minister, four prime minister's and five president called me over the last two days and they want to work it up if they want to get it worked out. and if you get also, they are talking money but the money is less important than the deaths. we're talking thousands of young people a week pick people to widely care about ukraine young people? why do i care about -- not all young but they are pretty young. ukraine is running a little bit low and there getting older. they are recruiting older people. it's a very, very sad thing that's happening over there and we want to get it finished. we want to stop the deaths. >> isn't any room left for testing to make it you before midnight? >> no room left for mexico or for canada. no, the tariffs, they're all set. they go into effect tomorrow. >> just to follow-up on my colleagues questions. to see what you think fast amounts of fentanyl have poured into our country from from

mexico and as you also from -- >> you can continue watch this on a website c-span.org. we are going to lead this teacher for over 45 your commitment to covering congress. the u.s. senate is gaveling into continue work on president trump's nomination for education secretary. confirmation vote on linda mcmahon to serve is set for 5:30 p.m. eastern. senators are expected to vote whether to begin debate on legislation to ban transgender student athletes from competing in girls in women's sports at schools that receive federal funding. live coverage of the u.s. senate is here on c-span2. order, the chaplain, dr. black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal lord god, the fountain of wisdom, we thank you for those

who guard our fragile gift of freedom. thank you for senators, who more than self, their country love, who daily make courageous decisions that keep us free. lord, use the members of this body to ensure that this precious gift of liberty will remain inviolate for those who come after us. thank you also for the brave souls, stout hearts, and indomitable spirits of those who have paid the ultimate price for the privileges we enjoy. sustain and comfort the families they have left behind.

during this blessed moment of talking to you, we ask that your presence will follow us throughout this day. and, lord, we continue to fast and pray for the people of ukraine. with we pray in your mighty name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty smal and justice for all.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of education, linda mcmahon, of connecticut, to be secretary. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: the senate will soon vote to confirm linda mcmahon to be secretary of education. i know that some people feel that the secretary of education should have extensive experience in a school system. however, it is important to

remember that education is still mostly a state and local responsibility. there is no such thing as a federal superintendent of education. the u.s. department of education doesn't run any schools. our many public school systems in this country do not report to washington, d.c., and washington also has no authority over what is taught in our schools around the country. the job description of a secretary of education is to manage a bureaucracy who runs a number of funding programs. by all accounts, linda mcmahon did a great job running the small business administration in the last trump administration.

i have no reason to believe that she cannot run the department of education. i think she understands the difference between state and federal role in education. i also expect is that she understands the difference between the and legislative branches when it comes to the ser seriouses policymaking of education, congress passes the laws and holds the powers of the purse. we also have the responsibility to make sure that laws are faithfully executed by the executive branch of government. i expect linda mcmahon to respond to all the congressional inquiries in a timely and responsive manner. on another subject, mr. president. this day, march 3, is world hearing day.

approximately 38 million americans report hearing loss. meanwhile, an estimated 29 million american adults could benefit from using hearing aids, so i'd like to speak to you about the importance of hearing health and treating hearing loss. hearing and balance of the body are deeply connected. even mild hearing loss puts you at greater risk of a fall. hearing aids can help prevent that risk. treating hearing loss can lower the risk of dementia. untreated hearing loss has been linked to loneliness and isolation. it can cut you off from those around you. historically hearing aids have been unaffordable and inaccessible. i've heard from iowans who told

me about their struggle hearing and how they want hearing aids to hear their kids and grandkids, but they held off on buying hearing aids because they were so expensive. now that brings me to the reason that senator warren and i led a bipartisan effort to pass and implement legislation called over-the-hearing-aid act. we did that in 2017. that law made over-the-counter hearing aids available in a safe, effective and accessible option for adults that had no greater than mild to moderate hearing loss. i'm also working to ensure that seniors have access to a range of hearing and balance health care services in my bipartisan medicare you aedology access

improving act. so i encourage americans to take steps to protect and care for their hearing as well as monitor for signs of potential hearing loss. 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.

crossroads and our history. my efforts to secure song and invasion with ukraine. the increase and defense spending and the recognition of the count in europe on strength but also a rediscovery and national security. the demands we have to make along the foundation.

the choices we made must use the process and our investment from every part of the country. a partnership with ukraine and they are experts. [chanting] that means you paid skills and are strongest possible position of these but looking innocent

civilians. i asked our relationship now what happened in the meeting? if nothing happening in this house and what? i do want to be clear security and technology they operate. there are and always will be indispensable. if anything, they are totally unserious.

while some may like the simplicity, ukraine. it is an opportunity. the discussions we've had your support of nato i will from the understanding and work together for lasting ukraine. i also went on the commitment to the use and it is sincere.

they cheered at the top of their voices. [chanting] and unwavering support for the people ukraine. we result to move together for lasting peace in ukraine. equally committed to this and the leaders of nato and the prime minister of canada ally of this country.

[chanting] responsible for 3000 ukrainian troops and as close as they are, the urgency. grants and allies will work loosely with ukraine on a plan to stop. discussed directly with the united states and clear principles. ukraine flowing, the atomic pressure on russia doubling down

on this record. 2.2 billion pounds and the british taxpayer and russian assets. the insecurity of ukraine. and there that is absolutely vital and a deal. and ready to defend a deal and ukraine.

they have signed agreements before and what to expect will play a leading role and together with others playing from the

air. mr. speaker, europe is the heavy lifting. and i want to assure this may take none of this like. and it is more heavy in the service of defense and security and i feel very strongly and the national security. it affects our nature. e sus opi quash be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, the senate will vote later today to

confirm linda mcmahon to be secretary of education. mrs. mcmahon is an accomplished businesswoman and public servant. she's known for her role in building world wrestling entertainment, better known as wwe, from a small operation to a large and thriving enterprise. she has used her success to give back and make a positive impact. mrs. mcmahon led efforts to promote reading and civic engagement through wwe. she spent 16 years on the board of trustees for sacred heart university in her home state of connecticut. she served on the connecticut board of education. and in his first term, president trump tapped lindsay mcmahon to lead the small business administration where she was known for listening to small businesses to make the sba a more effective agency. she will bring valuable experience and incredible work ethic, and a passion for education, to her new role

leading the department of education. mr. president, she has a big task ahead of her. let's acknowledge that. in january, the nation's report card revealed american students are still struggling to make up ground lost during the pandemic. reading scores among fourth and eighth graders declined again. after falling in 2022 and 2019. one third of eighth graders are reading below a basic level, the highest proportion ever recorded. math scores showed modest improvement, but still remain below pre-pandemic levels. and there's a widening gap in student performance. mr. president, this should concern all of us. as the son of two public school educators and father of two daughters who went to public schools, i know this problem isn't going to be fixed by washington bureaucrats. it's going to be fixed by good teachers, administrators, school boards, and parents, the people closest to the students and most

invested in their success. mr. president, the federal government provides less than 10% of funding for schools in this country. the other 90% of funding, money that keeps the lights on, pays teachers and buys new textbooks, well, that comes from state and local governments and from private sources. while the federal government provides a small percentage of education funding, it's responsible for an outsized amount of the bureaucracy and mandates in education. more often than not, it's these policies that are holding back school districts from innovating and ultimately improving the education that they provide. mr. president, i'm glad that mrs. mcmahon recognizes education is not one size fits all. states have different needs. school districts and individual schools have different needs. and every student has his or her own needs and aspirations.

so, i'm glad mrs. mcmahon plans to work in a way that empowers those closest to the student, because they are in the best position to do what's right for that student. when i met with mrs. mcmahon, we had a long conversation about south dakota's unique education needs, including our tribal schools. i look forward to working with linda mcmahon to limit bureaucracy, empower state and local governments, and let good teachers do what they're best at and what they love to do, and that's to help students succeed. mr. president, most americans are familiar with title 9. that was the landmark legislation designed to create equal spaces and opportunities in education for women. title 9 is particularly notable for the effect it's had on women's sports. with its requirement that federal funding recipients create equal athletic

opportunities for women and girls, title 9 paved the way for the women's athletic programs we see today at colleges and universities and high schools around the country. now the gains that have been made through title 9 are under attack. around the country, we have seen men, biological men who identify as women, take up spaces and medals in athletics meant for actual women. swimming, track, volleyball, soccer, basketball. this is happening across a range of sports, and mr. president, the problems here are obvious. first of all, there is the physical danger that can be posed by men participating in women's sports. but this is about much more than any physical danger. of this is a matter of fairness

and equality. title 9 was created to give women opportunities and spaces denied them, to give women the same opportunities that men enjoy. that's not possible when men are involved in women's sports. biologically, men possess physical advantages with greater muscle mass and aerobic power, which means by and large men are likely to dominate in women's sports, taking wins and medal opportunities away from women. this isn't hypothetical, mr. president. this is actually happening. let me quote from an august 2024 united nations report on violence against women and girls which addresses the participation of men in women's sports, and i quote, policies implemented by international federations and national governing bodies, along with national legislation in some countries, allow males, who identify as wichl -- as women,

to compete in fee fail sports cat -- female sports categories. in other cases this is not prohibited and is tolerated in practice. the replacement of the female sports category with a mixed sex category resulted in increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities, including medals, when competing against males. according to information received by march 30, 2024, over 800 female athletes in more than 400 competitions lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports, end quote. let me repeat that, mr. president. according to information received by 30 march 2024, over 600 female athletes and more than 400 competitions lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports. now, that, as i said, is from a

united nations report. this isn't some myth conservatives dreamed up. this is happening. mr. president, i could go down a list of examples here in the united states -- the female runner who did not qualify for the women's 55-meter final because a biological male qualified in her place. another female runner who resigned herself to second place, at best, because, as she said, she knew there would be no winning against the biological male who finished a full minute and 22 seconds ahead of the second-place female finisher. the male pole-vaulter who won the women's competition with a vault that exceeded that of the second place female finishers by six inches. the women's basketball team that saw nearly half of its season's points scored by a male. and that's just a sampling of

the stories out there. of course, mr. president, the female athletes in question aren't just being robbed of their potential places on the winner's podium. they're also being robbed of the opportunities that might be associated with that place. things like college scholarships as one female runner who was robbed of multiple wins by a biological male described the situation, and i quote, it robs girls of the chance to race in front of college scouts who show up for elite meets and to compete for the scholarships and opportunities that come with college recruitment. i'll never know how my own college recruitment was impacted by losing those four state championship titles to a male. when colleges looked at my record, they didn't see the fastest girl in connecticut. they saw a second or third place runner. mr. president, this isn't fair. girls should not be having to

compete in races that are stacked against them. women deserve their own athletic opportunities, opportunities that are not taken away by biological males who have their own spaces in which to compete. they deserve a level playing field, and mr. president, this is not a niche position. a 2025 "new york times" poll found that 79% of americans, including i might add a majority of democrats, is believe that biological males identifying as women should not be allowed to play women's sports. and that's not the only poll that found a huge majority of americans believe women's sports should be for actual women. mr. president, the beginning of february, president trump took action to protect the original meaning of title 9 and ensure federal funding would not go to schools that allow men to compete as women.

as the father of two former female athletes, i am grateful for his commitment to upholding fairness and common sense. mr. president, my dad, who was a division i athlete, came back to my hometown to coach women's sports, girls basketball and track. it would have been incomprehensible to him to think biological boys would be competing against his female athletes. but mr. president, unfortunately, there's no guarantee the next president will uphold president trump's measure. so today, we will consider legislation from my colleague, senator tuberville, a former high school girls basketball coach, to permanently reinstate the original intent of title 9 and ensure women, and women only, participate in women's sports at federally funded educational institutions.

i would thereof think that we would easily pass this legislation, that democrats and republicans would unite and stand with a vast majority of american peoples to protect -- of americans to protect opportunities for women. give than every single democrat voted to block this bill last congress, i have to say i'm concerned about today's outcome. so this will be a time of choosing for democrats. they can stand with women or they can stand with a radical transgender ideology that would see women and their opportunities sacrifices to make way for biological males. democrats can't have it both ways, mr. president. it's either one or the other. i had a professor in graduate school. he used to say that some things

are just intuitively obvious. well this, mr. president, is one of those things. if the democrats vote to oppose this legislation, they'll have to answer to the women and girls they vote to disenfranchise. i hope democrats will join republicans to protect women and women's sports and vote to proceed to the protection of women and girls in sports act. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

ability of the others and it is natural. in the strong support for ukraine. and it is at the table working with the conversation talking to

ukraine and this attention in the details at the moment with no guarantee of success. >> i welcome the prime minister the security in the summit of leaders, can they sure the house for a just lasting convinced president trump in both allies

separate and step up to the plate much more. >> that discussion i think it is right and we have to do more on security guarantees and across europe we have to step up on this. >> thank you, mr. speaker. it is great and it is criticism

of he does need to go further. we do shipped from this and would echo my points on this and make difficult decisions on defense spending but we will not try to play politics and will support them. >> you sent a message and

ukraine in the oral defense spending with confidence in this house. i invited them but maybe we should do this more often. >> pulling together all of our allies in ukraine last week and met with the front line city and the daily attack and forced. he told me it's been canceled at short notice and there energy.

that code from russian assets or our own paid. >> we will work with security and they go forward. >> they are a very size and remind them the kinds. and they are the most professional in the world

getting as good as it gets in 1939. >> can i congratulate for setting the record straight but president zelenskyy just like the nation represented we can see firsthand there's nothing the russians will not do.

our european allies in ukraine. >> i can get that assurance don't forget about the middle east for israel and on behalf of the government to reverse sides.

and it is at speed. >> whether or not he will when he disrespects. in this they increase without increasing the spend with the budget.

for the lengthy and they would wish the prime minister on them under this leadership. for president trump to discuss military aid. support the ukraine for his support of this issue.

and now it is the time to abandon this. and it is a opposition they should reconsider. can i ask you consider whether they should bring forward the 3% before the next election?

and it is what it will allow. >> the prime minister should be commended in the white house last week. urgency the gdp of russia two billing dollars and it's more than seven times, 50 billing dollars and that should add to the deterrence and work being done. it is being the measures particularly on sanctions.

and we need to step up in the last few days in that regard. and not partners for the ongoing.

>> we welcome this defense spending. i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: tomorrow president trump will address a joint meeting of congress for the first time since taking office, the oath of office. it's my honor, my true honor to welcome seven incredible new yorkers tomorrow who will tell the story of what's under threat by donald trump's agenda, from medicaid beneficiaries, to disabled veterans fired from their jobs at the v.a., to fired usda workers, to home health care workers. it will also be my profound honor to welcome orna nutra, mother of omr nutra and eti

chen, both killed by hamas thugs on october 7. it wasn't until over a year later that omir's family learned he was murdered by hamas on october 7. ruby's son etai was alsoing taken hostage and murdered by hamas on the border with gaza on october 7. alfa months of fighting -- after months of fighting for his return, etai's family learned he was also killed by hamas on october 7. i spoke to etai's dad and orna many times between october 7 and when they were notified their children had been murdered. it was vicious cruelty of hamas, whose viciousness seems to be

part of their way, not to let the families know what had happened. over and over again, especially ruby chen, who i got to know well and we have brooklyn roots together, would wonder is he dead, is he alive? is he alive, is he dead? and hamas kept them dangling, as i said, viciously and cruelly. but omir and etai's family endured is beyond comprehension, but i'm inspired by their perseverance, by their resolve by calling for the safe return of the remaining hostages and return of the bodies of their loved ones. we must bring all the hostages home now. but it's an honor, true honor to welcome all of my guests, the nutras, the chens and of course the others to the capitol.

now tomorrow americans can expect donald trump to say many things that are false, including perhaps russian information. what we will not hear from donald trump, however, is the truth. so today let us speak the truth about donald trump's agenda. in a little over a month donald trump, elon musk and republicans have set in motion the greatest transfer of wealth in favor of billionaires we have seen in modern times. on the one hand, you have elon musk calling social security the greatest ponzi scheme of all time. you have doge firing over 7,000 staffers from the social security administration. you have donald trump threatening trade wars with our own allies. and you have republicans cutting $880 billion from medicaid to pay for their billionaire tax cuts, money that funds things like community health centers, money that funds people who

desperately need health care, money that funds parents, elderly parents of middle-age couples who the parents are in nursing homes. all of that is at grave risk. together these actions will mean diminished wealth for working and middle americans and more money in the pockets of the billionaires. because, after all, when the wealthiest man on earth calls social security a scam and doge fires 7,000 social security staffers, that's a clear sign social security benefits are in danger. donald trump just said a few minutes ago that he was going to keep the tariffs against canada and mexico. when donald trump starts a trade war for canada and mexico, it means rising costs for produce, for groceries, for cars, even for ordering takeout and happy

hour. it is unbelievable what they're doing with these tariffs. it could mean that restaurant owners in states like mine could be forced to close down as food prices go up. it means that building new homes will be more expensive, and those costs will be passed down to would-be home buyers. the bottom line is very simple. one of the greatest things americans complained about in the past election was the high costs of so many p different kinds of goods and products, and now donald trump is making it worse because he just said that he would not, he continued the pause on canada and mexico's tariffs, but would let them go into effect. please, mr. trump, rethink your plans to start a trade war where

the average family will get slapped with an average $2,000 extra in costs. families will suffer, businesses will suffer. you said you'd bring down costs on day one, donald trump. yet here, one month in you're doing something that would raise costs significantly for the american people. and when republicans cut medicaid, it means health care costs will go soaring for tens of millions of kids, seniors with is disabilities. why are republicans doing this? why are they creating all this havoc, this cruelty and this harm to the american people? simple. to cut taxes for billionaires and have the american people pick up the tab. make no mistake about it, this is what a transfer of wealth looks like. a way from working americans and into the bank accounts of the billionaire club.

meanwhile it's not much better in terms of foreign policy and our own security. our allies across the world will look at america and see a country in decline under donald trump. they will watch in horror an american president continue to curry favors with war criminals like vladimir putin, while publicly berating friends, brave, valiant people who have risked their lives and have seen he so many of their countrymen die in a valiant fight for freedom like president zelenskyy. he gets berated, putin gets praised. what is going on? rest assured that nobody on earth was happier with what happened last friday in the oval office than vladimir putin. our allies will also watch in horror as donald trump and pete hegseth make america less safe. the world less safe.

there's no other way you can look at it when they give putin a free pass to launch cyberattacks against the u.s. while we disarm our own cyber operations against russia. can you believe that? letting putin attack us and we're saying we won't attack him in terms of cyber warfare. what is going on? the world's turned inside out and upside down all to the detriment of the safety and security of america and its people. tomorrow as donald trump addresses our nation, our western allies will wonder about the future of nato. so these are difficult and dangerous times, and donald trump is taking america, our democracy, and the world down a dark and deeply troubling path. but finally and most importantly, the american people will not take donald trump's agenda lying down. you can see frustration boil over in town halls in georgia, in kansas, in oregon and

everywhere in between. republican leaders are telling their members to cancel town hall meetings. they're running waep from the people because they know how badly the people have been hurt by what they're doing. maybe they don't want to do it, but they're forced to because president trump wants tax breaks for billionaires. you can see the frustration in the polls too. a majority of americans believe that donald trump has ignored the number-one issue they care about -- inflation, rising costs. you can see the frustration online. last week i joined a zoom. over 3 h,000 new yorkers got -- 3,000 new yorkers got on the zoom ready to mobilize on republican attacks on medicaid. people are ready, they are energized. you can also see it in the courts. the american people can rest

assured that whenever the administration breaks the law, we'll take them to court. it will be one of our best tools to protecting our country and putting a stop to the worst abuses of donald trump's agenda. and for the most part the courts are rejecting much of what donald trump has tried to do. the more donald trump pushes our democracy to the limit, the more americans will push back. organizing is never easy, but it works. it works. that's what we'll continue to do. we shall organize here in the congress, organize in the public square, organize in court to protect the country we all know and love. nothing that donald trump says tomorrow will change that fact. now on social security. something terrible is happening that democrats have long warned about. americans' social security benefits, one of the most sacred things people have, one of the most popular federal programs that has ever been created,

social security benefits are coming under attack. last friday elon musk claimed that social security is the biggest ponzi scheme of all time, and now the trump administration has announced massive cuts, more than 7,000 workers, to the social security administration. these cuts could affect workers who process checks, answer customer service calls, work in field offices across the country. the cuts could very well delay social security benefits. it means longer times on the phone to resolve issues. everyone knows how frustrating it is, especially seniors who need their checks and they haven't gotten them and they want to get on the phone and find out what happens and now have to wait for hours. it could mean local offices like in my home state close down. it could mean more americans get sicker, go hungry, get their checks far too late. you don't need to scratch your head and wonder what donald trump and doge are doing when

they fire social security staffers and call social security a scam. they're getting ready to go after people's benefits, plain and simple. let's be clear, if americans can't get their checks in time because staffers have been fired, that is a cut in benefits. if americans can't get an issue resolved over the phone because there's nobody to take calls, that is a cut in benefits. if field offices are closed, if trouble shooting is halted, if checks come late in the mail, that too is a cut in benefits. the only scam going on here is the one where the president of the united states would try to fleece social security from the american people to help pay for tax cuts for their billionaires club. democrats will not let it happen. and finally, on linda mcmahon, the nominee for secretary of education. i'm very proud that every single democrat will vote against ms.

mcmahon. ms. mcmahon's confirmation would be a slap in the face to students, parents, teachers who care about our public schools. americans believe in public education. they don't want to see these cuts. they don't want to see the department of education abolished. if the trump administration follows through on cuts to education, schools will lose billions in funding. and what's going to happen, mr. and mrs. average american taxpayer? your property taxes will go up. the least popular tax probably that there is. the american people do not want to see cuts to education and the consequent rise in property taxes, but that is the danger of confirming ms. mcmahon. before republicans vote for ms. mcmahon, you should remember slashing funds for schools, students, parents and teachers all for the sake of billionaires tax breaks is a very bad idea. senate democrats know it's a horrible idea.

the american people know it's a horrible idea. today we'll see where senate republicans stand. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. quorum call:

mr. schatz: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. mr. schatz: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent -- excuse me, let's start over. i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: thank you, mr. president. the price of everything is going up, outbreaks of measles and bird flu are killing people, airplanes are almost crashing or actually crashing, and falling

out of the sky, tens of thousands of federal workers, including veterans, are being laid off, and donald trump's government purge -- in donald trump's government purge. and so, obviously, it's a monday and we've got two votes tonight, and so we're going to address one of those critical issues -- oh, no, actually, we're going to do something totally irrelevant to 99.9% of all people across the country. now, let's just start with the basics, which is that everyone has and deserves human dignity, without stipulations or preconditions. not just the people you like, not just the people you understand, not just the people you agree with.

every human being is god's creature, and everyone, especially in the united states of america, has the right to be left alone. that is what freedom means, right? you've got to be left alone to live your life however you want, within the bounds of the law. and so, what republicans are doing today is inventing a problem to stir up a culture war and divide people against each other, and worse, they're trying to distract people from what they're actually doing, which is, at a time when people are finding it harder and harder to afford the basic necessities, at a time when diseases we eradicated almost 20 years ago are making a comeback and killing kids, at a time when people are getting on flights and saying an extra prayer or breathing a little heavier, you

have donald trump and the republicans saying, you know what -- let's cut taxes for billionaires. let's take money from regular people and the things they rely on -- social security, medicare, medicaid, the affordable care act -- let's take hundreds of billions of dollars from there and shovel it into the pockets of the richest people to have ever walked this earth, because that's what we need and that is what people voted for. republicans are focusing on the wrong 1%. tr trans people are not the reason people can't afford groceries or health care or housing. the other 1%, the top 1% economically, is responsible for a lot of that, and that's who republicans are desperate to help. and they're doing it by going after some of the most vulnerable people in our society. i will be joining my democratic colleagues in voting no on the

pending legislation. madam president, i ask consent that the following remarks appear in a separate part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: madam president, we are witnessing one of the worst starts to any presidency in generations, and it's not even close. there is the possibility of negative growth in the first quarter of this year, which would have been unheard of, so bad economically that the secretary of commerce is trying to concoct another way to calculate gdp. if you wonder how bad the data is, you have got the secretary of commerce going, well, this whole gdp thing, we've been measuring it wrong for all of these decades. there is no comparison for the staggering, staggering levels of incompetence and lawlessness coursing through this administration. and regular people are paying a

steep price. tomorrow night, the president will try to rewrite his record and recast blame when he addresses congress. i want to go over some of the worst things he's done that actually hurt people, because unless you're a billionaire, life has gotten harder, not easier, over the last couple months. number one, he's actively raising the price of everything. he is actively raising the price of everything. after specifically promising that he-week-old bring down prices -- that he would bring down prices on day one, he's gone out of his way to raise them. the price of eggs up 15%. coffee prices at record highs, the price of everything from tomatoes to strawberries to clothes to cars and toys and homes and home building is starting to go up, starting tomorrow, because trump is picking a needless fight with our largest trading partner with tariffs. prices will skyrocket, businesses will be hurt and people will lose their jobs.

number two, not a week into his second term, trump illegally froze federal funding for all 50 states. all 50 states, with one monday night memorandum, the white house locked states out of portals for medicaid payments to housing assistance, schools, child care centers, rural hospitals, v.a. clinics, were left wondering if they'd have to close their doors or lay off staff. almost a month later, the taps are not fully back on, as a result of the freeze, and trump's other executive orders, hundreds of billions of dollars, continue to be withheld from states and communities where they belong. these are taxpayer dollars. these are dollars appropriated by this branch of government, the article 1 branch of government. so, if you don't like how appropriated funds are going to be spent, there is a mechanism

for an executive branch to do something about it. they can propose a new budget, around they can either sign or veto a new appropriations bill. but that's not what they did. they just acted as though they could cross out things they found objectionable, and it's not even as though they did that in some methodical way. they had a bunch of kids, literally kids, control f. oh, gender? kill that. native? kill that. oh, climate? kill that. that's how they figured out what they were going to cut. number three, trump is illegally firing tens of thousands of government workers, many of whom are veterans. and he's not done yet. these are people who dedicated their careers to public service, and in the case of veterans risked their lives to protect our country. they're like the rest of us, bills to pay, kids to feed, parents to care for.

they're being discarded. this is the biggest mass firing of veterans in the united states' history. number four, no one stands to benefit more from this ransacking of the government than billionaires. which is no surprise, considering it's being led by the richest people on the planet. eliminating the consumer financial protection bureau, created in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis specifically to protect people from fraud and deceptive lending practices, or dramatically shrinking the irs, which means refunds will be delayed, and tax fraud will skyrocket without proper scrutiny. none of that benefits a regular person. none of that benefits a regular person. but it's great news if you're a billionaire trying to wriggle out of paying taxes, or a shady lender looking to defraud people. number five, if all of this

wasn't enough, trump and the republicans are looking to cut taxes for billionaires and make regular people foot the bill. that's not unusual for them, cutting taxes for billionaires is kind of their thing. they like it. it is their reason for being. but it's alarming nonetheless in the brazenness of how they're going about doing this. they basically want to cut money that goes to regular people and book that as savings, right? so whenever you do a tax bill, if you're doing it right, it pays for itself, which means you have to have something on the side of the ledger where you're bringing in more money, and another side where you're cutting revenue, then it adds up to zero, nets out. deficit neutral. the problem is they can't really figure out how to deliver this $4 trillion or so tax cut to the wealthiest corporations that ever exited, and in a deficit neutral way. so they're committing arson

within departments, then trying to book that as savings to pay for a tax cut. now, it is true that -- well, all political parties have a tendency towards exaggeration. and so, you'd be forgiven if you hear this, you go, well, that's a democrat saying this is what the tax policy is, and maybe it's not exactly like that. but i want you to understand that what's happening in the u.s. house, as they negotiate over this big tax bill, is exactly that. they're demanding more and more cuts from the affordable care a act, social security administration in terms of the staffing of the place, from medicaid, where they want to turn it into block grants, which is a euphemism for medicaid cuts, and then they want to take all of those savings and not reinvest in some other part of the government, right? not put it in the department of education. not give it to low-income

individuals so they can climb out of poverty. they want to take trillions, trillions of dollars from you, and give it to them. madam president, i ask that these final remarks appear in a separate part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. s mr. schatz: thank you, madam president. since taking office just over a month ago, donald trump has rapidly obliterated america's standing as the leader of the free world. decades of hard work, extraordinary sacrifice, and painstaking bipartisan diplomacy to lead our allies and partners against the forces of autocracy and repression have been crushed. and america's reputation as the indispensable nation is in at that timers. -- is in tatters. it started with the illegal dismantling of the united states

agency for international development, and continued with the unlawful elimination of virtually all foreign ass assistance, and culminated this last weekend, friday, with the oval office meeting with ukrainian president zelenskyy last week. trump has undermined american values and interests at every turn. this is not a doctrine that somehow puts america first. past presidents of both parties, in different words and through different means, aggressively pursued american interests. and i have to say, on the specific question of how usaid operates with the state department, you hear secretaries of state of both parties saying, hey, it would be great if usaid and the state department were better aligned. so i'm the top democrat on the s-fobs committee, i stithe sat down with chairman lindsey

graham and said i think there's opportunity to do bipartisan work here in reforming the foreign aid enterprise. a constructive conversation. that was two days before all hell broke loose at usaid. all hell broke loose at usaid. trump froze all foreign assistance, then moved to illegally shutter usaid, which is responsible for implementing most of our foreign aid. none of it was about achieving efficiency or rooting out waste. it was about trump trying to wish away whatever parts of the federal government he doesn't like, in violation of the law, in violation of the foreign assistance act, in violation of the constitution, in violation of the prompt payments act, in violation of every appropriations bill that we've ever passed as it relates to usaid, since the original foreign assistance act. like this is not actually a close call. you can hate usaid. i don't. i think it's great.

or you can think it needs reform. i also think it needs reform. but the way to enact a law is to enact a law. the way to enact a law is not to just break the law and see if a judge will impose parameters on you. trump literally fired the people whose job it is to identify and combat waste. that is not the kind of thing you would do if you were interested in combating waste. there was a person at usaid who brought a bunch of factual memorandums to senior staffers who said, this is the consequences of what you're doing. it says you may have a waiver program in place to allow lifesaving aid to continue, but you send everybody home and lock them out of their e-mail.

they sent everybody home and locked them out of their e-mail and then we're to believe that this waiver process is somehow going to push through the billions of dollars for lifesaving aid that are needed and expected. and so what is happening? and these big providers, i won't even name them because they're so terrified, good organization, no political valiance, if they do, they tend to be christian organizations doing god's work all across the planet. they are laying off people, they are literally closing up tents. people are flying home, back to the continental united states or hawaii or alaska, where ever they live, and just saying, we're out of here now. so babies are getting hiv-aids from their moms now because the pep far funding is frozen.

don't let anybody tell you pepfar is frozen, it is unfrozen. why? because as i recall it there's about 70 people left and this is a tens of billions of dollars enterprise. so how the hell are you going to consider a waiver for 5,800 individual programs when you have 70 human beings, not all of them in this particular bureau, to try to process the waivers? and so what i've been told is, hey, if there's anything especially important to you, sir, let me know. and i'm thinking i'm not here to petition the king for mercy. the way this works is everybody operates within the law. we lost the election. democrats lost the election. we lost the house, we lost the senate and we lost the presidency and we lost it all fair and square. but now it's on republicans to

operate fair and square. and what's happening at usaid, i understand this is not the most compelling issue for people back home in hawaii or people back home in alabama or people back home anywhere, it is not a burning desire, but people do understand following the law or not following the law. and what is happening right now is plainly unlawful. they're violating multiple statutes. and the consequences -- the consequences are not some like arcane discussion about legal principles or the rule of law. millions of people will die. i'm still new enough to the senate, i'm not that new to the senate, but i'm still new enough to the senate where i don't say

anything i mean to say on the floor. and so i want anybody who is listening to understand if we don't resolve this, millions of people will die. millions of people will die. because of an illegal decision made by this administration. and so we all have to decide, are we going to be stand up for some basic american values? what are those american values? we are the good guys. when people see that usaid logo, they should say, awesome, the americans are here. when they see that food grown in georgia, processed in the mid-atlantic states, grown in kansas and other places, when they see that food arriving to

prevent malnourished kids from going in the wrong direction, they should say, i am so espionage that america exists -- i am so thankful that america exists not just as a country but as an idea, we are the good guys, and as part of being the good guys, even if you hate something, if it's a law it's a law. there are a lot of laws on the book that i hate. the global gag rule, first one that comes to mind but there are probably a dozen more that i could come up with. it literally never occurred to me to ask joe biden or barak obama or donald trump to violate the statute and see what the judge says. and so we, as the article 1 branch, and we, as patriots, have to wrap our arms around this problem, get the aid enterprise back up and running

for humanitarian reasons, for geopolitical reasons, for moral reasons and for reasons related to what we are here to do. if this enterprise needs to be reformed, count me in. but this is a law-making process, not a law-breaking process. i yield the floor. mr. durbin: madam president. the presiding officer: the democratic whip. mr. durbin: madam president, i want to thank my colleague from hawaii, and if he can spare 30 seconds, i'd like to tell him a story. years ago i went to india to the dusty villages, not the big cities, just to see what usaid was doing. i heard about it, i wanted to see it. the most graphic example i can remember from that experience was when they showed me a bag of

some grain supplement and on it was written usaid from the people of the united states of america. what they were doing with this was making a lunch for the children in the village. i don't think your kids or mine would have touched it. it looked like some odd rice crispy bowl that was held together with water, and they sat with little tin plates with this rice crispy bowl on it from the usaid package to eat their lunch. but before they eight their -- ate their lunch, they paused and i asked what is going on. and the guy with me, said they're saying thanks to the united states of america for giving them food to eat. i said, for goodness sake's, it's 1% of our federal budget that we spend in this manner to try to give kids around the world to survive.

there's other things that we do, but the basic example of those kids sitting in the dust of that village eating that rice crispy bowl touches my heart to this day. i also want to say a word about what we're going to vote on today, an issue that's going to come before us. i might ask my colleagues if they could answer the following question -- how many athletes in -- ncaa asked r- atsdz -- athletes are there in the united states? i asked mr. baker, former governor of massachusetts that questions. he said over 500,000 -- 500,000. i said of all those athletes, what percentage are transgender? oh, fewer than 10. i said fewer than 10%? no.

fewer than 10 total out 500,000 are transgender, yet we're going to come to the floor with a proposal from senator tuberville to vote on this issue. he's going to attempt to bring to this floor a bill that targets transyouth. this bill would revoke federal funding from schools with athletic programs that allows trans-girls to participate in programs for transgirl. this could subject women and girls to physical inspection by an adult if someone from an opposing team accuses them of being transgender. think about that for a second. your daughter, someone in your family going to play a sport and someone on the other team challenges them, that's not a little girl, that's a transgender boy. this bill that we're about to vote on gives authority to someone to make a physical inspection of that little girl

if someone from the opposing team accuses them of being transgender. does that sound a little extreme to you? well, it sure does to me too. this infringes on the privacy of gerls and women and -- girls and women and is a dangerous use of government to target girls and their families. put yourself in the shoes of these families for a moment. imagine being the parent of a transkid and telling your child they can't play on the same sports teams as their friends at school because a politician said they couldn't. coincidentally, madam president, i had a hearing on this subject and in 2023, a teenager named harley walker, a 16-year-old transgender girl from the state of alabama, spoke with an unwavering voice in front of the senate judiciary committee about what it was like to be one of the children who were affected by these anti-transgender laws. harley walker, from the home

state of alabama, enacted a law threatening her ability to access the care she needs to be happy and healthy. she told the committee, quote, i want all of you to look at me here and now and hear my words, i am a very happy 16-year-old. i have wonderful friends who accept me for who i am. i'm active in my school's debate team and other extra curriculars. i'm trying to be a teenager in america, same as any other teen, but i keep having to jump through hoops that other people in my age group don't have to. i'm here in front of this committee instead of summer vacation to make sure that my rights aren't taken away. it's that person, it's that important, and we're going to vote here to give someone unspecified the right to physically inspect a girl or a young woman if the other

opposing team accuses them of being transgender. my goodness. is that what we're here about in the united states senate? tomorrow night members of congress and guests will gather on the floor of the house to hear the president on the status of our nation. this annual address traces its roots back to the founding fathers, but i doubt they would recognize their beloved country today. with president trump and elon musk acting unrestrained, we are barrelling down a path to a constitutional crisis in the judicial committee on which you serve often, we had nominees to serve in important positions in the department of justice. the question asked to them was very basic. would you advise a public official in the united states of america to follow a court order? just that simple. to follow a court order. and they himmed and lawed --

hymned and lawed. -- hawd. john and kennedy of louisiana said, yes, you either follow a court order or resign your office. it is that basic. but if you listen to those three witnesses, there's a serious question of whether that would happen. it's a question as to whether or not there's a check and balance on the executive branch if they will not live by the findings of the court it troubles me and it continues to trouble me and it's at the heart of the concern of our constitution. madam president, i'm going to have a guest at the state of the union address tomorrow night, dr. elizabeth sockel. she is from -- my daughter was treated at her hospital. it is one of the best on god's green erltsdz. for more than a decade, she has

been a pediatric oncologist, she treats young children with neuroblast toema, the leading cause of cancer death for children 1 to 5. her work, which includes clinical trials on brain cancer research is funded by the national institutes of health. the nih is quite simply the premier medical research agency in the world. it provides over $38 billion in research funding to all 50 states, including yours and mine, studying everything from pediatric cancer to dementia, alzheimer's, diabetes care and heart disease. breakthrough research from nih makes a difference. you know all the ads you see on television about the drugs, you can hardly pronounce the names, people skipping through a field of flowers feeling better because of the drugs.

99% of the new drugs, all of them, 99%, started at research at the national institutes of health. if they're good and they're important, you can credit taxpayers for creating an agency that does the research. that breakthrough research has made a difference in the lives of thousands of people. yet, this is one of the agencies, national institutes of health, that president trump is dismantling through a series of abrupt illegal devastating funding cuts, gag orders and mass firings. as a result, his work on neuroblastoma in kids is in serious danger. dr. sokol does the work to make america great, offering families hope. you don't think these families think it's great if she can find something to cure their child? donald trump and elon musk are trying to stop her. it sounds like a rash political

statement but it's true. at the same time, dr. sokol's hospital, lurie's children is staring down massive cuts to medicaid for lifesaving treatment of critically ill children. medicaid is the lifeline for children's hospital. if we go through with the planned budget we hear from the house, the cutbacks of 14.5% in medicaid funding will dramatically hit american hospitals. rural hospitals will close. children's hospitals will close. perhaps will be shut down. -- programs will be shut down. medicaid is their lifeline. it covers nearly half the kids in this country. if you slash med said funding for lurie children's in chicago, cincinnati children's in ohio, children's hospital, pennsylvania, you are harming lifesaving treatment for kids with cancer and other serious conditions. for as long as i can stand and speak, i'll be standing and speaking in support of nih funding and the work of people like dr. sokol.

she's my guest tomorrow night because i want my colleagues, when we soit down together for a -- sit down together for a light dinner before the address, to meet this nih researcher and hear from her firsthand what the cuts of elon musk and donald trump are doing to children's research in america. surely we are better than that. the last point i want to make is this, madam president, today is a special day in the state of illinois. and no other state that i know of today. it is comes mere -- kasmere day. he was a polish patriot who decided to help america in the revolutionary war. he came over and his military experience led him to create the u.s. salvalry. he was in the battle of savannah and severely wounded and died. he served our country as a patriot even though he was a polish person, not an american. we take that pretty seriously in chicago where there are more people of polish ancestry than any other place on earth except

for warsaw, poland. we're pretty proud of that fact and today we're proud of the fact that the president of poland came to chicago. he and his wife were given a warm welcome at the polish national museum. i recall the time -- it really wasn't that long ago -- when finally the iron curtain came down and we had a question they asked. how are we going to protect the nations that used to be part of the warsaw pact, the nations that used to be soviet republics? what is going to protect them if they want to aspire to democracy and move to the west. we came up with the obvious answer. there is only one alliance that can protect them, nato, north atlantic treaty organization. because in the 80 years now that it's been in existence, it's done its job of avoiding world war iii and strengthening the countries in the alliance because we stand arm in arm next to one another. as i said today, it was a poll las can i -- polaski moment. we stand together again for the

future of both their nations. i believe in nato and i don't know what we'll do without it but now we have to consider it. this new president just a few weeks into his presidency is threatening the very future and existence of nato. if we walk away from it, if the united states disengages from nato, the question is whether or not europe can stand on its own feet. i think they will eventually but in the meantime, countries like poland, the baltic nations and many others are vulnerable to putin's aggression. what he did in ukraine three years ago and even before that, he will do again. smaller nations don't have a prayer in fighting him. i am saddened, shocked, stunned, at what happened in the oval office last week with president zelenskyy. to have that display on live television breaks my heart. to think that this situation is such that we would humiliate our ally in ukraine and at the same

time talk about the greatness of vladimir putin i just find disgusting. people are no students of history if they buy into that thinking. for the longest time we stood with the people of ukraine. do you know what the briefing was when they -- they called the senators down and the intelligence agency says, let me tell you what happens when finally putin pulls the trigger and invades ukraine? they'll last between three days and two weeks. that was t. two weeks if they're good. and then it will be a gorilla war. well, they were certainly wrong. here we are three years later and the ukrainians are still fighting. how many ukrainians have died so far? we can't come up with an accurate figure but we know 46,000 have died. 46,000 have died fighting putin who invaded their country. and this president calls the head of the ukrainian country zelenskyy a dictator and says he actually invaded his own country. what in the world is he talking

about? these people have been fighting to the death, millionshave been displaced and -- millions have been displaced and have been standing up for the values we cherish in this country. to walk away from them and subject their leader to what we saw last friday in the oval office is disgusting, humiliating, below the dignity of the united states. i stand behind ukraine. maybe that's why i'm wearing this tie today. i stand behind ukraine because i believe those people are fighting for the very values that we treasure and they stood by the united states and they said thank you many, many times to me and to others. we need to stand behind nato and ukraine and stand for the values that are important. hitching our star to vladimir putin is a fool's errand. it is a disaster waiting to happen. i hope to goodness we don't reach that point. 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. i think about social security.

i think everyone should think about what it means and family lives. i know what it meant in my parents lives. my mom taught second grade at age 70 and then she finally retired and it was social security and some retirement savings that kept her going. she was able to then at the end of her life be in assisted living. my dad got late onset alzheimer's. my dad also worked until he was pretty old. when he was in the assisted living, i knew exactly when that medicaid day was because his savings ran out. he died a year before he had a go on medicaid. it just shows i know those dates , i knew how much money was going into social security, how much was from savings career. he got married three times. was not a lot of savings left by the time he ended his career.

so, 73 million americans rely on social security for at least part of their income. think about that. it is the majority of their income. men and women at the social security administration the local district is a lot of our we all know this and you probably know this from your own parents or grandparents, they rely on being able to talk to people. they bring in the papers and there can be a lot of confusion for dealing with it. trying to figure out what happened to my husband's benefits. what happens to my brother who is now in assisted living. i do not know what to do. they come to our offices all the time and who do we call. we call the locals in the thurible to go over there meet with them, we do. this is a daily occurrence for so many seniors. they are not just cutting off

the threats for medicaid and social security. when i manage an office i made a bunch of changes. work for mandy effective government. when any businessperson comes in and wants to make some changes they look at the old picture. that is not what this is. the social security commissioner put it you will see the system collapse if this keeps on. i do not see that happening.

the number social security and look at the number. look at it will be really affected by the tariffs with our farmers and our ranchers and minnesota canada our biggest trading partner. a 25% tariff and the fact that it can have rural america. to me, this is just a one-to punch in one week. yes social security medicaid on the line for rural and then you have these tariffs coming in. thank you. [inaudible question]

not in the hughes way that she is going after. everybody wants efficiency. social security getting their it systems up to speed and working better. so people can get responses more quickly, more efficiently. that is not what he is doing. all of the people that allow social security work. think about this. it is confusing enough and it is supposed to go to some machine to figure out when your husband dies. just not capable of going through that. they call social security. they have a right to give social security benefits and in this world maybe not the tech world of wherever they come from, but certainly in our world taxpayers

best way to have them get their benefits that they have earned efficiently as working with people in a real way. >> the latest numbers are social security delivered 99.7% of retirement benefits accurately and on time. this is an agency where we are happy to finance stuff. >> you want to deal with abuse you fire the inspector general. >> there are changes you can make on how much people are attached at the $400,000, making more than $400,000 a year. that would literally write the system for years and years to come. that is one way they can do it but that is not what they are talking about. [inaudible question]

>> we are looking at a number of different things. the only one who wants a shut down right now is elon musk. nobody else wants to shut down. we are all working to get this done. in my opinion they search room cr. our committees are capable of getting this done with a short-term cr and ready to go to work. [inaudible question] >> yeah. [inaudible question] >> ideal. if they let this many people go and do not get checked out, i think the assessment is right. what is the final goal here? to privatize social security? that would be a huge disaster. they don't have people to write the checks, you are looking for this disaster. >> the point really is if you take the system today with the suburban kind of statistics like

97%, 99% doing it accurately and then you start hollowing it out, which is essentially what they are doing, you hollow it out for the private sector this is kind of the history of these kinds of efforts. [inaudible question] >> i think the white house normally requests are completely inadequate. again, the solution is in front of us. telling our community to get to work. [inaudible question]

[inaudible question] >> i really hope so. northern border state. we depend on creating partnerships with canada on a broad range of products and things. not only that, we are already seeing our northern communities that rely on tourism from canada dropping significantly because of the way that they are being treated. having a huge economic impact. >> we have tried so hard to expand our market and done a pretty good job and our trade with canada. that is why you see better infrastructure. shutdowns of the border.

we did everything we could to open it up as soon as possible. this is a crazy way to handle our allies. he is literally reaching out to russia at the same time that he is putting a 25% tariff on canadian goods. i know what will happen for our farmers. we have some of the fertilizer and things like that if you look at how much that adds to a cause for an acre of corn or an acre of soybeans. it is an unbelievable market. this has been one of the crown jewels of american economies. the fact that we are able to export agriculture and have free trade back and forth, there are always things we can do to improve it. it was negotiated by mexican trade agreement under president trump. he was always proud of that trade agreement. that is a place to do it.

not with this across-the-board 25% tariff. when they are billing at hockey games, that's a big deal of minnesota, because that is an example of tourism on steroids when we've got all the trade that we do all the time with canada. >> i cannot imagine we've covered members of congress. >> businesses, farmers, they are all hearing it, they just are not saying it out loud. >> i will go do my rural radio interview. >> before we leave, real quickly , coming over here we were getting the information that manufacturers look like they are responding really badly to this latest round. >> one more question. [inaudible question]

>> it will resignation. when seniors and people that rely on social security call because their disability check or social security check is wrong and they cannot get through, they will be furious. [inaudible question] >> well, with the layoffs and office closures we are already starting to hear from people having trouble getting through. [inaudible question] >> yeah. if you kept that many staff personnel and offices -- >> this is hollowing out the program. you are reducing staff. making it harder for people to get information. this is the prelude to privatization. >> thank you all

coming up here in the senate there will be a couple of votes at 5:30 p.m. eastern. one nonconfirmation of linda mcmahon to serve as u.s. education secretary. the other voters on whether to ban transgender student athletes from competing in girls and women sports at schools that receive federal funding. and looking ahead to tomorrow night president trump will address members of the house and senate. the first address the congress of his second term. there are two ways to watch on c-span paper review starts at

8:00 p.m. eastern. followed by the president's speech in a democratic response delivered by senator. and we will take your calls and reaction. here on c-span2 you can also watch the president's speech beginning at 9:00 p.m. eastern followed by live reaction from lawmakers and guest in our studio. all of this also live on the free c-span now apt and online at c-span.org. right now, we are waiting for a senator to speak.

just weeks after 10 -- seven. facing down the president of then harvard and mit, she grilled these leaders. [cheering and applause] and interrogated them because not one of these individuals was willing to state unambiguously that it is wrong to call for the genocide of the jewish people on their campuses. because of the spotlight she held to shine on these institutions, two of those university presidents resigned. [applause]

you also may remember our next speaker for another hearing in which she probed the will during ambiguity of the president of my alma mater northwestern university and the face of indisputable anti-semitism on that campus. she waved a copy of adl campus anti-semitism report card. asking how an f was acceptable from one of the most prestigious universities in america. in both cases, congress worked closely with adl and with her and her team specifically behind-the-scenes sharing information, alerting them to problems in doing what we could do together to be back anti-semitism. let me tell you, from personal experience, she may have been

one of the busiest people on capitol hill, but she answers every text, she replies to every e-mail and she takes every call and always listens with an open mind. and once confirmed by the u.s. senate, she will take that commitment and tenacity to the united nations a place with a long history of anti-israel bias and anti-semitism. this woman she is fearless, she is ferocious, she is a fighter and she is a friend to our community. she is exactly what we need to bring some common sense to a un system that seems to specialize in nonsense. ladies and gentlemen, it is my honor to welcome to our stage the u.s. representative for new york's 21st congressional district the former fourth ranking republican in the u.s.

house of representatives and our next u.s. ambassador to the united nations, congresswoman elyse. [applause] ♪♪ >> thank you. thank you so much. thank you to adl for your tremendous leadership on combating anti-semitism and a special thanks to jonathan for the invitation to speak today es senate is in a quorum call. es ms. baldwin: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. baldwin: madam president, i rise today in strong opposition to any attempt by the federal government to meddle in decisions about who can and cannot participate in school sports.

simply put, it's not for the federal government, it's not their place, to tell state and local sports leagues across this country how to do their jobs. this is a decision for local communities, where players and parents can participate in that discussion at the local level. this is a decision for sports leagues to thoughtfully craft policy that actually takes seriously what is best for all players, not blanket mandates that will undoubtedly have unintended consequences for the safety of all students. i for one trust our states, our leagues, our localities to make these decisions, without interference from congress or the president. for years, we have seen them do it thoughtfully and carefully. they have done what is best for the children, in consultation with parents, teachers, coaches

and communities members. this is exactly how this type of policy should be created. the republicans are now saying that they actually know better than these local sports leagues. the president is saying that he knows better than parents what is good for their children. president donald trump and my republican colleagues have inserted themselves into this discussion, tying the hands of leagues who are actually focused on the best interests of our children. and as far as i can tell, it's just to score political points and stir the pot of the culture wars. i'll close with this, too often in this debate it gets lost that we're talking about real people. it's clear that my republican colleagues, when they casually deh

dehumanize trans americans in their attack ads, forget or simply do not care that they are talking about real people, often youth, often children who already do not feel welcome in their communities. this legislation tries to send the message that certain kids are not welcome in little league or on the basketball court, and really that they are not welcome in school at all, beside their peers. what a heartbreaking message to tell a child. no american, especially those who are already vulnerable, should be demonized and picked on so that politicians can win elections. period, full stop. and at the end of the day, while republicans are focused on playing politics with children's

sports leagues, i'm focused on the issue that i hear from my constituents every day. i am focused on lowering household costs and taking on the big corporations that are price gouging families, at the grocery store and at the pharmacy. and i'm focused on growing our made in america economy and making sure that everyone has a fair chance to get a good-paying job. i am focused on ensuring that people can access high-quality health care and protecting medicaid. i'm focused on the people of business which is and their needs, not stepping on their right to decide what is best in their own local communities. i yield the floor.

mrs. murray: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. i got my start in politics fighting to protect a preschool program. i am a former preschool teacher. i'm also a former community college educator, and i am also a former school board member. so i don't mess around when it comes to making sure every single one of our students in every corner of our country has access to quality public education, one that leaves them prepared for the future and opens the doors of opportunity wide. it's not a responsibility i take lightly. it never will be. our kids are the future of this country, and the department of education is really at the heart of how we make sure they are set up for success. but donald trump and elon musk want to rip the heart out of

public education in america and abolish the department of education. well, not if i can help it, and that's why i believe we need a leader at the department of education that actually believes in the mission of the department of education. we need a secretary of education with a really deep understanding of how to use this crucial position to strengthen educational opportunities and outcomes for every student in this country. we need a secretary of education who will put students first, not billionaires, who will stand up for our kids, every single one of them, even if it means standing up to donald trump and e elon musk. and, mr. president, on every single one of these counts, linda mcmap fails to make the great. i'm sorry to say my concerns have not been alleviated.

far from it. i asked her in our confirmation hearing about the every student succeeds act. that is the law i negotiated with republicans to finally fix the no child left behind and provide more flexibility tower states and -- to our states and schools while ensuring flect for our tax dollars. she couldn't name a single requirement of that law. not one. how is she supposed to enforce our education laws when she didn't even bother to study up before her confirmation hearing? i'm fighting for public schools. it is painfully clear that mcmahon's plan is in lockstep with trump's agenda. they are going to let public schools get robbed blind as the richest people in the world suck money out of our schools and communities that immediate it the most. they're going to cut off funding that directly supports our students and teachers and send

it straight to the pockets of unaccountable private and for-profit k-12 schools. and on standing up for our students, standing up to donald trump, linda mcmahon got it backwards. when i asked her about making sure schools get the money we, copping, passes, even -- congress passes, even if donald trump and musk try to block it, she made it it very clear she would not stand in their way. but it gets worse because p when it comes to trump's mission of destroying the department of education, she's all too ready to grab a hatchet and get to work. the irony is while trump and musk talk about eliminating the department of education, they're trying to roof the federal government even deeper into the schools than ever before. they talk about how schools and parents know best and then they threaten schools if thee don't

do what they say. apparently ms. mcmahon thinks, why should we have a department of education if trump and elon musk can tell schools what they can do and what they can teach? let's be clear what it will mean if trump, musk, and mcmahon have their way and try to turn the department of education into something that kids read about in our history books. there are 26 million k-12 students from low-income neighborhoods who could see their schools lose federal funding, lay off teachers, or even close. there are 9.8 million students at our rural schools that count on federal support, which could face similar challenges. there are 7.4 million students with disabilities who could see the idea program upended, cutting off support that state and local taxpayers will need to provide. there are 6.6 million students who get pell grants to help them afford college or enter the

workforce or further their careers who would be impacted by the chaos of abolishing the department. and there are 8.1 million high school students and 3.3 million college students who are served by our career and technical education programs that are administered by the department of education. trying bollish the -- trying to abolish the department or even taking a wrecking ball to the critical work it does will hurt our student whose face homelessness. it will cut off federal aid to students who want to pursue a higher education. it will undermine the enforcement of the rights of students with disabilities. it will reduce assistance intended to lift up students, not getting the support they need. we can -- weaken protection for students, scrap evidence-based research that helps us know what is working, for whom, and how, and it will leave for-profit colleges free to relationship off students and families which

we have seen happen in the past and we can't let that happen again. so the fact that ms. mcmahon has not opposed trump's grand plan to abolish the department of education is not just a red flag to me, it is a blinking, glaring fire alarm. it means she doesn't fully understand what the department does and how devastating it would be to abolish or she doesn't care. either way, i have to say i find that disqualifying. so here's my message to everyone and like any good preschool teacher i'm going to make it short appeared simple. we cannot have a secretary of education who doesn't believe in having a secretary of education. it's kind of common sense. i mean, why would we have someone in charge of the education department who thinks it should not exist, who doesn't care if we have a department focused on getting our students in schools the support they need? so, madam president, let me finish with this -- i still have in my office a quilt that my kids in my preschool made for me on the

very last day i taught preschool. it is hung prominently on the wall of my biggest meeting room. it is a beautiful patchwork and when i look at it, i remember the little hands that made each one of those squares. i think about those little heads with big, curious minds and a world of possibility before them. i remember the responsibility that we all felt to make sure they were leaving our preschool ready to succeed. i wonder how many of those children that made those little, small squares now have kids of their own, and i reflect on how the decisions we make in education today, the policies that we fight for, the people that we confirm or reject here will set at course for our children and our country for years to come. there are two clear courses ahead of us with this vote -- one where we have a department of education that continues to

work to support every student and give them a bright possible future or one where we don't, one where every kid is on their own, one where lights are turned off and doors are shut and opportunities are closed -- unless you happen to have the right zip code or the right money. i know which future i'm going to vote for today, the one where we live up to our responsibility and all of our kids can live up to their fullest potential and pursue big dreams. i urge my colleagues to join me today in voting for that future and against linda mcmahon for secretary of education. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. mr. tuberville: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. tuberville: madam president, today we have a very important day for women and girls across

this country. the third time is a charm. this is the third time that i've had a vote on this bill. the other two times this failed because we have had almost zero democrats help to support women and girls in sports. over the past four years women's sports at all levels has been under attack. since the beginning of time, people have agreed that sex is assigned at birth and determined by god. but under the biden administration, you had people claiming that men can get pregnant. pure, absolute insanity. but it didn't stop there. they weren't content just to erase gender norms that have been accepted for thousands of years. no, they wanted to allow

transgender men to participate in pwomen's and girls' sports. this has been happening at schools all across our country. we have women's' teams in some states that are all boys. let me say that again. we have women's teams in some states participating on the high school level that are all transgender boys. no opportunities for girls or women to participate on the team. young women have been foursed to -- forced to compete against men and even share locker rooms and shower time. and on top of that your taxpayer dollars are paying for it. thankfully president trump just signed and executive order saying no more. no more federal money, any state that alouse to happen -- that allows this to happen. but you have to understand, this only lasts as long as president

trump is in office. so we need this vote, which is going to happen in around an hour, to pass so we can make this into law. this executive order that he signed can be reversed, so we're going to continue to fight some states that are even not going by the executive order, like maine, some in michigan, some in new jersey. some say we're not going to go by that law, even though the president of the united states says that men and women can't participate on the same team. that will end up going to court, so we'll see how that happens and what the answer will be. but the big part of the problem we've created an unfair playing field where different states have had different laws impacting women and girls everywhere. this is not only confusing, but it is very, very dangerous. congress needs to act on this to

protect women in sports to ensure title 9 protections are preserved. my bill that we are voting on today in about an hour, the protection of women and girls in sorts act, would make sure women's rights to equal competition, equal scholarships, safe locker rooms and that they all are protected. this legislation has already passed the house just about a month ago. with two democrats actually supporting it. i appreciate the support of a all -- of all my republican colleagues on this. you have all joined me in championing this very important cause for the past three years. i especially want to thank leader thune for hanging and bringing this bill to the floor here in the united states senate. this will be the third time. it is hard to get a bill on this floor, but it is so important, and he understands that.

also i want to thank my friend and former colleague, senator joe manchin of west virginia, who was the only democrat in the last few years to support this when he was in the senate. unfortunately, my other democrat colleagues have been radio-silent on this very issue, despite the fact that a recent poll shows 67% democrats do not want men in women's sports. 67%. so, i'd like to make the case to eat and every one -- to each and every one of my colleagues today on this important issue. as most of you knows, i spent 40 years as a coach. what you may not know is my first job wasn't in college, but it was coaching high school girls bipartisan. -- girls basketball. i don't want to date myself, but that's about the time title 89 started -- title 9 started, and it was implemented most of it

during my tenure as a girls coach. i saw firsthand how the immediate difference was made through title 9. before title 9, a lot of schools' college women's athletes didn't really exist. you had very few sports. you might have had basketball, you supply had track. but you didn't have volleyball, you didn't have soft ball. you didn't have anything else. when title 9 came about, we started more women's sports. after title 9, was enacted, things started to change. for the first time young women i coached had equal access to facilities, resources, scholarships, and all kinds of competition. i saw these hardworking young women go to start successful careers and become leaders in their communities. and a lot of it was because of their opportunity to play sports at every level.

i still keep in touch with many of these young girls. they're not young anymore, but i'm proud of them for the success that they have had. looking back on it now i wonder if they would have had the same opportunities if we had not had title 9. would they have had the same success if they had to it compete against male athletes? one of the most frequent talking points i've heard from the other side on this issue is that it's not a big deal. it isn't impacting that many women. that's not true. at least 900 medals that belong to women have gone to men just over the last few years, of men competing against women. in pennsylvania alone, 66 female athletes have lost placements to male participants since 2020. now how sad is that? for each woman, the medals that

went to men, there are potentially hundreds of other women who lost out on that same opportunity, not to mention the hundreds of girls who perhaps did not make a team at all because they didn't have a spot. you only can have so many on a team. or how many young women who missed out on a scholarship because that man or biological boy took that scholarship? it's not fair. say no, this is a minor issue impacting a few americans. that's what the democrat, my democrat colleagues are saying. only a few. i took the liberty of looking up how many women and girls participate in women's sports in some of my democrat colleagues home states. more than 77,000 girls participate in high school athletes in the state of

georgia. in michigan, 114,000. in virginia, 164,000. new hampshire, 17,000. pennsylvania, almost 150,000. new mexico, almost 20,000. minnesota, 98,000. arizona, 120,633. and don't tell me it's not going to affect these states when today my democrat colleagues come on this floor that represent these states and vote against this bill. it will affect it and it will affect it for years. so as you can see, men competing in women's sports has had a negative impact on a lot of different girls across this country. but you know it's not just trophies. it's about playing time. it's about learning and being on a team, learning how to win, learning how to lose. but going back to what i said earlier, there are entire high school teams that are women's

teams that are nothing but transitioned biological boys. and because of that, you've got the young girls sitting in the classroom or going home or in a p.e. class that don't have that same opportunity. so it's the principle of the thing. title 9 has always been about protecting women. you know, last week my wife suzanne and i were proud to welcome our first granddaughter, rosie grace, about five or six days old. we want her to have the same opportunities that all the other girls have had over the years. she deserves that right. fair competition, scholarship, trophies. i've already bought her her first set of golf club at age five days old. but if democrats have their way today, she may be one day forced to compete against a man. let me tell you something, if she has to dress in a locker room with a boy, you're looking

at a grandfather that will raise hell. if they shower in the same showers, we're going to have problems. so what we're creating here is more and more problems across our country that we don't need. i heard a story the other day about a sixth grade girl in minnesota who was changing in a locker room after swim practice when a biological man who identified as a female walked in, came within four or five feet of the young girl to grab something. let me tell you, her dad came unglued. you would have too. anybody would. so this is not about politics. this is about right or wrong. 79% of americans agree on this issue, allowing men to compete against women is just plain wrong. 79% of the entire country.

and like i said earlier, 67% of my democratic colleagues, their constituents say no way, jose. this is not going to happen. so to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, you may want to check with your constituents before you make this vote today in about an hour, because if polling is correct, even close to correct, 8 out of 10 of your voters do not want men participating against women. and if that doesn't strike a chord with you, let me ask you this. do you have daughters, do you have granddaughters, do you have nieces? how would you feel if they trained for years, waking up early every morning, staying after school late practicing, putting in those long hours when nobody else was watching, missing spring break, family vacations, birthday parties and holidays, making a tremendous physical and financial sacrifice, all so they could one day have the opportunity either

to win a trophy or win a scholarship. but then only to have the opportunity ripped away by a bigger, faster, stronger male athlete because they want to participate against women. you know what? that happened to somebody, and most of you probably know who it is. riley gaines. she worked her entire life to earn a scholarship at the university of kentucky in swimming. she was winning races left and right until a man named will thompson changed his name to leah thomas and signed up for the kentucky women's swim team. riley and will thomas ended up tying in one race for fifth place in 2022 ncaa tournament. the -- the ncaa said we only have one tournament, we're going to give it to leah. imagine in that was your

daughter and all that time and effort was put in her career, her life to win a trophy, but she had a biological boy decide that he wanted to be a woman. or beyond that trophy, how would you feel knowing your daughter is sharing a locker room with that same man, which she refused to do, and dressed in a janitor's locker room. i've heard from countless girls across the country describe to me how men have joined their teams and proceeded to undress in front of them, much to their horror. one particular young woman, paula scanlan who swam at the university of pennsylvania, shared how being forced to be in a locker room with a male was particularly traumatizing for her as she had already survived a sexual assault months earlier. it's just plain awful what we are doing to these young women. plain awful. there's no common sense.

to thanks to president trump's executive order, the ncaa recently men will no longer be allowed to compete against women on the college level. while this is a step in the right direction, the ncaa's rules still allow to this day, ncaa changed the rules but they still allow men, biological boys or men to enjoy all the other benefits of being on a women's team -- practicing, dressing in the locker rooms, showering -- but they just can't compete in a game. it makes no sense. the ncaa needs to stand up for young women across this country and say no way. it just makes no sense when we've made that rule. to fully protect women, congress needs to pass legislation on this, as i said earlier. we've got to pass it.

it's the only way it's going to stop, because the people out there that have lost their mind are going to continue to force this to happen. the protection of women and girls in sports act would prevent a school from receiving federal funding if it lets boys compete against women. that's the only way we can stop it. it also denies gender as male or defines gender as male and female. what an idea, right. i've seen some of my colleagues on the left voice concerns about this type of language being hate speech. this is hateful to do this. i don't see it that way. what is hateful is allowing women scholarships and opportunities to be stripped away from their hard work and given to biological boys. i thought we left discrimination against women behind in this country decades ago, but i guess not because here we are 2025,

hanging women and girls out to dry. think about it. are we going to sacrifice the rights of 50% of this country for the rights of a small few? i was deeply disturbed this summer to see the videos of men boxing against women in the olympics. when i was growing up, i was taught that, hey, you should never hit a girl. but i guess that's okay nowadays. one study found that males can punch 162% harder than females. perhaps that's why you rarely hear about a woman competing in men's sports. it's not politically correct to say, but it's true. someday somebody is going to get seriously injured if we don't do something about this. it's unsafe and it's unfair and it's down right wrong. i've heard from countless parents, students, teachers and coaches all over the country about this issue. it is a huge topic.

and i bet that my democratic colleagues in blue states have heard the same questions, even if they won't admit it. the american people are on the same page on this, and their verdict is in. they want men out of women's sports and women's locker rooms. let's do the right thing. this doesn't have to be a republican or democratic issue. this is about standing up for girls and women, which i know my democratic colleagues also care about. this is long overdue. i hope we can put politics aside p, and in about an hour, 45 minutes do the right thing and protect women and girls in sports. i yield. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: before my colleagues vote on the next vote, linda mcmahon's nomination for secretary of education, they should remember a vote for ms. mcmahon is a vote for draconian cuts to education and rising

property taxes for middle-class and suburban american families. that's why i am so proud that every democrat will vote no to stand up for our schools, for our kids, for our teachers, for public education, and to prevent property taxes from going up further. donald trump is clear he wants to eliminate the department and push never-before-seen cuts to public schools. ms. mcmahon will make that happen. her whole background is anti-public schools. when you slash federal funding for education, it leads to higher taxes back home. so many of our school districts, they could be urban, suburban or rural, depend on federal funding. we cut that, it leads to higher property taxes to make up for the loss of money. communities will also be forced to slash other programs, including helping the disabled kids for funding for the schools. this is not what the american people want.

this is not what they bargained for. the senate should reject ms. mcmahon because funding cuts for schools, students, parents and teachers all for the sake of billionaire tax breaks, whose kids probably don't go to public schools, is an awful idea. i'm proud every democrat will vote no, and i ask for the yeas and nays. ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered.

. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question occurs on the nomination. the yeas and nays were previously ordered of the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin. mr. banks. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn.

mr. blumenthal. ms. blunt rochester. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mrs. britt. mr. budd. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito.

mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons.

the clerk: mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton.

the clerk: mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. curtis. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst.

mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mr. gallego. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper.

ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mr. husted. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. justice. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. kim.

the clerk: mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. mccormick. mr. merkley. mrs. moody. mr. moran. mr. moreno. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski.

mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schiff. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer.

is a mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. mr. sheehy. ms. slotkin. ms. smith. mr. sullivan. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. warner. mr. warnock.

ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

vote:

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- barrasso, blackburn, boozman, britt, cornyn, cotton, cramer, crapo, daines, grassley, hyde-smith, justice, lankford, marshall, moody, murkowski, paul, ricketts, scott of florida, scott of south carolina, sheehy, tillis. senators voting in the negative -- duckworth, kaine, merkley, rosen, shaheen, van hollen, wyden.

mr. peters, no. mr. husted, aye. mr. mullin, aye.

mr. gallego, no. mr. kim, no.

mr. warner, no. mr. warnock, no.

mr. thune, aye. mr. rounds, aye. mr. cassidy, aye. ms. hassan, no.

mrs. fischer, aye.

mr. curtis, aye. ms. cortez masto, no. ms. alsobrooks, no. ms. cantwell, no.

mr. heinrich, no.

mr. mccormick, aye.

mr. johnson, aye.

ms. collins, aye. mr. hoeven, aye. mr. kelly, no. mr. wicker, aye. mr. budd, aye.

mr. risch, aye. mr. moreno, aye. vote:

the clerk: mr. lee, aye.

the clerk: mr. lujan, no. the clerk: mr. schmitt, aye. mr. banks, aye.

the clerk: mr. reed, no. the clerk: ms. ernst, aye.

the clerk: mr. hawley, aye. mr. coons, no. mr. whitehouse, no. mr. fetterman, no. mr. kennedy, aye.

the clerk: mr. king, no.

the clerk: mr. graham, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, no.

the clerk: mr. schiff, no. ms. blunt rochester, no.

the clerk: ms. smith, no. ms. hirono, no.

the clerk: mr. schatz, no. mr. booker, no. mrs. murray, no. ms. baldwin, no. ms. warren, no. mr. durbin, no. mr. hagerty, aye. mr. murphy, no. mr. schumer, no.

the clerk: mr. tuberville, aye. mr. sanders, no.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, no. mr. blumenthal, no. vote:

the clerk: mr. bennet, no. mr. moran, aye.

the clerk: mr. markey, no.

the clerk: mr. padilla, no. mr. cruz, aye. the clerk: mr. young, aye.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, no.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, no.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, aye. the presiding officer: the yeas are 51. the nays are 45. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered madeland upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. barrasso: mr. president. the presiding officer: senator wyoming. mr. barrasso: i i ask unanimous consent that waive the mandatory quark with respect to the motion to proceed to calendar number 2, s. 9. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to legislative session and resume consideration of the following motion, which the clerk will report. t the clerk: 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. $, a bill to provide 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. signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture e cloture. by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the motion to proceed to s. the 9, a bill to provide for purposes of determining compliant with title 9 of the education amendments of

1972 in athletics, sex shall be based recognized solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth the clerk shall call the roll brought to the a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin. mr. banks. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet.

cleric mrs. blackburn. -- the clerk: blackburn.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal. ms. blunt rochester. mr. booker. vote:

the clerk: mr. boozman. mrs. britt. mr. budd. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. curtis. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mr. gallego.

mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. the clerk: mr. husted. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. justice. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. kim. mr. king.

ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. mccormick. mr. merkley. mrs. moody. mr. moran. mr. moreno. mr. mullin.

the clerk: ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schiff. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. mr. sheehy. ms. slotkin. ms. smith. mr. sullivan. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen.

mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- banks, barrasso, blackburn, boozman, britt, budd, cassidy, cornyn, cotton, cramer, crapo, cruz, curtis, daines, ernst, graham, grassley, hagerty, hawley, husted, johnson, justice, kennedy, lankford, lee, mccormick, moody, moran, moreno,

mullin, paul, ricketts, rounds, schmitt, scott of florida, sullivan, thune, tillis, tuberville, wicker, and young. senators voting in the negative -- alsobrooks, bennet, blumenthal, blunt rochester, booker, cantwell, cortez masto, durbin, fetterman, gallego, gillibrand, hassan, heinrich, hickenlooper, hirono, kaine, kelly, kim, klobuchar, lujan, murphy, murray, ossoff, padilla, peters, reed, rosen, sanders, schatz, schiff, schumer, shaheen, smith, van hollen,warnock, warren, whitehouse, and wyden. mr. scott of south carolina, aye. mrs. fischer, aye. mr. hoeven, aye.

the clerk: mr. king, no.

the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, no.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, no.

the clerk: mr. risch, aye.

the clerk: mr. merkley, no. vote:

the clerk: mr. marshall, aye.

mr. markey, no.

mr. coons, no.

ms. collins, aye.

mr. warner, no.

mr. warner, no.

>> is hard to believe the administration wants to cut social security but that's what, and shows which is there up to the cut 7000 workers and social security, on the other hand, elk said social security is a biggest ponzi scheme of all times until that the average social security recipient who depends upon the $1100.1500 pretty to buy food, rent, and go visit the grandkids, tell them that is a ponzi scheme. tell them they don't deserve that money and it is outrageous. i know that they are serious when you see they have cut 7000

already from the staff and at the same time, that elon musk said that it is a ponzi scheme. the ridge is minimal, is telling americans that earned benefits, that they depend upon, they paid into a scam, that's not a scam, americans know it and so, now we know this something we senate long time is coming through. social security is under attack and at risk. we do not need to scratch your head and wonder what is going on when you see the decimating the office and the staff and you do not need to ponder what might happen next when trump and muscat say that that tens of millions of seniors and families and children, who depend upon these benefits are part of a scam. it's insulting to them. they have been waiting for the social security, the heavily select newbies getting rich on

it. so they can have a decent of life in retirement. but trump and must have decided protect bedrock of america's social safety net and your pocket is the way. why are they doing it. why would they do this, why would the cut social security that no how risky it is politically but there are no get the tax cuts and breaks rather why would he do this come there in frenzy to get tax breaks. tax cuts top to the wealthiest very wealthiest billionaires in american just fanatic about it. and i can promise this to the american people. senate democrats all of us, everything a lot of us, will fight this effort the benefits and fight for americans to get the money they deserve in the

hard. social security sends over $126 billion to more than 70 $3m retired and disabled beneficiaries every month. the 7000 social security workers being part of the benefits in trouble and have to wait longer and how about when somebody does not get their check the needs that come to pick a grantor you have a because even though you're over a mortgage. you get all the footing have to wait for hours to talk to somebody and you know how frustrating that is. but make people wait, they want to give up and not get their benefits. by the way, just parenthetically, from just announced that he's going to keep the tariffs enemy, what is going on here. there you are in a frenzy and they're going wild on something sacred and social security on something is through to the market people as terrace the

recent prices. so we are finding this i remember back in 2005, george w. bush the same idea, harry reid nancy pelosi and me, got together, and said. and -- 51 and the nays 45, three fifths of the senators duly sworn having not voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.

mr. thune: mr. president. the presiding officer: i recognize the majority leader. mr. thune: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 27. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the motion to proceed. all in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. thune: mr. president, i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of justice, todd blanche, of florida, to be deputy attorney general. mr. thune: mr. president -- send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. can the clerk: cloture the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of todd blanche, of

florida, to be deputy attorney general, signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. thune: i ask that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative session 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 ask unanimous consent that the presiding offer to join with the like committee on the part of the house of representatives to supreme court the president of the united states into the house chamber for the joint session to be held at 9:00 p.m. on tuesday, march 4, 2025. the presiding officer: without objection. so ordered. thub law mr. thune: when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on tuesday, march 4, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the senate be in a period of morning business for debate only until 11:00 a.m. the senate recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to allow

for the weekly conference meetings if the motion is agreed to on the motion to proceed to calendar number 11, all time during recess count equally between opponents and proponents. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: senators expect the vote to proceed to senator cruz's cra at 11:30 tom. if there is no -- tomorrow. if there is no further business, if there is no further business, >> the senate confirmed linda mcho to be education secretary, lawmakers are also concerned about to bend transgender sdent athletes from beating in girls and women sports schools that receive federal funding. watch live coverage of the senate on "c-span2". >> cspan democracy unfiltered funded by these television companies and more including

media,. >> newly 30 years ago, media, is founded on a powerful idea when cutting edge broadband to underserved communities from coast-to-coast connected 850,000 and our team broke speed barriers delivered to every customer led the way in developing and now with many comparable is offering the best is most reliable not to work on the go, media, decades of deliverance it decades ahead took media come come as were c-span is a public service, one with these other television providers come up giving a front row seat to democracy. >> tuesday night, what c-span is live coverage of president trump's address to congress for the first address the second term in less than two months and taken office he stands live coverage begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern with review of the evening capitol hill followed by the president's speech at nine

eastern then watch the democratic response, after the present speech and also taking and get your reaction on social media or at "c-span2" you can also watch it simulcast of evening followed by reaction from lawmakers live from capitol hill, watch president trump's address to congress like tuesday beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, simulcast live on "c-span2", on c-span now free mobile video out, and also online is he's been dot org, cspan, bringing you your democracy unfiltered. >> discovered the heartbeat of the hypocrisy was c-span voices as we hear from you ahead of president trump's address to congress and we are asking you would like to hear the president during speech my name — i'm a student at pepperdine university and from los angeles california, an issue that when the president it to address in congress is

validity of the inland musk e-mail to the federal employees asking for the five bullet points of them accomplish in the past week and very unlawful left more elaboration on his part on why these e-mails are being sent out to federal employee. >> i am maggie and i am and it would love get the president talk about the national programs hello i'm originally from east tennessee and third-year student at the university of delaware i really think that the president should be talking about home since the upcoming congressional. >> i think. >> c-span voices, delivering democracy unfiltered be part of the conversation