Elizabeth Warren

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive section 302(f) of that act for the purposes of the pending amendment. I ask for the yeas and nays. Vote on Motion

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President.

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is the financial watchdog to keep people from getting cheated on credit cards and mortgages and Venmo and payday loans and a zillion other transactions. When this financial cop can't do its job, there is no one else in the Federal Government to pick up the slack. The CFPB has returned over $21 billion to more than 205 million Americans who were cheated by big banks and giant corporations. That is why this Agency is popular across the country. But, from the beginning, Republicans in Congress have been trying to kill it, and now they want to slash the CFPB's modest funding cap almost in half--not to save working people money but to make it easier for corporations to trick and trap millions of people. Scammers love this Republican move. I urge my colleagues to vote yes to support the CFPB, the little Agency that fights for all Americans, and I reserve the remainder of my time.

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 2414 and ask that it be reported by number.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Yup. Yup. Mr. President, on Friday I met Vivian. Vivian is an 11-year-old kid from Winston-Salem, NC. Vivian likes school. She likes her friends. She likes reading Harry Potter. She is a lot like any other 11-year-old; but for Vivian, going to school and being with her friends depends on Medicaid because Medicaid covers the cost of her wheelchair, for her therapists, and for her health aide. Right now, Republicans are trying to rip away healthcare from kids like Vivian. The cruelty is truly breathtaking. I asked for one Republican Senator--just one Republican Senator--who plans to vote for this bill to look into Vivi's eyes and tell her that her healthcare is just not a priority for this country. You know, Mitch McConnell said to Republican Senators that he knew they were getting calls about Medicaid but not to worry about people losing their care because, according to Mitch McConnell, ``they will get over it.'' So I ask the Republican Senators to look at Vivi and Vivi's sisters and Vivi's mom and Vivi's dad and say--if Vivi loses her Medicaid and her wheelchair and her therapists and her health aide, tell all of them that they will get over it, because here is the deal: Vivi won't get over it. Her family won't get over it. The people of North Carolina won't get over it. None of us--Massachusetts, Idaho, Louisiana--none of us will get over it. The cruelty here is off the charts, but the part that really burns is the Republicans are trying to slash the healthcare that keeps kids like Vivi alive so they can hand out more tax cuts for billionaires. It is beyond cruel. It is obscene. I am angry, and we should all be angry, because instead of playing at the pool or at the park like a regular kid on summer break, Vivian had to come here to Washington to beg Senators not to cut her healthcare. In a country as rich as ours, that shouldn't even be a question. Now, I actually don't think that my Republican colleagues have lost their hearts. They have lost their spines. It seems that all they can do now is bow down to Donald Trump and his billionaire donors. They will bow down even if it means hurting families, community hospitals, and nursing homes in their own States. Trump wants the Republicans in Congress to hand out giant checks to the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations, and the Republican Senators are willing to do that even if it means kicking Vivi to the curb. Republicans know what they are doing. They know that this bill will hurt people. They know that this bill will kill people. And though it is hard to believe, they just look the other way. But on behalf of Vivi and millions of other kids and mommas and seniors and families that rely on the lifesaving care that Medicaid makes possible, my Republican colleagues should grow a spine and stop this awful bill in its tracks. If it wasn't bad enough that this bill is set to rip away healthcare from 17 million Americans to pay for tax giveaways for billionaires, it actually has a bunch of other filthy giveaways buried in it too. Who wins if Republicans pass this ``Big Ugly Bill''? Billionaires; Wall Street; Big Tech; Big Oil; the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations. Big Oil will get a special ``get out of paying your taxes'' card while millions of people lose their healthcare coverage. Billions of dollars for Big Oil, nothing for Vivi. Meta--oh, man, Meta. There is a company that is really struggling. Meta will win $15 billion to incentivize them to do research in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Think about that. Unless a time machine comes with this, what Meta does in those 3 years is already done, but under this bill, Meta gets a $15 billion check on the day this bill passes simply for existing, while families lose access to their healthcare. Wall Street wins big with a provision Republicans squeezed in that would slash funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Giant corporations want the opportunity to cheat American families again, so Republicans are desperately trying to take the cop off the beat. And who loses thanks to this big, ugly bill? Americans who can't afford healthcare. Families who need a little extra help putting food on the table. Grandmas and grandpas in nursing homes. Little babies and their mommas. If Republicans pass this bill, 17 million Americans will have their healthcare ripped away. That number has kept growing as the Republicans keep making more and more changes to the bill. For them, it is just a question of how many more Americans they can rip healthcare away from. This bill would also make the biggest cut to food assistance for families, kids, and veterans in American history. Here is one to underscore: One out of every four nursing homes in America would have to shut down under this bill. You know, my Republican colleagues should just call a few seniors who are in nursing homes in their home States and just go over the plans for where those folks are supposed to go next. What exactly do the Republicans have in mind for them? Maybe call the daughter of someone who is in one of those nursing homes and explain how she has to become a full-time caregiver once this bill passes. Maybe call just a few of the people whose lives you plan to tear apart. Budgets are about our values, and Republicans have made their values clear: They are willing to throw millions of Americans under the bus so that they can help out a handful of their billionaire buddies and giant corporations. They should be ashamed. Here is what Democrats believe. Democrats believe that no baby should go hungry so that Mark Zuckerberg can buy another Hawaiian island. Democrats believe that no person with a disability who needs a wheelchair or a home health aide to live independently should have to give that up so that Jeff Bezos can buy a third yacht. Democrats believe that no grandma should be pushed out of her nursing home so that Elon Musk can take a subsidized rocket ship ride to Mars. It doesn't have to be this way. What if, instead of tax breaks for billionaires, we make the rich pay their fair share? What if, instead of slashing healthcare for our kids, we make it possible for every American to see a doctor when they are sick without breaking the bank? And what if, instead of giving Big Oil more giant handouts, we make universal childcare a reality for families all across this country? We can tax the rich. Dammit, if Jeff Bezos can afford to rent Venice for $50 million for his wedding, he can afford to pitch in his fair share on taxes so the next kid has a chance to make it big and the kid after that and the kid after that. We can make life better for working people. We can make it easier, not harder. We can lower costs for families, not jack them up even more like this bill does. We can put families first, not billionaires and billionaire corporations. Democrats believe this. Democrats are willing to fight for this. We will vote no on this awful bill. And for kids like Vivian, for seniors in nursing homes, for families who rely on home health aides, and for the millions more Americans that this bill will hurt, I urge my Republican colleagues to grow a spine and vote no. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN. I yield.

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I thank our leader for setting the record straight. It is really awful when you hear Republicans come down here and they just don't tell the truth about the bill that they are trying to pass. Maybe that is why they try to pass it in the middle of the night. They think no one will really notice.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following motions to commit for the bill H.R. 1 be placed in the Congressional Record: 1. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would strike any provision which reduces the average tax liability of corporations with income in excess of $1,000,000,000. 2. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) ensure sufficient funding and staffing for the Institute of Museum and Library Services. 3. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) strike any provision that increases the costs to students of attending an institution of higher education. 4. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; (2) would strike any provision that cuts funding to Federal health programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; and (3) would protect patients and providers, including hospitals and community health centers. 5. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would strike cuts to Federal nutrition programs. 6. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would strike all provisions that would decrease access to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care. 7. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would strike all provisions that would decrease access to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care. 8. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would ensure sufficient funding to reinstate veterans in Massachusetts who had been Federal employees and were removed while serving in a probationary period. 9. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would provide funding to protect the privacy of veterans in Massachusetts, including those working for the Federal Government. 10. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 1 day, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would restore to, or increase above, the fiscal year 2024 level any funding administered by the Office of Justice Programs of the Department of Justice for community violence intervention and prevention initiative programs. 11. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 1 day, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would restore to, or increase above, the fiscal year 2024 level any funding administered by the Office of Justice Programs of the Department of Justice for reentry programming and services, including to support employment, education, housing, and health care needs. 12. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would ensure sufficient funding for the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program. 13. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) would strike any provision that restricts borrower defense to repayment or closed school discharge. 14. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) prohibit the privatization of the program 4 carried out under the National Flood Insurance Act 5 of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.). 15. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; (2) would strike any provision that will take nurses out of nursing homes; and (3) would ensure big corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay a fair share in taxes. 16. A motion to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with instructions to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that-- (1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and (2) strike section 30002 (relating to rescission of funds for the Green and Resilient Retrofit Program for multifamily housing).

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, bombing another country is an act of war; and last week, Donald Trump launched an attack that could spin the United States into another endless war in the Middle East. What followed from that decision can only be described as pure madness. Trump declared total victory. Iran threatened retaliation. Americans in the region were forced to shelter in place. Trump's own team then admitted no one knows where the nuclear materials are and what nuclear capacity Iran might still have. Trump called for regime change, and then last night, just for a moment, we hoped and believed there was a cease-fire, only for us to wake up to frantic posts on social media by the President begging both sides to stop shooting missiles and rockets at each other. Today, the Deputy Commander of Central Command could not describe what kind of contingency plans the Defense Department was making or even whether they did or didn't have plans for the United States to put boots on the ground in this Middle East conflict. And a classified briefing scheduled for right now that we should be having so that all the Senators can ask questions about what has happened and what is currently happening in Iran has just been scrapped by the Republicans for another 48 hours. There is no grand plan. There is no careful effort to develop a responsible U.S. foreign policy designed to keep us all safe. Once again, Donald Trump serves up chaos--dangerous chaos--that threatens the long-term security of the American people. New reporting by CNN and the New York Times suggest Donald Trump's bombing of Iran failed to destroy its nuclear program. The media reports highlight that the strikes only set back Iran's nuclear program by a few months--a few months, while risking another war in the Middle East. Now, we all agree that Iran should not and cannot have a nuclear weapon. We are committed to that. But the only successful strategy for preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon is diplomacy, something that Donald Trump has been pursuing right up until Prime Minister Netanyahu began bombing Iran. That is what we need right now, for all sides to come to the table to build an agreement that is sturdy and that cements lasting peace in place. But Trump's reckless action, backed by many Republicans in Congress, makes it more likely that this crisis escalates into a deadly cycle of violence. Trump's reckless action puts American lives at risk. Trump's reckless action risks initiating another endless war that could last months, or even decades, as it did in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have the power to put a stop to this madness right now. Senator Kaine has introduced a war powers resolution to stop Donald Trump from turning these Iran bombings into another endless war in the Middle East. Americans don't need another war. Americans don't want another war. They need and want good jobs and lower prices, and that is exactly what we should be focused on.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, this is a horrifying moment in our Nation's history. Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla was violently removed from a public briefing for asking questions on behalf of the people he represents, people in California who deserve answers about the brutal crackdown on protesters. I have watched the video, as many of you have as well. Let me just describe what it shows. Officers pushed Senator Padilla backward, out of the room, as he said the words: I am Senator Padilla. I have questions for the Secretary. He was then shoved to the ground. When the Senator complied with the officers and went on his knees, he was forcibly pinned onto his stomach. He was ordered to put his hands behind his back. He can be heard on the video saying he is trying to comply with their orders. Officers then put handcuffs on the Senator while he was lying on the ground. His staff was then told to stop recording the handcuffing. He was put in handcuffs for asking a simple question. He was put in handcuffs for doing his job as a U.S. Senator. He was put in handcuffs for standing up for the Constitution of the United States. He was put in handcuffs for representing the people of California. Now, if you are not yet convinced that President Trump and his administration are trying to suppress free speech, then just watch the video. Watch the video. If you are not yet convinced that President Trump and his administration are trying to undermine the foundations of our democracy, watch the video. If you are not yet convinced that President Trump and his administration are hellbent on punishing people with differing opinions than those of the President, then watch the video. And here is the really chilling part. Make no mistake, what happened to Senator Padilla today is happening every day all across this country. Every day, DHS agents are throwing people to the ground and violently handcuffing them while they are not resisting, detaining them for exercising their First Amendment rights of free speech. Every day, Donald Trump is making this Nation look more and more like a fascist state. If this is how Federal agents treat a U.S. Senator who peacefully asked questions of this administration, then we all have to ask: How far will they go? How violent will they get? I know my Republican colleagues can see what happened today was wrong, but will any Republican Senator speak up for our democracy? They know Senator Padilla's character. They know that Senator Padilla is a kind man, a man who is concerned for his children, a man who is concerned for his home, a man who has dedicated his life to public service, a man who is a patriot. Where are our Republican colleagues? Where is the Republican Senate? Where are you? Stand up and speak out. This is a continuation of what we have been seeing: Intimidate every other check on Presidential power in this country. Fire the civil service. Get rid of those people. Threaten to imprison judges. Criminally charge House Members who try to visit an ICE facility. Arrest Senators who ask questions. This is not a drill. This is an assault on our democracy. I am calling on my Republican colleagues to join us in demanding a bipartisan investigation into this incident. What happened at this press conference was disgraceful. It was un- American. And every Member of the U.S. Senate should condemn it and condemn it now. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the GENIUS Act and the threat it poses to our financial system, our national security, and our democracy. Now, at this moment, I expected to be on the floor urging the Senate to adopt a series of amendments filed by both Democrats and Republicans, amendments that would fix the core problems with this bill. For weeks, Leader Thune promised that Senators would have a chance to vote on amendments on the stablecoin bill. Today, he broke that promise. This bill goes forward without a single chance for a single Senator to offer a single amendment. Even changes that have widespread, bipartisan support are left aside as Leader Thune decides just to strong-arm the bill on through the Senate. Now, before I outline the specific dangers posed by this bill, it is worth taking a step back to ask a simple question: Why is the crypto industry so vigorously lobbying for a bill that proponents claim will bring much needed regulation to the market? Simon Johnson, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, and Brooksley Born, the former Chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, answered this question in a recent op-ed by reminding us that we have seen this movie before. Back in the late 1990s, derivatives were a relatively niche market, but a new type of product called an over-the-counter derivative had just been developed. Most investors didn't really understand what they were or what they did, but the derivatives industry came knocking, begging for so-called regulation. Congress was ready to oblige. In 2000, Congress passed the Commodities Future Modernization Act, and President Bill Clinton signed it into law. Proponents of the bill claimed that the new law would provide legal clarity, promote innovation, reduce risks, protect consumers, and advance U.S. competitiveness. After all, people said, surely some kind of regulatory framework was better than nothing at all. But the bill established a weak set of rules loaded with loopholes-- just as the industry wanted. Sound familiar? The result was a disaster. Derivatives moved from the edge of the financial system to the center of it. After all, with regulation, these derivatives now seemed to have the implicit blessing of the U.S. Government, and buying, selling, and designing derivatives became a more mainstream activity on Wall Street. In less than 8 years, the market for over-the-counter derivatives grew sevenfold and embedded itself into the core financial system. By simultaneously boosting the derivatives industry and lightly regulating it, the bill Congress had passed helped set the stage for the 2008 financial crash. After the meltdown, Congress came back and cleaned up the mess in Dodd-Frank, but that was long after hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts had been handed to Wall Street, while 10 million families had lost their homes and millions more had lost their jobs. Mr. Johnson's Nobel Prize is an impressive credential, and his warning should carry great weight. But we should also pay special attention to the thoughts of his coauthor Brooksley Born. She was one of the few people who saw the 2008 train wreck coming and opposed the derivatives bill at the time, and now she is ringing the alarm again. The parallels to the Commodity Futures Modernization Act are striking. Industry is the driving force behind the GENIUS Act. Proponents argue the GENIUS Act will provide legal clarity, promote innovation, reduce risks, protect consumers and advance U.S. competitiveness in a new financial market. Passage of the GENIUS Act is expected to significantly grow the market from $200 billion now to an estimated $2 trillion in a short time. And the GENIUS Act is riddled with loopholes and contains weak safeguards for consumers, national security, and financial stability. Yes, it all sounds very similar. But there is one big difference between the GENIUS Act and the CFMA: President Clinton did not own a derivatives company. President Trump does own a stablecoin company. Through his crypto business, President Trump has created an efficient means to trade Presidential favors--like tariff exemptions, pardons, and government appointments--for hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of dollars from foreign governments, from billionaires, and from large corporations. This is the single greatest corruption scandal in American history, and by passing the GENIUS Act, the Senate is about to not only bless this corruption but to actively facilitate its expansion. The New York Times ran a front page essay this week by Ben Rhodes, President Obama's former Deputy National Security Advisor, on Trump's corruption. Rhodes interviewed Sandor Lederer, who heads a Hungarian anti-corruption organization and has witnessed the disintegration of Hungary's democracy under Viktor Orban. Lederer warned that ``the pressure corruption puts on a political system [is like] a river bearing down on a dam. Once the dam breaks, you're washed downriver by currents you can't control. If you try to rebuild the dam, it's too late.'' Instead of fortifying the dam, the Senate is now hacking away at it. In April, President Trump's crypto company, World Liberty Financial, launched its own stablecoin, called USD1. That stablecoin is already the fifth largest stablecoin in the world, and foreign investors have already begun to exploit this avenue for corruption. A UAE state-backed investment firm used Trump's USD1 to finance a $2 billion investment in a crypto exchange whose owner is reportedly lobbying President Trump for a pardon, essentially giving Trump a cut of this $2 billion deal. This is the model: Deposit your money in the ``Bank of Trump'' and use his stablecoin to make payments. He earns money by investing those deposits in other assets, like a bank, and also earns money on every transaction that occurs whenever the stablecoin is used as a means of payment. Even more publicized than his stablecoin, Trump launched a meme coin, another type of crypto asset. The coin was issued shortly before Trump's inauguration, and it initially soared in value. When people lost interest and the value of the coin began to sag, Trump launched a new scheme to make money. A few weeks ago, he hosted a dinner for the top holders of his meme coin, which, again, juiced the price and increased trade and volume. The meme coin has netted more than $320 million in transactions fees alone and has inflated Trump's net worth on paper by billions of dollars. And the favors for people who bought millions of dollars of Trump's coins have just begun. For example, one of those top holders at the dinner was crypto executive Justin Sun, who recently had his SEC lawsuit quietly dropped. Another was an investor with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party. There is nothing in the GENIUS Act to stop this corruption. In fact, the Senate bill would accelerate the corruption. The bill would expand the reach of USD1 and grow its size. It would make Trump the regulator of his own financial company, and, importantly, the regulator of his competitors. Senator Merkley is leading an amendment to fix this--an amendment that Leader Thune has blocked. There are other serious problems with the GENIUS Act--problems that Democrats and Republicans have amendments to fix. The bill permits Big Tech companies and other conglomerates to issue their own private currencies and take control over the money supply. It includes a special carve out that makes it even easier for private companies like X to issue a stablecoin. Musk has made it clear that, in a few years, he wants his new X Money payment platform to be ``half of the global financial system.'' Senator Hawley and Senator Blumenthal have an amendment to fix that. Leader Thune has blocked that amendment. Community banks have warned us that by creating a parallel, lightly regulated banking system, the stablecoin market will drain deposits from our local communities. There will be less funding available for small businesses and households all across our country. Senator Hickenlooper has an amendment to fix that. Leader Thune has blocked that amendment. The bill would also mean easier access to money for terrorists and cartels. Even today, the crypto industry's own analysts are calling stablecoins ``the new kingpin of illicit crypto activity.'' According to Chainalysis, a blockchain analytics firm, stablecoins account for more than 60 percent of all illicit crypto transactions. Unfortunately, the GENIUS Act massively expands the marketplace for stablecoins, while failing to address the basic national security risks posed by them. It also includes glaring loopholes that would allow Tether, a notorious foreign stablecoin issuer now based in El Salvador, access to U.S. markets. Just this week--just this week--prosecutors charged a Russian national in New York for using Tether to help Russians evade U.S. sanctions. Senators Schumer, Reed, Shaheen, and Blunt Rochester have amendments to fix those problems. Leader Thune has blocked those amendments. The bill also increases the likelihood that consumers will get ripped off and scammed in financial transactions involving stablecoins. It jeopardizes the CFPB oversight and the suite of consumer protections that people enjoy when they are using their Venmo app or an ordinary bank account. If you get cheated using a stablecoin, you may just be out of luck. The vast majority of stablecoin issuers won't even be required to undergo financial audits to make sure that they aren't committing fraud. Senators Durbin and Warnock have an amendment to fix this. Senator Thune has blocked that amendment. And, finally, the GENIUS Act lacks the basic safeguards necessary to ensure that stablecoins don't blow up our entire financial system. The bill permits stablecoin issuers to invest in risky assets and allows them to engage in risky, nonstablecoin activities, like private credit or derivatives trading. At the same time, the bill constrains regulators' ability to apply capital and liquidity safeguards to limit the chances of stablecoin failures. Again, we have amendments to fix this. And, again, Leader Thune has blocked those amendments. Over the past few months, Democrats seem to have forgotten that we actually have some power. This is an opportunity to use that power. Democrats can withhold their approval of this bill today and say that the bill will not go forward unless we have the opportunity to vote on some amendments, precisely as Leader Thune promised we could do. Democrats should show a little spine and insist on amendments as the price for helping advance this bill. We don't have to speculate on what could go wrong if this bill advances without changes. We have already seen it. The next time Trump is cut into a corrupt deal by a foreign government using his stablecoin or the next time North Korea uses stablecoins to add to its nuclear arsenal or the next time a person falls victim to a stablecoin scam or the next time the financial system is stressed by a stablecoin run, it is likely that the resulting harm will be traced right back to the inadequacies of the GENIUS Act. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this bill.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 293, confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 144, James O'Neill to be Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services. I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 294, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 120, John Andrew Eisenberg to be an Assistant Attorney General. I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 295, confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 120, John Andrew Eisenberg to be an Assistant Attorney General. I was absent, but had I been present, I would have voted no on rollcall vote No. 296, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 111, Brett Shumate to be an Assistant Attorney General.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the nomination of Michelle Bowman to be the Federal Reserve Board's Vice Chair for Supervision. Governor Bowman has served on the Federal Reserve Board since 2018 when she was confirmed as the first Governor required to have community bank experience, but during her tenure, she has consistently prioritized Wall Street over Main Street. She has weakened safeguards on the largest banks in the country and has opposed commonsense rules to promote financial stability, to protect consumers, and to drive investment in communities across this country. Just yesterday, in another Wall Street giveaway, she voted to lift the asset cap that was placed on Wells Fargo in an effort to rein in Wells' decades-long track record of customer abuses. She did this despite the fact that there is no public evidence that Wells Fargo has substantially changed its approach to banking. Governor Bowman's actions have already imposed serious costs on small businesses and families. It would be especially dangerous to put her in charge of further deregulating Wall Street now just as President Trump has pushed the economy to the edge of a cliff. Democrats on the Banking Committee unanimously oppose her nomination as Vice Chair for Supervision, and I urge all of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, to do the same now. In the years leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, the Federal Reserve Board effectively abdicated its statutory role as a financial regulator and supervisor. As a result, the Agency was asleep at the wheel as dangerous risks built up in the financial system, especially in the subprime mortgage market. When the economy tumbled, families, small businesses, and even community banks suffered the consequences of the Fed's negligence. Congress established the Vice Chair for Supervision position after the 2008 financial crisis in order to ensure that the Fed never again ignored its financial regulation and supervision responsibilities, but in her 6 years on the Federal Reserve Board, Governor Bowman has hacked away bit by bit at the safeguards put in place after the 2008 financial crisis. Let's take a look at her record. Governor Bowman has weakened critical safeguards for the largest Wall Street banks. She has voted to reduce big banks' loss-absorbing capital requirements, and she has voted to undermine the stress testing framework, both of which have left big banks more vulnerable to collapse. She has also voted to allow big banks to gamble with people's deposits in financial markets, including through increased investments in hedge funds and private equity funds. These actions have allowed Wall Street banks to take on riskier bets and juice their dividends, boost their buybacks, and pump up executive compensation--all at the expense of financial stability. Bowman also voted to deregulate massive banks with $100 billion to $250 billion in assets. That particular error in judgment came back to bite our country quickly, causing the second, third, and fourth largest bank failures in U.S. history just a few years later when these three deregulated banks--First Republic Bank, Silicon Valley Bank, and Signature Bank--all failed within weeks of each other in 2023. For a while, the entire banking system teetered on the edge of collapse. Now, instead of learning from that near catastrophe, Governor Bowman has refused to take any responsibility for her votes that led to this banking turmoil, and she has opposed commonsense rules to strengthen the resilience of large banks even after those failures. Governor Bowman also voted to approve more than 800 bank merger applications, including Morgan Stanley's major acquisition of E*TRADE and Capital One's recent acquisition of Discover, which created the largest credit card company in America. Her lax approach to bank mergers undermines competition and increases concentration in the banking sector. That, in turn, inflicts costs on consumers and threatens the stability of the entire banking system. It also poses a direct risk to the future of community banks in this Nation. In addition, Governor Bowman opposed even modest improvements to the Community Reinvestment Act. This is a 50-year-old law that was created to prevent racist lending practices by big banks and to ensure that all communities have access to critical financial services. Last year, she was the only Fed Governor--the only one--to vote against a rule that would have updated the CRA regulations for the first time in nearly 30 years and would have increased banks' investments in communities of color, in rural and Native communities, and in other low- and moderate-income areas. Beyond her deeply troubling policy record, Governor Bowman also demonstrated a worrisome lack of independence from the White House during her nomination process. For example, at her hearing, she refused to acknowledge any economic uncertainty created by President Trump's tariff policies, and she refused to concede any potential financial impact of those policies on U.S. financial stability. That refusal puts her at odds with Chair Powell, with the Fed staff, and with economic experts across the political spectrum. It was clear that Governor Bowman did not want to be seen even indirectly criticizing President Trump. Ms. Bowman also stated that she plans to submit regulatory actions to the White House for review, which undermines the Fed's independence and all but guarantees a new deregulatory bonanza for these Wall Street banks. She has refused to answer questions about whether she met with then- President Elect Trump or his transition team while on an official Federal Reserve-funded trip to West Palm Beach in November 2024. Look, our economy is in a precarious moment. President Trump's disastrous mismanagement of this economy is raising costs for families, is putting jobs at risk, and is threatening to decimate small businesses across this country. Deregulating Wall Street right now would throw gasoline on Trump's economic fire. The last thing families and small businesses need is another massive financial crash. I urge my colleagues to oppose Michelle Bowman's nomination. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the GENIUS Act. Analysts expect that passing the GENIUS Act could grow the stablecoin market tenfold over just the next 3 years. That would take a $200 billion market to a $2 trillion market, making it just a little bit smaller than the entire GDP of Canada. Two weeks ago, Democrats refused to vote for the bill because it had inadequate safeguards for consumers and it posed too much risk, both for our financial stability and our national security. Democrats also voted no because the bill failed to address President Trump's blatant crypto corruption. So here we are again. What has changed in the bill since the last vote? The answer: Not much. Its basic flaws remain unaddressed. While a strong stablecoin bill is the best possible outcome, this weak bill is worse than no bill at all. First, corruption. It is fitting that we are voting on the GENIUS Act just a few days before President Trump hosts a ``private intimate dinner'' and a VIP White House tour for the top investors in his meme coin, many of whom remain anonymous. Buyers, including some apparently foreign investors, reportedly spent an estimated $148 million in the contest, enriching Donald Trump and his family. And yet this pay-to- play scheme is only the tip of the iceberg of the President's crypto corruption. Trump and his family have already pocketed hundreds of millions of dollars from his crypto ventures, and they stand to make hundreds of millions more from his stablecoin, USD1, if this bill passes. It launched only weeks ago, but USD1 is already the fifth largest stablecoin in the entire world. Passing this bill means that we can expect more anonymous buyers, big companies, and foreign governments to use the President's stablecoin as both a shadowy bank account shielded from government oversight and as a way to pay off the President personally. For crooks, it is a two-for-one. This is not a hypothetical problem. Already, an Abu Dhabi investment firm called MGX is using Trump's stablecoin to finance a $2 billion investment in the Binance cryptocurrency exchange, essentially just cutting Trump in on the deal of this enormous financial transaction. MGX is chaired by the intelligence chief of the United Arab Emirates and co-owned by a firm with extensive ties to the Chinese Government. If Congress passes this bill, USD1 won't just be a coercive tool to pay off a corrupt President; it will be a financial instrument blessed by the U.S. Government. And this bill provides even more opportunities to reward buyers of Trump's coins with favors like tariff exemptions, pardons, and government appointments. For months, many Democrats have pushed for commonsense ethics provisions in this bill. Unfortunately, the final bill does nothing-- nothing--to rein in the President's crypto corruption. But some supporters say: Well, that is because the corruption is already happening, and at least this bill won't make it any worse. That is wrong. The GENIUS Act will accelerate Trump's corruption by supercharging the size of the stablecoin market and the reach and profitability of Trump's USD1. And, for the first time in American history, this bill will make our President, Donald Trump, the regulator of his own financial product. This Congress should be a check on the President. Congress should not be making it even easier for him to line his pockets with even more shady crypto cash. If Congress does not fix this issue here today, then it will be aiding and abetting his corruption every time President Trump's stablecoin is used to finance a corrupt deal. Second problem: financial stability. I am deeply concerned that this bill will directly lead to the next financial meltdown. This is not the first time that Congress has listened to the financial industry and created a weak regulatory regime for a new, innovative financial product. We have seen this story before, and we know how it ends. Twenty-five years ago, Congress passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act to support the obscure financial derivatives market, and almost nobody noticed. At the time, derivatives were a relatively niche financial product. Most people really didn't understand what they were or what they did. But when the derivatives industry came knocking, begging for so-called regulation, Congress was willing to oblige. After all, people said, surely some kind of regulatory framework was better than nothing. So Congress created a weak set of rules that was loaded with loopholes, just like the industry wanted. The result was a total disaster. Derivatives moved from the edge of the financial system to the center of it. The result of that law was to massively expand the reach of the derivatives market and further integrate it into the core financial system. That bill helped set the stage for the 2008 financial crash. Congress came back after the meltdown and cleaned up the mess in Dodd-Frank, but that was long after 10 million people lost their homes and millions more people lost their jobs and their savings. In the last decade, we saw this story in another version and just barely avoided another disaster because of it. In 2018, Congress debated and enacted S. 2155, the bipartisan Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act right here on the floor of the Senate. Republicans and the banking industry pushed that bill, and a number of Democrats joined them as well. They voted to roll back critical post-2008 crisis reforms for some of the largest banks in the country. Five years later--just 5 years later--three of those newly deregulated banks failed. Those three failures were the second, third, and fourth largest failures among banks in American history. For a while, it looked like we might face a run on the whole banking system. Swift action by regulators to bail out uninsured depositors and a whole lot of luck are the only reasons we didn't face yet another financial meltdown just 2 years ago. Now here we are back to do the same thing again. A financial meltdown triggered by crypto instability is not some alarmist, fever dream. In fact, it nearly happened just a few years ago. Crypto markets abruptly lost $2 trillion--that is trillion with a ``t''--after the collapse of several major crypto firms. In 2022, two of the largest stablecoins failed to maintain their pegs. Luckily, these cryptocurrency markets were mostly separate from the rest of the financial system, so we avoided mass economic destruction. That ends today if we enact this bill. The GENIUS Act folds stablecoins directly into the traditional financial system, while applying weaker safeguards than banks or investment companies must adhere to. Make no mistake, we are likely to see another financial crisis in the coming years, and we are virtually certain to see another set of wild swings in cryptocurrency values. It will be the American people who will bear the cost of a massive financial crash facilitated by the stablecoin market if Congress passes the GENIUS Act. Third problem: If this bill passes, it will mean easier access to money for terrorists and drug cartels. Even today, the crypto industry's own analysts are calling stablecoins ``the new kingpin of illicit crypto activity.'' According to Chainalysis, a blockchain analytics firm, stablecoins account for more than 60 percent of all illicit crypto transactions. There is a reason for this: These stablecoins are an ideal payment system that works for cartels, terrorists, sanctions evaders, and human traffickers to finance crime. Unfortunately, the GENIUS Act massively expands the marketplace for stablecoins while failing to address the basic national security risks posed by them. The bill fails to apply anti-money laundering safeguards to exchanges and intermediaries that facilitate the movement, obfuscation, and custody of stablecoins. The bill includes glaring loopholes that would allow Tether--which has reportedly become the cryptocurrency of choice for illicit actors because of its alleged willingness to turn a blind eye to money laundering--to now get access to U.S. markets. In fact, the bill text now contains a so-called decentralized finance loophole that allows Tether and other noncompliant stablecoins to access U.S. markets without any constraints--a loophole that does not exist today and that didn't even exist in the bill until this past weekend. I don't want to see fentanyl traffickers or child pornographers or terrorists or countries that are trying to avoid sanctions financing their operations with U.S.-backed stablecoins. I certainly don't want to see a major expansion of access to money by America's adversaries. But if we pass this bill in its current form, that is exactly where we are headed. Fourth problem: If this bill passes, it will allow Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg to issue their own money. The bill still permits big tech companies and other conglomerates to issue their own private currencies. Community banks have warned us that by creating a parallel, lightly regulated banking system, the stablecoin market will drain deposits from our local community banks and from the communities they serve. There will be less funding available for small businesses and households all across the country. So if this bill becomes law, Congress will be responsible if a handful of giants take control of our money and then access and abuse troves of valuable consumer spending data. We will be responsible if small businesses struggle to access credit and if more community banks disappear. Finally, if this bill passes, mainstream investors will be at greater risk of getting robbed and scammed. The bill jeopardizes CFPB oversight and the suite of consumer protections that people enjoy when using their Venmo app or their bank account. If you get cheated using a stablecoin, you may just be out of luck. Our constituents will be reaching out to our offices because they have fallen victim to a stablecoin scam or have been saddled with junk fees when they redeem their stablecoin, only to discover that in many cases, there will be no recourse. Congress should not choose to enable President Trump's egregious corruption. Congress should not fuel the next financial crash. Congress should not put consumers at risk for fraud or make it easier to engage in terrorist activities. It doesn't have to be this way. A bill that meaningfully strengthens oversight in the stablecoin market is worth enacting. A bill that turbocharges the stablecoin market while facilitating the President's corruption and undermining national security, financial stability, and consumer protection is worse than no bill at all. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote no on the GENIUS Act. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the vote we just had on the motion to proceed on the GENIUS Act. Despite promises that the GENIUS Act's fundamental flaws would be fixed ahead of any vote, we still don't have the new bill text. Now, many of my colleagues have made clear that they want to improve this bill and that it is important for Republicans not to jam us. Well, the Republicans decided to jam us anyway. But the Democrats have power to say no, and that is exactly what we just did. The GENIUS Act would establish a new regulatory framework for stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency whose value is pegged to the value of another asset, often, the U.S. dollar. This is a $100 billion market. A stablecoin is very similar to a bank deposit. Its value, like the value of your deposits in a bank account, is supposed to maintain a stable value. That is why they call it a stablecoin. But as we have learned throughout history, banking can be a really risky activity. It requires a robust regulatory and supervisory framework that protects consumers, that protects our national security, and that protects the stability of the financial system. Democrats in the Banking Committee worked hard to improve the GENIUS Act before, during, and after we had a vote in committee on the bill. We want to strengthen the guardrails on this new financial product to make sure that it is safe and reliable. Democrats--even Democrats who voted for the bill in committee--made it clear: The bill needs to improve significantly to win their support on the floor. But this new bill that was introduced last week and rushed to the floor this week, and that we voted on just today, lacked those guardrails. So far, Republicans have refused to adopt changes that would apply basic consumer protection rules, like the ones the banks and other financial institutions have to follow so that their customers don't get cheated; have refused to adopt changes that would make it more difficult for cartels, terrorists, sanctions evaders, and human traffickers to use stablecoins to finance illegal activity; have refused to adopt changes that ensure that stablecoins do not destabilize our financial system and require taxpayers to bail out crypto companies when they crash; have refused to adopt changes that would prevent Big Tech billionaires from using this bill to issue their own private currencies; have refused to adopt changes that would stop Donald Trump and his family from corruptly profiting off their new stablecoin, USD1, which is already the fifth largest stablecoin in the world and has already been used to cut them in on shady, multibillion- dollar deals with foreign governments. So what happened when the Democrats saw the new version of the bill last week? We stood together, we held firm, and we made clear that we were not giving them enough votes to get to 60 and move the bill forward. That brought Republicans back to the negotiation table over the last several days. The lead negotiators made clear: Republicans need our votes. We will not be rushed. We will not be jammed. We will not vote on something that we haven't even seen. This issue is simply too important. And that brings us to today. We were asked by the Republicans to take this vote without ever seeing the text of the new bill. There is no way for any Senator to know whether the final bill sufficiently protects consumers, no way to know whether the final bill prevents terrorists in rogue nations and cartels from using stablecoins to move dirty money around, no way to know whether the final bill stops Big Tech billionaires from taking over our money supply, and no way to know whether the final bill stops President Trump from making billions off his stablecoin and accepting bribes from foreign nations. These purported fixes were negotiated behind closed doors, in the dead of night, and we don't even know for sure what they are. We need time to evaluate them carefully. This is what it looks like when Republicans try to jam the Democrats. But the opportunity for bribery and corruption through a Trump stablecoin is not hypothetical. It is not like, well, here is something that might happen. Trump has already shown us right out in public exactly how to run the corruption play. It was reported last week that an Abu Dhabi investment firm, MGX, is using Trump's USD1's stablecoin to finance a $2 billion investment in Binance, essentially giving Trump a cut of the deal. The firm is chaired by someone who is referred to in the industry as the ``spy sheikh'' of the United Arab Emirates and co-owned by G42, a firm with extensive ties to the Chinese Government. I do not think that some of my colleagues fully comprehend the scale of this corruption. Donald Trump and his family have essentially started their own bank, and money from foreign governments and large corporations is already pouring in. This is not one of Trump's standard failed side hustles, like steaks or vodka or his licensing deals. His stablecoin, USD1, is the fifth largest in the world, and it is only 3 weeks old. He is set to make hundreds of millions of dollars, potentially billions of dollars, on this undertaking. If you are seeking pardons, if you want tariff exemptions, if you want other special favors, you don't need a briefcase of cash pushed under the table; you can do it conveniently online with Donald Trump's stablecoin. How can any Senator--Democrat, Republican, or Independent-- endorse that kind of corruption? How can any Senator--Democrat, Republican, or Independent--facilitate that kind of corruption? Over the past few months, we as Democrats have too often forgotten we still have some power, and this is our opportunity to use it. We did not vote for this bill today. We stood firm, and we demanded improvements. I have heard from some of my colleagues that this bill will happen with or without us, and that is simply not true. We proved it today. I urge Democrats to continue to use their power and make sure that we don't sign off on a weak deal, on a bad deal, on a deal that, months from now or years from now, we say: Oh, that turned out to be a bad idea. We can only vote for the GENIUS Act when we have a bill that protects consumers, that promotes financial stability, that protects our national defense, and that fights back against Donald Trump's aggressive and public corruption. We need to stand strong as Democrats, and if we do, we can get a better bill and better serve the people of the United States of America. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote no on S.J. Res. 13. President Trump promised that he would lower costs for American families on day one. He promised to cap interest rates on credit cards at 10 percent, and so what is it that the Senate is prioritizing today? Making it easier for banks to merge, raising the cost of credit for small businesses and households, and eroding banking services in local communities. This resolution would undo commonsense provisions and improvements to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency bank merger review framework after decades of that office rubberstamping deals that have reduced competition in the banking sector and put community banks all across this country out of business. Now, we have witnessed small banks just vanishing from our local communities over the past several decades. These are the banks that are deeply rooted in our neighborhoods, that do the painstaking local lending that many small businesses rely on. Regulators' long record of rubberstamping bank mergers has resulted in scores of branch closures, leaving consumers with fewer choices when it comes to whom to trust with their money. Between 2006 and 2021, the Federal Reserve approved more than 3,500 consecutive mergers without denying a single one--not even one single no. With the regulators completely asleep at the switch since 1990, the number of banks in the United States has declined from more than 18,000 to fewer than 5,000. The biggest banks have been the beneficiaries of this consolidation because they have grown even bigger. In the mid-1990s, the 20 biggest banks in this country held a total of 15 percent of all bank assets-- the 20 biggest had 15 percent of all the assets. Today, the top 20 hold more than 65 percent of all bank assets, and the concentration at the very top is even more extreme. The biggest four banks alone hold more assets than the next 75 banks combined. This problem can be life or death for small businesses that can't get ahold of anyone at a big bank who understands the local economy or the nuances of their business or their credit needs. At a big bank, you get a 1-800 number and a cookie-cutter product developed in some far-off headquarters. The problem is even more dire in low-income neighborhoods where research shows that predatory lenders and check cashers proliferate as bank consolidation increases. Concentrating power into a few financial giants and money centers reduces competition, and it results in Americans paying higher prices for their banking services. That means higher credit card interest rates, higher fees, higher auto loan payments, and unaffordable mortgages. And when these banks become too big to fail, the entire economy feels the pain when those banks' risk-taking blows up, and taxpayers are the ones who have to foot the bill when Wall Street comes in here demanding bailouts. In recent years, regulators started to wake up to the fact that a highly consolidated banking sector is bad for consumers and bad for our economy. Bank supervisors and antitrust enforcers have been taking a careful look at the rules that guide how mergers are scrutinized, and they finally--finally--began to apply the law, as written by Congress, and they retired the rubberstamp. In 2024, the OCC, which oversees most of the very largest banks, finalized improvements to the bank merger framework, creating a more comprehensive process and a more transparent process. First, the new rules will end the practice that allows certain mergers to be automatically approved just 15 days after the closing of the public comment period. This resolution would reinstitute automatic approval just as Elon Musk's, his DOGE, guts the very staff that are reviewing these bank merger applications. It is a dangerous combination to actually say: We are going to do these automatic approvals, give them a really short period of time, and then cut the number of people who are there in the regulatory Agencies to be able to review the mergers. Second, the updated rules also ensure that all applicants provide regulators with the information they need to weed out harmful transactions and to ensure that the OCC is more transparent about how it weighs certain factors when making a determination for whether to approve or deny a merger, and all that would go away. The OCC's final rule is a commonsense step to revitalize the bank merger framework after decades of lax review. Passing this resolution would turn back the clock, raise costs for Americans at a time when they can least afford it, and choke off credit even more for the small businesses that need it most. I urge my colleagues to vote no on S.J. Res. 13. It is bad for consumers, bad for small businesses, and, ultimately, that means it is bad for our economy. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. I want to note that President Trump is pushing our economy off a cliff. Over the past week, the President has told families to brace for more expensive toys for Christmas and he continues to lie about the fact that grocery prices are actually going up. He has managed to shrink the economy in his first 100 days and experts from across the spectrum are already predicting a recession. He is also working to tear our Federal Government apart. And while President Trump works to burn down our economy and our future, the Senate is still chugging along with business as usual in confirming the President's nominees to lead the Agencies that he is actively trying to destroy. My litmus test for any executive branch nominee is will they enforce the law and uphold our Constitution or will they simply bend the knee to the orders of President Trump? I am worried that Mr. Pettit will simply go along with the Trump administration's deregulatory agenda, instead of fighting to protect consumers and to ensure financial stability. I know that Mr. Molinaro wants to improve the public transportation system and support public transit workers. I appreciate that. I genuinely do. I have no doubt about it. But it seems clear that the White House and Elon Musk's DOGE will gut the Federal Transit Administration and undermine the Department of Transportation. We cannot wave these nominees through by unanimous consent without a real debate. Therefore, I object.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Madam President, Donald Trump and Elon Musk are taking a chain saw to Social Security. For nearly a century, Social Security has been there for tens of millions of Americans. But now, Trump and Musk are threatening to tear all of that down. They are firing staff. They are plotting to close down offices. They are making it harder for people to get help over the telephone. Trump's pick to head up Social Security, Frank Bisignano, will rubberstamp Trump and Musk's attack on Social Security. He will let them keep slashing services. He will let them keep threatening benefits. That is going to hurt people everywhere, from seniors who count on their monthly checks right now to the parents of kids with disabilities supported by Social Security, to every American who is paying into the program now for results later on down the line. Social Security, by the way, is more than just a retirement program. It is insurance. If you are 30 years old today and you get in an accident and become disabled, Social Security has you covered. If you have a child and something happens to you, that kid will get Social Security benefits. Donald Trump and Elon Musk want to rip that protection away. Two people who don't have the slightest clue how much Social Security means to families are now threatening Americans' benefits in order to pay for giant tax cuts for billionaires, and since those two cannot begin to imagine what it means for working people, let's tell them what Social Security does. A few weeks ago, I posted a video explaining what Trump and Musk were doing to Social Security, and I asked people: Just tell your stories. And the stories came flooding in, and here are just a few: I'm on Social Security disability--it's about 95 percent of my total income. Every month since Trump took office this year, I've worried about whether or not my [Social Security] payment will come as usual. Yes, there are millions of people out there who are worried about getting their Social Security payments on time because Trump and Musk are out there with that famous chain saw, doing what they can to make it harder for people to get the benefits that they have earned. Or here is another: I've had Medicare medication coverage for around 20 years, and all of [a] sudden, with Musk's appearance, I've had to fight to keep it. Here is someone who has a legal right--a benefit--and now, thanks to Elon Musk, has to be in the fight in order to keep what this person is entitled to. Or another: I've been getting my Social Security check with zero problems for 15 years. Last night, I was so worried about me not getting a check [that] I stayed up to the early morning hours, to make sure it was in my account. Thanks to Trump and Musk, I worry if I will be able to pay my rent every month. Since Trump has been in office, it's been extremely stressful. Yes, that is the stress people are feeling about whether or not they will have access to the money that they invested year after year when they were working, the money that they earned--their Social Security benefits. Or another: We have a son born with Down syndrome and we are now retired, depending on our Social Security for the three of us--for food, utilities, clothing, medical services, things that we worked [for] all our lives, only to have billionaires come in and take what little we have to live on away. Yes, the billionaires may not care about Social Security, but here is someone who depends on it every day. Or another: I'm about to turn 65 and have had a nightmare of a time trying to even talk to a real human being at the Social Security office. It's been just a series of dead ends and mistakes piled atop confusion. And, boy, there is the heart of it. Donald Trump and Elon Musk can't legally cut Social Security benefits, but what Trump and Musk are now doing is cutting access to being able to get your Social Security benefits started, which has a very similar effect for people who don't get what they earned all their lives. Or here is another: I had cancer at 52 years old--stage 4 uterine cancer. I spent more than a year fighting cancer. I am currently 66 years old and fighting the chronic pain from the chemicals they used to treat the cancer. I rely on my Social Security to survive. What am I going to do? This is what is happening in America now because Donald Trump and Elon Musk are taking a chain saw to Social Security. Or another: I'm 71 years old and work part time as a data technician in dementia research, so my [Social Security benefits] supplement my income. I'm anxious that eventually I, too, will have my Social Security check delayed or stopped altogether. Or another: We all need Social Security to survive, as a nation. I myself have been having it drawn out of my paychecks for over 40 years but haven't retired yet and will need it shortly. My only hope is that it is still there when I need it. We earned that right to collect this money and [will] not let a bunch of billionaires take it from us. Amen. I have worked since I was 16 years old and now I'm 71 but I still work part-time. It goes without saying that I need my [Social Security] benefits to survive and since Trump and Musk took over I don't know from one month to the next what might happen. So scary now! This is what Donald Trump and Elon Musk are doing to people who are counting on Social Security. Or another: I only get $25,000 yearly from Social Security, and it constitutes more than half of my income. I have a small pension from the company where I worked for 40 years. If I lose my Social Security, I'll have to support myself and my sister (who cannot work) . . . I don't have much in savings due to continuing medical expenses over the years. [We] need my Social Security to survive. I will say that again. [We] need my Social Security to survive. Or another: I'm a [Social Security] employee and I just want to say thank you for standing up for the programs SSA runs and the beneficiaries. It is true it's been becoming harder for people to access their benefits but also for other services such as getting their Social Security card replaced. There [are] some days where people are waiting for 8 hours just to talk to a customer service representative or they don't even get the call back and have to call again the next day to have an issue resolved--that's if they have the time [to call] the next day. That is testimony from the frontlines, from one who works at the Social Security Administration--lines that are 8 hours long. Or another: I went to a [Social Security] office yesterday because I need[ed] to change my direct deposit for my monthly benefits. The doors were locked . . . All the booths were shuttered. Sign on the door said ``by appointment only'' and there was a number to call, which I did. The automated system put me on hold, and the recording said 15-minute wait, and after time passed, the recording said I would be helped as soon as possible, then said they were receiving higher than normal call volumes . . . After several rings, the recording said . . . leave [a] message (which I did) and someone will return your call, but that hasn't happened yet. As I sat outside that office, another person walked up and said he heard that we have to go into the office in person to show our ID or lose our benefits--then realized the door was locked . . . Now I am very concerned that I might not get my benefits in the future. So, Donald Trump and Elon Musk, that is what your attack on Social Security means for Americans: more problems and fewer people to fix them; hours on the phone or hours waiting in line at an office, trying to get help--all to get the benefits that people have paid into their entire working lives. That is money they have earned and money they are owed. Frank Bisignano has made clear he will not stop the chaos. He will not stop the harm. That is wrong. On behalf of every single American who counts on Social Security, I am voting no on this appointment, and I encourage all of my colleagues--Democrat and Republican--to do the same. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the GENIUS Act and the urgent need to strengthen this bill before the Senate votes on it later this week. The GENIUS Act would create a framework for bringing stablecoins deeper into the U.S. financial system. For those who are unfamiliar with stablecoins, they are a type of cryptocurrency whose value is pegged to the value of another asset like the U.S. dollar. A stablecoin is similar to a bank deposit only without the guarantees of a bank behind it. A stablecoin is supposed to maintain a stable value, so a holder can redeem it to get their cash back on demand, and they can make payments with it, at least in theory. Democrats want to work with Republicans to advance a stablecoin bill that will make stablecoins safer to use and curb the worst abuses of the industry. There are five areas that need revision. First, a bill must include basic rules so government officials can't use stablecoin ventures to line their own pockets and so that foreign governments and giant corporations cannot use stablecoins to pay bribes to the President of the United States. Second, the bill must prevent Big Tech and other commercial firms from issuing stablecoins, thereby preserving America's historical separation between banking and commerce. Third, the bill must include basic consumer protections--the same as for any other financial transaction. Fourth, the bill must safeguard national security, providing the same guardrails as other payment systems, to make sure that we are not turbocharging the financing of drug traffickers, terrorists, adversaries like North Korea, and crypto scammers. And, fifth, the bill must have sufficient safeguards so that a stablecoin meltdown won't trigger an economywide financial meltdown. With adequate changes in those five areas, Democrats can support the GENIUS Act. When the GENIUS Act was before the Banking Committee in March, Senate Democrats worked hard to improve the bill. Together, Democrats introduced nearly 70 amendments. We called for votes on more than two dozen of them. Every single Democrat voted for every single amendment, and every single Republican voted no. When the bill advanced out of the committee, Democrats made clear they needed to see real changes in the bill before they could vote for it down here on the floor of the Senate. The version that will be voted on by the full Senate as early as this Thursday makes only minor changes, leaving fundamental problems with the bill. I know that the Republican majority intends to force this vote with no real changes. That would be a mistake. If the majority wants to establish a durable legal framework for digital assets rather than just try to score political points, they will take these concerns seriously and agree to improve the bill. Since the committee vote, President Trump's aggressive efforts to profit from stablecoins and the obvious opportunities from bribery and other influence peddling have demonstrated why it is vital that we make meaningful, substantive reforms to the bill. So let's talk for just a minute about how we got here. During his first term, Donald Trump was extremely critical of crypto, describing crypto as ``highly volatile and based on thin air''--thin air--and highlighting that it can ``facilitate unlawful behavior, including drug trade and other illegal activity.'' When he ran for office in 2024, however, the crypto industry poured enormous sums of money into Donald Trump's election, and after he was elected, crypto leaders contributed another $18 million to his inauguration. It was no surprise when Trump reversed his position and began to boost the industry, but it has been shocking to see Donald Trump move at breakneck speed to use his position as President to reap billions of dollars for himself personally and for his family. The biggest corruption scandal in modern history is unfolding right now, and no one in here is paying attention to it. Trump has created the opportunity to trade Presidential favors like tariff exemptions, pardons, and government appointments for crypto purchases that will directly benefit himself and his family, and no one needs to speculate on what might happen. All of this is happening in full view of the public. Over his first 100 days, the President has enabled corruption on such an unprecedented scale it would truly make a two-bit dictator blush. Most people are aware that the meme coin Trump launched ahead of his inauguration was sagging in value recently, so his recent announcement that he would host a dinner for the top 220 investors in the coin and would provide an ``exclusive bonus'' VIP White House tour for the top 25 investors suddenly boosted Trump's crypto venture. Trump has already made more than $300 million from trading fees alone and billions more in unrealized gains since he owns 80 percent of those coins. And this is not his only crypto grift. Two weeks after the Banking Committee voted on the GENIUS Act in March, President Trump's crypto company World Liberty Financial launched its own stablecoin called USD1. Donald Junior is promoting it as ``just as safe as a bank account but without all that extra nonsense.'' USD1 was quietly launched less than a week ago, and its market capitalization now exceeds $2 billion. It is already the seventh largest stablecoin in the entire world. As the New York Times reported last week in a front-page story about Trump's crypto corruption: World Liberty Financial has eviscerated the boundary between private enterprise and government policy in ways without precedent in modern American history. And here is the most egregious example: Trump's stablecoin was issued on the network of Binance, the largest crypto exchange in the world. Binance is an interesting choice to be Trump's partner in the stablecoin business. Back in 2023, Binance pleaded guilty to criminal charges after allowing ``money to flow to terrorists, cyber criminals, and child abusers through its platform.'' Its CEO went to jail after also pleading guilty to criminal money laundering charges. He is reportedly lobbying Trump for a pardon. What better way to buy off Donald Trump than to offer him a very favorable business deal in the stablecoin business. The opportunity for corruption is not hypothetical. Trump has already given us a staggering example. Last week, it was reported that an Abu Dhabi investment firm MGX is using Trump's USD1 stablecoin to finance a $2 billion investment in Binance, essentially giving Trump a cut of the deal. The firm is chaired by the so-called spy sheikh of the United Arab Emirates and co- owned by G42, a firm with extensive ties to the Chinese Government. The Trump Organization recently announced plans to build a hotel and an apartment building in the UAE, and buyers--you guessed it--will be allowed to make payments in bitcoins. The GENIUS Act makes this kind of corruption worse. There is nothing in the bill to stop it. Instead, the bill would accelerate it. President Trump and the crypto industry are not trying to jam through this bill because they know it will make corruption and bribery harder. They are trying to jam it through because they know it will turbocharge the size and scale of the stablecoin market and help boost the value of their own stablecoin ventures, all while containing no real restrictions on the President's self-dealing. Under the current version of the bill, President Trump is able to rake in transaction fees every time his stablecoin is used or traded. When trading is active, those fees are measured in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Trump will also make money a second way: Everyone who owns USD1 essentially provides Trump with an interest-free loan. This means that Trump will make money on assets backing the stablecoin, and he will pay no interest to the holders of the coin. Big corporations and foreign governments can run the MGX play and use USD1 to cut Trump in on business deals or openly pay him off for tariff exemptions and other special deals, pardons, or government appointments. For a giant corporation hoping to see a prosecution dropped or a license granted, Trump's new stablecoin business creates a way to offer a payoff for the President of the United States to use his influence to get the desired outcome. These massive opportunities for grift must be stopped, and Democrats have commonsense amendments to do exactly that. For example, we propose that the President and all other elected officials and their families be barred from owning, controlling, promoting, or otherwise participating in stablecoin business ventures. While I believe that all elected officials should be barred from buying, selling, and trading stock, investments in stablecoin companies themselves create a special risk right now. Congress is currently writing laws that will sharply increase or decrease the value of these businesses. The public should know that no one is making decisions to further their own financial interests. The current version of the GENIUS Act contains no such restrictions. The Senate should not pass a bill that facilitates Trump's breathtaking corruption and lines his pockets and welcomes other elected officials to do the same. There are other fundamental problems with the GENIUS Act that need to be fixed before we vote. It is crucial to prohibit the intermingling of commercial businesses and stablecoins. For centuries, our country has maintained a separation between our system of money and payments on the one side and actual businesses in the real economy on the other side. That separation helps protect the stability of our financial system, helps promote fair competition in the economy, and prevents concentrating too much economic power in the hands of just a few. Democrats and Republicans have, time and again, linked arms to defend exactly this separation. For example, when Mark Zuckerberg tried to leverage Facebook to create a stablecoin in 2019, both Democrats and Republicans said: No. Run Facebook or run a stablecoin operation, but do not mix the two together. Under the GENIUS Act, however, Zuckerberg could launch his own coin as soon as the bill is passed. This is particularly of interest to Elon Musk. He has already explained his plan to expand his social media platform X into a payment platform, X Money. He has said that he can use the reach of X so that, in a few years, his X Money and his stablecoin will be ``half of the global financial system.'' The man has vision. He and other Big Tech billionaires would be free to issue their own currencies to compete with the U.S. dollar. There is absolutely no reason to allow this. Other bipartisan stablecoin bills have not permitted this. Blessing ``co-President'' Elon Musk's ambitions to overtake the U.S. money supply is completely unnecessary to build a well-regulated and safe stablecoin regime. Democrats have an amendment to prohibit the intermingling between nonfinancial companies and stablecoin issuers, and we should make that change before we vote on the GENIUS Act here in the Senate. It is also important to strengthen the GENIUS Act to safeguard our national security. Stablecoins now count for more than 60 percent of crypto transactions, according to a recent public analysis from the blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis, making them the ``new kingpin of illicit crypto activity.'' The current version of the bill does little to prevent stablecoins from being exploited by terrorists, cartels, and criminals. In fact, compared to the version voted out of the Banking Committee, the current bill creates new loopholes to allow operators of so-called decentralized crypto exchanges and other services to continue circulating for noncompliant stablecoin issuers. It is critical for service providers like crypto exchanges and custodians to maintain programs to check for illegal financial activity and for our government to be able to sanction mixers that move millions of dollars for our adversaries. It is important also that terrorists and drug traffickers know that they cannot escape sanctions enforcement by switching from dollars to stablecoins, and it is critical that stablecoin issuers be required to monitor the blockchains on which stablecoins are traded. As drafted, the GENIUS Act does not include those safeguards. Democrats have language to fix that. We need also to ensure that the same basic consumer protections that apply when somebody pays their rent using their checking account or buys a cup of coffee with their credit card also apply to stablecoins. For example, at a bare minimum, consumers should have easy access to their money if they want to redeem their stablecoins. However, the GENIUS Act does not do that, leaving consumers exposed to potential delays, process hurdles, and junk fees. When it comes to consumer protection, the most recent version of the bill actually got worse compared to the version that was voted on in committee. The current GENIUS Act strips out certain protections, leaving consumers exposed to fly-by-night, scammy wallet providers to hold their stablecoins. And--get this--all but the very largest stablecoin issuers get to evade auditing requirements, leaving consumers vulnerable to the type of financial fraud that is now rampant in the crypto ecosystem. Notably, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is not mentioned once in the bill despite the CFPB being responsible for enforcing our Nation's Federal consumer financial laws. As Fed Chair Jerome Powell said in a Senate hearing shortly after DOGE attempted to shut down the CFPB, when CFPB is not on the job enforcing consumer protection laws, there is no one in the Federal Government to pick up the slack--no cop on the beat. That is exactly what the supporters of the GENIUS Act are hoping for--no one in the Federal Government who has the expertise or the budget to be a real cop on the beat. The stablecoin scammer will target every person in America, and under the GENIUS Act, they will run almost no risk of getting caught. The current version of the GENIUS Act leaves consumers exposed to scams, fraud, and abuse. We can plug those holes and make sure that consumers are protected when making electronic payments regardless of the technology that underpins the transaction, and Democrats have amendments for that. Finally, the GENIUS Act lacks the basic safeguards necessary to ensure that stablecoins don't blow up our entire financial system. This isn't a hypothetical risk. Circle's stablecoin dipped from $1 to 88 cents in March of 2023--2 years ago--threatening a broader run on the crypto market. But regulators bailed out Circle's and other big corporations' deposits at Silicon Valley Bank in order to prevent a banking crash. Money market funds and the repo market, which pose similar risks as stablecoins, have been bailed out twice in less than 20 years. The threats that stablecoins pose to our economic system are real, and once again taxpayers will be called on to bail out millionaires and billionaires--only this time, it will be the millionaires and billionaires who are fronting for cryptocurrencies. The bill as drafted permits stablecoin issuers to invest in riskier assets, including uninsured U.S. and foreign bank deposits and repo loans and hedge funds, and allows them to engage in risky nonstablecoin activities, like private credit or derivatives trading. At the same time, the bill constrains regulators' ability to apply capital and liquidity safeguards to limit the chances of stablecoin failures. It restricts regulators' ability to enforce the already weak requirements of the bill when a stablecoin issuer violates them, and it stacks the deck against denying stablecoin applications submitted by risky companies. In addition, regulators would have no authority to block worrisome mergers and acquisitions even if the new stablecoin owners have a history of financial fraud or money laundering. Let's just give an example here. Sam Bankman-Fried decides he wants to buy a stablecoin company while he is still in prison. The GENIUS Act says: Go right ahead. Democrats have solutions to fix these financial stability weaknesses, and we should include them in the bill now. If the GENIUS Act goes forward without these changes, Donald Trump will continue to line his pockets with crypto scams while his policies continue to tank the economy for everyone else. Efforts to personally pay off government officials like the President of the United States will accelerate, and they are going to happen right out in the open. Big Tech billionaires will have even greater control over our economy. Terrorism financing and sanctions evasion risks will grow. Consumers will be at greater risk of getting cheated. Another financial crash will be more likely. The problems with this bill are serious, but here is the thing: They can be solved. Democrats have offered solutions throughout this process, and it is not too late. We can find common ground on a reasonable framework to regulate the stablecoin market and to put those changes into the bill now. But we cannot bless Trump's corruption and put consumers, our financial system, and our national security at risk. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, President Trump took a strong American economy and broke it in less than 100 days. Right now, Republican Senators are at a crossroads. Will they vote to stop Trump's chaotic tariffs and save our economy, or will they continue bending the knee to Donald Trump? That is the vote that we are forcing tonight. When he ran for office, Donald Trump promised, over and over and over, that he would lower costs on day one. Those were his words: Lower costs on day one. In fact, he said after he was elected that it was one of the main reasons that he won. But as soon as the election was over, he ignored that promise. Instead of working to lower costs on day one, he has decided to start the dumbest trade war in U.S. history, which is already increasing costs for American households and damaging our economy. So let's take a step back and talk about what has happened since Trump started this trade war. The stock market took the biggest plunge since the early days of the pandemic, sinking millions of Americans' retirement accounts. Businesses have begun hiking prices and laying off workers. Americans are worried that they won't be able to survive a cratering economy. And, just today, Americans woke up to the news that Donald Trump single-handedly shrunk our economy in 3 months and raised the cost of their groceries. The warning lights are all flashing red. We have seen this before, but this time our economy is teetering on the edge not because of a mortgage meltdown or a one-in-a-century virus but because of one man alone: the President of the United States. Unless we reverse course quickly, many economists believe that a recession is inevitable. And like in all recessions, the pain will fall hardest on working families. Many Americans will face the one-two punch of job losses on top of overwhelming debt burdens. A cascade of defaults and foreclosures and personal bankruptcies could follow. With so many indications that American families are in serious trouble, our government should be throwing them a lifeline. Instead, President Trump is throwing them an anchor, while he carves out exceptions for a few well-connected billionaires who have bent the knee. This is the moment for Congress to step up. And where are the Senate Republicans? Watching? Waiting? Hoping it doesn't get worse? Hoping that maybe somebody else will step up? Well, I am here to say: It is up to us in the U.S. Senate. No one else is coming to save us. We are the ones who have to act. If Republicans care about the American people, they will vote yes on our resolution today and turn off the fake emergency that Donald Trump is using to impose his on-again, off-again red-light, green-light tariffs--the tariffs that are pushing our economy off a cliff. Let me repeat: Congress can end this economic threat today. All we need are some Republican Senators to join us to vote down the President's abuse of emergency authorities. Unless we take action now, millions of people will lose their jobs, families will be destroyed, and our economy will take years to recover. But this time, it will be the President of the United States who destroyed our economy, and it will be congressional Republicans who helped him do it because they didn't have the spine to stand up to Donald Trump. So I say to my Republican colleagues: Let's get this done. You have a choice. You can either continue to enable Donald Trump's tariff chaos, or you could actually stand up for our constituents. It is truly that simple. The chaos and corruption of Trump's first 100 days can be curbed. The President is no King, and he only has as much power as Congress is willing to let him keep. It is time for us--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents--to step up and head off a crisis before millions more American families are hurt. We have the power. We just need the courage to use it. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN

Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I want to say how much I appreciate the remarks of Senator Alsobrooks. It is an honor to fight alongside you. So here we are--100 days, 100 acts of corruption. Today, I am reading into the Congressional Record 100 reports of corruption from Donald Trump's first 100 days in office. Now, when he ran for office, Trump promised repeatedly--repeatedly-- that he would lower costs ``on day one.'' But instead of following through on his promise, Trump and his Trump administration have paved the way for the President, his top officials, and his billionaire buddies to personally feed at the trough of government corruption. So count with me. In just 100 days, Donald Trump, his family, and his administration have: No. 1, turned the White House into a Tesla dealership. No. 2, fired independent Commissioners at the Federal Trade Commission. No. 3, punished former officials who opposed his 2020 election lies. No. 4, paid for the White House Easter Egg Roll by soliciting corporate sponsors who have business pending before the government. No. 5, helped Trump's son set up a club--pay $500,000 for access to Trump's Cabinet. No. 6, declared that there would be no tariff exceptions, then permitted Apple's CEO behind-the-scenes access, and, poof, iPhone tariffs were cut. No. 7, created an opening for insider trading by reportedly giving Wall Street exclusive information about how trade talks were going. No. 8, hosted million-dollar dinners between Big Pharma CEOs and their regulator, R.F.K., Jr. No. 9, launched crypto meme coin right before the inauguration to make millions of dollars, then increased the value of those coins by signing Executive orders, making crypto a priority. No. 10, launched a meme coin for Melania too. No. 11, promised his ``rich-as-hell'' donors a giant tax handout and is working hard to deliver. No. 12, weakened rules insulating government workers from politics. No. 13, limited corporate foreign bribery investigations. No. 14, halted enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act-- wouldn't want people to know what is going on. No. 15, offered a private dinner with Trump himself and a special tour of the White House for the top 220 holders of his meme coin, permitting Trump and his family to profit both from the runup in the value of the coin and the increase in trading on the Trump platform. No. 16, accepted $40 million for First Lady Melania's documentary from Jeff Bezos--way above the market rate. No. 17, pointed to Bezos's multimillion-dollar documentary payment as a model when Warner Bros. asked Trump's team how to improve its own relationship with the White House. No. 18, struck a deal with Amazon to stream Trump's old show, ``The Apprentice,'' which will mean more money for Trump, as Amazon is seeking tax breaks and other Federal benefits. No. 19, coercing law firms to offer almost $1 billion in free legal work in an arrangement that experts say could run afoul of anti-bribery laws. No. 20, started undermining Medicare's ability to negotiate drug prices after Big Pharma gave millions to Trump's inauguration. No. 21, filed a meritless lawsuit against ``60 Minutes'' and launched a baseless FCC investigation. No. 22, tried to get the AP to bend the knee and kicked them out of the White House briefing room when they refused to bend the knee. No. 23, hired Defense Secretary Hegseth's younger brother to serve in a key role. No. 24, hired a longtime former partner of Don, Jr., to serve as Ambassador to Greece. No. 25, nominated Jared Kushner's father to serve as Ambassador to France. No. 26, selected Tiffany Trump's father-in-law to serve as an adviser. No. 27, appointed an oil and gas executive to lead the Department of Energy. No. 28, selected a Chief of Staff who was a big-time lobbyist for clients like tobacco and mining companies. No. 29, named officials who had recently lobbied for oil and chemical giants to help write EPA rules. What could possibly go wrong? No. 30, appointed Mehmet Oz, who had close ties to Medicare Advantage insurers--in fact, sold it on TV--to lead CMS to set payment rates and otherwise help out whom? Medicare Advantage insurers. No. 31, appointed John Phelan, a major donor with no military or government experience, to lead the Navy and hand out Navy construction contracts. No. 32, appointed Pam Bondi, a former lobbyist for a Federal detention contractor, to lead the DOJ. No. 33, announced that the DOJ would stop prioritizing enforcement of restrictions on foreign lobbyists under the leadership of Bondi, who herself is a former foreign lobbyist for Qatar. No. 34, appointed Howard Lutnick, who has billions invested in companies accused of illegally facilitating crypto money laundering, as the guy to lead the Commerce Department. No. 35, appointed Marty Makary, the former executive of a company selling weight-loss drugs, to lead the FDA, which would be the Agency that would regulate his company. No. 36, appointed Sean Duffy, who lobbied for the airline industry, to be the Transportation Secretary to regulate the airline industry. No. 37, tapped Pete Hegseth, whose wife owns stock in large defense contractors, to lead the Defense Department and help hand out those defense contracts. No. 38, tapped Doug Burgum, who made money from leasing land to Big Oil, to lead the Interior Department and manage the leasing to oil companies. No. 39, nominated a Big Oil lobbyist to run the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. No. 40, nominated as IRS head Billy Long, an aggressive salesman for a fraud-riddled tax credit who received donations after being nominated so he could clear out old campaign debts. No. 41, tapped Paul Atkins, a former crypto lobbyist, to lead the SEC that will regulate crypto. No. 42, appointed a former tax lobbyist to lead tax policy. No. 43, appointed Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who planned to get paid for anti-vax lawsuits while he was heading up HHS and could affect the outcome of exactly those same lawsuits. No. 44, appointed a top Pentagon official who led a firm investing in defense contractors and has directed DOD to outsource as much as possible to defense contractors. No. 45, appointed someone who lobbied to privatize Medicare to lead OMB's healthcare budget. No. 46, installed Steve Davis to effectively lead DOGE, while also leading another Musk company. No. 47, installed another DOGE leader to control Treasury's payment system, while still holding down his day job, oh, as a software CEO. No. 48, handed the power over crypto policy to a White House crypto czar, who leads a venture capital firm that heavily invests in crypto. No. 49, selected a border czar, who led a firm that got tens of millions of dollars of Federal contracts for Homeland Security companies. No. 50, appointed Treasury Secretary Bessent, who is gutting the IRS so that it can't audit rich tax cheats because he himself is a tax- dodging megamillionaire. No. 51, pardoned Rod Blagojevich, the former Illinois Governor convicted for corruption after his vocal support for Trump. No. 52, pardoned January 6 insurrectionists who tried to overturn an election that Trump lost. No. 53, pardoned a Trump loyalist found guilty of wire fraud. No. 54, pardoned the son of a longtime Republican donor. No. 55, pardoned a corporation that had been fined $100 million for money laundering. No. 56, watched his own stablecoin while preparing to sign legislation that will help stablecoin and let Donald Trump oversee it. No. 57, sold merch with Presidential branding. No. 58, disbanded DOJ's crypto unit after business talks between Binance and a Trump-backed crypto company ramped up. No. 59, halted SEC enforcement actions against crypto companies that enriched Trump personally. No. 60, met with crypto executives who are asking Treasury to back off of oversight of their companies, all while simultaneously exploring a deal to list a Trump-linked crypto company's new stablecoin. No. 61, maintain financial ties between Trump officials and Trump's media company that includes FBI Director Kash Patel, who was given a huge award of Trump media company stock. No. 62, nominated Attorney General Bondi, who owned $2 million in DJT shares. No. 63, paid the Education Secretary almost $1 million in Trump media company shares. No. 64, nominated Intelligence Board nominees who have millions in Trump media company shares. No. 65, selected a special envoy to the Middle East who wants to develop real estate in Gaza while running his own real estate firm while he is Special Envoy to the Middle East. No. 66, appointed an FBI Director who consulted for the Qatari Government. No. 67, picked that FBI Director, even though he also received millions of dollars from a Cayman Island holding company with ties to China. No. 68, decided to cancel the Direct File Program. The cancellation of this program that lets taxpayers file their taxes online for free will help the bottom line of Intuit, which charges people for filing their taxes and that gave $1 million to Trump's inauguration. No. 69, took its largest inauguration donation from a poultry company that was under DOJ's scrutiny. After the donation, the SEC approved its parent company for the New York Stock Exchange. No. 70, dropped a probe into sexual misconduct allegations against Trump's Education Secretary's husband. No. 71, hosted dozens of foreign Federal and State officials at Mar- a-Lago, helping enrich Trump. No. 72, hosted a GOP retreat at another one of Trump's resorts, for which Trump's resorts get paid. No. 73, circumvented the normal contracting process to pick a company with close ties to Trump's former campaign manager. No. 74, awarded a $30 million ICE contract to Trump insider Peter Thiel. No. 75, continued developing new Trump properties overseas, including in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. No. 76, hatched a plan for the State Department to pay Tesla $400 million. No. 77, accepted a $4 million inauguration donation from a GOP megadonor and then nominated him as UK Ambassador on the same day. Did anyone miss the message here? And Donald Trump took actions so that he could advance the personal interests of his ``co-President,'' Elon Musk. How? Well, he fired EEOC leaders that were investigating and suing Tesla. He illegally fired the NLRB Chair, which had filed a complaint against SpaceX, one of Musk's companies. He gutted the CFPB staff and fired the Director after they investigated complaints against Musk's companies. He gutted the Department of Labor office investigating Tesla and SpaceX and fired the USAID inspector general who launched a probe into satellite terminals made by Musk's Starlink. No. 83, targeted the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration staff who were reportedly ``a thorn in Tesla's side.'' That is enough to fire them. No. 84, said Musk would self-police his conflicts of interest--yeah, right. No. 85, pressured the Administrator of the FAA, which fined Musk's SpaceX, to resign. And No. 86, permitted Musk to keep his financial disclosure hidden. And, by the way, I have a new bill to fix that one in particular. No. 87, allowed Musk's Starlink to start working with the FAA after Musk criticized the FAA's air traffic telecom system. No. 88, made Musk's SpaceX the frontrunner for a new, lucrative Golden Dome contract. No. 89, stood by Musk when his X executives told an advertising firm to increase ad revenue, threatening that Musk could interfere with their pending merger if they didn't play along. No. 90, permitted Musk to join Trump's interview with the Air Force Secretary nominee while SpaceX held billions of dollars in contracts with the Air Force. No. 91, permitted the National Transportation Safety Board to share news related to the airplane crashes in Washington and Philadelphia only on Musk-owned X. No. 92, permitted the Social Security Administration to share important public communication only on X. No. 93, dropped the Department of Justice's anti-discrimination complaint against Musk's SpaceX. No. 94, fired FDA staffers reviewing Elon Musk's Neuralink clinical trial applications--a lot of benefits for Elon Musk there. And for our closing six moves that make every bit of this corruption even harder to root out, Trump got rid of the cops on the beat. No. 95, fired 18 inspectors general who make sure that Federal Agencies follow the law. No. 96, fired the head of the Office of Special Counsel, who protects whistleblowers and makes sure that civil service laws are followed. No. 97, fired the head of the Office of Government Ethics, who watches to see that the President and his administration follow the laws on conflicts of interest, bribery, and other ethical issues. The guy is gone. No. 98, fired DOJ prosecutors who worked on the January 6 investigations. No. 99, sidelined DOJ's office that reviews the legality of Executive orders. And No. 100, gutted DOJ's office that prosecutes misconduct by public officials. That is 100 corrupt acts in 100 days. Americans deserve accountability. We need to fight back--all of us. I yield the floor.

Ms. WARREN. Of course.

Ms. WARREN. I appreciate the question. I want to say here that I have never seen, anytime in American history, this level of corruption over 8 years in the White House, much less in just 100 days. This level of corruption is everywhere, all the time, and it truly undermines the ability of our country to function. It undermines our economy. It undermines our position in the world. It undermines the economic stability of our families. And it undermines our entire democracy. I thank the Senator for the question.