even represent. Second, if the Senate passes this resolution, it is going to mess up the tax filing season for thousands and thousands of residents of the city. The DC government is going to have to spend millions fixing that mess over the course of several months. So you can forget about all the speeches about good government and fiscal discipline when it comes to this resolution. It is undemocratic and wasteful. And third--and here is the stunner--if the Senate passes this resolution, it would throw out two big anti-poverty programs that the DC area is implementing: a brand new child tax credit and a big expansion of DC's earned income tax credit. So the end effect here is thousands more kids living in poverty and higher rates of poverty overall in the Nation's Capital. The elected representatives in DC looked at the city's big economic challenges--challenges made much worse by the Trump administration--and then they decided to shore up the city's fiscal health and bring down poverty at the same time. I ask my colleagues on the other side: Who are you to overrule them? Let's remember, if Congress sits back and leaves the District of Columbia alone, absolutely nothing changes for us, and absolutely nothing changes for the people we represent at home. When it comes to making life better for our constituents, this is literally a waste of time. All this resolution does is stick it to a bunch of kids and families living in poverty, meddle with democracy in a city of 700,000 people, and waste millions of dollars by creating bureaucratic headaches out of thin air. I urge my colleagues strongly to oppose this resolution. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, the Senate will vote very soon on a resolution I put forward to overturn a new Trump administration policy regarding corporate taxes and partnerships. When you start using a whole bunch of Washington lingo about the corporate alternative minimum tax and income allocated across partnerships, people go to sleep in a hurry, so I am going to explain it as simply as I can. The Trump administration treats the U.S. Treasury Department like Make-A-Wish for corporations and private equity. Any giveaway or special treatment an ultrawealthy corporate executive can dream of, the Treasury Secretary and his crew are there to move Heaven and Earth to make it happen. With respect to the resolution we are voting on today, the question is whether the most profitable corporations and private equity giants in America--those with profits north of $1 billion in a single year-- ought to pay a minimum tax--a minimum tax--of 15 percent. Now, keep in mind that 15 percent is roughly the tax rate you pay if you are a middle-income household--a nurse, a firefighter, or a couple of schoolteachers. Democrats say those hugely profitable firms ought to pay a 15-percent minimum rate. The Trump administration and Senate Republicans say no. And since Republicans have unified control of government, the big corporations can get exactly what they want in America. The Trump administration tore a giant hole in the minimum tax with a new policy change, a change that amounts to a $10.3 billion corporate handout--and that is according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. Now, it has been the case for decades that these huge corporations play financial games to conceal their profits from the IRS. That is how they winnow down their tax rates to single digits--maybe even zero. The same goes for the private equity giants. They report to their shareholders and investors that profits are booming. Everybody celebrates. Share prices and executive comp go up. It is party time in the C-suite. Then the financial chicanery and trickery begins. They fudge the math, and when it comes time to report earnings to the IRS, suddenly these corporations and private equity firms are out there hollering about poverty. Forget that they told the shareholders they were swimming in cash; suddenly, they claim they owe little to nothing in taxes. This kind of tax rate gamesmanship is why Democrats created the corporate alternative minimum tax in 2022. The minimum tax has only been in place for a few years, but already corporations and the private equity crowd are trying to rip it to pieces, and clearly the Trump administration is helping. The $10.3 billion handout never got any debate here on the floor of the Senate. It didn't even come from any legislation. The administration created it out of thin air. It is a hidden piece inside part of Federal rulemaking with a very deceptive bureaucratic name. It is IRS Notice 2025-28. And the topic is so bland, if you don't have a background in tax policy, you might not even catch on to what it is all about. The notice rewrites the rules that govern how corporations and private equity firms count income from the partnerships they own. They get to pick from six different methods--six--for counting their cash, adding a whole lot of complexity to a part of the Tax Code that is already like root canal work just reading it. Essentially, these firms get to play a game of ``choose your own tax rate.'' I repeat: They can play a game of ``choose your own tax rate.'' The Trump policy encourages these giants to set up and abuse partnerships--layer after layer of redtape solely for the purpose of dodging taxes. It has nothing to do with creating jobs or launching new product lines or areas of investment; it is just a matter of moving money around on paper until you are able to make sure your taxes just go poof. These big, profitable corporations and private equity firms got a great deal from the Trump administration last year. This debate is about a simple change in policy from the Treasury Department that handed them $10.3 billion. If you ask me, they have already gotten enough from the people in charge. The Trump administration and Republicans gave them $1 trillion in new tax breaks in the budget megabill they passed in July. Somehow, that wasn't enough. The Trump administration junked an effort to crack down on another partisanship abuse, something known as basis shifting. That is when businesses dodge taxes by moving assets around from one operation to another. Again, this provides no value to our economy; it is just a big tax game. The Trump administration doesn't have any problem with that, so they put the green light to the tax games and said: OK, everybody, there is not going to be a crackdown. That was worth $100 billion to these same corporations and private equity giants. Today, I ask my colleagues: When is enough actually enough? Millions and millions of families in Oregon and across the country struggle to get by, buried under the rising cost of living. Federal deficits shoot through the roof. The job market looks shaky. Young people tell us there is not any opportunity for them to get ahead. It is a slap in the face to all those Americans every time the Trump administration gives another handout to huge corporations and the ultrawealthy. They believe the system is rigged, and they are right. It is rigged because the Trump administration, as I said at the outset, treats the U.S. Treasury like Make-A-Wish for big corporations and private equity. The ultrawealthy and the megadonors get what they want; everybody else gets short shrift. So the resolution I brought before the Senate today is better. This isn't about the Federal Government clobbering big corporations with big taxes. We are talking about a minimum contribution--a 15-percent tax rate that a lot of people wouldn't even consider to be actually a fair share for these big corporations. The biggest, most profitable corporations and private equity firms don't need a special carve-out. They don't need any more Trump giveaways. So, today, I ask my colleagues to support this resolution. Let's block this latest handout to the megacorporations and private equity giants that really do not need it. I yield and now move to proceed to Calendar No. 297, S.J. Res. 95.

Mr. WYDEN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Zev Braun and Candice Morrissey, members of my Finance Committee team, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I will object to the Senate proceeding to the nomination of Sean Plankey of Pennsylvania, to be Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, CISA Department of Homeland Security. Since July 2022, I have been fighting to get CISA to release an important, unclassified report titled ``U.S. Telecommunications Insecurity 2022'' that the Agency commissioned from independent cyber security experts. Congress and the American people have a right to read this report and the shocking information it contains. The Senate has even passed a bill demanding its release. Last session, I objected to proceeding to this nomination until CISA finally released this report. Since CISA continues to hide this report from the American people, I must continue objecting to this nomination. CISA permitted my staff to read the report in person at the Agency's office in the fall of 2023. However, CISA has marked this unclassified report ``For Official Use Only'' and has refused to provide copies of the report to Congress and in response to FOIA requests from the public. CISA claims that the report is predecisional and deliberative and protected by a so-called ``deliberative process privilege.'' This refusal is unjustified. Setting aside that a FOIA exemption does not apply to disclosures to Congress, based on my staff's review of this report, this report is a technical document containing factual information about U.S. telecom security. Although the report includes some general recommendations, the report does not recommend or discuss specific policy options that CISA itself could take to address this threat. And I want to emphasize that this report contains important factual information that the public has a right to see. CISA must drop its purported ``deliberative process privilege'' claim and stop hiding this important information from the public. I have repeatedly urged CISA to release this report, across two administrations. I directly asked then-CISA Director Jen Easterly to release the report in a February 27, 2024, phone call; however, she continued to stonewall my requests until she left office in January 2025. On February 29, 2024, I wrote to then-President Biden, urging the administration to take action to address the serious national security threat posed by foreign governments exploiting U.S. phone carriers' weak cyber security. In that letter to then-President Biden, I stated that ``CISA is actively hiding information about [the threat] from the American people . . . CISA refuses to publicly release this unclassified report, which includes details that are relevant to policymakers and Americans who care about the security of their phones.'' The Biden administration took no action in response to my letter. The Trump administration has taken no action in response to my requests either. On July 28, 2025, the Senate unanimously passed the Telecom Cybersecurity Transparency Act, my bill that would require the report's public release. Soon after, CISA told the press that it now intended to release the report. However, it has still not done so. Senator Warner and I sent a November 12, 2025, letter again urging DHS to release the report. But in a December 18, 2025, phone call, Acting Director Madhu Gottumukkala reiterated that CISA would continue to withhold the report in its entirety from the public. In that call, Dr. Gottumukkala made a new claim that releasing the report would threaten our country's cyber security. Given that the report details vulnerabilities that are already actively being exploited by our adversaries and urgently need to be remediated, Dr. Gottumukkala's claim is frankly absurd. CISA's inaction on telecommunications security prompted the Agency's top telecommunications security expert to file a whistleblower report with the Federal Communications Commission FCC, in the summer of 2024. Citing his access to nonpublic reports and other ``very concerning information,'' the CISA official told the FCC that ``there have been numerous incidents of successful, unauthorized attempts to access the network user location data of communications service providers operating in the USA.'' He added that foreign surveillance went beyond location tracking and included ``the monitoring of voice and text messages'' and ``the delivery of spyware to targeted devices.'' CISA's multiyear coverup of the phone companies' negligent cyber security has real consequences. In a November 2024 joint statement, CISA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation confirmed that the Chinese Government hacked ``multiple telecommunications companies to enable the theft of customer call records data, the compromise of private communications of a limited number of individuals who are primarily involved in government or political activity, and the copying of certain information that was subject to U.S. law enforcement requests pursuant to court orders.'' Vice President Vance subsequently revealed that his communications and those of President Trump were compromised in this hack. This espionage incident and the harm to U.S. national security caused by it were the direct result of U.S. phone carriers' failure to follow cyber security best practices, such as installing security updates and using multifactor authentication and Federal Agencies failing to hold these companies accountable. The Federal Government still does not require U.S. phone companies to meet minimum cybersecurity standards. While it is too late to prevent the Salt Typhoon hack, there is still time to prevent the next incident. As such, I intend to object to considering this nominee until CISA agrees to release this report, which will enable Congress and the public to better understand the current threats and the need for stronger cyber defenses.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, last week, the Senate passed legislation to fund the Department of Health and Human Services and other Agencies, including a section reflecting bipartisan, bicameral negotiations on healthcare policies in the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee. This bill takes important steps forward on healthcare priorities like taking on pharmaceutical middlemen, also known as pharmacy benefit managers, and achieving mental health parity by going after insurance companies that mislead seniors in Medicare Advantage with lists of doctors that aren't actually available. Americans have deep concerns about the state of their healthcare, and these reforms represent a down payment on the effort to ensure our system benefits families over giant corporations. This package also includes a 5-year extension of the Hospital at Home Program, an innovative initiative championed by my friend and former colleague Senator Thomas R. Carper. I want to take a moment to recognize Senator Carper's leadership to advance the Hospital at Home Program. This special initiative allows hospitals to treat patients in their homes, rather than in-patient facilities. The program lets patients receive healthcare services where they want, supports family caregivers, and increases hospitals' capacity. Through the Hospital at Home Program, hospitals are able to provide acute care to patients in their own living rooms through a combination of telehealth and in-person care along with home-delivered meals, nutrition, and medication. Hospitals are able to set patients up with equipment so they are continuously monitored from the comfort of their own homes. Senator Carper knows the value of providing Federal support for solutions that help more Americans receive healthcare in the setting they prefer: their own homes. So far, 381 hospitals across 37 States are approved to participate in the Hospital at Home Program, and a long-term extension of the program will give more hospitals the certainty they need to take advantage of this opportunity to help patients receive healthcare in their homes. It will also help researchers evaluate whether the program is lowering out-of-pocket healthcare costs, improving outcomes for patients, and expanding access to services offered by rural and urban safety net hospitals. This data will be invaluable as Congress contemplates the future of the program. Senator Carper championed Hospital at Home up until his last days serving the Senate because he knew of the value it delivered to his constituents and its potential to serve Americans across the country, especially in rural and underserved communities. In recognition of his leadership, the Congressional Record should reflect that this extension would not have been possible without the leadership, vision, and persistence of Senator Carper.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, for the Trump administration to stomp to death the 1st, the 2nd, the 4th, the 5th, and the 10th Amendments to the Constitution is not immigration enforcement. It is a totally lawless abuse of Federal power. The First Amendment guarantees Americans the right to make their voices heard and to document lawlessness by the Federal Government. It guarantees the right to peacefully assemble and protest against those abuses. The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms. Regardless of what you think about current gun law, there is no justification for murdering a man who was lawfully carrying a firearm. The Fourth Amendment protects the American people against illegal search and seizure of their property. That includes private data and information. I will touch more on that in a minute. The Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to due process. Instead, Trump's masked agents are now stopping people across the country and saying: Papers, please. Then they get thrown into unmarked vehicles, herded into detention centers, and deported to dangerous conditions without due process. The 10th Amendment limits Federal Government overreach, and it protects States' rights. The recent events in Minneapolis--the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti--demonstrate exactly how the Trump administration is breaking the law and trashing the Constitution. Mr. Pretti was exercising his First Amendment rights to peaceably observe and record abuses--abuses by ICE agents. He was exercising his Second Amendment right to lawfully carry a firearm, and he had a permit. He was murdered by the CBP agents. Renee Good was sitting in her car, exercising her First Amendment right to peaceably observe the actions of Federal agents. She was shot and killed in broad daylight. In both instances, there is ample video evidence to disprove the Trump administration's idea that these Americans were domestic terrorists who were covering up lawful killings. I warned, when Trump began deploying Federal agents to our cities, that lives would be at risk. That is now the reality. So our country needs appropriate Federal law enforcement to identify and remove those who committed violent crimes. What is not needed is an American Gestapo rousting tourists, immigrants, and naturalized and native-born Americans, alike, with guns to their head. Shooting unarmed Americans on the street is not immigration enforcement. It is intimidation. It is a blatant attempt to suppress free speech and anybody who tries to stand up to Trump's abuse of Federal power. Trump's ICE and CBP agents have clearly been trained in fear tactics, instead of in legitimate law enforcement. I have said it before, and I want to say it again before the Senate: Kristi Noem and the political appointees at DHS have got to go. So I am calling on ICE and CBP agents in our streets to get out of our communities. I am pushing for legislation to get them out of schools and hospitals, places of worship, childcare centers, courthouses, and additional public spaces. I am also calling for the end of ICE locking people up who don't need to be, including the end of family detention and privately run immigration detention centers. And I call on the Border Patrol to go back to ports of entry and get out of the business of terrorizing our communities miles away from duty stations. If an individual has committed a local crime, then local law enforcement can step up. It is far past time that these armed agents who have now murdered two American citizens and shot more under disturbing circumstances are sidelined. ICE and CBP agents certainly have proven they can't be trusted in our communities with weapons and firearms, as we have seen. If you listen to Trump and his crowd, they seem to think it is the American people who ought to be disarmed. I think most people around our country understand we need to overhaul immigration to continue the rich history of welcoming immigrants and refugees as we secure our border and enforce immigration laws, but that is not what Trump's lawless activities are about. Right now, ICE is destroying the rule of law, not protecting it. I have made it clear that I cannot and will not support more Federal funding for Trump's ICE unless there is an end to these killings and abuses and accountability for everybody involved. In its current form, ICE is no longer an immigration enforcement Agency; it is Trump and the administration's personal Gestapo. There can be no more funding for ICE when it kills people on the streets, incites violence, and defies the law. When Democrats have the opportunity, we will investigate and publicly prosecute anybody complicit in these murders, from Kristi Noem to Mr. Bovino, all the way down to the ICE and CBP agents who pulled the trigger on Renee Good and Alex Pretti. It is also important to investigate the agents who have subjected immigrants, including children, to extraordinary cruelty. Before wrapping up, I want to touch on something else that has been missed with regard to the abuses, and that is data privacy. For years, I have come to this floor to sound the alarm on the growing appetite of ICE to exploit legal loopholes that allow the Federal Government to buy up troves of Americans' most private information, including geolocation data. We now see exactly how the Trump administration is abusing that information. ICE is using Palantir apps to collect biometric data and run protesters through facial recognition systems. This amounts to labeling people as domestic terrorists just for exercising their First Amendment right to peaceably protest and report on Federal agents. It is a clear threat to the constitutional rights of Americans, and I am working with Senator Markey and others to stop these abuses. Second, ICE is buying Americans' private location data from sleazy data brokers through a legal loophole that allows the government to get around the Fourth Amendment. This isn't a red issue or a blue issue; it is a constitutional issue. The American Government has no business in purchasing the location data of American citizens. So I have proposed the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. That would put a stop to the government being able to buy up troves of Americans' personal data from anybody who has got a credit card. We ought to be pushing to get it passed into black-letter law as soon as possible so that Agencies like ICE don't have access to the personal information of millions of Americans. Finally, my investigators exposed that ICE is using government data from State motor vehicle departments and other Federal Agencies. It has refused to answer questions as to how that data is being used. So we are leading a fight here in the Senate to rein them in. I have warned States that care about their residents: They had better stop sharing DMV data and enabling ICE abuses. ICE is using this information to target Americans on our streets. My view is that it is important for the Senate to recognize that data privacy is now a life-and-death issue in America. As long as Trump's agents are shooting American citizens dead on the street, this administration having access to our private location data and other information is a threat to everybody's safety. I will close with this. My parents fled the Nazis during the very real threat of growing authoritarianism in Germany. What the Trump administration is offering us is, indeed, the authoritarian playbook: Attack the weakest in order to cow the rest of us. My family knows a thing or two about watching a democracy slide toward authoritarian rule. I know a little bit about what comes next. The American people have a right to feel and be safe. No one should be forced to live in a country where they are terrified that Federal agents might bust their door open in the middle of the night. I hope that all Americans who have a chance to follow this discussion and learn about it, in the days ahead, will speak out and that all Americans will never, never, never yield their liberties. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Tomorrow is the final day for Americans to sign up for health insurance through the Affordable Care Act Marketplace. After that, the doors slam shut, high premiums are locked in, and millions of families all across the land will be unable to afford essential care. On this side of the aisle, we have been working for more than a year to develop bipartisan support to prevent this from happening. We told our Republican colleagues we wanted to work with them, long before Donald Trump was sworn in. Democrats spent the summer warning about the dangers of higher premiums, while Republicans were forcing through the largest cut in history. We pressed for action before the signup period began. At every turn, Donald Trump and congressional Republicans slammed the door in the face of millions of Americans seeking premium relief. This morning, it is clear why. Yesterday, the Republican Study Committee, which constitutes a majority of the House Republican conference, released yet another new plan to unleash another set of harmful partisan changes to Americans' healthcare. This is being done when millions are already reeling from the cuts that we saw to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act in the last bill. The new draft plan contains yet another trillion dollars in cuts to healthcare which, if passed, would represent a knockout blow to the American healthcare system. It is, once again, another hacksaw to Medicaid, targeting blue States and cities in yet another attempt to weaponize the Federal Government against the Republicans' political opponents. This new Republican plan would unleash insurance companies and shady brokers to push more junk plans that I can tell you aren't worth the paper they are written on. Americans are fed up with high healthcare costs, and yet Republicans now want to double down on misery and, once again, allow these Swiss cheese health plans that don't cover healthcare like chemotherapy or prescription drugs. This morning, the mask is off. It is clear Republicans haven't been serious about holding premiums down from the start. All the hemming and hawing about healthcare premiums and taking on big insurance has been for show, and the American people are fed up with excuses. Today is an opportunity, finally, to do the right thing. Senator Schumer has made it clear that extending the tax credits for middle- class healthcare is a key first step--a first step--toward moving America toward a healthcare system that puts our families first. That is the priority, not helping giant corporations looking to do another stock buyback. Unfortunately, it seems like Republicans, on healthcare, are focused on doubling down in the wrong direction. That is what this morning's developments say. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, before she leaves the floor, I just want to say that the Senator from Minnesota has been relentless in terms of standing up for folks who are just trying to get a fair shake on their premiums. I have been doing this since my days with the Gray Panthers, and I know what it means to be persistent. That defines Senator Klobuchar, and I thank her. I am pleased to be working with Senator Warner and Senator Ossoff-- and I see Senator Kaine here--because all of us want to make sure we lower healthcare costs for American families. Today, the Senate is going to vote to repeal a host of damaging policies that Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy, and Dr. Oz have unleashed on Americans who are unsuspecting. People are just trying to get by in tough times and are going to get hammered, and from the day Donald Trump was sworn in, this administration made attacking Americans' healthcare their top priority. Last summer, Republicans in Congress rammed through a massive bill to give tax breaks to billionaires and giant corporations, while making the largest healthcare cuts in American history. At the same time, the Trump administration used the Byzantine Federal rulemaking process to double down on these efforts by finalizing the rule that all of us on this side of the aisle are working to repeal today. The harmful changes made by the Trump administration come down to one proposition: It is OK to have more redtape, and it is just fine to increase healthcare costs. That is the exact opposite of our agenda, which is to focus on affordability and making the American healthcare system simpler. I am going to just tick through a couple of the worst examples to illustrate why these rules need to be junked. First, the Trump rules will increase what American families have to pay out of pocket each year by nearly $1,000. So the question becomes: What is the purpose behind that change, other than to take money from Americans who are already struggling? The rule adds new fees, such as a new reenrollment fee that applies to low-income workers. To be clear, that means, if you want to keep your health insurance, you have got to pay a fee to the government just for the right to keep what you have got. Even by Washington, DC, standards--I say to my friend from Montana--that just defies common sense. They also create mandatory minimum premiums that are going to cause millions to lose their coverage. Now, Republicans say that these fees are aimed at reducing fraud. There is just no evidence to back it up. My view has been, ever since my days with the Gray Panthers, and my friend from Virginia knows about this--I say any fraud--any fraud--is too much. But the numbers are clear. The vast majority of fraud in healthcare is conducted by shady insurance brokers who are looking to make a fast buck through commissions from phony enrollments, not working Americans looking to buy healthcare. So I have introduced legislation to create tough, criminal penalties for these insurance brokers. So make no mistake about it, Senator Kaine, there is something we ought to be doing to root out fraud. Let's go after these insurance brokers with tough criminal penalties. I have been talking to Republicans to ask them to join as cosponsors, and they haven't been willing, really, to give us the time of day. Instead of going after fraud where it exists, Donald Trump and Republicans create barriers that are going to trip up Americans trying to navigate a healthcare system that is just too complicated. Beyond fees and higher premiums, the Trump rule also adds new verification checks and enrollment rules that amount to an enormous heap of redtape. These redtape measures, according to authorities who have analyzed them, are going to create 15 million hours of paperwork, and 1.8 million people are going to lose their coverage as they try to navigate this never-never land of a maze of healthcare rules. These types of changes are right out of the playbook of Big Insurance because they create barriers and bureaucratic hurdles so they can keep more of your money while denying working families basic healthcare. It is no secret that Americans are fed up with a healthcare system that gets in their way at every turn. It is time for Republicans to do the right thing and join with Democrats to lower Americans' healthcare costs, instead of creating new cost barriers and redtape restrictions. They can help those families by voting with us today. I urge my colleagues to support Senator Warner, Senator Ossoff, Senator Klobuchar, and Senator Kaine. We are all here for one purpose: less bureaucracy, less redtape, lowering premiums for families. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am announcing my intention to object to any unanimous consent request to proceed to H.R. 5345, the Improving Social Security's Service to Victims of Identity Theft Act. I support my colleagues' efforts to support victims of identity theft, including children, and I am a proud cosponsor of this effort. However, I continue to be concerned that the bill's lack of administrative funding to implement the legislation would harm the Agency's ability to serve the American public. According to SSA estimates in August 2024, implementing this bill would cost approximately $93 million over 10 years due to hiring and training new employees, implementing necessary system changes, and estimated increased workloads. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Social Security's customer service budget has dropped by 23 percent since fiscal year 2010 after adjusting for inflation. Over the same period, SSA is serving 17 million more Social Security beneficiaries, a 28- percent increase. Moreover, Since February 2025, SSA reduced staff by nearly 6,000 employees through encouraging retirements and voluntary resignations, including 2,000 from frontline positions. In August 2025, SSA diverted 2,000 field office staff away from serving customers in the front office to answer national 800 number calls indefinitely. Field offices, which bore the brunt of those staffing cuts, are now forced to backfill the staffing shortages with other employees at the expense of timely processing benefit claims and assisting seniors who come into the field offices. Simply put, SSA is having to do more with less resources and fewer staff. Creating a new component within the Agency without sufficient funding will force SSA to divert even more of its skeletal staff away from its other core mission work to perform these duties, exacerbating wait times further. I am committed to working with the sponsors of the legislation and our colleagues on the Committee on Appropriations to ensure that SSA has the necessary resources to effectively implement the bill while improving customer service for the millions of Americans who rely on Social Security. Until then, I will object to any unanimous consent request in relation to this legislation.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, there is a runaway train barreling toward our country in the form of a massive increase in healthcare costs for millions of Americans who are tied to the tracks. Today, the Senate will vote on two different plans: One, offered by Democrats, would save Americans from the health cost freight train and get them off the tracks. The other, offered by Republicans, amounts to tossing Americans a hacksaw and wishing them luck as the train speeds into view. Come January 1, millions of Americans are going to have to figure out how they are going to pay for their healthcare. Families will be making a near-torturous decision between paying their premiums or paying for rent and groceries. Millions will decide to forgo coverage completely. The Republican plan on offer is snake oil in a gaping wound. It is going to spark an avalanche of junk insurance plans designed to enrich big insurance companies. A puny savings account to cover the cost of an appendectomy, having a baby, or getting your tonsils out under the Republican plan is going to leave patients up to their eyeballs in financial debt. The biggest winner under this Republican scheme won't be Bartley and Carla of Eugene, OR, whose premiums will skyrocket by 500 percent on January 1. The real winner under the Republican proposal will be Big Insurance--specifically, the biggest, UnitedHealth Group. But enriching rich donors and giant corporations while typical Americans foot the bill is pretty much par for the course under a failed Republican leadership. What Democrats are offering today is a clean extension of the tax credits to keep ACA plans in place. Every Member of this body can agree that healthcare costs and insurance companies are spinning out of control and that more needs to be done to rein them in, but the solution is not to kick millions of people off their healthcare until Republicans get their act together to find a replacement. I am now going to take a brief moment to talk about the off-base Republican claims about fraud in the individual market. The fact is, Republicans are cherry-picking statistics or are outright distorting the facts to justify kicking millions of people off their healthcare under the guise of fighting fraud. Independent Federal watchdogs recently posed as sleazy insurance brokers to fraudulently enroll Americans in healthcare plans. That tells me that what is needed is tough criminal penalties aimed at stopping these unscrupulous insurance brokers. I wrote that legislation--legislation that would, for the first time, hit the sleazy insurance brokers with criminal penalties. Based on how much my Republican colleagues talk about fraud, you would think they would be tripping over themselves to support our bill, but none of them are doing so. That tells me that their rhetoric is just empty talk. I will close with this: The only timely solution that saves Americans who are now in harm's way is by extending these credits and keeping costs down for families. Once the crisis is averted, let's look in a bold, new direction for American healthcare because it is clear the status quo doesn't work. I urge my colleagues to support a clean extension of the ACA tax credits to provide American families the money they need to pay for high-quality healthcare. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. While he is on the floor, I want to tell my colleague, it has been a pleasure to work with him on this, and what you have said is so eloquent. I am going to be very brief and just make one point. What you want to make sure of is that the American people aren't in the dark with respect to important health issues. You want them to be able to comment. You want them to be able to weigh in. And I think that is extraordinarily important. And the reason it is needed is, earlier this year, Robert Kennedy took the unprecedented step of doing away with that and basically taking away that right to comment on matters that are so important to them. From day one of his tenure at HHS, he has gone to great lengths to upend public health and erode the safeguards that have been in place for decades to keep kids and seniors and families safe and healthy. He has fired thousands of scientists, health professionals, and staff in charge of the health and well-being of kids and families. And one of the things that I appreciated your mentioning is, the roots of this--the roots of the Richardson waiver--are with Republicans. This was not some plot by a bunch of people for ideological reasons on the other side of the political spectrum. This was a basic proposition of making sure that people had a say in the healthcare policies that the Federal Government enacts. And I would just say to my friend, back in my days when I was director of the Gray Panthers--I know my colleague was with legal aid-- we thought the right to participate was just about as fundamental as you can get. And doing away with that makes it a lot easier to undermine science and healthcare in America and make every one of us less safe. And under the rule change that is being talked about, it is all being done for reasons of secrecy. Since Kennedy's repeal of the Richardson waiver, HHS has abruptly and arbitrarily canceled hundreds of millions of dollars of previously approved public health funding. The Secretary has announced a major reorganization of his Department, resulting in fewer health experts at HHS, and without the Richardson safeguard in place, it seems to me that we will have a government that is emboldened to move forward with sweeping rules about vaccines without input from the public. Robert Kennedy--and my colleague touched on this--promised radical transparency. We had the confirmation hearing in the Senate Finance Committee. So on promises for radical transparency, it looks like what we got, to me, I would say to my colleague, is radical secrecy. Instead of throwing open the doors of government, what has happened is the gates have been shut, and the key has been thrown away. So the resolution that you are introducing today makes sure that the American people get their voice back, and on what I think is the most important issue, which is health. I visited with my colleague before on this, I have always felt the most important issue is health because, if you and your loved ones don't have their health, everything else goes by the board. And what you are doing with this important resolution is giving Americans a say in the future direction of their own health. You are giving them the power to speak up about this crusade against healthcare and the power to speak out against the policies that are making them less safe. I come to the floor today to say that this is a thoroughly nonpartisan CRA. You look at this and the language and what you are trying to do, and how you describe it on the floor has really drained some of the ugly partisanship out of an important debate. You have said this comes down to--as I said earlier: Let's make sure the American people aren't in the dark. I urge my colleagues to vote for transparency, to vote for the right to weigh in on these healthcare issues. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I am going to make just a few brief points in response to Senator Ernst's proposal. This bill would rescind each dollar of unspent funding from emergency supplementals, including funds America needs to prevent the spread of infectious diseases. For example, the Trump administration is using this funding right now--that is right now--to address an Ebola outbreak. Rescinding this funding makes America less safe. The point of the Rapid Response Reserve Fund is to have money in case there is a need for a rapid response. This funding can save lives. This bill would further rescind funding for medical supply chain development, manufacturing, and production to develop products like a universal flu vaccine to prevent the next pandemic. And it rescinds funding available to build a stronger healthcare workforce for nurses and disease specialists who can address emergency interventions. I want to say to my colleague: We have always worked well together, and I would be glad to work with her and other colleagues to have a comprehensive look at what should and should not be rescinded because of the discussion that we have just had. That is something that should be done as part of the appropriations process, not, in my view, through this legislation. For that reason, Mr. President, I object.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, families across the country are struggling with skyrocketing costs--health costs, grocery costs, energy costs--but instead of working to address these challenges, Republicans are bringing yet another disastrous Trump nominee forward to support his agenda. Thomas March Bell has been nominated to be the independent watchdog at America's health Agency. There could not be a more dangerous choice for this position. I have long believed in the bipartisan coalition that works here to defend the integrity and the independence of the inspectors general. Senator Grassley once said: Inspectors General are intended to be equal opportunity investigators and are designed to combat waste, fraud, abuse and misconduct . . . without regard to political affiliation. They are the ultimate [drainers of the swamp]. One of Donald Trump's very first acts after taking office was to fire these independent investigators. In less than a year, he has gutted the integrity and independence of these Offices. A few years ago, this body overwhelmingly passed a law to secure the independence of the inspectors general in government, but 4 days into his second term, Donald Trump threw that law into the dumpster. He unlawfully fired nearly two dozen inspectors general across the government. Now he is replacing them with a wave of partisan operatives who stand ready to sabotage the independent oversight of inspectors general. Meanwhile, it has been crickets from Republicans. They are just happy to let him do it. No nominee has exemplified the assault on independent oversight quite like March Bell, the nominee to serve as Health and Human Services inspector general. I would be remiss if I didn't start off by noting that he is nominated to fill a position that is not legally vacant. He is nominated to fill the role of an inspector general that was illegally fired by Donald Trump. My Democratic colleagues and I on the Finance Committee urged Chairman Crapo to pause this nomination. It was met with radio silence. Now Republicans are pushing him through, unbothered by Donald Trump's complete disregard for the law that almost every one of them voted for just a few years ago. How times change. Let me talk about Mr. Bell's supposed qualifications. Once in a while, I get called a privacy hawk, and I never consider that an insult. I have worked for decades, often with my Republican colleagues, to safeguard the privacy of Oregonians and all Americans. I have come to believe there are few places where privacy is more important than in the healthcare system. That is why this nomination is so dangerous for HHS. Mr. Bell has made a career out of plastering people's private information in so many places, everywhere he can make it stick. When he was chief counsel for a select House panel, he made public a slew of information on reproductive healthcare providers and patients that he targeted with a sham investigation, all while they were being subjected to threats and physical harm. Staff and even Members of Congress raised multiple concerns about his behavior during this investigation. He couldn't care a lick. Those patients and providers saw a ninefold increase in violent threats during his investigation. When my staff asked Mr. Bell what steps he took to protect the targets of this critical investigation, he replied: ``None.'' That is unacceptable. I also note that the entire investigation was based on doctored, manipulated, and sometimes downright fabricated evidence, much of which he got from a personal connection. This wasn't oversight; this was raw partisanship intended to target and intimidate reproductive health providers and the women seeking their care. This is shocking behavior from the person nominated to oversee the privacy and protection of the private health information of Americans, but that is Mr. Bell's bread and butter. In questions for the record following his nomination hearing, he refused to admit that Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential election. An inspector general needs a firmer grasp of reality than this. Even now, while he is nominated for a role that requires resolute independence, he is leading another sham investigation. This time, he is looking at ActBlue. This is nothing more than Donald Trump weaponizing the Federal Government to target political opponents with political enforcers. Instead of serving the American people, he is focused on carrying out the Trump agenda. If my colleagues think that this blatant partisanship is going to stop if he is confirmed as an independent inspector general, they are betting on the wrong horse. When Mr. Bell came before the Finance Committee, he said that he ``will examine, evaluate, audit, and investigate to support the initiatives of President Trump and Secretary Kennedy.'' Last time I looked, an inspector general isn't there to follow the President's marching orders; they are there to make sure that the train stays on track and that nobody is out there pilfering the boxcars. Mr. Bell has spent his whole career as a partisan operative. His confirmation will be a blank check to continue to make the healthcare system more expensive, more exclusionary, and less effective. It will all be done at the expense of the American people. This goes beyond the fox guarding the henhouse; it is giving the fox free rein to investigate henhouses from coast to coast. And while that might be the MO of this administration, it is dangerous for the American people, and it is exactly the opposite of what Congress set up inspectors general to do. By confirming Mr. Bell, the Republicans send yet another strong message to Donald Trump that he can use the Federal Government to settle personal scores. I urge my colleagues to respect the laws that we passed here and to respect the privacy, the decency, and the safety of patients and providers. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the dangerous Bell nomination. I yield the floor.