mr. fetterman, no.

the clerk: mr. budd, aye. mr. kelly, no. vote: the clerk: ms. warren, no. mr. mccormick, aye.

ms. rosen, no. ms. alsobrooks, no. mr. padilla, no. mr. warner, no.

ms. baldwin, no. mr. heinrich, no. ms. lummis, aye.

mr. coons, no. mr. welch, no. ms. blunt rochester, no. mr. reed, no. mr. cruz, aye.

mr. bennet, no. mr. peters, no. mr. schatz, no. ms. cantwell, no. mr. warnock, no.

mr. kaine, no. mrs. murray, no. mr. graham, aye. mr. cornyn, aye. mr. schumer, no. mr. moreno, aye.

mr. hagerty, aye. mr. whitehouse, no.

mr. justice, aye.

mr. boozman, aye. ms. smith, no.

ms. murkowski, aye.

mr. ossoff, no.

mr. thune, aye. ms. cortez masto, no. mrs. hyde-smith, aye.

mr. markey, no. ms. klobuchar, no.

the clerk: mr. king, no. mr. murphy, no.

mr. sheehy, aye.

the clerk: mr. booker, no. mrs. gillibrand, no.

the clerk: ms. slotkin, no.

the clerk: mr. hawley, aye.

mr. cassidy, aye.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, no.

vote: the presiding officer: the ayes are 51. the nays are 47. and the motion is agreed to. mr. thune: mr. president.

the presiding officer: i recognize the majority leader. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that all postcloture time on the mcmahon nomination be expired. further, that the senate vote on confirmation at 5:30 p.m. on monday, match 3. if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative business and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i move to proceed to calendar number 2, s. 9. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 2, s. 9, a bill to provide -- that the purposes of determining compliance with title 9 of the education amendments of 1972 in athletics, sex shall be recognized based solely on a person's reproductive biology. mr. thune: i send a cloture motion to the desk for the motion to proceed. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we,

the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 2, s. 9, a bill to provide that for purposes of determining compliance with title 9 of the education amendments of 1972 in athletics, sex shall be recognized based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. thune: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to consideration of calendar number 16, s. res. 94. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 16, s. res. 94, authorizing expenditures by committees of the senate and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to consideration of s. res. 104 which was submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 104 designating february 27, to 20 as rare disease day. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the motion? without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the s. res. 12 be indefinitely postponed. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, i have nine requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, is stand adjourned until

3:00 p.m. on monday, following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed ex-point of order, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed and the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of executive calendar number 24, the mcmahon nomination under the previous order. finally, following disposition of the mcmahon nomination, the senate proceed to legislative session and resume consideration of calendar number 2, s. 9, and that the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of my colleagues. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. thune: let me restate unanimous consent that s.j. res. 12 be indefinitely postponed. the presiding officer: duly noted. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: i recognize the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, as we celebrate public schools week, senate republicans are preparing to confirm linda mcmahon, another president trump's billionaire patrons as secretary of education and i oppose such nomination. during her confirmation hearing, mrs. mcmahon demonstrated little knowledge of public education or the basic programs and functions of the department of education. clearly, the choice of this nominee was not based on merit. but that does not matter because mrs. mcmahon was selected to be upfront as the agency she hopes to lead is being dismantled by elon musk and doge.

indeed while mrs. mcmahon was at her confirmation hearing claiming that she would work to improve the department of educ education, eamon musk -- elon musk doge's minions were firing, compromising sensitive data and laying the groundwork to eliminate the entire agency. and on valentine's day, president trump's department of education threatened to cut federal funding from public schools as well as colleges and universities if they did not eliminate any program that the trump administration deemed as promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. during her confirmation hearings, mrs. mcmahon seemed unsure whether this edict meant that schools can't celebrate or teach classes on african american history or host clubs like special olympics or girls who code. as reminded by law, the

secretary of education may not interfere with the contents that schools teach nor the academic standards that they set. mrs. mcmahon doesn't seem to know that. by the way, while mr. musk has been tearing the department of education apart from the inside, republicans in congress have passed punitive budget blueprints that will cut trillions in government services to the american people, including education all to pay for tax cuts for the richest americans and the biggest businesses. in the senate the republicans are calling for an unspecified $9 trillion in cuts. in the house the education workforce committee must provide a minimum of $330 billion in cuts from education and training programs. it's no wonder that educators, students, and families from across the country feel under

siege. we know what this looks like because we see how teachers, students, and military families are reacting with dismay as our world class department of defense schools are laboring under another secretary intent on politicizing its department and promoting an indoctrination agenda authorized by president trump. i would like to take a moment to first thank all educators, school staff, family volunteers, and all community members who tirelessly worked to equip our students for the future. we owe you a debt of gratitude and so much more than that. we need to commit to strengthening our public schools and to investing in them. in the first part of the 20th century, it was the high school move that brought educational attainment, preparing young americans for success in a changing world and evolving

economy. this movement featured professional educators and engaged families and communities. it was about general knowledge and practical application. this movement launched the united states as a world economic power. it was essential to our national defense. and it created the conditions for the success of the largest expansion of post sector education through the g.i. bill. the high school movement meant that soldiers returning from world war ii already had high school diplomas and were ready for post-secondary education. head start, the elementary and secondary education act, the adult education and family literacy fact, the individuals with disabilities act, and the higher education act are some of our federal laws that work to ensure that opportunities to learn and advance are not limited by income, race, ethnicity, or disability.

the expansion of public education is a great american story. yet today it sometimes seems to have been forgotten. some argue that we do not need public schools. we can offer vouchers or education savings accounts or home schooling instead. today instead of freedom of inquiry and inclusion, we are seeing policing of what schools can teach, what students can read, what they can discuss, and how they should think. this is a recipe for stifling creativity and the development of the skills needed for an ever changing knowledge economy. we politicize and neglect public schools at our peril. they educate nearly 50 million students and our future. it is time that we treat public education as the priority it must be if we want a brighter future for our children and our

grandchildren and our country. we should embark on a new public school movement, one that will strengthen and support the education profession, one that will ensure that all communities can provide modern state of the art facilities, one that will ensure all students have the right to read with evidence-based reading instruction, school libraries, books at home, diverse materials, and the freedom to choose what to read. today we are failing our public schools because we are not investing in them. for example, the average age of our public school facilities is 49 years. the gao found that over half of our school districts in our country needed to replace or update major systems in more than half of their buildings. as a nation we should commit to modernizing our school facilities, and that's why i will be reintroducing the

rebuild america's schools act to invest $130 billion in our school facilities in the communities with the greatest need. we know there is a crisis in the education profession. too many school districts struggle to hire and train teachers. too often a career in teaching means financial struggles and little support to meet student needs. additionally, we need a national focus on literacy. in 2024, the percentage of eighth graders reading below the basic level on the national assessment of educational progress was the largest in the assessment's history. and the perm of fourth graders -- percentage of fourth graders who scored below was the largest in 20 years. and adults are not doing any better. recent results of the program for the international assessment of adult competencies show that overall scores in literacy and

knew mercy has increased with adults scoring at the lowest level of proficiency and literacy increasing from 19% in 2017 to 28% in 2023. this is a crisis. eliminating the department of education does nothing to solve it. instead of gutting educational funding and eliminating the department of education to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy, congress should address the acute literacy crisis of both adults and children across the nation. we should be increasing funding for adult education, at least doubling it. we should increase resources for schools to provide evidence-based reading instruction by fully funding title one. increase funding for the comprehensive delivery development state grant program and for innovative approaches to

literacy grants. we should double the pell grant and restore its purchasing power so students do not have to rely mostly on loans to pay for college. sadly, none of this is on mrs. mcmahon's agenda i urge my colleagues to join me in ushering in a new public education movement, a movement to ensure that this general -- generation as well as future ones have the foundation to achieve their full potential and build a prosperous future. the nominee is not the person to lead such an effort. all indications are that she will actively work against it so i encourage my colleagues to vote no on her confirmation. and with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. i also note, mr. president, an absence of the quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. quorum call:

all democrats including yourself were opposed, the 2 trillion in cuts to mandatory federal spending, where you think that is going to come from. >> it's really clear from the reconciliation for the resolution instructions to the committee that a great deals going to come out of agriculture $230 billion that also seems to be where snap formally called food stamps comes from. 880 billion added energy and commerce committee's which presides over medicaid and also the inflation reduction act energy improvement that was made under the budget administration. that's where great deal of money is going to come from and people

who are concerned rightfully concerned. >> where shortcuts come from in your opinion most people agree the current deficit spending is not sustainable the size of the national debt is not sustainable, where would you cut in federal spending. >> i would cut the wasteful giveaways and tax breaks to people who don't need them and wealthy corporations is a huge loophole and what we call small business initiative the 199 a provision that provides a pass-through income to businesses and businesses that have gross receipts of $10 million and as far as i'm concerned are unworthy of this particular tax break, bonus depreciation i would cut some of

the fat of the tax breaks that we are providing the $4.5 trillion that is being proposed for tax cuts primarily benefit corporations of the wealthiest individuals in the united states. >> political reports that gop lawmakers are discussing and acting work requirements for medicaid closing some of the state loopholes. would you be in favor of that. >> let me just say this imposing work requirements is never created more work people who are able to work are happy to work when people are not working there is often really important reason, their own health or they have responsibilities or children or elderly people and the only purpose for imposing work requirements is to

discourage people that would otherwise be eligible from applying the whole strategy around work requirements is not to increase work but to deny people who are eligible of the benefits. >> if you would like to join a conversation with representative wayne mora democrat of wisconsin she will be with us until the end of the program at nine eastern when the house is scheduled to gavel in the numbers are 2,027,488,001 for republicans, 2,028,004 democrats 2,027,488,002 for independence. congresswoman i would like to get your reaction to the doge activities of elon musk and what you've seen so far and where you are on this. >> i tell you doge does exist as a statutory department it does not exist really.

there's nobody operating with them, doge that has been confirmed by the senate that has been appointed by anyone it's a very and morpheus group of people headed i don't know if it's headed by elon musk but they are now denying that he is the head of doge buddies calling all the shots. i want people to understand this is not regular order this is not normal this is not constitutional this is a group of people from my opinion continuing the insurrection that we saw started on january 6, 2021 they reach not only the halls of congress but into the treasury and into the military facility data labor data for knox they have breached our government and is totally

inappropriate and the support of the continuance of the insurrection will been unelected and confirmed by the senate a naturalized citizen not even a birthright person in charge of our government elon musk it is not normal and it is not legal and not constitutional. >> when you say it's not constitutional can you elaborate on that. >> president trump was elected as our 47th president of the united states and he has completely seeded his power and control calling the shots to elon musk. not only that but congress has ceded its role to the president and to the executive branch. it is not legal for the

president to be doing what he's doing to impound funds, article one of the constitution the members of congress it is our job to discern whether or not we make cuts or withhold money based on waste fraud and abuse this is not elon musk's call nim for my stable trade policy act with senator keene, an act that would prevent any president from imposing tariffs on a u.s. ally or free trade agreement partner without congressional consent. and i'll make that motion in just a moment. but let me first just explain what this is and why i'm doing it. next week president trump has announced plans to impose 25% tariffs on products coming into the united states from mexico and canada, our number-one and

number-two trading partners. these tariffs will be disastrous for our economy and our national security. these tariffs will cost the average american household about $1200 a year. they'll raise costs for avocados, appliances, diesel fuel, dog toys, car parts, christmas tree parts, tomatoes and at the key la -- at the key la, i could go on. it'll increase the cost of a g.m. pickup truck about $10,000. even if the tariffs are delayed, businesses are hurt by the uncertainty, which continues to increase costs. president trump plans to follow those tariffs with recicy pro-cal -- reciprocal tariffs on the e.u. imposing tariffs on our allies and partners diminishes our standing in the world appeared

makes our neighbors less likely to help us in the future. it's no surprise that americans think this is a terrible idea. barely a quarter of americans think imposing tariffs on canada are a good idea. more than double that disapprove. president trump has already declared an economic emergency to justify imposing these tariffs on mexico and canada, but my bill with senator kaine would prevent him from ba.abusing long-established national security authorities from following through on further tariff threats against our allies and fta partners. the u.s. constitution gives congress jurisdiction over trade policy and it is time we took ownership back of controlling the ability to impose tariffs willy-nilly on our trusted partners and allies by passing this bill and reining in president trump's costly and danning idea.

-- and damaging idea. and so,mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on finance be discharged from further consideration of senate bill 348 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president. mr. crapo: i rise to object. the presiding officer: i recognize the senator from idaho. mr. crapo: i rise to discuss some issues with senator coons' request to pass s. 3488. senator caoons is a good friend and great ally. i stand to oppose this motion on this particular procedure. first senator coons an i agree with much on trade policy, including the need for the united states to have more high-standard free trade

agreements like the u.s.-mexico-canada trade agreement, or usmca. we should ensure that the commitments in those agreements are respected. the last administration not only refused to negotiate new trade agreements but undermined u.s. rights under them when it waived our intellectual property rights under the wto trips agreement and without informing congress attempted to remove the rights of american investors under the usmca. second, i am agree we should not undertake tariffs actions lightly on our allies or free trade agreement partners. we should, however, take care before we say that all options are completely off the table. in fact, all of our free trade agreements provide exceptions for when parties can remove economic benefits, including on national security grounds. i don't recall anyone suggesting that the biden administration could not impose sanctions on

nicarauga last year because it was a cafta party. instead we recognized that legitimate national security grounds, including nicarauga's human rights abuses, warranted the economic pressure. third, it was only yesterday that we confirmed jamieson greer as the u.s. trade representative to serve as the principal advisor on trade issues. he told the finance committee that he wants to work closely with congress. there are a lot of good things we can do together. for instance, we can negotiate new agreements and reinvigorate congressional executive partnerships on trade. the stable trade policy act is aked accordedly too blunt of an instrument when new options called for including the option of tariffs in some instances. with that, mr. president, i object to senator coons' request and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. coons: mr. president, i understand that senator crapo,

the chairman of the finance committee, a supporter of president trump, has blocked this bill today. is and i hope to find ways to work with him on improving market access and on elevating the quality and the capabilities of u.s. trade engagement with our partners. but i really don't understand why president trump seems so intent on harming one of his signature mrishlts -- accomplishments. i'm disappointed because congress gave the president authority to impose tariffs in the event of a national security crisis. congress did not grant this power to pursue petty grudges against trusted neighbors. how can anyone be angry at canadians? they are the nicest people in the world, and yet here they are working with us, pleading with us to not impose ruinous tariffs that would harm their economy and ours. i'll briefly then just make

again a few simple points. i'm disappointed that president trump isn't doing more to reduce costs. he was elected in no small part because of high inflation and promised it would come down on day one. these tariffs, if imposed, will make inflation worse and hit the lowest income americans the hardest. it will impact american business, american families, and american communities. so i hope that working together with my friends and colleagues here in the senate, we can find ways to lower costs on pharmaceuticals and automobiles and micros chips, but sparking tariffs wars in our region and around the world is not the way to do that. two-thirds of americans already think that president trump isn't doing enough to lower costs. blocking this bill will only accelerate that if president trump continues to act unwisely and bully and threaten our closest and most trusted

partners. we must find a better way forward together. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. i would request that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to

recognize a very painful milestone. this week marks the third anniversary of russia's full-scale invasion of ukraine. over the past three years the world has witnessed the incredible bravery and resolve of the ukranian people as they have stood up to russia's unspeakable brutality and destruction. we have seen and indeed the united states should take great pride in having led an impressive coalition of nations coming together to support ukraine in this fight to preserve its democracy. at the same time an alarming convergence of authoritarian states -- russia, china, belarus, and north korea -- have banded together to enable russia's illegal war of choice. as we mark this milestone, we

are faced with another frightening set of developments. president trump has set his sights on negotiations with vladimir putin to end the war. but before reaching negotiating table, mr. trump has appeared so eager to reach a deal that he has been willing to acquiesce demands for essentially nothing in return. even worse he deliberately excluded ukraine and europe from the discussion. and we've seen this playbook before. most recently in afghanistan. in 2020, president trump, eager to achieve a quick deal, negotiated directly with the taliban and excluded the afghan government from the negotiating table. he capitulated to taliban

demands, including the release of over 5,000 taliban fighters, and blindly agreed to a one-year withdrawal timeline even as evidence mounted that the taliban was not holding up the meager demands in the agreement. i fear president trump has not learned any new negotiating skills in the five years since. the tenets of his approach to ukraine and europe appear to be the same. exclude and criticize american allies, capitulate to our enemies, and withdraw support without any assurance of success. earlier this month munich was the scene of another capitulation when vice president vance and defense secretary hegseth kicked off trump's giveaway campaign to president putin. the historical irony is

unmistakable. since munich is a place that has inauspiciously become a shorthand for the appeasement of tyrants. in 1932 british prime minister neville chamberlain left his meeting with adolf hitler in munich and after surrendering czechoslovakia in exchange for a peace pledge, when he returned to england, chamberlain waved about a piece of paper with hitler's l promise and declared peace in our time. in reality it was the beginning of a capitulation that would lead inexorably to the greatest war in history. hopefully this administration's rush to appease vladimir putin will not lead to the carnage like that of world war ii. but it well may cost ukraine its sovereignty and independence while also undermining the

international order. the the very same order that america and her allies created from the ashes of world war ii. let's review the bidding so far. to begin, defense secretary hegseth's speech in brussels at the ukraine defense contact group set a shameful tone for the american delegation in europe. the ukraine defense contract group or udcg was created by the united states under the biden administration. p has organized and led the international efforts to support ukraine which has enabled the ukrainians to significantly repel the russian invasion and continue the fight to protect their homeland. the united states has led this effort throughout the war. i regret that secretary hegseth's first appearance marked the retreat of america's

role as leader of the udcg. in his remarks, he said, quote, we must start by recognizing that returning to ukraine's 2014 borders is an unrealistic objective. he further stated, quote, the united states does not believe that nato membership for ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement. in essence, secretary hegseth conceded away our most important leverage against russia. his statement, echoed by president trump and vice president vance, have already badly weakened and undermined our negotiating position by gifting the russians with unilateral concessions, all without any apparent consultation with the ukraine or nato allies. against the shortsightedness of president trump and hegseth and

vance's statements are alarming. nato has been the bulwark against russian aggression in europe since 1949. the alliance has more than doubled its membership since its founding. central to the enlargement is nato's open door policy enshrined in article 10 of the north atlantic treaty which aff affirms a core nato tenet that any european nation that demonstrates a willingness to contribute to our collective security and the values and obligations of nato alliance may seek membership. vladimir putin does not get to dictate who may or may not become a member of the nato alliance just as his predecessors could not stop the membership prospects of poland, hungary or germany. to preemptively select

membership to nato only benefits vladimir putin. finally, secretary hegseth declared that europe and nato are no longer priorities of the trump administration. in his words, quote, we're here today to directly and unambiguously express that stark strategic realities prevent the united states from being primarily focused on the security of europe. further, quote, the united states faces consequential threats to our homeland. we must and we are focussing on security of our own borders. i agree that the security of america's homeland is our number-one national security mission, but i reject secretary hegseth's myopic that it is so fragile and strained that it must shift its focus to the

border of the security mission. moreover, border protection is a civilian law enforcement mission. deploying large numbers of military forces to support the border patrol is a gross misallocation of forces and raises numerous legal issues. the administration's shameful claims have been a shock to ukraine, nato, europe, and a democratic world at large. they have provided great comfort to putin and autocrats everywhere, which is a shame. in addition to secretary hegseth's speech, vice president vance took the stage in munich and further eroded our status in the world. he castigated european allies for his perceived grievances with their domestic politics and alleged movements away from, quote, democratic guidance while

at the same time remaining silent on the dictators in russia and belarus who have a free, have never had a free or fair election in the course of their tenure. president trump gave his tip of the hat to autocracy last week when he attempted to revise history by alleging that ukraine, not russia, started the war, and that president zelenskyy was a dictator in this situation. these categorically false statements are either a product of deliberate deceit or historical delusion. president trump even directed the acting u.s. ambassador to the united nations to vote against the u.n. resolution condemning russia's war against ukraine. the u.s., instead, voted en bloc with russia, iran, north korea

and other authoritarian nations, which is a stunning reversal of decades of american foreign policy. this toxic revisionist history has now pervaded his political nominees as well. throughout the week, his political appointees have contorted themselves in order to avoid acknowledging a fact that russia was responsible for starting the war in ukraine. this is something straight out of north korea, where facts, quote-unquote, are the sole purview of the dear leader. we must also note the deafening silence from many of my republican colleagues. many republicans claimed for years to be unapologetic supporters of ukraine, who are outraged by the perception that president biden was not sending enough u.s. support to ukraine. but now they appear to be standing by silently as facts are erased, as the pipeline to

ukraine peters to a halt, at trump administration disbands federal task forces to establish the assets of russian oligarchs and guard against federal election interference and d disinformation campaigns. silence is complicit. we cannot allow this to continue. if we're going down the path of negotiations with russia, we must act to strengthen our hand in these negotiations. and ironically, russia is in a very weak negotiating position. let us briefly review putin's situation. over the course of three years, ukraine has inflicted a staggering cost on russia. putin has lost 200,000 soldiers and many hundreds of thousands more wounded. he has lost hundreds of billions of dollars in military equipment and weapons.

indeed, russia's weapons and logistical stocks are perilously diminished. the closest ally in the war, iran, is weaker than it's been in decades due to israeli and u.s. actions. north korean soldiers, sent to reinforce flagging russian forces, are suffering severe casualty rates. russia has been ousted from syria, and it's wagner mercenaries in africa are struggling to reorganize. the russian economy is afloat but stagnant. any shrewd negotiator should recognize that russia is on the ropes. now is not the time to appease putin. of this is the time to exert maximum pressure to bring him to the negotiation table, hat in hand. there are three things we must do now -- first, we must continue to pressure russia economically. this means strengthening

existing sanctions, identifying secondary sanctions, and bolstering sanctions enforcement and anti-evasion efforts. at the top of the efforts to control the evasion of the sanctions, we should be working with allies to combat the illicit oil trade, including efforts to go on the offensive against the so-called ghostly of aging tankers russia employed to facilitate the export of oil and other sanctioned goods. second, we must work with our european partners to impound and leverage russia's frozen assets. finally, we must ensure, in both word and deed, that ukraine has our support and commitment to working with them to establish a just and lasting peace. however, instead of taking action to strengthen the negotiating hand on any of these

fronts, the administration has shifted focus to the signing of a deal to exploit ukraine's natural resources. much remains to be seen about the shape of this agreement, but we do know it will take years, if not decades, to see substantial returns. a large number of ukraine's rare earth deposits are actually located in ukrainian territory that is currently contested or occupied by russia. i'm not sure how one is to square this agreement with secretary hegseth's comments about the forfeiture of ukraine's sovereign territory. furth furthermore, the deal includes no security guarantees from the united states, which the ukrainians had rightly, i believe, insisted upon. security guarantees are essential to assure ukraine that the united states is not simply

interested in an enrichment scheme, but is committed to the pursuit of a just and lasting peace. indeed, a just and lasting peace must be the final outcome. that is in united states' national security imperative, one that has, at least until recently, enjoyed robust and vocal bipartisan support. we support ukraine because we know that the war on ukraine is not just a regional war. it is the most visible demonstration of the larger existential threat russia poses to our national security. we support ukraine to ensure that vladimir putin cannot achieve his goals, which are counter to our own national interests. we must be clear-eyed about this. if putin succeeds in ukraine, it will be the first piece in his long-stated promise to re-create the soviet empire.

if that happens, if we fail to learn from history and to see brutal and craven authoritarians for what they are, and the threat they represent, we may again find american sons and daughters sent overseas to fight on foreign shores. i urge my republican colleagues, and my democratic colleagues, all my colleagues, to speak up and stand with ukraine, as they have done so for many years, let us continue. with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. and mr. president, i would also -- excuse me. i believe senator klobuchar is here. thank you, mr. president.

ms. klobuchar: mr. president. mr. president, i rise today alongside my colleagues in strong opposition to the firings of scientists, medical researchers, and more at the health and human services. hhs is in charge of everything from preventing disease o outbreaks to making sure our kids are healthy, to ensuring that seniors can live with dignity. it directly touches more lives than any other cabinet agency. that's why the administration's mass firings of thousands of hhs employees are deeply troubling. when a new ceo comes in and wants to see a new direction for

a company, they look at it, they look at all of did the visions, they figure out their direction, they maybe cut a division, they maybe make changes to it, they look at the merits of certain employees, they move some employees to different divisions, and they figure out thoughtfully what's the right way and what's the best way for their company. this is the entire government, but that is not what's happening here. they are firing people across the board, without regard to merit, without regard to function. they're firing some of the newest employees who are eager and excited to have their jobs. they're firing some people who were simply up for promotion, and that put them in a probationary status. they are not looking at what these people are doing or the value they bring to the workforce and to the american pe

people. they're just doing it and getting on tv with the chainsaw. these are people who went into public service for a reason. they are people, in the case of health and human services, who keep us healthy and save lives, who work every day to keep america at the forefront of medical breakthroughs and innovation. it's been our secret sauce. it has given the world the most incr incredible, incredible lifesaving drugs and medical devices, like the pacemaker in my state. that didn't just come out of one company. that came out of a lot of ideas, and that came out of a lot of universities, and that came out of people doing clinical trials, and that came out of a devotion by our country to moving forward. that's how we've gotten these lifesaving cures. that's how we mapped the human genome, so that we are now starting to offer personalized

medicine, drugs that fit people, things that work, things that cure diseases we never thought were possible to cure. that's how our economy has been so strengthened and we've led across the world. you know, i've worked for years to cut red tape, and i know there's more to do. i know there's more we can do to make our government effective. we can do that together and take the ideas from the administration, we can work on it in the next budget, make some changes. i support permitting reform. all kinds of things that we could do. but these mass firings, in the area of medical research? this makes no sense. the health and human services is also tasked with implementing medicare drug price negotiation, which i fought for years to pass into law, along with my colleague, senator welch, from vermont, when he was in the

house. and senator sanders here in the senate. this is expected. we finally passed it. it was part of the inflation reduction act, and it actually says, hey, this sweetheart deal that pharma had with the medicare, in which they can't negotiate at all and the prices are locked in, and so our country, people are paying twice as much as they do in places like canada for the drugs, yet it is our taxpayers that put in the money for the research, or the v.a. which works so well for our veterans, they're able to negotiate and get better prices, but not 50 million seniors. so, what did we do? we finally end the sweetheart deal and passed law. i would have been more aggressive about how many drugs you negotiate. i understand that you start with a group of drugs, presentee soon that helps people who -- pretty soon that helps people who aren't seniors, as we did with the insulin cap of $35 a month. that was only seniors.

but merck and other companies offered it to nonseniors as well because we got it going with the biggest prescription drug buying group in the country, our seniors. this medicare negotiation has ramifications for everyone in this country. however, even though we only did ten drugs at first, the biden administration picked blockbuster drugs, bug drugs so many people take, like januvia, jardiance, xarelto and eliquis. combined, in one year, when this starts next year, no one refuted these statistics, nine million seniors will save $1.5 billion in out-of-pocket costs in the first year alone. and save taxpayers over 100 billion in the next decades. that's just ten drugs. they've now come up with 15 more drugs, including ozempic and those weight-loss drugs, and

passed that torch now, or the voters have, on to the next administration. now it's on them to negotiate these 15, then pick 15 more, and 15 more. imagine how much money we can save. not just for the seniors -- that's obvious -- but for the taxpayers, because we're footing part of this bill. ultimately, it will bring down drug prices, like they have in other countries. but firing the men and women who carry out these price negot negotiations, put those savings totally at risk. you cannot take on some of the world's biggest companies, the pharmaceutical companies, with band aids and a skeleton crew. that's not going to work. i think we all know that. we all know this is really hard work. on top of this, the firings threaten health care for the 170 million american who get coverage through medicare, medicaid, which is so many of our seniors when they're in

assisted living with their long-term care, and people's parents and grandparents, as well as coverage under the affordable care act, including over 2 million minnesotans. medicare provides health care for 20% of the rural residents in my state. you will see similar numbers across the country. more than half of all nursing home residents in our medicaid. i remember when my dad was in assisted living, he got late onset alzheimer's, i got a prays for him -- place for him, and i knew when his savings would run out. and then he would go on to medicaid. and that was a safety net. i actually knew i couldn't keep him at the same place but i knew of a place he could go to, he ended up dying a year before that date happened but there are

so many people in our country that know the exact date when their parent or grandparent is going to be able to have that safety net of medicaid because they've actually run through all their savings. nationwide, medicaid provides coverage for two-thirds home nursing care. where they have put targets on programs that include medicaid, these cuts will be disasterous for people with chronic conditions, including millions of veterans who become sick or disabled as a result of their service. what is this all about? it's about funding giant tax breaks for billionaires. yeah, over two million of that money, that goes to people that are wealthy. people making over $400,000 a year. i'm all for keeping in these tax cuts for people making under $400,000 a year, but i do not know why when you're facing the

debt that our country has, and dealing with people's needs with medicaid and the like, that you would decide to add tax cuts and make permanent tax cuts for people who are making over $400,000 a year. we actually had a vote on this late at night about a week ago where we asked our republican colleagues, okay, well, how about for people making over $10 million a year? that was senator warren's amendment. she said okay, how about if they're making over $10 million. can we agree they should pay taxes, and our republican colleagues for that amendment yelled out no. and then we said, senator kelly got up and said, okay, how about if they're making over $100 million, then we should add more tax cuts? our colleagues voted against that amendment, which said we should not add more tax cuts for

people making over $100 million when our country is facing the debt it has and we've got the needs for people in nursing homes and the need for child care and the like. they tried one more time. senator angus king, independent from maine, he said, okay, how about people making over $500 million, then you could agree with us that she shouldn't add more be tax cuts for those people making over $500 million a year. and, sadly, our colleagues voted no. instead of cutting costs for regular people and their prices and groceries, they're cutting medicaid, which provides health care for 7.2 million seniors, almost 40 million children, nearly two-thirds of nursing home residents and millions of people with rare diseases. this isn't just the numbers. there are moms and dads,

brothers and sisters, friends and neighbors. i heard of one minnesotan who at 10 years old had muscular dystrophy, which makes it harder to compete and complete most physical tasks. but this minnesotan who is now 26 is able to thrive because he has medicaid. he has graduated with a master's degree and has a job and paying taxes, medicaid gave him the affordable health coverage he needed to manage his condition. for him and millions more the cuts at health and human services put their lives and livelihoods at risk. this week is rare disease week, i met with many rare disease patients, they are in town to convene with federal researchers, ph.d. researchers, drug and advice reviewers and advocates. many of them were looking

forward to attending the rare disease event that was supposed to be today. and this year it was going to be a collaboration between nih and the fda because of all the intragal work that goes with drugs being approved. and now it has been canceled because of people here -- that was canceled because the people who did the event were fired. the event of the health and human services who were fired -- they enhanced the well-being of all americans. these mass firings are a direct affront to that mission. the building that housing them is named after hubert hum tri. it -- humphrey.

it had been that way, who is a champion to expanding health care access. inscribe are words by his final speech. he was loved right here in this chamber by democrats and republicans, some of the most conservative republicans mourned his loss and they loved the guy. and this is what he said in his final speech here. the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children, those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly, and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick. and he added, given he had a child in his own family with down syndrome and those with disabilities. the firing of those who care for kids and seniors and those who work on rare diseases and those who are bringing together our

people who work on drugs that are supposed to solve and are solving the problems for these rare disease families and those that are doing the approvals and those that are doing the research and the families that want to talk to them about it, they were all here and they canceled it because just like that, elon musk came in with his chainsaw. those families are not going to tolerate this much longer. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. welch: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. welch: thank you. mr. president, i want to speak about the extreme cuts that have affected the department of health and human services federal drug administration, national institutes of health, centers for disease control. you know, first of all, the doge operation starts out with a premise that it is attacking waste, fraud, and abuse.

and i'm for that. any place that we can save taxpayers money by responsible assessment of what programs are working or aren't, any time we can uncover waste or certainly fraud and abuse, i want to do that. and i want that to be done across the board whether you're talking about health programs where they could be better organized or they could be more efficiently run to achieve the goal of better services for the people you represent, and i represent, for all americans, i want to do that. but how is doge going about it? and we're here to talk about how they're doing it in the department of health and human services under mr. kennedy.

basically they're doing it by sending out firing notices to people. over 5,000 people have been fired, and that includes 700 in the food and drug administration, 1200 in the national institutes of health, and 600 in the centers for disease control. here's the question, and the answer is obvious, if you want to make a program more efficient, do you fire the people first and essentially erode any capacity of that program to deliver the services that the american people need or do you study the organization? do you kick the tires? do you investigate and analyze where the issues are that can be addressed by a comprehensive plan that would include getting

rid of any waste, it would include getting rid, obviously, of any fraud and abuse. but what doge is doing is not that. it doesn't have a plan. what it has is a decision to fire people. so essentially doge is saying that if the -- the higher the body count of the people who were fired, the more the savings will be. well, there's truth in that. you just fire people and they're not on the payroll, you're going to save taxpayers money. but does that mean you're getting waste, fraud, and abuse out of the system or are you just wrecking the program? and it clearly is going to be the latter, you're just wrecking the program because you didn't take the time to examine what's going on and how best to do it. think about it. in the national institutes of health, there are investigators,

there's scientists, these are people who are working on research that's important to your state and mine about diseases, about cures, about vaccines, about families, things that, you know, that american people are entitled to have some confidence and security that we have the best minds addressing health issues and focusing on cures to diseases that all of us could be subject to for the people -- or the people we love that they'll be doing that job. but these people are now just fired. they're gone. and that means, just think about it, nih scientists, that may be -- that's somebody who probably has a ph.d., went to one of our state institutions, it might have been a land grant college in north carolina or a land grant college in vermont, and there was probably an

enormous amount of talent in that person who was able to achieve a ph.d. in scientific research and there's probably a good deal of public investment in the career of that person with the return being that that person is going to be doing research on trying to cure diseases and that person may well have gotten some federal grants, including college assistance or ph.d. investigatory assistance. it could be hundreds of thousands of dollars that the taxpayers have really invested in supporting a person who's become a scientist helping us on very important research that is really good for the american people. boom, they go to work, or they're at home, and they get an e-mail and it says, don't show up for work, you're fired. there's a certain cruelty in a lot of these notices, it also has an assertion that your

performance has been sub par, and we find out that there's been no performance review and in many cases these people who were fired supposedly because of sub par performance did just have a performance review that said you are doing a fantastic job. or think about the food and drug administration. i mean their job is to review, among other things, medications that can provide hief enhancing -- life enbe hansing, pain recan -- live enhancing and pain relieving medications that americans can benefit by. the sooner that work and investigation gets done, the sooner that approval decisions can be made, the sooner cures get to market and to folks in this country. boom, they're fired. again, these people, some of whom do have ph.d.'s, as i

mentioned but others who have been at the fda for 20 years and has the institutional knowledge of how it works. they are getting fired independent of any performance review, independent of any assessment of where do we need more people or where do we need fewer people or what are some of the functions that no longer need to be done versus some functions that we may need to enhance, the staff, to get a better job for the american people. so, you know, what's so bogus about doge is that it is not about waste, fraud and abuse. it really is not because there would be have to be an investigation, a plan. people looking at how the functions are being performed. it is simply a mechanism to justify firing people. and lowering the head count. and as i mentioned, you know what? that will, quote, save money but it will destroy the capacity of

these organizations that all of us agree are doing incredibly important work. it's going to destroy their ability to do it. so it's just manageling the -- mangling the services in the area of health and human services that are so essential to the well-being of the people of this country. by the way, this has a real economic impact in that it's the economic impact first and foremost among those individuals who lost their jobs. but it's a real economic impact because we're eroding the infrastructure of science, of inquiry and of investigation for better health cures. and you don't destroy that and put it back together again overnight. that's what's so wrongheaded about the doge approach to things. body count versus better service, better performance, more sustainability.

mr. president, you couldn't have a worse approach if what your goal is more efficiency, better service, and better outcomes. the other question that is going to be recurring for the american people is the likelihood, inevitability, actually, of massive reductions in aid for medicaid. under the version of the house budget reconciliation act, they have to come up with trillions of dollars in savings. the only place you're going to get that is by cutting medicaid. and we've got a contradiction here because the president says he loves medicaid, but he also says he loves the house bill. and the house bill does not love medicaid. what the house bill does is it attacks medicaid. in vermont, we've got 20% or so, a little more, of our folks

would depend on medicaid for health care. and it's kids from low-income families. it's seniors. two out of three of our nursing home beds are paid for by medicaid. so you're going to have families where the kids are really trying to help their parents. parents need a nursing home and they're going to get kicked out literally. that's what happens. finally what we know is why is this happening? why are these firings on a mass level being made when there's been no study and no plan in place to indicate that that action will improve services or in the long run save money for the american people. it's being done because there is a goal to have a tax cut.

and, you know, that's a fair and square debate. what should our tax rate be? should we have a tax cut? if we do have a tax cut, how much should we allocate? how much goes to billionaires, how much goes to everyday people. but to have that debate without acknowledging that the way you're going to pay for it is by taking away health care for everyday americans, that's not on the level. and that's what's happening here is that there is an agenda. get that tax cut. i happen to profoundly disagree with the tax cut for major multinational corporations. and i profoundly disagree with lowering taxes for billionaires. totally disagree with that. but when it is the situation that we're going to pay for it by taking away nursing home beds from vermonters, from folks in the carolinas, that's really appalling. we should not do it.

so, mr. president, i'm here with my colleagues to defend our commitment to good scientific research, to good cancer research, to good health care access for poor kids and seniors. and to sound the alert that that is what is at stake despite what the president may say about his, quote, love for medicare, what he clearly has as his major agenda item is that tax cut. and i'll acknowledge we can have a debate fair and square about that tax cut, but i think it's incumbent on all of us to acknowledge that the path to the president getting his tax cut goes -- marches right through access to health care in an attack on medicaid. mr. president, i yield back.

a senator: thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. -- the senator from maryland. ms. alsobrooks: thank you, mr. president. i would like to use my time to highlight the attacks currentlying -- being thrown at our federal workers and the unconscionable firings that are taking place. we heard baseless and callous criticisms of our federal workers from this add in, for weeks now -- administration for weeks now. they're wrong and much of what they're built on is a lie and they're dehumanizing. this is in fact a witch hunt. our civil servants are among the best of what our nation has to offer. they serve with no political motivation. many have served for years under democratic administrations and republican administrations. they have one dedication, to

their fellow americans. it's a patriotic calling that they have all answered. they're not faceless villains. they are real people with real stories. people like a woman i spoke with who has served at the department of health and human services for over 35 years. she's been put on leave as a part of the president's executive orders. for her and people like her to be caught up in these partisan attacks is infuriating. the administration claims to be doing this in the name of efficiency. there's nothing efficient about gaining unauthorized access to private data and then blindly firing 5,200 employees across multiple agencies. there's nothing competent about cutting the workforce without any thought about how it would impact operations. this is not efficient. this is senseless.

and this is heartless. nih is based in my state of maryland. and many of the workers there are among the 150,000 civil servants who call maryland home. each one of them has made a commitment to public service. each one of them is a civil servant that i am proud to represent. these abrupt and improper firings have shaken up the lives of thousands of dedicated workers who do not deserve this treatment. and what makes this even worse is that attacking our federal workers doesn't just hurt them. it hurts all americans. the people who rely on government programs to keep them healthy and safe. these aren't hypothetical concerns. these firings will have real world consequences. eliminating staff at nih will delay the development and approval of lifesaving treatments.

cancer patients will have to wait longer for promising new treatments as clinical trials still stall due to shortages, staffing shortages. this will slowly eliminate research and medical intervention and weaken our standing in global biomedical science. cuts to an already understaffed cms workforce will hurt patient care. we will see disruptions in medically necessary care and delays in payments to hospitals and other health care providers. firing staff at hhs will cripple our ability to quickly identify and respond to public health threats. and right now we are experiencing the worse flu season in over 15 years resulting in school closures in at least ten states. we're monitoring an outbreak of e-lolla -- ebola in uganda. we're keeping the track of the growing threat of avian

influenza. without a strong workforce, we will not be able to react effectively. and it's impossible to forget the significant role that nih plays in developing and deploying vaccines and treatments. we are just beyond the clutches of the last major public health crisis. and without a strong workforce, we will not be prepared to face the next pandemic. in the clearest terms possible, these cuts aren't about efficiency. to the american people, it quite literally could be the difference between life and death. they are a detect -- a direct contradiction as you can have of the priorities this administration claimed to set when they took control, to ease burdens on families. instead these firings could add enormous strain to a nation that's already in need of relief. they're irresponsible, they're inefficient, and they're undeserved. what our civil servants deserve

is a recognition of the work that they do every day to make us stronger. what the american people deserve is for us to keep our obligation to ensure their health and their safety. and i will continue to defend them and apply pressure to this administration until it happens. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin .

a senator: i rise to sound the alarm what's happening to our nation regarding lifesaving medical research. in the first month of the trump administration. as many of you know, i am a proud graduate of the university of wisconsin madison law school. ms. baldwin: in many ways i grew up at the university where both of my grandparents who raised me worked. my grandmother ran the costume lab at the theater department, and my grandfather was a scientist. he was a biochemist who spent four decades unlocking the key to how our metabolism works. in large part, thanks to funding from the national institutes for health. my grandfather and his colleagues pioneered breakthroughs that impacted biochemistry around the world leading to all kinds of

developments to keep our bodies healthy. from nutrition and diet to advanced drugs to really so much more. and i share my grandfather's story because it demonstrates why the nih is so essential. as the world's premier biomedical research institution, nih invests in our health. our national security, our economy, and our future. these investments influence our nation's competitive edge. pati patients treatment options, and simply put, american lives for generations to come. research supported by the nih has helped us find breakthroughs for treating diabetes, alzheimer's disease, and substance use disorders. it's supporting clinical trials right now for patients battling

terminal diagnosis for cancer. and in fiscal year 2023, the nih generated almost $93 billion in economic activity, nearly twice the agency's budget. and the engine behind all of it is, of course, researchers and scientists, dedicated scientists like my grandfather who right now are worried their life's work, the work of keeping our loved ones healthy and saving lives is in danger. all because elon musk and president trump are firing nearly 1200 critical staff across nih institutes and centers, halting lifesaving research in its tracks,

indiscriminately and illegally freezing funding from going out the door to academic and research institutions across the country. across the department of health and human services, trump and elon musk have fired more than 5,000 public servants. we're talking about scientists, doctors, researchers, and so many others who are doing this critical work to keep us healthy. and musk and trump are going so much deeper than firing the hhs workforce, which is damaging enough to research programs and puts americans' lives at risk. they are throwing sand in the gears of the nih. their basic grant-making operations to prevent scientists from getting the resources need

to conduct the lifesaving boy medical research -- biomedical research in the first place. for instance, the president has unilaterally fired more than 130 employees at the national cancer institute, many of them scientists. and across the nih, trump and musk have fired more than 160 promise officers, grant management specialists, and other key administrators whose job it is to get grant funding out the door to universities and other research institutions across the country. since president trump took office, his administration has canceled more than 70 nih study sections and advisory council meetings that are the final step in grant approval, and this means that more than $1.5

billion in funding that has been withheld -- has been withheld so far, illegally and in blatant defiance of court orders by this administration. the impact is already having ripple effects across the research community. take, for instance, alzheimer's disease research. the trump administration has stopped tens of millions of dollars from going out the door for alzheimer's research. halting studies, clinical trials, and moving us further from a cure. the trump administration is also terminating entire nih training programs focused on supporting early career scientists from diverse backgrounds and folks that are underrepresented today in biomedical research. and in its endless quest to cancel any program that even

uses the word diversity, the trump administration has even paused research involving women. and make no mistake, we will be feeling the impact of these cuts for decades to come. universities are pausing graduate student admissions because they aren't sure they will have the funding to support the students they currently have enrolled. and what's at stake is not just a generation of talent and our nation's competitive edge, it's also the next breakthrough that could cure cancer or alzheimer's disease. thanks to president trump, actions the united states -- thanks to donald trump's actions, the united states may lose its global competitive edge in biomedical research and cede it to china.

in wisconsin, our universities follow a long-held tradition known as the wisconsin idea. it is a pretty simple philosophy that says the work done at our universities should make an impact far beyond the classroom itself. and it does. from vitamin d to human embryonic stem cells to blood thinners and new treatmentses for alzheimer's disease, wisconsin universities and dedicated scientists like my grandfather have discovered breakthroughs that revolutionized the world of medicine. and more importantly revo revolutionized how we keep our loved ones safe and well. so when president trump and elon musk come after this funding, come after these public servants, they aren't just coming after scientists in classrooms and laboratories.

the impact will spread far beyond those institutions. when they come after the nih, they are coming after patients with terminal illnesses who are right now being turned away from potentially lifesaving clinical trials because of these cuts. they're coming after the next breakthrough that could have helped your loved one battling alzheimer's. they're coming after a young scientist who is living paycheck to paycheck who will not be able to pursue a research career developing treatments to help others get better. now, you may be asking yourself, why are donald trump and elon musk doing this? well, the answer is pretty simple. so they can give tax breaks to billionaires. why are they cutting off clinical trials on cancer

research? so that people like elon musk don't have to pay their fair share. why are they withholding funding to find a cure for alzheimer's disease? so big corporations can pay less in taxes than the average american family. the cuts we're seeing right now will damage americans' lives for the next generation, all so the wealthiest americans can get wealthier. we must stand up to this illegal freeze on funding, this assault on the federal workforce, these billions of dollars in cuts that will take decades to undo. our health and the health of our loved ones depend upon it. mr. president, i yield.

mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the chair recognizes the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i come to the floor today to make a simple point -- the law cannot be in the eye of the beholder. the law is the law. but yet again we are seeing the trump administration break the law. many of us have been closely following the trump administration's illegal freeze of congressionally appropriated funding, including of foreign aid, not just from the state department but also from usaid. the african development foundation, inter-american foundation, and other independent agencies -- each of those agencies' existence as an independent entity has long been enshrined in statute and reaffirmed by bipartisan majorities in both chambers year after year in annual appropriations.

our appropriations law also explicitly requires the administration to notify and consult with congress before undertaking any efforts to reorganize, realign, or downsize foreign affairs agencies as the sweeping reductions in force issued last week and many other brazen actions we've seen clearly seek to do so. the administration's actions, including firing the usaid inspector general and the state i.g., will make waste and fraud more likely and will prevent even foreign assistance programs allegedly supported by the administration from being effectively implemented. and it will also effectively block hundreds of millions of dollars for other programs enacted into law by bipartisan majorities. needless to say, the trump

administration has not consulted or notified congress about these changes. that is in violation of the law. but this week they took a further step. the trump administration has chosen to spit in the face of the law and congress expressing total disdain for a court order mandating the foreign aid they had illegally withhold. when told they must comply, secretary rubio personally approved the termination of 90% of the usaid programs virtually overnight. they terminated more than $58 billion in multiyear programs and have told us they have no intention of utilizing those funds. the termination of those awards is absolutely not what congress

intended. congress appropriated the funding on a bipartisan basis with the express intent to see those dollars spent. this is not trivial stuff. we're talking about resources that often mean the difference between life and death, resources that are imperative, not just because they are lifesaving but because they are an investment in our own national security and in u.s. businesses. let's take ebola, for example. usaid helps other countries around the world respond to and contain ebola outbreaks. that's pretty darn important because there is no known cure for ebola. thanks to the good work of usaid, along with our international partners often supported by usaid awards, we have never had an ebola outbreak here at home.

yesterday at president trump's cabinet meeting, elon musk even admitted that, yes, we want to fight ebola. of course, then he said, accidentally cut usaid's ebola efforts that had been restored with no interruption. yet, mr. president, we know for that fact that is a lie. u.s. companies implementing these programs received termination notices yesterday. any basic accounting of usaid's capacity to stop outbreaks abroad shows quite plainly any disease prevention efforts supported by the u.s. at this point are merely symbolic. you cannot break the foundation of public health systems overseas and expect that it won't have a damaging impact here at home. this makes america less safe. if ebola, march bur, or any --

marbur, or any other infectious disease makes it to our shores, it will be because of elon musk and trump, who are smug about their own ignorance. everything from resources to help prevent kids from getting malaria, to aid for refugees in war-torn places like syria where it is directly in our national security interest to foster stability, and it's not just resources for faraway places. this will hit in blue and red states, in indiana, in florida, in texas, and other states have had their partnerships terminated. mr. president, american students from across our country that are now participating in exchange programs overseas are impacted by this. to put it into perspective for

my colleagues, 5,800 of 6,300 usaid grants and contracts are being terminated. that is nine out of ten. and that is to mention 4,100 of 6,800 state department grants and contracts. and the only detail we have is from the ngo's faith-based organizations and u.s. contractors sending these termination notices to our committee. we do not have one shred of detail from the state department, not one shred. the scale is staggering and it shows you that this administration's scheme is to bulldoze right through restraining orders and court orders so by the time the law does catch up, the damage will have been done. compliance is easy at this point. what's left to fix once you've burned everything to the ground? this administration knows full well they are breaking the law. they are showing us all in plain

view their goal is to do irreparable damage, as much as possible as fast as possible. well, i'm here today to sound the alax because this -- the alarm because this illegal power grab is in direct violation of congressional intent and appropriations laws. the supreme court should act with haste to bring this administration to account and ensure that money congress appropriated gets to where it was intended. whether it's president trump, elon musk or the secretary of state calling the shots, congress has no visibility into doge's actions, frustrating our ability to write funding bills when government funding runs out in weeks. by ignoring the law and congressional intent, the administration has created chaos. they have eroded trust in the united states, and they made way for russia and china to take advantage of this leadership

vacuum. no one should fall for this thin veneer about efficiency while this administration racks up legal fees, overdue payments to contractors, pays people not to work, and forces a global recall of staff. we have a process, mr. president, to avoid this kind of chaos. the president submits the budget request to congress. congress holds hearings publicly, writes and passes bill, they become law. we have explicit notification and consultation requirements for foreign assistance funding for a reason. mr. president, do i need to march down to the national archives? do i need to make sure we still have a constitution? do i need to check whether the laws we passed are even still there or did they start running them through a shredder? because as blatant and as

persistent as it has been, no one, no one should expect this kind of lawlessness to fade away. i cast my votes and i speak on this floor as a voice for the people of the state i represent, washington state. i was not elected to let the president of any party or some unaccounted billionaire to decide how their tax dollars get spent. every senator here should speak loudly with one unified voice. congress hold the power of the purse. no president can unilaterally abolish an entire agency or ignore our appropriation laws. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 3:00 p.m. stands adjourned until 3:00 p.m.

writing aut the senor she says she is nothing short of a

rising star in our party. she is dedicated her life t our cotry. she will chart a ph forward. slated to speakhortly after the president's address. a preview on c-span. taking fewer calls on social media. c-span now our free mobile app. c-span.org. >> it is not just an idea, it is a process, a process shape by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few guarding against basic principles. it is where debates unfold, decisions are made in the nations court is charted. this is your government network. this ispa