Ron Wyden

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President and colleagues, here is how flawed this plan is. The danger Senate Republicans are causing for rural hospitals is so great, Republicans have had to create a rural hospital relief fund so they can look like they are fixing the problem they are causing. It is a bandaid on an amputation. It provides just a tiny fraction of the nearly $1 trillion in cuts the bill makes to Medicaid. It would be much more logical to simply not cut $1 trillion from Medicaid in the first place. This amendment doubles down on that flawed plan that is going to set rural hospitals adrift. I urge opposition to the amendment. I yield the floor. Point of Order Mr. President, I make a point of order that the pending measure violates section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I have a motion to commit at the desk.

Mr. WYDEN. I ask that further reading of the motion be dispensed with.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President and colleagues, Republicans started out planning to repeal the tax credits that Finance Democrats wrote for wind and solar energy. Then it got a whole lot worse. The Republican plan actually taxes clean energy. Taxes raise energy bills. The Republican plan will raise your energy bills. If this passes, it is a death sentence for the wind and solar industries and hundreds of thousands of American jobs. It is a surrender to China on clean energy manufacturing. Leader Schumer and my colleagues on our side all support this effort. If you are for all-of-the-above energy, something I have heard my Republican colleagues say, you will support my motion to commit the bill back to the Finance Committee to strike the cuts to clean energy.

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

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am going to speak very briefly, and then I think my colleagues would like a voice vote. I rise in opposition to the Lee amendment. The Lee amendment repeals important technology-neutral electricity credits. Tech-neutral allows all energy sources to compete on a level playing field. Wind and solar are an essential part of American energy. These sources keep prices from skyrocketing as demand soars and keep the AC on during historic heat waves. U.S. manufacturing in wind and solar rely on the deployment of these technologies. Reversing course on 21st-century energy sources wipes out American jobs. I urge a ``no'' vote when we vote on a voice vote. Vote on Amendment No. 2745

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am happy to have a voice vote. Let me just speak briefly on this. This amendment is a backdoor way to undermine unemployment insurance. The fact is, Republicans have turned down numerous opportunities to ensure the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes. That is not what this amendment is about. This is about turning a social insurance program that everyone pays into, a program built on earned benefits, into something Republicans can cut until it disappears. If it happens to unemployment insurance, it can happen to other parts of the safety net. I oppose the amendment. Point of Order Mr. President, I raise a point of order that the pending measure violates section 313(b)(1)(e) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 because it reduces revenues over the budget window. And I am happy to have a--I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I withdraw my--

Mr. WYDEN. I am happy as well. I withdraw my point of order.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, why would anybody vote against this? Duh. We can accept--

Mr. WYDEN. We can accept a voice vote on this amendment. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, when the Senate considers the reconciliation bill, H.R. 1, it is my intention to make the following motions to commit the bill: 1. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that (1) would strike any provision that cuts funding for Medicaid; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. This motion to commit is supported by Senators Cantwell, Bennet, Warner, Whitehouse, Hassan, Cortez Masto, Warren, Sanders, Smith, Lujan, Warnock, Welch, Alsobrooks, Baldwin, Blumenthal, Blunt Rochester, Booker, Gallego, Gillibrand, Hickenlooper, Hirono, Kaine, Kelly, Kim, Markey, Murray, Padilla, Peters, Reed, Rosen, Schumer, and Van Hollen. It is also supported by Accountable.US, AFL-CIO, American Association of People with Disabilities, American Federation of State, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, County and Municipal Employees, Catholic Health Association of the United States, Families USA, First Focus Campaign for Children, Justice in Aging, Leading Age, Medicare Rights Center, National Association of Community Health Centers, National Council on Independent Living, National Health Law Program, National Women's Action Fund, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and UnidosUS. 2. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) increase annual funding for the Child Care Entitlement to States established in section 418 of the Social Security Act to at least $20,000,000,000 per year; (2) provide an additional $5,000,000,000 to such Child Care Entitlement to States annually to provide new grants to improve child care workforce, supply, quality, and access in areas of particular need, including rural communities; and (3) eliminate provisions that would cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires. This motion to commit is supported by Senators Warren, Smith, and Booker. 3. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that forces families to sell their home to qualify for long-term care in Medicaid; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 4. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that makes it harder for States to expand Medicaid to cover uninsured residents; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 5. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that creates a sick tax by charging Medicaid enrollees living on low incomes new copayments; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 6. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that locks kids out of the Children's Health Insurance Program; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 7. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that imposes waiting periods for health care on kids enrolled in the Children's Health Insurance Program; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 8. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that imposes lifetime limits on health care for kids enrolled in the Children's Health Insurance Program; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 9. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that will take nurses out of nursing homes; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra- wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 10. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that defunds Planned Parenthood; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 11. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that cuts Medicaid payments and restricts access to abortion; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 12. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that bans States from covering gender-affirming care in Medicaid for all enrollees; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 13. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) would strike any provision that cuts Medicaid payments rural hospitals need to stay open; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 14. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that cuts Medicaid payments, forcing States to cut K-12 education and public safety; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 15. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that cuts Medicaid payments, forcing States to cut home care seniors and kids with disabilities need to live at home; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 16. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike section 71101; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 17. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that strips Medicare coverage from victims of human trafficking, refugees, and asylum seekers; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 18. A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report changes that would (1) strike any provision that strips Medicare coverage from current enrollees; and (2) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, before she leaves the floor, I want to thank my colleague, in particular for putting a human face on what this is all about for us on this side of the aisle--that small child, the senior you were talking about. I am going to pick up on what you said, and I thank you for your leadership. I am going to get into the specifics of this horrifying bill, in a moment--all the details, the healthcare carnage, and the clean energy bloodbath that Republicans are dragging America toward. First, though, I want to spend just a few minutes on the state of the Senate and our democracy. As of a few hours ago, the rules of the Senate are whatever Republicans feel like when the day begins. It is democracy-defying, plain and simple. The bill before the Senate is loaded--loaded--with fraudulent budget math that hides trillions of dollars in handouts to corporations and the ultrawealthy. It is a violation of the rules that used to be followed for years for the reconciliation process. It is a violation of the Congressional Budget Act. It is a violation of common sense. Republicans decided that none of that matters. So they have kind of gone nuclear to advance the bill. Apparently, in this Chamber, if the Republican chair of the Budget Committee says so, one plus one equals three. That is unsustainable. We are going to be a sicker, poorer, and weaker country if this bill becomes law, and the Republicans have used this process, going nuclear, to pass it. But these moves cut both ways, and there will be a lot of cleanup for Democrats to handle down the road. Now, in my time in public service, I have never seen a more destructive, regressive, commonsense-defying bill debated in the Senate. This bill is going to determine the future of healthcare in America. Millions of Americans will lose their health insurance if Republicans pass the bill. My colleagues seem to be ignoring, for example, the fact that rural hospitals are the anchor of life in much of America. This bill will sever that anchor and set rural healthcare adrift. Here is how flawed the Republican plan is. The danger they are causing for rural hospitals is so great that Republicans have had to create a rural hospital relief fund. It is a bandaid on an amputation. I can tell you, one thing I know for sure is that only in Washington, DC, would you create a relief fund to address a problem that you caused. How about you just not cut $1 trillion from Medicaid in the first place? Now, I wanted to get a sense of what rural America thought of this legislation. So last weekend, I held four townhalls in three Eastern Oregon counties. It is as rural as it gets. Donald Trump carried these counties overwhelmingly. One of them was Malheur County, where Donald Trump received more than 70 percent of the vote. This is where I held an open-to-all townhall meeting. It happens to have one of the highest Medicaid enrollments in the country. The message I heard was very clear and very loud: This bill will be a disaster for Malheur County on rural health. Now, healthcare is a top employer in America. If these cuts go through, the healthcare workforce in rural areas of our Nation is going to be decimated. Nurses, doctors, and support staff will lose their jobs, and rural economies are going to suffer. Many of the Americans that will feel the consequences of this legislation, today, walk an economic tightrope. Many have multiple jobs. Millions more Americans will lose their benefits, like home care and mental health, and services that already fall far short of what our people expect. These are overwhelmingly kids, people with disabilities, seniors--all to pay for more tax cuts for multinational corporations and the ultrawealthy. It is not just the cuts. It is also a whole lot more redtape, making it harder for people to get care. At the center of the Republican Medicaid changes is a bunch of redtape thickets designed to entrap people into a never-ending maze of AI chatbots and phone trees that make it impossible for them to get the coverage they need. And even if you manage to get through all that bureaucratic water torture and sign up for Medicaid, the Republican plan says: If you lose your job, you lose your healthcare. Why would the Congress want to inflict that on more people? Nobody I could find wants these cuts, no matter their political persuasion, and I was in places that were bright red. I am sure most of us can agree there is a real debate to be had on how we can make healthcare more affordable and accessible, but this bill achieves none of that. Let me mention seniors. My colleagues have touched on the elderly. Two in three nursing home beds in America are covered by Medicaid. If Republicans pass this into law, conditions will deteriorate. Seniors will be forced out of their nursing homes or forced to move in with a family that doesn't have the necessary skills to care for their aging parents or grandparents. Nursing homes would be forced to shut their doors as a result of these cuts, during a time when States are in desperate need of more nursing home options, not fewer. The bill also repeals nursing home safety standards. That is going to mean fewer nurses in nursing homes. You would think that would be a concern of Republicans in the Trump administration. But when the Finance Committee was considering the nomination of CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz, he said: I believe we can provide quality of care equivalent to having a nurse in that nursing home using tools and technologies. Dr. Oz was apparently talking about AI, and I said: You are for cutting nurses. What is going to happen when an 85-year-old woman has to go to the bathroom in the middle of the night and needs some help? He had no answers. But he is still being a big booster on artificial intelligence. I am deeply troubled about what the Trump administration has in store for America's seniors. That is on top of the fact that the home-based care that most seniors prefer will be one of the first benefits States are forced to cut because it is optional now rather than mandatory. Hundreds of thousands of seniors are going to see a premium increase of about $200 a month. The bill also applies the worst forms of corporate redtape to the Affordable Care Act: shorter enrollment periods, more verification forms, more hoops, more bureaucracy, more redtape for Americans who just want affordable healthcare. And the healthcare carnage may get worse with the Republican amendments coming up. It is my understanding that they are going to offer an amendment that would lower the Federal Medicaid match for new enrollees in what is known as the Medicaid expansion. That was a key part of the Affordable Care Act, which delivered affordable healthcare to roughly 21 million Americans last year. If this amendment is adopted, taken together with the other awful policies in the bill, it would amount to repealing the Affordable Care Act and making good on the 15-year Republican crusade to dismantle that law. Millions more working Americans are going to lose their health insurance, and it would break a promise to the 41 States that have expanded Medicaid, many of them red States. These healthcare cuts aren't just going to be felt by Americans with Medicaid. Those who buy health insurance on their own are going to be similarly hit. Emergency room wait times are going to skyrocket, and premiums will spike. Families will be one lost job or financial calamity away from being tossed onto a safety net that has rips and tears everywhere you look. So many are going to fall between the cracks. I also wanted to touch on another horrendous provision on healthcare buried in the bill: the defunding of the Planned Parenthood program. And they are doing it in a way that is essentially a backdoor, nationwide abortion ban. This provision is going to strip clinics of their funding and make it impossible for them to provide lifesaving healthcare, cancer screening, and annual exams. All of that will disappear for the people who rely on these clinics for basic care. The healthcare cuts are getting a big focus with myself and colleagues because of the challenge for so many communities, but there is something else that is absolutely imperative; that is, the clean energy bloodbath, and it certainly deserves attention. In the middle of the night Friday into Saturday, the bill that was already a disaster for clean energy got much, much, much worse. What Republicans have on offer doesn't just repeal the tax credits I wrote for wind and solar energy in the Finance Committee; now we have an actual massacre on our hands. This Republican plan actually taxes wind and solar--a new tax on the cheapest and easiest ways to get new energy to the grid. At the same time, somebody tucked into the bill a brand new tax break for coal. So here we are, 2025, and the Senate is about to pass a bill that taxes wind and solar while subsidizing coal. It is so backward, it leaves you slack-jawed. When you look at this bill, it is awfully clear that the Republican goal is to destroy key sources of clean energy in America. It is a death sentence for the wind and solar industries in our country, a total abandonment of hundreds of thousands of workers who are about to lose their jobs as a direct result of the bill. The head of the North America's Building Trades Unions that represents millions of construction workers issued a stunning statement on the bill yesterday. I will read a few select lines from the statement. He said it is ``the biggest job-killing bill in the history of the country,'' is how he described the Republican plan; ``staggering and unfathomable job loss;'' a threat to ``an estimated 1.75 million construction [workers].'' This union leader said it was ``the equivalent of terminating 1,000 Keystone XL pipelines'' and that it was ``another lifeline and competitive advantage to China in the race for global energy dominance.'' He also said that ``critical infrastructure projects [will be] `sacrificed at the altar of ideology.'' Those are all direct quotes. Hundreds of billions of dollars in clean energy investments, under the Republican plan, will simply disappear--not government subsidies or handouts; these are private sector investments we will not have. Even worse, this is a guaranteed way to hike utility bills for families and businesses of all sizes in every nook and cranny of America. I have never seen this kind of economic self-sabotage. The demand for energy booms right now. Even the heads of companies involved in fossil fuels are saying to me and other Members of Congress: We need solar quickly to get more electrons to the grid. But Republicans don't want to listen, because this plan risks plunging us into an energy crisis. It would be a disaster and a total surrender to China on clean energy manufacturing. It is clear as a sunny day that all the talk from Donald Trump and Republicans about American energy dominance was just a fraud, nothing but a hollow campaign slogan. I will close with this: There is no question in my mind that the American people went to the polls in 2024 to vote for cheaper groceries, cheaper utilities, and cheaper gas. They didn't vote to kick 16 million people off their healthcare so Republicans can give more tax breaks to billionaires and corporations. They didn't vote for an energy crisis that benefits nobody except Big Oil investors. There is a real cost-of-living crisis facing American families right now, and this Senate ought to be focused on finding ways to lower drug prices, for example, expand access to quality and affordable healthcare, and bring down the cost of living. Instead, Republicans are using every ounce of their power to jam through another round of tax breaks for those at the very top, and they are doing it on the backs of everybody else. There are serious challenges ahead, and there is going to be a serious mess to clean up, but until then, countless Americans will needlessly suffer and die as a direct result of losing their healthcare under this legislation. I don't believe the American people are going to forget, and this side of the aisle will make certain that this topic is something that is dealt with again and again until the American people finally get a fair shake. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, what the Republican majority is doing right now on the Senate floor is hiding trillions of dollars in handouts to corporations and the wealthy--trillions of dollars. If you measure this bill the way we measure every other reconciliation bill, it simply doesn't comply with the rules. The Republican majority has figured out a trick that allows them to sidestep the Parliamentarian, violate the Congressional Budget Act, and lift the filibuster for Trump's entire legislative agenda in one fell swoop. It is fakery. The budget numbers are a fraud, but the deficits will be very real. The prospect of a catastrophic death spiral is very real. The hardship this terrible bill is going to inflict on tens of millions of Americans will be very real. So my parliamentary inquiry will proceed now: Does the score of the finance title of the Senate substitute, which the chairman asserts complies with its instruction, rely on the use of two distinct baselines: current policy for taxes and current law for health provisions like Medicaid?

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I want to pick up on the point that my colleague from Washington State touched on. Everybody ought to understand that this is the nuclear option. It is just hidden behind a whole lot of Washington, DC, lingo. The only difference is, instead of pressing a big nuclear button right at the beginning of the Congress, Republicans decided that they would hide behind the cloak of Senate procedure and go nuclear for every individual bill they want to pass on party lines. I just say to my colleagues: There is going to be a lot of horrendous messes to clean up after this legislation. But my colleagues need to understand that the move, as my colleague from Washington State has said, cuts both ways. I yield the floor. Unanimous Consent Agreement

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, international trade is critical to the resilience and functioning of global supply chains, with goods and services--including industrial inputs and manufacturing equipment being imported and exported along the way. The trade policies and trade actions of the U.S. Government impact the structure, operation, efficiency, and security of U.S. supply chains, and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) plays a key role in developing and coordinating the implementation of those trade policies and actions. USTR can provide valuable input to the Supply Chain Resilience Working Group, and the committees with jurisdiction over trade--the Senate Committee on Finance and House Committee on Ways and Means--can likewise provide valuable oversight. I look forward to working with my colleagues who sponsor this bill to bring those trade interests into the fold. In addition, I look forward to working to clarify the definition of ``ally or key international partner nation'' to ensure that this bill will focus on supporting more secure and resilient supply chains in the United States and reliable partner nations, while limiting our critical supply chains' exposure to foreign countries that may not be aligned with the economic or security interests of the United States. I thank my colleague Senator Cantwell for her work on this bill and her willingness to work with me on these issues.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, child sexual abuse materials are a toxic plague on the internet. Congress should act as soon as possible to give law enforcement officials the resources they need to find and prosecute criminals responsible for exploiting children and spreading vile abuse materials online. In addition, Congress should act as soon as possible to provide robust resources that help prevent children from becoming victims in the first place. However, instead of focusing on stopping online predators, S. 1829, the STOP CSAM Act, weakens the single strongest technology protecting children and families online: strong encryption. The bill explicitly allows courts to punish companies that offer strong encryption. It will make it easier to punish sites that use encryption to secure private conversations and personal devices. It will also encourage scanning of content on users' phones or computers, before information is sent over the internet, which has the same consequences as breaking encryption. Weakening encryption is probably the best gift you could give to the predators and creeps who want to stalk and spy on children. Sexual predators will have a far easier time stealing and extorting photographs of children, tracking their phones, and spying on their private messages once encryption is breached. Doing so threatens the privacy and security of every single law-abiding American. Last Congress, I made progress with the bill's sponsors to address some of these concerns. Indeed, I compromised on a version of this bill and had agreed to remove my hold to let that version pass by unanimous consent. It is unfortunate that the sponsors have chosen to abandon those efforts and instead advance a dangerous bill that makes internet users unsafe. However, I remain open to revisiting those conversations. For these reasons, I will object to any unanimous consent agreement to take up or pass the STOP CSAM Act of 2025.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I want to make sure that the country and this institution knows that the leadership of our new colleague from the State of Delaware is making a difference already. She has been doing yeoman's work on this for quite some time. In fact, in the other body, as it is called, the House of Representatives, she stood for the values that have been expressed here today and we so appreciate her leadership and I thank her, personally, for including me. We are on the floor to mark an anniversary of what was essentially the end of women having power over healthcare decisions. Before Roe v. Wade was overturned, many of my Democratic colleagues and I warned that it would be deadly for women. We were labeled liars and gaslighters and fearmongers. And, unfortunately, for the women of America, you don't have to take our word for it. Since the Dobbs ruling was handed down 3 years ago, 22 States have passed restrictive, near- or total abortion bans, and countless women have died as a direct result of those laws. In Georgia, Amber Nicole Thurman died after she developed an infection during pregnancy and was denied lifesaving reproductive care under her State's new abortion law. In Texas, Porsha Ngumezi, a mom of two, was expecting her third child when she suddenly developed complications and began miscarrying. She died after going to the ER where she was denied the care she needed, and she was left to bleed out all because her doctors were too scared to perform the necessary medical care under Texas's abortion law. Josseli Barnica of Texas was pregnant, hoping to give her daughter another sibling, when she developed complications with her pregnancy. She rushed to the hospital where doctors left her to suffer for 40 hours without giving her the healthcare she needed. That was because it was illegal under Texas law. She died 3 days later after developing a preventable infection because she had been denied care. Despite Federal law that requires providers to give women reproductive care in emergency medical situations, these States are letting women die anyway. Every single one of these deaths was preventable if Republican lawmakers hadn't put abortion bans in place that threaten doctors and hospitals with jail time and other legal actions if they provide necessary reproductive care. Many of the women hurt by these abortion bans are already mothers or women hoping to start a family, but because they are being denied necessary care, those that don't die are often being left with complications that take away their ability to have kids in the future. In Tennessee, Breanna Cecil had to travel out of State, all the way to Chicago, to get an abortion after a complication with her pregnancy. But before returning to Tennessee, she developed a recurring infection that resulted in invasive surgery that left her infertile. Breanna says that her State's strict abortion law ``took away her fertility.'' So I am going to end very briefly by fast forwarding to 2025. Republicans don't seem to have learned any lessons. They don't seem phased by the pain and suffering their laws are causing women and mothers across the land. Instead, they are doubling down on their efforts to restrict access to reproductive care for even more women; this time, through a backdoor abortion ban in the reconciliation budget bill. This legislation contains a provision that would strip funding from Planned Parenthood clinics that perform abortion services. Mr. President, Planned Parenthood does not receive a single dime--not a dime--of Federal funding for abortion care. These clinics do receive funding to provide essential care, like STD and cancer screenings and annual exams--often, for women of color or women living in low-income communities to have access to this care. All of this will be ripped away under the Republicans' ``Big Bad Budget Bill,'' alongside the 16 million people they plan on kicking off their health insurance with their Medicaid and affordable care cuts. Before Roe was overturned, I warned repeatedly that the loss of privacy--the loss of the right to make your most private decisions free of government intrusion--would have a domino effect. Unfortunately, that has become the reality. The overturn of Roe has not stopped an abortion. Since the Dobbs ruling, Republican lawmakers and conservative judges have also taken aim at the use of IVF and contraception. A headline out of Ohio, less than 1 week ago, reads: Republican lawmakers in Ohio to propose total abortion and IVF ban. The endgame for Republicans here is a politician in every single exam room and bedroom in America; a politician between you and your doctor, between you and your spouse. The overturn of Roe has stripped women in America of the right to make their own healthcare decisions. It has stripped women of control over their own bodies and has stripped women of their basic constitutional rights. Mr. President, ever since I chaired the first-ever congressional hearing on access to abortion medication, back in 1990, I felt that this was a fundamental right that women were entitled to. I am just as committed today to battling against these draconian laws as long as it takes to secure women the ability to make their own healthcare decisions. I see a number of my colleagues on the floor who have been eloquent speakers for women's healthcare. I want to close by thanking my colleague from Delaware, again, for championing all of us to be here at this time to make sure that we made a difference and spoke out. We very much appreciate your leadership. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise to oppose the nomination of Rodney Scott to lead the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency. In my view, this is yet another appalling nomination from the Trump administration. As a senior Federal official, agents in Mr. Scott's direct chain of command tried to cover up their culpability in the beating death of a man in their custody with his help. His record, in my view, is disqualifying for someone seeking one of the most important law enforcement posts in the Nation. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has extraordinary discretion to conduct searches of Americans' belongings and phones and to interrogate American citizens at border crossings and to seize illicit goods. The Agency has more than 60,000 employees. Leading this Agency requires someone whose judgment and character are unquestioned. Mr. Scott does not meet that bar. In 2010, Mr. Scott led the San Diego sector of the Border Patrol, a position that included oversight of a unit that tampered with evidence after agents beat and tased Mr. Anastasio Hern ndez-Rojas while in their custody. He died of those injuries soon after. This unit taped over recordings of the incident and served an illegal subpoena on the hospital for the man's medical records and then refused to share them with local law enforcement. This is according to allegations filed with the Inter-American Human Rights Commission of the Organization of American States and by police investigators. The actions were so egregious that the Human Rights Commission concluded a few weeks ago that the U.S. Government violated Mr. Rojas's family's right of access to justice. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Critical Incident Team's and DHS Inspector General's reports about the incident, first obtained by the Project on Government Oversight, be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, Mr. Scott admitted before the Finance Committee that he signed the illegal subpoena and expressed no remorse for his actions. He appears so unfazed by these allegations of brazen lawlessness that it seems inevitable he will sanction similar abuses of power if he is confirmed to lead Customs and Border Protection. Since Donald Trump took office, on far too many occasions, CBP has shown contempt for the constitutional rights of Americans. For example, in Texas, a 10-year-old U.S. citizen was left in Mexico with her family after being stopped by CBP on her way to a doctor's appointment for brain cancer treatment. In Washington, CBP detained a family of six, including a pregnant mother who was still breastfeeding her baby, a U.S. citizen. CBP held them in a windowless cell for 24 days. They had no access to due process or ability to contest their detention. In Arizona, a 19-year-old U.S. citizen with intellectual disabilities, who has difficulty speaking, writing, and reading, was arrested by CBP and charged with illegal entry, despite being an American. CBP kept him detained for 10 days. There are countless gut-wrenching stories like this. Courts have already raised concerns about CBP's inability to uphold the Constitution. I am of the view that America needs strong enforcement at the border to protect our people against criminals and drug traffickers, but that does not have to come at the expense of violating Americans' constitutional rights. Our country does not need a border Agency that indiscriminately violates the rights of Americans or one that feels like it is above due process and above the law. That doesn't make our country safer. It only leads to corruption, more wrongful arrests, and more wrongful deaths. Americans do not need to choose between security and our rights. We can have both, just as Ben Franklin said many years ago. I fear that confirming Mr. Scott would make our country less secure and less free. For that reason, I strongly oppose this nomination. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, in a few minutes, the Senate will vote on whether to put somebody who is up to their eyeballs in tax scams, corruption, and coverups in charge of the IRS. This ought to be an easy no. It is one corruption bombshell after another with former Congressman Billy Long--fake tax credits, scam tax advice, shadowy political donations that went straight into his pocket, promises of personal favors, and no-show jobs with high-paying Federal salaries. Yesterday came the latest revelation. My Finance Committee staff investigators determined that Long appears to be implicated in a major bribery scheme in his old congressional district. The scandal unfolded while he was in office. Twelve people in Missouri and Arkansas pled guilty or went to jail when these crimes were prosecuted. It was a criminal case the size of the Ozarks. Court documents identified him in one guilty plea as ``U.S. Representative #1.'' That is the guilty plea of a man named Donald Andrew Jones, D.A. Jones. Jones's prosecution involved kickbacks and other illicit payments, a network of executives, and the misuse of charity funds in Springfield, MO, his hometown. The Justice Department's summary of the case describes ``payments routed through different business entities or lobbying firms'' as well as D.A. Jones's ``advocacy services, including direct contact with elected and appointed public officials.'' The guilty plea describes multiple communications in which Jones said he interacted with Billy Long, ``U.S. Representative #1.'' It includes discussions of services performed by Long's office. It includes descriptions of interactions with Long's top adviser. It includes Jones directing political donations and offering to hand-deliver a check to Billy Long to guarantee he was immediately aware of the money's source. For his role in this bribery scheme, Jones got a prison sentence of a year and a day behind bars. The Finance Committee held Billy Long's nomination hearing a few weeks ago. I asked several questions in writing about this matter that were informed by certain reports brought to my investigations team. I laid out the names of all the characters and organizations involved in this massive bribery scandal. I asked the former Congressman whether he or his campaign received payments from anybody involved. I asked whether he was an unindicted coconspirator in a Federal criminal case involving any of them. I asked whether he was ever interviewed by Federal prosecutors or law enforcement agents in relation to this criminal investigation. I asked if he ever acknowledged to the Department of Justice that he received bribes from individuals involved or if he struck any kind of cooperation agreement to avoid prosecution. I asked whether his decision to leave Congress in any way related to his involvement in this investigation or a condition to avoid prosecution. Here is the answer: ``I had nothing to do with any of this and I do not know any of these people or organizations.'' Colleagues, this is just impossible to believe. We are talking about a major bribery scandal that unfolded in Billy Long's hometown--not even on the other side of the district. He is implicated in a guilty plea as ``U.S. Representative #1.'' The idea that he doesn't know anybody involved is just absurd. I am convinced, colleagues, there is more to this story. Senators ought to ask themselves whether they want to be on the record supporting this nomination when the rest of it comes to light. In my view, this nomination should never have come to the Senate floor. Billy Long never did any serious legislating on tax issues. He has no experience in tax policy. What he does have is experience in tax fraud. He left office in 2023 after an unsuccessful Senate campaign. He went straight into the tax fraud industry. He teamed up with a bunch of sketchy operators selling tax deals that were sleazy at best. He got paid to promote fake Tribal tax credits by a firm called White River Energy. Neither Long nor White River can tell us what Tribe they acquired these so-called tax credits from. The IRS confirmed to my staff that the credits were fake. They said that the promoters of them could face prosecution. The same day a Bloomberg News article exposed this scheme, December 19--just a few days after Donald Trump announced Long's nomination--the CFO of the company got on a call with investors and told them they would soon have friends at the IRS to clean up their mess. My investigators obtained the audio. We have it on tape. Not long thereafter, White River executives started cutting checks to Long's failed Senate campaign that had ended years before. Between their donations and others that poured in after his nomination went public, Billy Long was able to stuff $130,000 into his own pockets by repaying his personal campaign loans. Now he has refused to answer any questions about this scheme and his role in it. If that is not enough reason to oppose this nominee, let me talk briefly about the employee retention tax credit. This was a small business rescue program Congress created during the depths of the pandemic. But after it expired, the scamsters came in, and they turned it into a firehose of fraud. Billy Long must have seen an opportunity, and he used his credibility as a former Congressman to sling these tax credits to anybody who would listen. We have him on tape saying that ``everybody qualifies'' for the ERTC. That is a lie. He bragged about getting money for a funeral home even though the pandemic was a boom time for that kind of business due to the number of Americans dying of COVID-19. Finance Committee investigators obtained another recording, this time of an executive at a firm called Appreciation Financial that sold the scam-ridden tax credits. He said he made the Congressman his guest to the inauguration earlier this year. He said they had dinner and spent a few nights together. His exact quote on the subject of IRS enforcement around employee retention credits is this: ``We could be worried about promoter audits now but we don't have to worry about any of that now with Billy coming in.'' I asked Long about this at his nomination hearing in written questions, whether he knew this executive and what he promised him. There was no real answer either time. Now, colleagues, I will say it again. That ought to be enough to vote down this nomination, but if you want more scandal, let's talk about no-show jobs at the Office of Personnel Management. Back in March, Mr. Long was made a senior advisor to the Director of OPM. Our staff asked Mr. Long in a due diligence meeting what his responsibilities were there. He picked up a recent OPM press release, read it word for word, and then said he worked on it. When asked for additional detail or more examples of his duties, he mumbled a few things about retirement and proofreading--no other information. Now, the Congressman is a talkative guy. His brevity on this subject speaks for itself. After that meeting, Finance Committee investigators obtained copies of internal OPM work calendars belonging to Billy Long and three persons who were hired with him. They were nearly blank--a scant meeting here and there; no evidence of legitimate work being performed. An investigative reporter for the Talking Points Memo dug into the matter. Neither Billy Long nor OPM would provide any real answers either. It sure looks to me like the former Congressman got high-paying, no- show jobs for himself and three others. If they were doing real work, they would have told us what they were doing. They have nothing to lose if everything is on the level. Somebody who ripped off the taxpayer by accepting a no-show job on a maxed-out salary cannot be trusted to run the IRS. Colleagues, it is that simple. And let's remember, this was going on just as the Trump-Musk-DOGE crowd were first breaking into OPM with the goal of terrorizing public servants and triggering mass layoffs. So I close with just one question: How can the Senate possibly-- possibly--put this individual in charge of our tax system? The reality is that this is all about fairness. It wouldn't be all that difficult for the Trump administration to go back and find a tax expert or somebody with lots of management experience to run this vital Agency. We had great working relationships with the first Trump IRS Commissioner, Chuck Rettig. This is not about whether you have an ``R'' or a ``D'' next to your name. There are serious issues to deal with when it comes to the Tax Code--protecting taxpayer data, building on our improvements in taxpayer service. The Trump administration is signaling that the wealthy have a green light to commit tax fraud, and that is outrageous, with huge implications and consequences for years to come. The bottom line is, fairness matters at the IRS. Independence matters at the IRS. Ethics and honesty matter at the IRS. The American people aren't going to get any of that--none--from Billy Long. He is surrounded, in my view, by a cloud of corruption, and we ought to keep that away from the IRS at all costs. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to oppose the Long nomination that we will vote on in a few minutes. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I was on my way to the floor to talk about clean energy policy this afternoon, but I have to join my colleagues in addressing the shocking video out of Los Angeles. I have now looked at it. If you are following at home, our colleague Senator Padilla was carrying out his constitutional responsibilities to conduct oversight and defend the people he represents. At that time, he was physically accosted and shoved out of a press conference, pushed to the ground, and handcuffed at a press conference being held by Kristi Noem. It is a horrifying video, truly horrifying. And I am of the view--why I especially wanted to come to the floor--it is not about it happening to a U.S. Senator. Here is what it is about: If they will do this to a sitting U.S. Senator in front of a room full of media, imagine what is being done to powerless people in secret. In Portland, in my hometown, we have had firsthand experience with this kind of activity--faceless, unidentifiable agents with guns staring down peaceful protesters. In Portland, it was a ``wall of moms.'' My neighbors--we all said then it is un-American, and I say it again this afternoon: What we have seen on our screens is un-American. It doesn't have the support of the American people, this kind of anti- democratic conduct. I will close simply by saying this: This has to change. Peaceful Americans cannot have this kind of abuse rained down on them for the next 3\1/2\ years. It has to end now. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 299, confirmation of the nomination of David Fotouhi to be Deputy Administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency. Had I been present for this vote, I would have voted no. Mr. Fotouhi has demonstrated an alarming record as a partner in the D.C. law firm Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher LLP, where he has represented an industry challenge to the Biden ban on asbestos, challenged EPA's water quality standards related to legacy PCB contamination, represented tire companies that released a chemical known to kill salmon, and represented International Paper in lawsuits accusing the firm of contamination from PFASs. During the first Trump administration, he served as the EPA's deputy general counsel and acting general counsel. In these roles, he played a central part in revising the Waters of the U.S. rule that stripped Federal protections from wetlands and streams, and also led the EPA's effort to oppose bonding requirements on mining companies. Because of this poor environmental record, I would have voted no on his confirmation.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I urge a ``no'' vote on Jim O'Neill to be the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. His nomination comes before the Senate as Republicans push ahead on an agenda that is going to cut Americans' healthcare by more than a trillion dollars and cause 16 million Americans to lose their health coverage. The legislation is filled with ideas straight out of the for-profit insurance industry's playbook. Republicans are rolling out more redtape at a time when Americans are already sick of jumping through hoops so that insurance companies can continue to post profits. The legislation, in my view, is also a disaster for America's senior citizens. A million low-income seniors are going to see their Medicare premiums go up by nearly $200 a month. The legislation is going to make nursing homes less safe for frail, older people. In a word, they are going to start taking the nurses out of nursing homes. If Mehmet Oz has his way, nursing homes would replace staff with AI bots. That is not going to work for a senior who needs help getting to the bathroom in the middle of the night. The legislation is going to hurt hundreds of thousands of seniors and kids with disabilities by reducing services for those who count on Medicaid to get care at home. Americans have heard a lot about Medicaid in the bill, but the legislation is such a deficit buster that it is going to trigger $500 billion in Medicare cuts. This legislation is going to hit rural hospitals like a wrecking ball. This comes on top of the Trump administration stepping back from tough negotiations with the big pharmaceutical companies that would lower the cost of medicine. Here is the truth: Trump and Republicans are willing to kick millions of folks off their health insurance and hurt older Americans so there will be more tax breaks for corporations and the ultrawealthy. I asked Mr. O'Neill in the Finance Committee to basically give us a straight up-or-down on whether he is going to oppose cutting Medicaid during his confirmation hearing. All he would do is repeat the same tired talking points about how only certain groups of people deserve healthcare. The Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are simply unwilling to defend the bill. They know it is morally bankrupt. They basically won't even talk about it in public. I guess that is why we are not having an open-to-all Finance Committee discussion or markup of the bill because I guess the Republicans would rather just pretend to make up what the bill actually is all about. Mr. O'Neill has gone out of his way to defend Robert Kennedy's disastrous approach to prevent infectious diseases like measles. To make matters worse, Mr. O'Neill expressed his support for Kennedy's appalling views about the livelihoods of Americans with autism. As Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services, Mr. O'Neill would be Robert Kennedy's right-hand man. That person needs to be willing to challenge the Secretary's worst impulses, which the American people have now seen on full display. I see no evidence Mr. O'Neill is that person. Each day, Americans turn on the TV, pick up a newspaper, or turn on radio stations and podcasts only to hear that Donald Trump and his Republican cronies are ripping away basic healthcare for millions of Americans who are just trying to get by. These families are worried sick about what will be next on the chopping block. I want to make it clear. I don't think it makes sense to support a nominee who would do whatever Robert Kennedy says, including destroying Medicaid and the rest of the American healthcare system. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the O'Neill nomination. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Kirsta Hackmeier of our team be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress.