Senate
Page S5131 · Official textThe Senate met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Honorable Alan Armstrong, a Senator from the State of Oklahoma.
Tuesday, September 29, 2026
Vol. 172, No. 154 · 119th Congress, 2nd session
Prayer
Page S5131 · Official textThe PRESIDING OFFICER
This morning, I am happy to introduce Dr. J. Blair Blackburn, president of East Texas Baptist University, from Marshall, TX, and he will lead us in prayer this morning.
The guest Chaplain offered the following prayer: Join me in prayer. Dear Heavenly Father, Creator of Heaven and Earth, author and perfecter of our faith, To You, O Lord, not to us--to You--be the glory and honor. And Father, we come to You this morning with hearts full of gratitude. We recognize that You are sovereign over every nation, every authority, and every generation. God, in a world that is turning their face from You, may the United States of America be a people who seeks Your face. We lift before You these esteemed Members of the U.S. Senate and entrust their service to our Nation unto Your providence. Grant them discerning hearts and eyes attentive to Your work in America and around the world. In the weight and the complexity of their responsibilities, Father, remind our Senators that true leadership ultimately is an act of stewardship. Shape the passion of their hearts and establish the work of their hands to serve others with humility, with integrity, and, Father, with love. Lord, convict our congressional leaders, President Trump, Vice President Vance, the Cabinet, and our Supreme Court Justices to be instruments of Your peace. As it has been stated, where there is division, cultivate reconciliation; where there is disagreement, kindle charity; where there is uncertainty, grant wisdom; and where there is despair, Father, awaken hope. But where there is darkness, let Your light prevail. Help these leaders of our Nation seek to understand others and, Father, to serve rather than to be served and to lead with grace and mercy. Surround these leaders with wise and faithful people who will strengthen them, Father, when they are weary, counsel them, Lord, when they are uncertain, and guide them toward whatever is true and noble, whatever is right and pure, Father, whatever is lovely and admirable. In the midst of our differences, Lord, remind us that our deepest hope is not found in political power, human institutions, or earthly kingdoms, but in You, God, whose kingdom will never end. I offer this prayer in the Name above every name, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, my Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. Amen.
Pledge of Allegiance
Page S5131 · Official textThe Presiding Officer led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (174 characters)
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 and justice for all.
Appointment of Acting President Pro Tempore
Page S5131 · Official textThe PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will please read a communication to the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Grassley).
The senior assistant executive clerk read the following letter:
Text printed in the Record (295 characters)
Washington, DC, September 29, 2026. To the Senate:
Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable Alan Armstrong, a Senator from the State of Oklahoma, to perform the duties of the Chair.
Chuck Grassley,
President pro tempore.
Mr. ARMSTRONG thereupon assumed the Chair as Acting President pro tempore.
Reservation of Leader Time
Page S5131 · Official textThe ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
Under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved.
Morning Business
Page S5131 · Official textThe ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
Under the previous order, the Senate will be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.
Recognition of the Majority Leader
Pages S5131–S5132 · Official textThe ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
The majority leader is recognized.
Legislative Session
Pages S5132–S5138 · Official textMr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 684, H.R. 9340.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (267 characters)
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 684 (H.R. 9340), to amend the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to establish a Federal standard relating to the recovery of the full, incremental costs of upgrades that serve large-load customers, and for other purposes.
Mr. President, we are coming to the end of the first year of the Rural Health Transformation Program. This multiyear initiative created in Republicans' Working Families Tax Cut legislation will invest $50 billion in all 50 States to put rural healthcare providers on a more sustainable footing for the future.
Beyond helping to ensure that Americans in rural areas can access healthcare, it will also ensure that providers are able to leverage technology and innovation to address the challenges unique to rural States.
One year in, this program is off to a promising start, and that is certainly the case in my home State of South Dakota. Just last week, CMS announced a $13 million investment in behavioral and mental health care in South Dakota. This funding will help expand crisis services and build out our State's workforce in behavioral healthcare, and it comes after another announcement in August of funding to modernize technology and strengthen cyber security at rural healthcare providers in South Dakota, an initiative that will not only modernize care in my State but also support future innovation to address the unique needs of rural South Dakota.
When Republicans created the Rural Health Transformation Program, last summer, we didn't take a top-down, Washington-Senate approach. Instead, we designed it to give States the resources and freedom to find solutions to their particular challenges, and I am proud to see South Dakota taking the same approach when it comes to distributing the funding that it will receive.
In the words of South Dakota Secretary of Health Melissa Magstadt, "the initiatives that we've developed came strictly from the assessments we had, the expert input we garnered, and what citizens themselves said they needed in the community."
That is exactly how the Rural Health Transformation Program is supposed to work, and it is not just working in South Dakota. As I mentioned, all 50 States are taking advantage of this transformative program.
Ohio is putting $3 million toward expanding offerings at pharmacies in rural communities.
A nearly $5 million award will help a hospital in central Maine update its electric medical records system to integrate it with the wider health system it is part of.
Providers in Kansas will benefit from nearly $17 billion this year to support new technologies and improve transportation options for specialty healthcare.
And Missouri will use $35 million to support 20 rural hospital projects and another $4 million to train its rural EMS workforce.
A hospital in South Carolina will use funding to add an additional operating room and upgrade its technology.
And a nonprofit in Alaska received $16 million to improve primary care offerings and bring in more providers and staff.
This is just some of the funding States are receiving for the first year of this program. As this list suggests, the Rural Health Transformation Program will make an impact in every corner of this country. All 50 States are receiving funding from this program, red States and blue States alike, which makes Senate Democrats' opposition to this program particularly baffling.
Our Democrat colleagues have made their opposition to the Rural Health Transformation Program very clear, with the Democrat leader going so far as to say this last year:
Text printed in the Record (67 characters)
This little fund to help reimburse rural hospitals is just a fraud.
Let me repeat that.
Text printed in the Record (67 characters)
This little fund to help reimburse rural hospitals is just a fraud.
That is from the Democrat leader.
Well, perhaps the Democrat leader should check in with his State's Governor, who said of a recent $76 million investment from this program:
Text printed in the Record (214 characters)
These investments will bring rural hospitals, health centers and community providers together to strengthen regional health care networks and make it easier for New Yorkers to get the care they need closer to home.
That is from New York's Governor.
Let me repeat that:
Text printed in the Record (82 characters)
. . . and make it easier for New Yorkers to get the care they need closer to home.
Well, that doesn't sound like fraud to me. But whether this would help the people in rural parts of their States didn't seem to matter to Washington Democrats. In fact, Senate Democrats voted more than half a dozen times, last year, to repeal--repeal--the Rural Health Transformation Program.
That is right.
Around this time last year, during Democrats' record-long government shutdown, Senate Democrats were working to end this program. I am curious if the Democrat leader would like to claw back the $212 million that rural healthcare providers in New York are going to receive from this program this year.
Should already-strapped rural hospitals not spend this money because Democrats are going to take it back the next time they have the power to do so? Let's hope it never comes to that.
The Rural Health Transformation Program is helping Americans in rural areas across this country. It is helping South Dakota, Ohio, Idaho, Kansas, Rhode Island, Alaska, and everywhere in between. And I am proud that Republicans are delivering for rural Americans.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The majority whip.
Mr. President, I want to talk today about action, action Republicans are taking to lower the costs for American people.
Let's start with the cost of energy. We need to be able to build, to build things faster, better, cheaper, smarter. That is what we need in America today.
We need to do it for pipelines, for energy projects, and we need to do it all across the country. There are critical energy projects right now that have been spending years trapped in regulatory purgatory. They have been in the penalty box.
Lawsuits by environmental extremists keep these projects tied up even further than that. Republicans are committed to permitting reform, and the Presiding Officer has been one leading the charge. Senators Capito and Lee who chair the appropriate committees have spent months and months working on this critical topic.
Democrats here in the Senate, led by Senator Schumer, continue to block our efforts. Democrats are objecting to solutions that actually would work to lower the cost of energy, to keep more money in people's pockets. Democrats seem to embrace higher energy costs, and they have a long history of doing that.
It is one of the features of the Democrat Green New Deal, their agenda, to keep the energy, American energy, in the ground. Last week, Senate Democrats blocked a bill from Senator Jon Husted of Ohio, a bill called the Ratepayer Protection Act, again, designed to keep more money in people's pockets. It relates to energy.
Senator Husted's bill protects American workers; that is why it is called the Ratepayer Protection Act. Senator Husted's bill guarantees that large users of energy, of electricity such as data centers, that they would end up paying the full cost of their electricity use, not the consumers.
It also holds them responsible for upgrades to the grid, and we need upgrades to the grid. They are responsible for what they need and what they are doing. Well, this will block costs going up for families so that people aren't forced to pay more; not just families but small businesses as well.
Now, Senator Husted's bill has actually been to the House of Representatives already. It passed the House of Representatives 417 to 3. That doesn't happen all that often. That is overwhelming support. And 206 Democrats actually voted for it. You would expect there would be similar numbers here. The American people support it. Democrats in the House support it. All the Republicans support it, but yet Democrats here in the Senate following Senator Schumer stand in the way of relief for folks at home.
We need to pass it. We need to pass Senator Husted's Ratepayer Protection Act. Republicans are going to continue to fight to get it done, in spite of the delays by the Democrats. Tomorrow we are going to vote on this again, on Senator Husted's bill.
So Democrats tomorrow will have a choice: They can join Republicans in helping to lower costs for American families, or they can explain to American families why their party continues to stand in the way of relief.
Republicans are never going to stop fighting to ensure Americans keep more of their hard-earned money. When Americans keep more of what they earn, the economy grows. And I have always said people at home with money in their pocket have a much better time figuring out how to spend it or save it or invest it than does the government.
Across the country, more people are working. Take-home pay is rising. These are good signs. The Wall Street Journal recently pointed out "it is one of the best job markets in decades" for young adults without college degrees.
That is where the country stands today. Last year, the American people faced the largest tax increase in America's history. Had Democrats gotten their way, there would have been an increase of taxes of $4 trillion. Democrats would have snatched hard-earned money away and right out of the pockets of our firefighters, police officers, nurses, and waiters.
Republicans stopped that largest tax increase in history. We got rid of the tax on tips. We got rid of the tax on overtime. We eliminated tax on Social Security. More money in people's pockets. And then on top of that, we expanded the child tax credit. It is now $2,200 per child. We delivered permanent relief--you know about this as do I, in my home State, from the dreaded death tax.
Millions--farmers, ranchers, small business owners--have benefited. We permanently raised the standard deduction; that helps people keep more of what they earn. As a result of the Working Families Tax Cuts law, 97 percent of Americans received a tax cut when they filed their tax return last year.
Refunds that they got this year were bigger than they were in the last years. People who benefited the most: people who earn less than $200,000 a year. Also, one of the unique aspects of the Republicans' tax cuts bill are called the Trump Accounts. They are brand new. They are tax-advantaged investment accounts. Every American child can have one. Every child born between 2025 and 2028 starts with $1,000 in this account coming directly from the U.S. Treasury.
Trump Accounts follow a very American idea: When families are free to invest their own money, their children can build wealth for the future. Millions of children in families all across America are using these Trump Accounts. Parents, family members, churches, community groups, and even employers are contributing as well. I am seeing it in my home State.
Recently, Delta Airlines--the international company--Delta Airlines committed to invest $1,000 into Trump Accounts for each of their employees' children--every one of them. Other businesses are doing the same. They are following the example.
But yet every single Democrat in this House voted against these valuable accounts--every one of them--and that includes the two Senators from Georgia where Delta Airlines is headquartered.
Democrats refuse to even put children's financial interests first. As Republicans fight to put more money into people's pockets, we continue to crack down on waste and fraud and abuse and corruption. And people watching the news have seen it.
Last week, the Trump administration took another big step to root out fraud in our healthcare system. It identified three-quarters of a million names--not necessarily people but names--that were fraudulent, improper, and ineligible for ObamaCare.
Many of these names didn't even have a Social Security number associated with it. Many of the names were signed up without actually an individual knowing about it. It was insurance brokers gaming the system, and they earned a commission for each one of these new accounts. We are putting an end to this.
There is no verification of identity, no notice of whatever the people made--if they were people or not--no identification of identity, income, or immigration status. Red warning lights were flashing, signaling fraud and corruption.
And the crackdown on this fraud is helping taxpayers save $2.2 billion. That ensures that more money and services go to the people who actually have earned it, need it, and deserve it.
Democrats want to keep the money flowing out of the Federal Treasury. It is astonishing. I remember Joe Biden and the Democrats--they enabled this fraud. They seemed to welcome it. Enrollment doubled under ObamaCare on their watch without justification and often falsehoods.
It was juiced by generous bonus subsidies, by bonuses for people signing up, putting names on the roll, big checks that went directly from the taxpayers to the Federal Treasury, into the pockets of healthcare companies. Perverse incentives encouraged liberal Governors to spend money from Medicaid without any oversight. We have seen it all.
I mean, people were shocked when they saw what happened in Minnesota--money going to phony treatment centers. In California, it went to phantom hospice providers--made up but the money kept flowing. Republicans are committed to stopping this abuse and to making sure that criminals pay the price.
When it comes to the sort of things we have been talking about this morning--cutting energy costs, cutting taxes, fighting fraud and corruption--this is a core difference between commonsense Republicans and the craziness that has taken over the Democratic Party.
Republicans want every American to keep more of their hard-earned money, more of what they earn. Democrats seem to want more money going to the Federal Government so that they can turn around and spend it. That is why Democrats are determined to repeal the Working Family Tax Cut law--because it means a direct tax increase on every American.
They want to raise taxes on waitresses, on nurses working overtime, on firefighters, on police officers, and on our seniors. What do they want to use the money for? They have said it. A number of their candidates have said it around the country. They said so they can provide healthcare for illegal immigrants with taxpayers paying for it. That is the new Democratic Party.
They are radical, they are extreme, they are dangerous, they are scary, and yet they proudly march off saying that is their new mantra. Actually, they don't even call it a mantra. They call it a manifesto.
We know what they want to do, and it will be very detrimental to the country. You read through it: Shut down the military. Shut down the police. Defund this. Open the prisons. Put the dangerous criminals into our communities.
It is astonishing. They want to do that while Americans are struggling to pay their bills. Americans shouldn't be paying the bills for millions of illegal immigrants. Joe Biden let 10 million of them into the country. We shouldn't be paying the bills for these fraud centers that they are allowing in Minnesota and what we see happening in California. The American people shouldn't have to be forced to be paying for that.
Republicans are going to continue to fight to put more money in the pockets of the American people. The American people earned it, and they rightly deserve it.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Democratic leader is recognized.
Mr. President, well, Donald Trump is asleep at the wheel when it comes to reining in unchecked AI. Right after news came out over the weekend about rogue AI agents infiltrating government websites in the United States, Australia, and at the U.N., do you know what Trump told FOX News? "I don't worry about it." Well, he is about the only one.
Trump doesn't worry about rogue AI, but the American people certainly do, so do cyber security experts and even many of the people who are building this technology. Everybody who knows anything about it worries about rogue AI--not Donald Trump. He keeps his head in the sand like an ostrich. He doesn't pay any attention to the facts and just says whatever pops into his head, no matter how harmful it is.
When Trump meets with various AI industry leaders at the White House today, he ought to stop resisting the growing consensus that we need real guardrails to mitigate AI's risk.
Trump's meeting at the White House will be a flop, a failure, an utter failure if they don't propose and start talking about and start to come to an agreement about some real guardrails that need to be done. And, of course, he should consult with those of us in Congress who believe we need stronger guardrails.
Dismissing the potential dangers of AI as a hoax, as Trump has done over and over and over again, won't protect the American people. The Senate GOP's response to AI risk has been almost as meek as Trump's.
Americans are demanding real guardrails on AI and data centers, but all the Republicans offer is a toothless messaging bill. The bill is a fraud.
I can sum up the shortcomings of the Republican data center bill with one word: optional. The bill is optional. America, do you hear that? Here, we need some real action on data centers. And what does the Republican Senator from Ohio come up with? Something that is optional. It is up to the companies to decide.
Well, they are the ones that need the guardrails: optional--optional requirements in his bill on data center development, optional standards for safety against catastrophic risks, optional enforcement to protect the American people. A guardrail that is optional isn't a guardrail at all.
At a time when Americans are calling out for real guardrails on AI, Senate Republicans are trying to secure an ineffectual participation trophy before they skip town. Instead of trying to score cheap political points with hollow proposals, Senate Republicans need to work with us to take meaningful action that will actually contain these existential risks. They are not doing that, and the American people are in real danger because of their failure to act.
Mr. President, on stock trading and voter ID, Senate Republicans continue to show the country they care more about playing partisan political games than stopping corruption. The Senate GOP has bucked a longstanding bipartisan effort to ban stock trading in Congress, which is what Congress should do.
Last July--July--the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee advanced a strong, commonsense, bipartisan bill to ban congressional stock trading, but Senate Republicans abandoned this effort. Too many of their Members didn't want to do it.
If Senate Republicans truly cared about banning stock trading in Congress, they wouldn't have let the House Republicans water down the ban. The bill Republicans are offering today is Swiss cheese legislating, creating loophole after loophole after loophole, and it is a step backward to solving this critical problem.
The bill even lets Members continue to own and sell stocks. The Republican bill even lets Members continue to own and sell stocks. This is the Republican MO. The public is mad about a problem. The public wants something done. And what they do is put in a bill that does virtually nothing because they want to try to assuage the public but not solve the problem because it affects them.
The Republican bill also explicitly allows Members to trade stocks in privately held companies to profit off their insider knowledge. So the bill makes things worse than present law because it would simply hide insider trading. It would not stop it.
And if Senate Republicans cared about reining in stock trading, they would advance a bill that prohibits the President from trading stocks. We know that Trump has traded more stocks than all of Congress combined, but this bill does no such thing.
The worst part of this bill is that Republicans know it will never pass. They designed it that way. They don't want this bill to become law. So they put a poison pill in that they knew would tank it. It is really trickery. It is skulduggery.
If Republican Senators really cared about stopping stock trading by Members, they wouldn't have loaded it up with a poison pill voter ID bill, which Senate Democrats have defeated already twice.
Republicans know that no one in their right mind would ever go along with the draconian voting restrictions that they attach to their stock trading bill. The voting restriction provisions in this bill are more severe than any law in any State--do you hear that?--more severe than any law in any State. They are designed to kill the bill.
So this bill is just another desperate Republican attempt to pretend they are fighting corruption, when all they really want is to score political points before they head home to campaign.
Mr. President, on Trump propaganda, Donald Trump continues to cram his taxpayer-funded propaganda down the throats of the American people. In less than a single week, Trump has aired three campaign ads, costing at least $1.5 million, all paid for by--guess who--the American taxpayer.
Trump is getting you, American taxpayer, to use your dollars to pay for his political ads. Have you ever heard anything so egregious in terms of how our system is supposed to work?
I am calling on the White House to explain this great, blatantly corrupt, and egregious abuse of taxpayer dollars immediately. The Trump administration has a lot of questions it needs to answer: Who is responsible for these ads? Which Agency? Where were the funds diverted to pay for Trump's propaganda? Was Trump involved personally?
There has already been some reporting from anonymous sources that Trump was personally involved in pushing these campaign ads on the taxpayers' dime.
Let's be clear, these ads were anything but public service announcements. They were pure propaganda. After fawning over foreign authoritarians like Putin and Kim Jong Un for so long, Trump must have gotten jealous of their control over state TV.
Trump needs to answer for this corruption and for all of his other efforts to rob the American people to fund his extravagant vanity projects. It is time for Republicans to either call the President out for this corruption or to call it quits in November.
Mr. President, finally, on the Affordable Care Act CRA, well, today Senate Democrats will force consideration of a resolution to stop Trump from further sabotaging the ACA.
Trump's recent rule terminates coverage for 2 million Americans. It jacks up healthcare costs for millions more and gives big insurers carte blanche to force the American people to pay more for less.
As if Americans weren't drowning enough in Trump's failed economy, this callous rule comes on the heels of Trump and Republicans ransacking over $1 trillion--$1 trillion--from the healthcare system, all to bankroll tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations.
Now rural hospitals are shuttering, millions are losing lifesaving coverage, and tens of millions of working Americans are watching their premiums double, triple, even quadruple.
For years, Trump has tried to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act with no idea of what replacement will look like whatsoever.
As Trump's economy bleeds the American people dry, Trump isn't trying to lower costs but, rather, kill the Affordable Care Act with a death by a thousand cuts.
So my Republican colleagues ought to join us on this resolution to protect the care their constituents rely on or they will continue to own every lost healthcare policy, every closed hospital, and every skyrocketing premium that follows.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Graham)
The Senator from Virginia.
Madam President, I think most of us in this Chamber realize that we are literally living through one of the most consequential technology moments in our lifetime, and that is why I am here with several of my colleagues--Senator Schatz from Hawaii and Senator Kim from New Jersey--to say that we can't, frankly, have regular business at this moment.
You know, before I got into politics, I was in the technology field. I was lucky enough to be on the ground floor of the wireless industry and then became a venture capitalist and was involved in iterations around the internet and cloud computing. I can say without reservation that as big as wireless was, as big as the internet is, as big as cloud computing is, they will pale in comparison to the innovation that will come about through artificial intelligence.
In many ways, the reason I chose to ask the people of Virginia to hire me one last time was because, having spent an enormous amount of time on this subject, I am enormously concerned that we get AI right, that it is safe and it is fair, that America leads in AI innovation.
Over the last year and a half or so, 2 years, I have spoken on this subject repeatedly. I have laid out my ideas on how we ought to have a comprehensive approach--legislation on data centers that would actually, if they don't meet minimum Federal standards, would impose their inability to get a bonus tax depreciation.
I have plans in terms of how we ought to be dealing with child safety. If you think social media messed up your kids, wait until your teenage daughter or son thinks they have an affinity or a relationship with a chatbot. How ironic that China has already prohibited that.
We are seeing increasingly the use of AI agents. Well, who bears the liability? I have some ideas there.
National security. When Mythos came out from Anthropic, our head of NSA and Cyber Command said that this tool will change warfare as much as drones.
Finally, I continue to be enormously concerned that while AI may create jobs long term, in the short run, in the next 2 to 5 years, I think we will have an enormous disruption in our workforce. I will make a wager with anyone that I hope I will lose that we could see up to 30 percent of recent college grad unemployment as companies try to integrate the productivity gains from AI, and they are simply not going to hire as many folks going forward.
So I remain an AI optimist. I am not an AI doomer. But we are at a moment in time, looking over the last few weeks, where I think the whole world has recognized that we have to do something.
When AI companies, one after another, come out and say "We have to elevate safety and put that first and foremost," when OpenAI just yesterday said they are slowing the model on Astra, when Anthropic has said they are trying to build in more safety protocols--I think that is good, but are we really going to trust the industry to self-police on something that, if it goes beyond what is happening--and we have already seen not tens but literally thousands of examples where these models go beyond what humans want them to do, the most famous being the OpenAI Hugging example, where 3,000 bots jumped the sandbox fence, attacked another company, and then came back and attacked OpenAI. Literally, during that period, they communicated with each other, hid their intent from human beings, would sacrifice some of the bots for the greater cause, and we are doing nothing? That was July. In August, they had 10,000 bots collaborate.
So we three--and there are a lot of Senators on both sides of the aisle who I think are enormously concerned who said that we will all have time to debate all of our--I don't want to use the term my friend from Hawaii will use, but pet rocks--I hope he will use it again--and say that we all have great ideas here, but we should not miss the moment to put a safety protocol in place now.
As we leave, if the Congress goes out and, God forbid, we have an incident--AI is already suspect by most Americans--we could actually see the stop of innovation if an AI tool took over a hospital or a water system. I am not an AI doomer, but the ability to have these AI agents take over and shut down part of the financial system is real. We should heed the call from the experts.
I think you will also see shortly--the finance world has said we need mandatory controls. I think you will see other large businesses say so as well. We need to make sure whatever safety board we put in place doesn't ensconce the already largest frontier labs.
Our request is really simple. It has been as pared down as possible. Before these models are released, they should be pretested to make sure, secondly, that the sandboxes where they do the testing have appropriate cyber protocols, that even before you start testing, there is at least a basic safety policy. And these companies welcome this. And God forbid we have an incident, we have to have an incident reporting mechanism. No more, no less.
We would house this at NIST. The safety board would have to include, obviously, where the expertise is--the frontier models. I actually think it would be good to have an international validator--somebody like the British--on it as well. They have an AI safety institute. We could actually guarantee to the rest of the world that our models are safe.
So let's not get involved--this is not a partisan issue. I think the chairman of the Commerce Committee is coming down. We have worked with him. We look forward to working with him further. But let's go ahead and put a statement in place that we in the U.S. Senate recognize the enormous upside of much AI, but there is also a downside.
With that, Madam President, I would like to yield to my colleague, the Senator from Hawaii.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Hawaii.
Madam President, you know, this is about a couple of very simple questions. The first question is, Humans in control of technology or not? That is the first question.
Even the mechanisms that we are accustomed to, for instance, in aviation, where you say "Before this plane can take off, we have to certify to its safety," don't really get at the fundamental problem because what we have is technology that is equivalent to a plane being able to take off on its own while it is still being built. So the question is first, Humans in control or not?
The second question is, If we agree that humans should be in control, should this be voluntary or not? Do we trust--not any individual CEO or board of directors, but do we trust that companies that are rolling toward the biggest IPOs in human history will voluntarily regulate themselves as opposed to maximize the value of that IPO, maximize shareholder profit?
We have traditionally tried to strike the right balance, and Democrats and Republicans don't always see the sort of level of regulation necessary on an eye-to-eye basis, but I think at some level, there are 100 of us who believe that when it comes to serious risk to public safety, that those should not be voluntary safety regimes. They should be mandatory. They should be Federal. It shouldn't be every legislature. It shouldn't be some announcement from a bunch of tech CEOs. It has to be in Federal statutory law.
Now, the third question is, Should we do this comprehensively or not?
The answer, in my view, is not--not right now. Here is why. We don't have the capacity to pass a very complicated law to deal with all of the societal and economic and human impacts of the AI revolution. We are not going to do that with the House out of town. We are not going to do that with the Speaker of the House being sort of so skeptical of any policymaking in this space that he basically left town to avoid dealing with this. So what we have is the most modest but most serious proposal to take down the acute risk that we are being told by the labs and by AI safety experts and others really does exist.
We could have an argument about "Is it a 10-percent chance of a terrible thing happening or a 1-percent chance of a terrible thing happening? How much time do we have?" but I think nobody is disagreeing that the risk is nonzero of something terrible happening if we don't have a basic architecture of these labs having to not just test before they commercially upload something but to have a safety regime from the very beginning because, as we now have learned, this is a unique kind of product that could become dangerous even before it is released to the public.
So the question is, Comprehensive versus not--and as much as Senator Warner and I talk about our pet rocks--I have a bunch of bills in the AI space that are important. Of course, I think mine are the best. I am sure Senator Kim and Senator Warner think theirs are the best. But the point is, we are not going to come to a resolution on this. This bill is trying to thread that needle of being nonpartisan, on the level, not a setup, not designed as an electoral bludgeon but simply to try to take down the acute risk that is right in front of us. So that is why we are trying to be modest enough to actually be able to look the Commerce Committee chairman in the eye and say: There are no tricks or traps here. This is what we have come to conclude is the safest way forward in the very short run. It also doesn't preclude Senator Cruz and Leader Thune and Senator Klobuchar and others from legislating in this space because there is lots more to do, but right now, we are facing something rather precipitous. The other question is, Are we going to do something after something terrible happens or not? I think that we have an opportunity to tee up legislation that takes down--that doesn't reduce to zero--but that takes down the risk of something really horrifying happening to people in the United States of America. So this is about humans in control, this is about keeping politics out of it, and this is about taking down the short-term risk of something really terrible happening. To the extent that it is possible in this polarized time and in this election season, we tried like heck to display enough discipline on our own to not introduce a bunch of stuff that was going to freak a bunch of other people out. I actually haven't heard of any substantive disagreements with what we are proposing--I am sure they exist--but in terms of Member interaction, in terms of the expert community, in terms of my Republican colleagues, people aren't saying: I hate this bill. I have an ideological objection to it. It won't work. They are not saying that. They are just saying: We are doing another process and give that time. And my judgment is that we don't have the luxury of time. You know, the Senate is supposed to be the cooling saucer that allows the hot liquid from the House to cool off, and then we can deliberate, right? Well, the House is out of town, and they did not send us anything to drink. So that is a lovely way to understand this body, but we are all that is left, and we have to work on a nonpartisan--forget bipartisan--on a nonpartisan basis to make sure that humans remain in control of the technology. With that and with the permission of the Senator from Virginia, I yield to my friend the junior Senator from New Jersey who knows more about national security and who is, I think, appropriately alarmed at the potential impacts of inaction in the U.S. Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from New Jersey.
Madam President, I thank my colleagues Senator Warner and Senator Schatz.
This is really an invitation to all of our colleagues to be able to join us in this moment because this is a call from the American people to address their worries, to avoid disaster, and to give them a sense of stability and predictability.
Yes, this effort we are putting forward today is not going to fix all of the problems; it is not going to avoid all of the pitfalls, but it is a start, and that is what the American people are looking for. They are looking for a start. They are looking for action that we are taking not just in words but in recognizing, yes, innovation without control just leads to chaos and leads to unpredictability. That is something that we need to make sure we are meeting at this moment to ensure that the American people have control over the incredible strides that we are seeing on AI.
Now, control can't be built on faith and half measures. Just yesterday, we saw again OpenAI saying that they are not going to release their newest model Astra because of security concerns. We have seen other major labs take some steps to mitigate. That is progress, but the stakes are too high for this to be just voluntary that big corporations take the right action just because it is the right thing to do.
When I was working in national security, the starting point of every conversation was, "What is the magnitude of the problem that we are facing?" and then to be able to work backward from there to understand what the magnitude is of the solution needed to actually address that problem.
Well, when I did a townhall 2 weeks ago, I had a constituent come up and ask me--because I was talking about the Hugging Face incident or some of the other news that we had seen of rogue AI agents breaking out. This one constituent asked me, he said: Well, how many times has this happened? How many times? Are we documenting it? How many times have we actually seen this?
Look, the answer that I had to give, truthfully, was that we didn't know.
Even still, today, we are standing here on the floor of the Senate, and we don't know how many of these types of instances have happened. I will be honest with you, I don't think the top AI companies fully know the total number of incidents and other challenges that they have faced.
So when they have the question: What is the magnitude of the problem we are trying to solve, the answer right now is that we don't know. That is scary, that is worrisome, and that is something we should work incredibly hard to be able to address.
Do we know just how much the move toward full recursive self-improvement is going to magnify these problems? We don't know yet, which is why we are trying to set out, with the effort today, to recognize that the stakes are too high and that control comes from creating efforts like an AI safety board or in establishing more secure sandboxes for testing and other types of standards. Control is necessary because we need to ensure that the technology does not outpace safety and common sense.
I am grateful, again, to be working with my colleagues here and, again, to be, hopefully, working with all of our colleagues together on this shared agenda. That is what the American people are not just asking of us but are demanding of us to be able to do so that this bill can be part of a comprehensive approach that will help us maintain control and avoid the chaos that no American wants to see.
With that, I yield to the Senator from Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Virginia.
Madam President, in a moment, I am going to ask for a UC.
I appreciate that the chairman of the Commerce Committee is here as it is in his jurisdiction, and he has been working on this issue. Congratulations on his legislative success last night.
To address, kind of, a little bit of what Senator Kim just mentioned, we don't know. What we do know is that the ChatGPT model that has already been released and is out in service has literally had thousands of times where it has gone beyond what the model was supposed to have done.
I completely don't think we can solve this State by State. Yesterday, Florida sued ChatGPT in kind of a very red State with a very Republican attorney general's taking, you know, an almost the-sky-is-falling approach.
We are trying to say--you know, I am pro-AI here, but if we lose this moment--I have never seen an innovation that could be so positive but be viewed so negatively by the public at this point, particularly by young people. So we are just saying: Let's put a safety board in place. We have to recognize things where we don't empower the existing incumbents, but I think we can do that. We are saying: Release testing. Make sure the sandboxes are safe on cyber protocols. Make sure there is a safety protocol that goes back even before testing, and make sure, after--God forbid--an incident, that there is an incident report.
Again, I would echo what my colleagues have said. You know, I have not talked to a single Member on either side of the aisle who doesn't think we need to move. I don't think the option of simply relying on the good will of these companies will be enough.
If we are not able to move forward today, I commit to continuing to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle because I think there is, frankly, no issue more important. If we don't get safety rights and all of the things about workforce or agent liability or national security, which has to be dealt with, we may miss. That would be the worst. If Americans turn against this innovation and say: We are going to stop it across the board, nothing would be better for China, and we don't want that to happen.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the Artificial Intelligence Risk Management and Security Act, which is at the desk; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Is there objection?
The Senator from Texas.
Madam President, in reserving the right to object, there is no doubt that AI will have profound effects on America's economy, national security, and culture. It is already having an enormous beneficial impact on economic growth and productivity. Millions of Americans are using AI for everyday tasks like handling home repairs, teaching their children math, conducting legal research, or using it to work to draft memos. It is incredibly useful, and it will only become more so.
So Congress must not legislate on the issue of artificial intelligence hastily or in a closed manner. Robust AI legislation needs to involve both sides, and I trust that my Democratic friends who are on the floor today genuinely want to work together on this. I would note that with all three of the Democrat Senators on the floor, I have worked productively on other legislative matters, and I look forward to continuing to work productively on this matter as well which, I agree, is of exceptional importance.
As the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, I have also been having extensive and constructive conversations with Majority Leader Thune and Senator Klobuchar to give the government new authorities to protect against the potential catastrophic risks from AI. I think that is important.
Now, I agree with Senators Warner, Schatz, and Kim that our artificial intelligence presents new challenges. Some of the warnings we have had are as scary as hell. I commend my colleagues for wanting to tackle the issue, but I retain real reservations about this specific proposal. This bill would let the executive branch handpick a new AI safety board to unilaterally draft standards for AI developers on whatever it believes is related to "national security, national economic security, or public health and safety."
The Secretary of Commerce, in turn, would need to mandate by rule that AI developers then follow those standards. The Secretary would also exercise unilateral authority to change those standards based on national security. These terms are not bound by existing statutes or traditional legal doctrines or are even further defined. That concerns me because it is difficult to imagine what an ambitious bureaucrat couldn't shoehorn under this broad authority.
I would be more than happy to work with the sponsors on approaches that do not offer such unbounded discretion to the Federal Government and that are not an invitation for abuse, approaches like involving independent judges, which preserves debate and transparency through the adversarial process of litigation. Federal standards on advanced AI must also address the burgeoning patchwork of State laws.
I would be glad to address my concerns with the sponsors and to work together. We need a bipartisan solution. AI offers enormous potential, and the question of who wins the race for AI, whether it is the United States or China, I believe is the single most important economic question facing America. The answer is that one or the other will win, and to whichever country wins, trillions of dollars of investment will follow as will millions of new jobs. I want those millions of new jobs to be here in America. I don't want them in China.
More fundamentally, as to whichever nation wins that race, the values of that nation will suffuse AI. I do not want the world using an AI that is governed by the values of communist China, that is, governed by surveillance and espionage and propaganda and coercion and control. The Chinese communist Government wants to use AI to control its citizenry and to control everyone else. I am not interested in the American people being captive to that degree of power by the Chinese communist Government. I would far rather American values suffuse AI: free speech, individual liberty, free enterprise, individual rights. So winning the race for AI matters enormously.
Are there risks from AI? Of course. Any new tool has risks. I think we need guardrails particularly to protect against risks in the nuclear space with biohazards and critical infrastructure. Those are some of the most fundamental risks that we face.
We need to, as with any technology, have rules, but those rules should be bipartisan, and they should be measured and prudent. I don't believe we are there yet, although I am very happy to work with my colleagues constructively to get there and to get there in a bipartisan manner.
As of now, though, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The objection is heard.
The Senator from Virginia.
Madam President, I thank the Senator, and I look forward to working with him.
In terms of the composition of the safety board, that is where the rubber hits the road. You have to acknowledge that the frontier model has got most of the expertise. I think we all share a deep commitment, and as the chair and vice chair of the Intelligence Committee for the last decade, I have been calling out the CCP and their approach to technology that is just not in AI but across the board.
But I still--and I defer to my colleagues--feel like, my gosh, we are going to look pretty darned silly if something happens, and the American people turn dramatically against this technology because we didn't put safety first. Literally, the commercial ChatGPT model out there has created thousands--and this is not my word; it is the ChatGPT management's--of incidences where it has gone beyond what it was supposed to do. Literally, almost all of the members of the Anthropic company have said this something we need to address.
We have to do this with urgency. I look forward to working with the chairman. We have got to make it mandatory. We have got to make it safe.
And, clearly, how that Board is constructed--and it has to be able to move very, very quickly. I am not sure that the traditional judicial process could move that way, but I thank the chairman.
I don't know if my colleagues wanted to have a closing note as well.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Hawaii.
Madam President, I am mildly encouraged. I, obviously, would rather he not object, but I am encouraged by the potential for common ground here.
Composition of Boards, what the mechanism is for ensuring safety is something that I personally don't have religion on. The question at hand is: Should we have some sort of mandatory safety and cyber security regime, and how do we stand up something that is quick enough to deal with the hastening pace of this technology and the abundant evidence now that some of these AIs are escaping human control?
Look, I am always ready to modify something. If the Secretary of the Commerce Department shouldn't be the person in charge of determining the AI safety standards, that this should take 2 weeks rather than 6 months, you know, I am very openminded. But the threshold question is: Should this be voluntary or mandatory? And if you are saying you are open to some sort of mandatory regime with the caveats that you have expressed, I think that is progress.
I will make one final point. I think we get a little hung up on anthropomorphizing the tech itself, including this idea that the values are going to be imbued in the AI.
The AI gets given a task. It doesn't have ideas of its own. It doesn't have thoughts of its own. It doesn't have consciousness. It doesn't have feelings. And so this idea that we are going to have American, patriotic, liberty-loving AI and they are going to have the other kind I think is a misunderstanding of what we are actually talking about right now, which is we actually just want normal cyber security controls for this incredibly powerful tech. And the cyber security controls are going to have to be more robust than ever, but, like, that does not seem at all inconsistent with American values.
And if you want us to win the AI race--the quickest way to lose it is to allow a terrible incident to happen without any Federal guardrails, and then I think, figuratively speaking, the pitchforks will be coming.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from New Jersey.
Madam President, I will be quick here. I just want to say I hope we can be able to take this step and continue to move on. And as someone who is on the Commerce Committee, wanted to find ways to be able to engage.
I agree on the importance of America leading the innovation of the future, but I don't think that that competition, especially vis-a-vis China, is mutually exclusive with the need to be able to engage with safety and security.
We have pieces of the legislation, things that I have been pushing, like the MATCH Act, that are about us being able to further strengthen our innovative lead, and I hope that this body does take those measures up, as we have them before us in this very Congress. Within the end of the year, we can move forward on those types of steps.
But as we are engaged in this, it is not just about the United States. It is not just about China. It is about our ability to proliferate this technology all over the world. And whether or not all of these other countries are going to be choosing our technology or someone else's is going to depend on its performance and whether or not it carries risk.
So us being able to do this isn't just about showing the American people that we have something safe and secure, it is about a product that we hope the rest of the world will very much engage on and be using and driving American innovation as well as American prosperity going forward. So that is something that, again, I hope we can work on together.
I yield the floor.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Indiana.
Expressing Support for the Designation of September as Dystonia Awareness Month
Pages S5138–S5139 · Official textMadam President, in a few moments, I am going to ask for unanimous consent for my resolution to designate the month of September as Dystonia Awareness Month.
But before I do, I want to speak a little bit about dystonia, what it is, and how personal the disease is for me and my family. Dystonia is a neurological movement disorder that affects nearly 250,000 Americans. It causes involuntary muscle contractions and repetitive movements. These contractions can affect any part of the body, and they can be very painful. Dystonia affects people of almost any age, and it may develop without any clear cause.
My mom has suffered from dystonia for nearly 40 years, and I have seen firsthand how difficult the disease can be on anyone who has it. But my mom, with the help of good friends and family and some really good doctors, has never let dystonia hold her back from being a great mom, a great grandma, and from someone who goes out and lives her everyday life in the way that she has.
Dystonia is often misdiagnosed, and there is no cure for it yet. That is why it is so important to raise awareness about dystonia, what it is, and what it causes. Greater awareness leads to better research and eventually better treatments and hopefully even a cure.
I urge all of my colleagues to support this simple resolution and draw attention to this painful disease that affects so many.
Madam President, and, with that, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 917, which was submitted earlier today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (167 characters)
A resolution (S. Res. 917) expressing support for the designation of September as "Dystonia Awareness Month" to promote public awareness and understanding of dystonia.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution.
I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 917) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to. (The resolution, with its preamble, is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to modify the order from September 28 to allow 10 minutes of debate, equally divided, at 2:15 p.m., prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. President, the President of the United States--acting, in my view, without any legal authority--is imposing unilateral tariffs on Canada. Those tariffs are now being reciprocated by Canada on us.
They are doing enormous damage today to Vermonters and to Americans. They are doing enormous damage to our Canadian neighbors and their businesses. They are doing nothing beneficial for our long-term relationship with our major trading partner.
Canada is Vermont's major trading partner, but we are not unique. Thirty-four States, and, I think, including Idaho--I may be wrong--count Canada as their major trading partner.
Canada and the United States have been operating very well under a trade agreement, the USMCA. That was a trade agreement that President Trump bragged about--and, by the way, rightly bragged about--as the best trade deal ever. And that is being ripped up by the President, without any committee hearings in the Finance Committee, without any discussion with Republicans or Democrats, but with undeniable harm to everyday people in this country.
Senator Gillibrand and I have introduced the BAD DEAL Act, and it is to repeal these extraordinarily damaging, unjustified tariffs, give relief to commerce on both sides of the United States-Canadian border, and begin the process of healing our relationship with our closest ally.
I am going to just give a couple of examples of what has happened in Vermont. We have an extraordinary cheese-making company called Jasper Hill in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont. It was started by two college graduates a number of years ago. They are now worldwide renowned and win cheese-making awards internationally.
They have been a source of sustaining agriculture in Vermont, which is very tough. They have created hundreds of jobs. They have a piece of equipment that costs a million dollars. It is on the Canadian side of the border. They will have to pay an extra $500,000 if they need this piece of equipment. They can't do that.
We have a manufacturing company with a facility in Wisconsin and also, again, in the Northeast Kingdom. They make snow-moving equipment on tracks. They have a number of pending sales to Canada. This is a $500,000 piece of equipment. They are losing the sales because the buyer will have to pay an extra $250,000. For what?
This is just bone crushing, business crushing, job crushing, and there is no rationale for it. And then, when you add onto that the rhetoric--the 51st State, the Governor of Canada--our tourism industry, very close with Canada, is down with Canadian visitors by about 47 percent.
We have Jay Peak, which is an extraordinarily wonderful ski area for families. Canadians generally come down and have close relationships with the Vermonters up there in Burke, VT. They are not coming. And, by the way, it is an emotional blow, as well, because our business is like the Presiding Officer's. The folks really care about who their customers are. And some of these are bed and breakfasts with families that come back every single year.
And for what? Nothing--nothing good is coming of this.
The other point that I think is absolutely essential for every single one of us in the U.S. Senate to acknowledge is that the taxing power of this country is vested in the U.S. Congress, not in the President of the United States. And when the President is claiming emergency authority to justify these tariffs, when there is no emergency, and where even the grant of emergency authority, in a bipartisan way in years past, was based on the premise that there would be restraint on the part of the Executive and would only use it in the moment of a real emergency, that authority is just rampantly being abused by the Executive. And we, with our responsibility, under the Constitution, Republican or Democrat, must insist that it is this body that decides yes or no on taxes that are imposed on the American people. And make no mistake, a tariff is a tax.
Our bill--Senator Gillibrand and I--on these tariffs that are invoked under section 338, a never-before applied section of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, that notorious act that was an accelerant of driving this country into the Great Depression, would repeal that authority. It is called the Banning Antiquated Duties and Delivering Equitable American Levies, or BAD DEAL, Act. It would also repeal President Trump's import ban on various Canadian products.
In Vermont, the average household is going to be paying $4,500 more for goods and services due to rising costs, due in large part to the President's trade war. In Vermont, these section 338 tariffs, according to our agency of commerce, will cost Vermont businesses an additional $193 million.
For what? We are not going to build a road. We are not going to repair a bridge. We are not going to help farmers through a tough season. We are not going to be able to put that money into our schools.
It really hurts. One in four businesses in Vermont relies on trade with Canada, and Vermont buys more goods from Canada than the next nine largest foreign markets combined.
So it is time for us to accept our responsibility for taxing authority and not capitulate to an Executive who is reaching into the powers of this Congress. And we have the opportunity now, by acting, to end these punitive tariffs, these punitive taxes, that are leading to higher costs everywhere, including fertilizer costs in my State and in Idaho.
I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of S. 5397 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
Is there objection?
The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, first, with regard to Canada. Canada is a great ally and trading partner of the United States. That is true.
It is also true, however, that Canada has for years engaged in nontariff trade barriers against the United States that are unjustified. Think lumber, think dairy, and others. President Trump is trying to stop Canada from these nontariff barriers that are hurting Americans and have hurt Americans for years, and he is doing so by enforcing tariffs.
This is not the first time--nor is it likely the last--that a colleague of ours on the Senate floor has tried to pass unvetted legislation on the floor to address a disagreement with President Trump.
But as the chairman of the Finance Committee, which is the appropriate forum for legislation, I object to the unanimous consent request for S. 5397.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
The objection is heard.
Recess
Page S5139 · Official textThe ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore
Under the previous order, the Senate stands in recess until 2:15 p.m.
Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:31 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mrs. Britt).
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Wisconsin.
Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under Chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, of the Rule Submitted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services of the Department of Health and Human...
Pages S5139–S5140 · Official textPROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES RELATING TO "PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, HHS NOTICE OF BENEFIT AND PAYMENT PARAMETERS FOR 2027; AND BASIC HEALTH PROGRAM"--Motion to Proceed
Madam President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 456, S.J. Res. 197.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (416 characters)
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 456, S.J. Res. 197, a joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services of the Department of Health and Human Services relating to "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, HHS Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2027; and Basic Health Program".
The PRESIDING OFFICER
There will now be 10 minutes of debate equally divided.
Madam President, I rise today to ask my colleagues to join me in stopping President Trump from terminating healthcare for up to 2 million Americans on the Affordable Care Act.
Let's back up for a second. President Trump has made it clear that he does not like the Affordable Care Act. He has vowed and tried to repeal it for over a decade with absolutely no plan to replace it. That would leave 23 million Americans without insurance.
We are talking about hourly employees and contractors in the gig economy. We are talking about small business owners on our Main Streets. And we are talking about the one in four farmers who are already being pummeled from every side by higher costs brought on by President Trump.
Americans banded together and, so far, we have stopped President Trump and congressional Republicans from completely repealing the Affordable Care Act. But that hasn't stopped the President from doing everything he can to chip away at, and hollow out, marketplace coverage.
Republicans and President Trump refuse to keep tax credits that help working families afford their coverage. This alone is causing premiums to double for 22 million Americans and has pushed more than 2\1/2\ million Americans off their care because they simply could not afford it.
They have slashed the funding by 90 percent for navigators, the very experts who help people find affordable health insurance.
Just last week the Trump administration kicked hundreds of thousands of Americans off their insurance with no details as to why.
That brings us to this rule that undermines Americans' healthcare, jacks up cost, terminates coverage for millions more Americans. President Trump's policy will promote catastrophic health plans with extremely high deductibles and out-of-pocket costs, luring Americans into selecting plans that cover next to nothing when they get sick or injured. We call these junk plans.
The effort will also loosen physician network requirements, leaving Americans with fewer providers who will take their insurance. And it will allow insurers to offer nonnetwork plans to make it easier for insurers to raise out-of-pocket costs, sell new kinds of junk insurance coverage, increase deductibles, cover fewer services, and kick more providers out of network.
The result will be more Americans buying worse care that does not cover necessary services, from routine checkups to life-threatening emergencies. It will leave working families holding the bag for medical expenses.
The Trump administration itself says that this will kick 2 million Americans off their Affordable Care Act coverage while jacking up costs on millions more. Benefits could be reduced for tens of millions of Americans, meaning folks could lose access to coverage for addiction treatment, hearing aids, or other critical services. Plus, the rule would pile on redtape, increasing the paperwork burden of nearly 5 million Americans.
Americans understand what a lifeline this program is for a cancer patient, Americans with disabilities, working families, and entrepreneurs. On behalf of the 23 million Americans who rely on the Affordable Care Act for their health insurance, we cannot allow this administration to continue the attack, raise their costs, and undermine their ability to access quality care.
Right now, Americans are unequivocal: they cannot bear the high costs of life. The war in Iran is causing gas and grocery prices to skyrocket, our farmers are struggling from needless trade wars, and now the President is raising the costs of healthcare for millions of Americans.
I urge my colleagues to stand with the vast majority of Americans who support the Affordable Care Act and stop this misguided rule that would jeopardize care for millions of Americans.
I yield the floor.
Madam President, Republicans yield back all time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
All time is yielded back.
The question is on agreeing to the motion to proceed.
I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll. The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan).
The result was announced--yeas 48, nays 51, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (783 characters)
Alsobrooks Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Blunt Rochester Booker Cantwell Collins Coons Cortez Masto Duckworth Durbin Fetterman Gallego Gillibrand Hassan Heinrich Hickenlooper Hirono Kaine Kelly Kim King Klobuchar Lujan Markey Merkley Murphy Murray Ossoff Padilla Peters Reed Rosen Sanders Schatz Schiff Schumer Shaheen Slotkin Smith Van Hollen Warner Warnock Warren Welch Whitehouse Wyden
Armstrong Banks Barrasso Blackburn Boozman Britt Budd Capito Cassidy Cornyn Cotton Cramer Crapo Cruz Curtis Daines Ernst Fischer Graham Grassley Hagerty Hawley Hoeven Husted Hyde-Smith Johnson Justice Kennedy Lankford Lee Lummis Marshall McConnell McCormick Moody Moran Moreno Murkowski Paul Ricketts Risch Rounds Schmitt Scott (FL) Scott (SC) Sheehy Thune Tillis Tuberville Wicker Young
Sullivan
The motion was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Banks)
The Senator from Missouri.
House Bills
Page S5140 · Official textMr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc: H.R. 1945, which is at the desk, and Calendar No. 492, H.R. 1550.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bills en bloc.
I ask unanimous consent that the bills be considered read a third time and passed, en bloc, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bills considered and passed en bloc are as follows:
America's National Churchill Museum National Historic Landmark Act
Page S5140 · Official textAMERICA'S NATIONAL CHURCHILL MUSEUM NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK ACT The bill (H.R. 1945) to designate the America's National Churchill Museum National Historic Landmark, and for other purposes, was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Strengthening America's Turning Point Act
Pages S5140–S5144 · Official textThe bill (H.R. 1550) to redesignate Saratoga National Historical Park as Saratoga National Battlefield Park was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Mr. President, on October 3, 1945, a Mr. Franc L. McCluer of a liberal arts college in Fulton, MO, set pen to paper to write to then former-Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who was enjoying his retirement, having recently lost an election in the midst or just after the Second World War. Mr. McCluer--President McClure of the college, which was named Westminster--invited the former Prime Minister to come to Missouri, to Fulton, to deliver a series of lectures.
And I suspect that the invitation might there have met its final end, had not another American and, indeed, another Missourian appended a few words to the bottom.
Here is what President Harry S. Truman wrote in his own hand on that invitation to Winston Churchill. He says:
Text printed in the Record (100 characters)
[Dear Winston:] This is a wonderful school in my home state. Hope you can do it. I'll introduce you.
So, lo and behold, the invitation made its way to former-Prime Minister Churchill, who accepted on the spot; and he and Harry Truman traveled together overland by train to Westminster College in Fulton, MO, to deliver, on Churchill's part, what became one of the most famous speeches of the 20th century, known as the Iron Curtain speech.
It was such a significant speech and such a significant moment in the history not just of Westminster College and Fulton, MO, but such a significant moment in American history that the trustees of the college and the leaders of the town decided thereafter it would be well worth commemorating. And so after that speech was concluded, they tried to decide on an appropriate form of commemoration.
They settled on a symbol that I think is altogether fitting: a church--a church called St. Mary Aldermanbury--actually, from London, which the trustees of Westminster and the town leaders of Fulton had brought from London brick by brick and rebuilt on the college campus at Westminster.
Here is a picture of it right there, with a statue of Churchill delivering his famous Iron Curtain speech that stands on the site to this today.
The thing about the church is, its own story retells the grit and determination of the American people through depression and war and also of the long alliance between the people of the United States and the people of the United Kingdom, because the church was first built in the 12th century as a parish church in London, but then it was destroyed by the Great Fire of London in 1666. Sir Christopher Wren, the famous architect, redesigned it and had it rebuilt in 1679, only for it to be gutted and destroyed once again by the London Blitz in 1940.
And there the church sat in ruins until the people of Westminster in Fulton, MO, brought it to the United States--to Fulton, to the campus--and rebuilt it as a commemoration of the speech, yes, but I would suggest even something more: as a commemoration and mark of what we hold dearest together, what we most cherish as Americans, because that church symbolizes, really, the cradle of our civilization; the values that underlie who we are as a people; the sanctity of the individual; the rights of individual conscience; the right to worship; the liberties that flow to us not from a government, not from a bureaucrat, but from almighty God, as our own Declaration of Independence, 250 years old this year, so eloquently declares.
And there the church stands today, continuing as a symbol of what it means to be an American, continuing as a symbol of what we hold most dear, most valuable, most cherished as a people.
And today, the measure that we just adopted on this floor makes, for the first time, this landmark into a National Historic Landmark, there on the campus of Westminster in Fulton, MO, that will forever preserve this historic place and this historic site for posterity but will also, I think, communicate the significance of this moment and the significance of the church and what it represents for the American story.
And in this time of trial and difficulty we face in our own country, when so many question the value of our historical heritage, when so many question the fundamentals of our culture and suggest that this country is fundamentally evil, fundamentally racist, fundamentally bigoted, fundamentally ill-founded, I think this church and this landmark speak to the great and enduring goodness of our country, the powerful and enduring significance of the values on which this country is founded.
And I hope now, for decades and indeed, Lord willing, for centuries to come, this church will stand on the campus of Westminster in Fulton, MO, blessed as a National Historic Landmark, to speak to the principles that are at the heart of the American experiment and which we reaffirm in this 250th year and which continue to shine brightly in the State of Missouri.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Iowa.
Mr. President, lowering costs for Americans has been a key focus of this Republican Congress. The 2025 Working Families Tax Cut Act prevented the largest tax increase in the history of our country. If that bill had not passed, taxes would have gone up by about $3,500 per family.
The tax cuts have put more money into working families' and seniors' pocketbooks by establishing no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and expanding tax relief for seniors to the tune, for seniors, of a $6,000 tax credit.
It also increased the child tax credit, and it also has a deductibility of interest on car loans. So you see, when we call it the Working Families Tax Cut Act, you can see the important provisions that back up that title. Those taxpayers earning between $50,000 to $200,000 that took advantage of at least one of these new deductions received an average tax cut of between $815 and $1,250.
Moreover, the rest of the law made pro-growth policies that incentivized business investment permanently. This has enabled Iowa companies such as Sukup Manufacturing in Sheffield and Vermeer Corporation in Pella to fund multimillion-dollar expansions and add hundreds of good-paying jobs.
This Senator has worked to lower costs of healthcare by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse out of the healthcare system. I am also working hard to hold pharmaceutical companies and powerful drug middlemen called pharmacy benefit managers accountable.
In February, Congress passed key PBM reforms to lower drug costs for seniors and Americans with private health insurance. Of course, everybody agrees more needs to be done to stop anticompetitive practices of Big Pharma and these pharmacy benefit managers.
I will continue to push to fix a broken system and lower drug costs. I have also worked to lower food costs by supporting American agriculture and passing the farm bill. Lowering high input costs for farmers is key, a very key way to help American agriculture and, at the same time, all American families at the dinner table.
The Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee-passed farm bill includes my transparency tools to help bring down fertilizer costs. It also includes year-round E15 that will deliver a $14 billion boost in corn demand and lower the price at the pump of up to 40 cents per gallon.
Here in the Senate, we have expanded and protected the Trump administration's effort to remove redtape and put more money back into the pockets of working families and small business owners. So far, the administration's efforts have resulted in over $1 trillion in total regulatory cost reductions.
Reducing redtape spurs innovation and lowers production costs, putting downward pressure on the price of household goods.
Last here, but not least, affordability requires fiscal sanity, something the Biden administration didn't have because fiscal recklessness by the previous administration spurred 9 percent inflation, costing Iowa households an extra $7,000 in just his first 20 months in office.
Now, we hear all this talk about inflation since Trump took over. Is the memory of Americans so short that they don't remember 9 percent inflation in the previous administration and how now it is dramatically down?
Now, self-proclaimed democrat socialists are running for office, promising a pile of budget-busting policies rather than delivering affordability. Such policies would exacerbate inflation and push up interest rates on mortgages, car loans, and consumer credits.
In contrast, Republicans, by focusing on rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse in government, are working to snuff out inflation and contain interest costs. This includes trimming $1 trillion in mandatory spending as part of the Working Families Tax Cut Act. This work and more are making life more affordable for America.
Mr. President, now another short comment I want to make on another subject about cancer screening. Last week, I introduced a bipartisan cancer screening bill titled the "Standardizing Cancer Recommendations for Early Evaluation and Navigation of Screening Act"; SCREENS, as an acronym for that legislation and that long name of the legislation.
The bill will improve access to cancer screening guidelines so they are more accessible, transparent, and user-friendly.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the United States. We know that access to cancer screenings increases the chance of early treatment and reduces mortality. This is especially important for rural Americans and with the rising rates of cancer in young people.
To ensure patients have access to the best information at their fingertips or in the doctor's office, the Federal Government, through the Office of National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, can help ensure cancer screening recommendations are in a data-friendly format for apps, for tools, and for interoperable technology development.
Cancer screening guidelines still sit in lengthy documents that are not easy to navigate for patients or even for providers. These guidelines are routinely updated and refined, but it is difficult to track every change.
Patients want to know: Are they at risk for cancer and when should they get screened? Patients expect doctors to have the latest information, and they often have sticky notes on the recommendations taped to their computer, but it might not be the latest information or applicable to a particular patient.
There are some leading examples that are working to address this problem, including the Cancer Screen Iowa tool and Decision Precision+. My legislation will enable more technology development for patients and providers by streamlining access to cancer screening guidelines.
Making sure cancer screening recommendations are more patient-centered is common sense. Improving cancer research, access to early detection and screening, and cancer care are critical in defeating cancer.
I am proud to say that Iowa is taking this same comprehensive approach. This includes the cutting-edge research at the University of Iowa's Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center and Iowa's use of the $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Fund that was in the tax bill of last year that is investing in rural cancer care at rural hospitals and clinics across the State. I will keep fighting to prevent cancer and improve cancer care.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Florida.
Mr. President, I am going to say something that might shock people here: Zohran Mamdani is right. Yes, the socialist mayor of New York City Zohran Mamdani is absolutely right about something that is facing every American right now: Our political system has totally failed the American people and is set to fail the next generation too.
Now socialism is not the solution to this problem, but I am not shocked that affordability is the No. 1 issue for Americans right now. Overall inflation is up 500 percent over the last 50 years.
A college education used to be an affordable investment toward getting a good-paying job. Thanks to government--your government--it is now too often a 4-year runway to a lifetime of debt.
The cost of a college degree has gone up 1,500 percent in the last 50 years without the wages to match it. Average student debt is just under $40,000, according to the Education Data Initiative. Why? Government; your government.
Then there is the cost of a home. A first home used to be a monumental stepping stone for a young family. I can remember when we bought our first home. Now, it is out of reach to almost everyone. Home prices have gone up 800 percent over the last 50 years.
Fifty years ago, the median age of a first-time home buyer was 29 years old; today, it is 40. Why? Government; your government.
How are people supposed to afford to start a family if they can't even afford a house until they are 40?
Then there are other costs to worry about. When I finished my enlistment in the U.S. Navy, healthcare costs for a family were about $700 a year for a family of four--$700. Now, thanks to government interference, especially ObamaCare, costs continue to go up and options are getting more and more limited for the average family.
The cost of healthcare is up over 1,000 percent over the last 50 years. Why? Government. All of these costs have outpaced inflation, and all of these industries have seen the government get more involved over the last 50 years.
The answer is not more government. More government is simply not working, and it never did. For example, the Federal Government budgeted more than $1.2 trillion--$1.2 trillion--for low-income assistance programs last year. According to the Washington Post, "Using the Census Bureau's official poverty count, that anti-poverty spending comes out to $35,000 in annual expenditures for every person in poverty"--$35,000 in annual expenditures for every person in poverty--"or $181,000 per family in poverty."
If we are spending that much, why isn't it working? The fact of the matter is that we have been trying to spend our way to fixing poverty with our current approach for over 60 years. We are now $40 trillion in debt.
To those who want to claim it is all defense spending, that is not true. We spent about 3 percent of our GDP on defense spending last fiscal year. It makes up 13 percent of the Federal budget. Never mind that handling the military is one of the few things the U.S. Constitution actually tells Congress to do.
But we spend about $3 billion per day on interest payments on our debt while we run $2 trillion deficits for programs that clearly aren't working--$2 trillion each year.
Now, we can't tax our way out of this. The U.S. Federal Government collected a record $5.3 trillion in gross taxes during fiscal year 2025. I don't need people that say: Oh, their taxes are too low. If you confiscated every asset from every billionaire in the United States, you would only be able to run the Federal Government for just over a year.
Democrats say: Oh, just tax the rich. So we will take all the money from the billionaires, you can barely fund the government for a year.
Now, those who think--you know, then who do you think democrat socialists are coming for? Who do you think they are going to come for when they bleed the millionaires and billionaires? They are going to come for you and your family and everything you worked hard for.
The socialists are correctly identifying the problem, which is the cost of living. People understand that it is the fault of Congress giving them the short end of the deal year after year. It is not a surprise that people see hope in an alternative like socialism when it is clear that politicians maintaining the status quo aren't interested, and they are not doing anything to help them.
But socialism only leads to ruin in the end. If this country turns toward socialism, my grandkids won't have an America to inherit. The rise of socialism in America is terrifying to anyone who has read a history book, but it shouldn't shock anyone who watches Washington fail to lead with policies that work for American people.
Every 2 years, the DC swamp politicians beg for votes with the same empty promises: to hold government accountable. Oh, yes, they are going to hold government accountable; they are going to lower prices; they are going to fight for the American dream.
We have watched this cycle repeat decade after decade, and both parties are complicit. And every American knows that things have only gotten worse. Instead of holding government accountable, politicians in Washington have armed a $40 trillion debt bomb by massively expanding the Federal Government year after year.
We are only one economic crisis away from exploding. While promising lower prices, Congress keeps approving massive government spending bills, causing prices and interest rates to skyrocket for the same voters we promised to lower prices for.
In the name of protecting the American people, Big Government has crept into every part of our lives and crushed opportunity and put the American dream on life support. Let's look at the facts. Americans have seen this play out and are furious about it--especially young people. They were robbed, and the culprits are the ones in this building from both parties.
President Trump and his administration are doing everything they can--everything they constitutionally can--to fix this. The poverty rate reached the lowest point in American history last year, and child poverty also reached a record low. Since President Trump took office, more than 1.5 million Americans have been lifted out of poverty. More than 1 million new private sector jobs have been created during the Trump administration. Wages are rising, but inflation--inflation caused by government spending approved by Congress--is cutting into what those wage gains can do for families.
The simple fact is that Congress has the power of the purse, not the President. Congress has been abusing that power for decades, and Congress is responsible here.
Who can blame the American people for being angry? The American dream that existed for their parents and grandparents is out of reach for a lot of them. Where is the outrage on their behalf in this Chamber? Washington's failures have left them feeling cheated and disillusioned with our political system and way of life, stuck in a world where they can't afford to buy a house, have decent healthcare, or start a family. How can the American dream survive like that?
Their anger is real and it is justified, but the answer from today's Democrat Party--the embrace of socialism--will not solve any of their problems. Socialists promise steady wages, good healthcare, and plenty of benefits. It sounds really nice, and also, it is all free, but let's look at what happens when you choose socialism. You hand over all the control of your life to the government in exchange for a promise, but you get no leverage. The government gets to make all the choices. All the decisions are made by government to "level the playing field." So what does government do? It controls where you work, how much money you make, where you can live, and where you can go to school. They make all your decisions.
The government becomes the one that can decide if you live in a house or a one-bedroom apartment. The government decides how much food your children need or whether your elderly mother can have surgery.
Karl Marx summed it up well when he described a communist society that all socialists want. Remember, socialism is really just a gateway drug to communism. Marx said that perfection in government was creating a society that was "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Under socialism, the government, not you, determines what your needs are. They decide what you need. You don't need that new shirt. You don't need a bigger home. You don't need more money for your family. You don't need more diapers for your baby. You don't need cataract surgery; your other eye is fine. Under socialism, people dream, but achieving dreams is not allowed. Everyone gets the same crappy deal. There is no hope. The government tells you what you are entitled to, and it always is less and less and less. The only dream under socialism is survival and escape.
Ronald Reagan talked about this 60 years ago in his "A Time For Choosing" speech. There is nowhere for Americans to escape to. If our way of life fails, there is nowhere else to go. Where would you go?
If you think I am exaggerating, there are plenty of Cuban and Venezuelan socialism survivors in my great State of Florida who could share their stories.
Socialism isn't the answer, and I think a lot of Americans would say they don't want it. So where do we go? If more young people feel like the American dream doesn't exist for them, how do we prove them wrong? The answer is simple: Listen to the American people. They are smart. Make government work for the things that are most important to them. We need to blow up the status quo in Washington to lower prices--we need lower prices; fuel private sector job creation--we need more private sector jobs; and return to American freedom. American freedom is what gave me and the generations before me the chance to succeed.
We have to do three things. We have to dramatically reduce government spending to balance the Federal budget, shred the massive regulatory regime that has grown out of control in Washington, and third, we have to make job creation the No. 1 priority through tax cuts, smart investment, and good economic policy.
Does it work? It absolutely works. I did it when I was Governor of Florida. When I ran for Governor, I said: We are going to create 700,000 private sector jobs in 7 years. By the end, we created 1.7 million new private sector jobs in 8 years. We brought in countless new businesses, and we helped Florida businesses expand.
So I have good news for the people worried about the American dream and the Democrats' turn to socialism: It is never too late to turn things around. The choice in front of us isn't complicated. It is incredibly simple, but it won't be easy. We don't need any new laws, actually. We need self-control. We need self-control on spending.
Eventually, we will have to do what every American family does and prioritize where we spend money. We know how much money we make, we know we cannot spend more than that, and we prioritize our spending. We have to do the exact same thing in DC.
We need to be willing to stay here to debate with each other about how we reduce our government spending and how we prioritize spending. Working 2\1/2\ days a week is not going to cut it. No business does that. We need to roll up our sleeves and get to work.
When I came in as Governor, the budget hadn't been balanced in Florida in decades. How did we balance it? I told them that we are not going to spend more than we take in. That is what every family does, and that is what happened.
But until we as a body decide enough is enough, we only have ourselves to blame for the high prices our constituents are facing now.
Washington's obsession with spending, spending, spending has become so reckless that we are now running multitrillion-dollar annual deficits. These deficits are fueling a $40 trillion debt that costs more than $1 trillion in interest annually.
That is $1 trillion at today's interest rates. What happens if those interest rates double? That is $1 trillion that provides zero return for American families. What do we get out of it? It is not going to build a better military, Social Security, roads, Medicare. To save the programs Americans depend on, we must reduce government spending in all the places it doesn't provide a real return for taxpayers and finally balance the Federal budget.
When I was Governor of Florida, we went through all the lines of the budget, 4,000 lines of the budget. We had a written purpose for every line. We should be doing that here. And if it doesn't meet the purpose, we don't do it anymore. That is what you do with your own money.
The beautiful thing about solving this problem is it doesn't need more legislation. We don't need another law. We don't need more laws. We need to use all the serious brain power in Congress that we already have and use the appropriations process to stop funding stupid programs that don't work.
To make sure that workers keep more of their paychecks and can afford loans for cars, homes, and businesses, we must balance the budget. When we balance the budget, interest rates will come down.
Next, Congress must take an absolute sledgehammer to Federal Government regulations. Why do we need more regulations and people telling us how to lead our lives?
As Governor of Florida, I slashed 5,000 burdensome regulations, taking permitting times from months to days, eliminating stupid regulatory hurdles that had no impact on safety, and cutting costs to start and grow a business. That is what we did. I cut taxes and fees a hundred times, and we still balanced the budget and paid down debt. So it clearly can be done. It can be done in any city, any State, and it clearly can be done here. We should be doing it.
Jobs should be our mantra. We should be focused on jobs every day. That should be the No. 1 priority of the Federal Government--how to create more good-paying jobs.
The American dream we all believe in is on life support for young people, but it is not dead yet. I have launched a Rescue America project to reignite the American dream. It starts by pointing out all the ways that Big Government and bad policy have completely betrayed the average American, and it is plotting a roadmap back to sanity. From there, we will map the way back to the kind of country that made it possible for a poor kid like me who grew up in public housing, born to a single mom, to become a CEO, a Governor, and a Senator.
If we want to spare the next generation the misery, the absolute misery of socialism, despair, and hopelessness, we need to show them the opportunities freedom always offers when Washington actually works for them and they have the opportunity to live the American dream.
For every socialist, shame on you. You are absolutely lying to the American people. Your ideas result in despair, death, and hopelessness.
To every young person watching the cost of starting a family rise while Washington refuses to act, this speech is for you.
For every blue-collar worker--like my dad--who sees his taxes funding wasteful programs while his family does without, I feel your pain.
For every aspiring business owner with a great idea drowning in regulations and redtape, preventing you from getting started unless you are rich, I am working for you.
The solution is simple, but it won't be easy. We can balance the budget tomorrow. Families do it every day. We just need to have the courage to sit down with each other and figure out how and not leave town until we do it.
Today, we could cut the number of regulations in half, if we wanted to, the exact same way--just sit down and do it. We just need to be willing to put in the hours and get the job done.
This is all doable. We have to do it for the benefit of every young person in this country. Every child should have the same opportunity to live the American dream that each one of us believed when we were growing up.
Let's get to work.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. President, I have come to the floor this afternoon to seek unanimous consent to pass a bill. This is called the Southcentral Foundation Land Transfer Act.
I know that oftentimes, Members come the floor and say: Oh, it is not controversial at all.
Let me tell you, this one is pretty straightforward, and it is truly a noncontroversial provision.
Senator Sullivan and I have introduced this in the Senate. Congressman Begich is leading the companion legislation in the House. We are seeking to send this bill to the President's desk before recess because it has become time-sensitive.
It is pretty simple. It would convey approximately 3.5 acres--3.5 acres--of Federal land in Anchorage. This is land that is currently owned by the Indian Health Service, and it would be conveyed from IHS to the Southcentral Foundation.
The Southcentral Foundation is an Alaskan Native Tribal health organization that provides healthcare services to IHS beneficiaries under a self-governance compact. The Southcentral Foundation has built something pretty special on this property. They call it the Quyana Clubhouse. This is where Alaska Native people can find support, find connection and a path forward when they are dealing with mental health challenges.
The program serves adults that are over 21 who are experiencing severe and persistent mental health issues through case management, therapy sessions, health education, tobacco cessation, life skills training--all while integrating Alaska Native culture.
Given its success, Southcentral Foundation plans to expand the building as well as the services they provide as they work to support intensive levels of outpatient programming. Right now, Southcentral Foundation is providing these services in one of the oldest buildings in the IHS inventory in Alaska. They were really never intended to provide this kind of patient care. In fact, one of the rooms that is now still being used was once a morgue. So it has been around for a while.
As I noted, we are here because this straightforward land transfer has become time-sensitive. Without ownership of the parcel, Southcentral Foundation cannot finance and construct capital improvements and permanent facilities and, in turn, do more to address mental health in Alaska. So this legislation will give Southcentral Foundation the certainty it needs to keep investing in places like Quyana and continue providing these services for the long term.
This is a House-passed bill. It can go directly to the President and be signed into law. I would hope that we would agree to do that today because there are no substantive objections to it. Both the House and Senate have had hearings on their prospective versions. Both have been marked up and reported favorably by unanimous consent on the Committee on Indian Affairs.
So, really, there is no reason to hold the bill up. We can add to our record of bipartisan legislating at scale. We can address an issue that is important to Alaska Native health and uphold the Federal trust responsibility by passing the Southcentral Foundation Land Transfer Act.
The Calendar
Page S5144 · Official textMr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc: Calendar No. 535, H.R. 3620, the Southcentral Foundation Land Transfer Act of 2025; Calendar No. 459, S. 3383; and Calendar No. 682, S. 3219.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bills en bloc, which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs.
I ask unanimous consent that amendments, where applicable, be agreed to; that the bills, as amended, if amended, be considered read a third time and passed en bloc; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bills considered and passed en bloc are as follows:
Southcentral Foundation Land Transfer Act of 2025
Page S5144 · Official textThe bill (H.R. 3620) to provide for the conveyance of certain property to the Southcentral Foundation located in Anchorage, Alaska, and for other purposes, was ordered to a third read, was read the third time, and passed.
Unlocking Native Lands and Opportunities for Commerce and Key Economic Developments Act of 2025
Pages S5144–S5145 · Official textThe bill (S. 3383) to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. The amendment (No. 6839), in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to, as follows: SA 6839. Ms. MURKOWSKI (for Mr. Schatz (for himself and Ms. Murkowski)) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 3383, to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (3,372 characters)
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Unlocking Native Lands and Opportunities for Commerce and Key Economic Developments Act of 2025".
SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF TRIBAL LEASES AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY
ACROSS INDIAN LAND.
(a) Leases of Trust or Restricted Lands.--The first section of the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539, chapter 615; 25 U.S.C. 415) (commonly known as the "Long-Term Leasing Act"), is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), in the second sentence, by inserting ", land held in trust for any other Indian tribe included on the most recent list published by the Secretary pursuant to section 104(a) of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5131(a))" after "Chehalis Reservation";
(2) by striking "That (a) any" and inserting the following:
"SECTION 1. LEASES OF TRUST OR RESTRICTED LANDS.
"(a) Authorized Purposes; Term; Approval by Secretary.--Any"; and
(3) in subsection (h)(1)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking "and the term of the lease does not exceed--" and inserting a period; and
(B) by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B).
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 2 of the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539, chapter 615; 25 U.S.C. 415a) (commonly known as the "Long-Term Leasing Act"), is amended by inserting "of the Interior" after "Secretary" each place it appears.
(c) Modifications of Rights-of-Way Across Indian Land.--The Act of February 5, 1948 (62 Stat. 17, chapter 45), is amended--
(1) in the first section (62 Stat. 17, chapter 45; 25 U.S.C. 323), by striking "That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, empowered to" and inserting the following:
"SECTION 1. RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR ALL PURPOSES ACROSS INDIAN
LAND.
"(a) Rights-of-Way.--The Secretary of the Interior may";
(2) in section 2 (62 Stat. 18, chapter 45; 25 U.S.C. 324), by striking "organized under the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984), as amended; the Act of May 1, 1936 (49 Stat. 1250); or the Act of June 26, 1936 (49 Stat. 1967),"; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
"SEC. 8. TRIBAL GRANTS OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY.
"(a) Rights-of-Way.--
"(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), an Indian tribe may grant a right-of-way over and across the Tribal land of the Indian tribe for any purpose.
"(2) Authority.--A right-of-way granted under paragraph (1) shall not require the approval of the Secretary of the Interior or a grant by the Secretary of the Interior under the section 1 if the right-of-way granted under paragraph (1) is executed in accordance with a Tribal regulation approved by the Secretary of the Interior under subsection (b).
"(b) Review of Tribal Regulations.--
"(1) Tribal regulation submission and approval.--
"(A) Submission.--An Indian tribe seeking to grant a right-of-way under subsection (a) shall submit for approval a Tribal regulation governing the granting of rights-of-way over and across the Tribal land of the Indian tribe.
"(B) Approval.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Interior shall have the authority to approve or disapprove any Tribal regulation submitted under subparagraph (A).
"(2) Considerations for approval.--
"(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall approve a Tribal regulation submitted under paragraph (1)(A), if the Tribal regulation--
=========================== NOTE =========================== On page S5144, September 29, 2026, second column, through S5145, second column, the following appears: UNLOCKING NATIVE LANDS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMERCE AND KEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS ACT OF 2025 The bill (S. 3383) to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows: S. 3383 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the "Unlocking Native Lands and Opportunities for Commerce and Key Economic Developments Act of 2025". . . ."(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.". The online Record has been corrected to read: UNLOCKING NATIVE LANDS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMERCE AND KEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS ACT OF 2025 The bill (S. 3383) to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. The amendment (No. 6839), in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to, as follows: AMANDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE intended to be proposed by Mr. SCHATZ (for himself and Ms. MURKOWSKI) . . ."(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.". The bill (S. 3383), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. ========================= END NOTE =========================
Text printed in the Record (6,559 characters)
"(i) is consistent with any regulations (or successor regulations) issued by the Secretary of the Interior under section 4;
"(ii) provides for an environmental review process that includes--
"(I) the identification and evaluation of any significant impacts the proposed action may have on the environment; and
"(II) a process for ensuring--
"(aa) that the public is informed of, and has a reasonable
opportunity to comment on, any significant environmental
impacts of the proposed action identified by the Indian tribe
under subclause (I); and
"(bb) the Indian tribe provides a response to each
relevant and substantive public comment on the significant
environmental impacts identified by the Indian tribe under
subclause (I) before the Indian tribe approves the right-of-
way.
"(B) Statutory exemptions.--The Secretary of the Interior,
in making an approval decision under this subsection, shall
not be subject to--
"(i) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
"(ii) section 306108 of title 54, United States Code; or
"(iii) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.).
"(3) Review process.--
"(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date
on which the Indian tribe submits a Tribal regulation to the
Secretary of the Interior under paragraph (1)(A), the
Secretary of the Interior shall--
"(i) review the Tribal regulation;
"(ii) approve or disapprove the Tribal regulation; and
"(iii) notify the Indian tribe that submitted the Tribal
regulation of the approval or disapproval.
"(B) Written documentation.--If the Secretary of the
Interior disapproves a Tribal regulation submitted under
paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary of the Interior shall include
with the disapproval notification under subparagraph (A)(iii)
written documentation describing the basis for the
disapproval.
"(C) Extension.--The Secretary of the Interior may, after
consultation with the Indian tribe that submitted a Tribal
regulation under paragraph (1)(A), extend the 180-day period
described in subparagraph (A).
"(4) Federal environmental review.--Notwithstanding
paragraphs (2) and (3), if an Indian tribe carries out a
project or activity funded by a Federal agency, the Indian
tribe may rely on the environmental review process of the
applicable Federal agency rather than any Tribal
environmental review process required under this subsection.
"(c) Documentation.--An Indian tribe granting a right-of-
way under subsection (a) shall provide to the Secretary of
the Interior--
"(1) a copy of the right-of-way, including any amendments
or renewals; and
"(2) if the right-of-way allows for compensation to be
made directly to the Indian tribe, documentation of payments
that are sufficient, as determined by the Secretary of the
Interior, as to enable the Secretary of the Interior to
discharge the trust responsibility of the United States under
subsection (d).
"(d) Trust Responsibility.--
"(1) In general.--The United States shall not be liable
for losses sustained by any party to a right-of-way granted
under subsection (a).
"(2) Authority of the secretary.--
"(A) In general.--Pursuant to the authority of the
Secretary of the Interior to fulfill the trust obligation of
the United States to the applicable Indian tribe under
Federal law (including regulations), the Secretary of the
Interior may, on reasonable notice from the applicable Indian
tribe and at the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior,
enforce the provisions of, or cancel, any right-of-way
granted by the Indian tribe under subsection (a).
"(B) Authority.--The enforcement or cancellation of a
right-of-way under subparagraph (A) shall be conducted using
regulatory procedures issued under section 6.
"(e) Compliance.--
"(1) In general.--An interested party, after exhaustion of
any applicable Tribal remedies, may submit a petition to the
Secretary of the Interior, at such time and in such form as
determined by the Secretary of the Interior, to review the
compliance of an applicable Indian tribe with a Tribal
regulation approved by the Secretary of the Interior under
subsection (b).
"(2) Violations.--If the Secretary of the Interior
determines that a Tribal regulation was violated after
conducting a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the
Interior may take any action the Secretary of the Interior
determines to be necessary to remedy the violation, including
rescinding the approval of the Tribal regulation and
reassuming responsibility for approving rights-of-way through
the trust land of the applicable Indian tribe.
"(3) Documentation.--If the Secretary of the Interior
determines that a Tribal regulation was violated after
conducting a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the
Interior shall--
"(A) provide written documentation, with respect to the
Tribal regulation that has been violated, to the appropriate
interested party and Indian tribe;
"(B) provide the applicable Indian tribe with a written
notice of the alleged violation; and
"(C) prior to the exercise of any remedy, including
rescinding the approval for the applicable Tribal regulation
or reassuming responsibility for approving rights-of-way
through the trust land of the applicable Indian tribe,
provide the applicable Indian tribe with--
"(i) a hearing that is on the record; and
"(ii) a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged
violation.
"(f) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section affects the
application of any Tribal regulations issued under Federal
environmental law.
"(g) Effect of Tribal Regulations.--An approved Tribal
regulation under subsection (b) shall not preclude an Indian
tribe from, in the discretion of the Indian tribe, consenting
to the grant of a right-of-way by the Secretary of the
Interior under the section 1.
"(h) Terms of Right-of-Way.--The compensation for, and
terms of, a right-of-way granted under subsection (a) will be
determined by--
"(1) negotiations by the Indian tribe; or
"(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.
"(i) Jurisdiction.--The grant of a right-of-way under
subsection (a) does not waive the sovereign immunity of the
Indian tribe or diminish the jurisdiction of that Indian
tribe over the Tribal land subject to the right-of-way,
unless otherwise provided in--
"(1) the grant of the right-of-way; or
"(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.".
The bill (S. 3383), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
=========================== NOTE =========================== On page S5144, September 29, 2026, second column, through S5145, second column, the following appears: UNLOCKING NATIVE LANDS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMERCE AND KEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS ACT OF 2025 The bill (S. 3383) to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows: S. 3383 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the "Unlocking Native Lands and Opportunities for Commerce and Key Economic Developments Act of 2025". . . ."(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.". The online Record has been corrected to read: UNLOCKING NATIVE LANDS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMMERCE AND KEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS ACT OF 2025 The bill (S. 3383) to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. The amendment (No. 6839), in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to, as follows: AMANDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE intended to be proposed by Mr. SCHATZ (for himself and Ms. MURKOWSKI) . . ."(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.". The bill (S. 3383), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. ========================= END NOTE =========================
Albuquerque Indian School Act of 2026
Pages S5145–S5146 · Official textThe bill (S. 3219) to transfer certain Federal land into trust for certain Indian Pueblos in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs with an amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (6,275 characters)
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Albuquerque Indian School Act of 2026".
SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF LAND INTO TRUST FOR THE 19 PUEBLOS.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) 19 pueblos.--The term "19 Pueblos" means the New Mexico Indian Pueblos of--
(A) Acoma;
(B) Cochiti;
(C) Isleta;
(D) Jemez;
(E) Laguna;
(F) Nambe;
(G) Ohkay Owingeh (San Juan);
(H) Picuris;
(I) Pojoaque;
(J) San Felipe;
(K) San Ildefonso;
(L) Sandia;
(M) Santa Ana;
(N) Santa Clara;
(O) Santo Domingo;
(P) Taos;
(Q) Tesuque;
(R) Zia; and
(S) Zuni.
(2) Indian pueblo cultural center.--The term "Indian Pueblo Cultural Center" means the nonprofit organization wholly owned and operated by the 19 Pueblos (or any successor corporate or administrative entity designated by the 19 Pueblos).
(3) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.
(4) Survey.--Except as provided in subsection (e), the term "survey" means the survey plat entitled "Plat of Tracts 1 Thru 3 Lands of US Indian Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs", prepared by Surv-Tek, Inc., and dated May 2023.
(b) Transfer of Jurisdiction.--Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of General Services shall transfer to the Secretary administrative jurisdiction over the Federal land described in subsection (d).
(c) Land Into Trust.--Not later than 90 days after the transfer of administrative jurisdiction under subsection (b), the Secretary shall take into trust all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the Federal land described in subsection (d) for the benefit of the 19 Pueblos.
(d) Federal Land.--The Federal land referred to in this section is the 3 tracts of Federal land, the combined acreage of which is approximately 9.89 acres, that were historically part of the Albuquerque Indian School and, as of the date of enactment of this Act, are under the administrative jurisdiction of the General Services Administration, more particularly described as follows:
(1) Tract 1.--The approximately 3.57 acres located in secs. 7 and 8 of T. 10 N., R. 3 E., of the New Mexico Principal Meridian in Albuquerque, New Mexico, as identified on the survey.
(2) Tract 2.--The approximately 5.78 acres located in secs. 7 and 8 of T. 10 N., R. 3 E., of the New Mexico Principal Meridian in Albuquerque, New Mexico, as identified on the survey.
(3) Tract 3.--The approximately .54 acres located in secs. 7 and 8 of T. 10 N., R. 3 E., of the New Mexico Principal Meridian in Albuquerque, New Mexico, as identified on the survey.
(e) Survey.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary--
(A) shall obtain, with respect to the Federal land taken into trust under subsection (c)--
(i) a survey; and
(ii) from the Administrator of General Services, a copy of all encumbrances on that land; and
(B) may make minor corrections to the survey and legal description of the Federal land described in subsection (d) as the Secretary determines to be necessary to correct clerical, typographical, and surveying land title errors.
(2) Availability.--The survey and all applicable transfer documents, including copies of all encumbrances, obtained under paragraph (1)(A) shall be recorded in--
(A) the public records of the County Clerk Office of Bernalillo County, New Mexico; and
(B) the appropriate Land Titles and Records Office of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
(f) Use of Land.--The Federal land taken into trust under subsection (c) shall be--
(1) used for the educational, health, cultural, business,
and economic development of the 19 Pueblos; and
(2) subject to Federal laws applicable to Indian trust
land.
(g) Limitations and Conditions.--The Federal land taken
into trust under subsection (c) shall remain subject to any
private or municipal encumbrance, right-of-way, restriction,
easement of record, or utility service agreement in effect on
the date of enactment of this Act.
(h) Conveyance of Buildings and Other Improvements.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the transfer
of administrative jurisdiction under subsection (b), the
Secretary shall convey all ownership interests of the United
States in all buildings, structures, improvements, and
appurtenances located on the Federal land described in
subsection (d) to the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center, to own
in fee.
(2) Lease.--
(A) In general.--As part of the conveyance of buildings and
other improvements under paragraph (1), the Federal
Government shall enter into a lease with the Indian Pueblo
Cultural Center for the continued occupancy and use of Tract
2 of the Federal land, as described in subsection (d)(2), by
each Federal tenant located on that tract of Federal land as
of the date described in that paragraph.
(B) Requirement.--The lease entered into under subparagraph
(A) shall permit the Federal tenants described in that
subparagraph to remain on Tract 2 of the Federal land, as
described in subsection (d)(2), for an initial term not to
exceed 24 months.
(C) Extension.--The parties to the lease entered into under
subparagraph (A) may, by mutual written agreement, extend the
term of the lease for 1 or more additional terms if the
parties determine that additional time is necessary.
(D) Termination.--At the option of a Federal tenant
described in subparagraph (A), the Federal tenant may
terminate its participation in the lease entered into under
that subparagraph prior to the expiration of the initial or
any extended lease term by providing notice in accordance
with the terms of the lease.
(i) Gaming Prohibition.--The Federal land taken into trust
under subsection (c) shall not be used for any class II
gaming or class III gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory
Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) (as those terms are defined in
section 4 of that Act (25 U.S.C. 2703)).
The committee-reported amendment, in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to.
The bill (S. 3219), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Ms. MURKOWSKI. It is good to be able to not only get the Southcentral Foundation Land Transfer Act accomplished but several other measures that the Indian Affairs Committee has been working on for some time.
Als
Pages S5146–S5148 · Official textMr. President, since I am here on the floor and since I have my friend and partner who has worked with me on other matters of great import and impact, I want to take this opportunity to celebrate something that happened last evening when we here in the Senate passed the reauthorization of the ACT for ALS bill. This bill has passed the House, it has now passed the Senate, and it can head to the President for his signature.
The path on this one, again, should have been easy. It should have been easy, but it just hasn't been. It has taken years of work here in the Congress and even more years of work and effort and heartfelt effort from the ALS community, who are amazing men and women--the people who live with ALS and their families, their caregivers, the researchers, the advocates who share their stories and kept pushing us to keep moving this forward.
We passed the ACT for ALS in 2021. That was an enormous milestone, and, again, I appreciate my colleague here. But what it meant for those who have been diagnosed with ALS to know that for the first time, there would be this pathway for individuals who have an ALS diagnosis who are not eligible for clinical trials to be able to access these investigational treatments.
So we have made good progress. We pushed funding to NIH and to FDA so that we can accelerate the research and we can help move more of these promising treatments from the laboratory to the people who need them.
So we have been working with our partners in the House, Senator Coons and I along with Representatives Calvert and Quigley, on this reauthorization--good, strong bipartisan progress in both the House and the Senate. We thought we were cooking. We are going to make this thing happen. We are going to get it across before the September 30 deadline. And then we were literally running out of time.
I think my colleague and I would both agree we respect the legislative process. There are times when slowing things down makes good sense, but when it comes to ALS, a slowdown, a lapse in authorization--this is not just a procedural issue; this is disruptive. It causes uncertainty. It causes so much anxiety for those who are already navigating such an unpredictable and such an uncertain disease.
Families should simply not have to wonder about whether or not the research infrastructure and the treatment access pathways they are relying on are now going to disappear because a Federal authorization has expired. That is what this reauthorization does. It continues that continuity so that the work that has been built continues and it doesn't have to stop and restart, because ALS is progressive and not in a positive way. Every day, it is harder and harder. People living with ALS and their families cannot put their lives on hold while they are waiting for the next breakthrough because every single day matters.
So what this is about is to see the momentum that has been built over these past 5 years. The ALS community has helped build this momentum, and it is through the research networks, it is through the collaborations, the new pathways.
But this reauthorization is about protecting the momentum that has been built. So it is not just about preserving a program; it is preserving the momentum, preserving the options, and preserving the hope because that is what these families are clinging to every day, is that when you are facing a disease that does not wait, that maybe today is going to be the day for that breakthrough.
I am so honored to work alongside my colleague Senator Coons. He could not be a better advocate. I am so honored to work with so many ALS advocates and the broader ALS community. We have more work to do. We still have to get the Justice for ALS Act and the ALS Better Care Act. We are going to do that. But I am so enormously grateful for the persistence we have shown, the heart that has been here, and, again, the success that was achieved here in the Congress, and now, moving forward, the hope that will continue with the families and those who live with ALS.
With that, I yield to my colleague and partner in all of this, Senator Coons.
Mr. President, thank you to my dear friend the Senator from Alaska, Senator Murkowski, and to all the ALS advocates out there who have reached out to both of us--to us, to our families, to our staff, to our friends.
ALS is the cruelest disease I know. It slowly and steadily and relentlessly robs someone of their ability to control their muscles, to be themselves, to live their lives, to engage with their families, to carry out their careers, and to share their blessings with others around them. While they remain fully conscious and present, they lose their capacity to button their buttons, to drive a car, to speak, to do the things they were born and meant to do. It is an awful, terrible disease. It is colloquially known as Lou Gehrig's disease. We know people whose lives have been touched directly by it.
I think all of us remember the Ice Bucket Challenge--one of the first YouTube or TikTok sensations that seemed to me to be purely good in that it challenged people to douse themselves with ice water in order to raise the visibility of the urgency of investing in ALS research.
I know Senator Murkowski and I are grateful for Brian Wallach and his wife Sandra, who founded I AM ALS after Brian was diagnosed in 2017--someone who was a skilled and talented advocate and lobbyist and leader here in Washington who made purpose out of pain.
And, as have so many others with ALS, refusing to go quietly into the night, he began coming to the Hill, documenting in a daily way his struggles, his courage, his success in the face of ALS, and engaged both of us and got us to help launch the ALS Caucus here in the Senate.
Dear friends of mine--Dan Tate, who went to Amherst College, as did I; Craig and Kristen Colby from Delaware, who have visited me year after year; my younger brother Steven's best friend; the father of Alex Snyder-Mackler, a talented lawyer I knew from Delaware; and, of course, my chief of staff's father--have all lived with and ultimately died from ALS.
When Senator Murkowski and I first got engaged in this, it was before it affected us personally or deeply. But since we passed ACT for ALS, back in 2021, it has come closer to home.
I recently went to my high school reunion, and my very best friend was absent, because Dr. Jack Flynn is living with ALS. Yesterday, his grandson Liam was born. And it is a wonderful reminder that, even in the midst of struggle and tragedy, life goes on; that the blessing of birth and creation continues.
And I just have to say, of all the people who have witnessed to me about what faith can mean in the face of adversity, Jack has shown better than anyone I have known what it means to be a good husband and father. So forgive me.
When we first began, advocates were asking us if we could find appropriations for $10 million--$10 million--for ALS research, to bring the hope that Senator Murkowski is talking about. This year, we got $115 million appropriated for ALS research.
Now, we often ask ourselves--at least I ask myself: What are we doing here? What are we getting done in the late night votes, in the endless partisan swirl, in the bickering and the fighting, outside and inside.
We, frankly, get a lot of good done here, and often that good goes unremarked. But I cannot thank enough my friend and colleague Senator Murkowski for her tireless dedication to moving ACT for ALS for its reauthorization, as she just detailed.
Our partners, Congressman Calvert and Congressman Quigley, got it done in the House and sent it to us. But there were small but important differences between the version in the Senate and version in the House.
Our challenge here is to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. And we locked arms and said, after lots of calls for support and help, that we were determined to get this passed and sent to the President's desk for his signature before we left for the next month, before it expired tomorrow, because at the end of the day, the urgency, the necessity of hope in the face of this dread disease, is the single biggest gift we can give to families living with ALS.
This year, 700 people have gained access to experimental NIH treatments, 1,200 people are enrolled in a landmark genetic study of the origins and causes of ALS, thousands of lives have been changed and made better, and tens of thousands of families have been given hope where previously there was none.
So, today, we can say that we have done it again because of you: $100 million a year is authorized for ALS research for the next 5 years.
And as senior appropriators, I suspect we can commit that we will do everything in our power to ensure those funds are actually delivered.
This is a small but real bipartisan miracle of partnership, of effort, and of investment in hope.
At the end of the day, I struggle with understanding how a just God can impose on good people the suffering of this disease, but I know that our calling is to offer hope in the face of that suffering, and to celebrate those who continue to live bravely with purpose and with love, even in the face of this dreaded disease.
I cannot thank you enough--all the advocates who reached out to us; the chair and ranking member of the HELP Committee, who helped make this possible; the staff who have supported Senator Murkowski and me in this work; and my dear friend Senator Murkowski from Alaska--for this day that is worthy of celebration.
Thank you.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. President, I am so honored to work alongside colleagues like my friend from Delaware, who has so much heart and so much passion. But it is a reminder to me of how much we have to do on behalf of those who do feel that they do not have a path forward, and they look to us in Congress as they go through some of the most difficult and dark moments as families together.
Like Senator Coons, I have been touched by ALS, and my family has. And, in fact, it was through my family that I came to this cause, and it is through my family that I will remain committed to this cause, until such time as we have a full treatment and a cure for this awful and dreaded disease.
It was my cousin's sister, as I call her--it was her husband Pat, who lived with ALS for 8 years. And for 8 years, as a family, we came to understand the impact of the disease, but more than the impact, what it meant to live day by day, hoping--just hoping--that tomorrow was going to bring something that was more positive.
And so after Pat left us, my cousin Jenny stayed in the fight. It is pretty hard after you have fought alongside your spouse, and pretty hard when you have come to hate a disease so passionately, and you want to never utter those words, those letters, again.
But when ACT for ALS reauthorization passed last night by voice vote, I sent a text to Jenny. And I said:
Text printed in the Record (63 characters)
It is done. It is not signed into law yet, but it is happening.
And she sent a note back, late, late last night. And I am just going to share this as my final comments.
She said:
Text printed in the Record (352 characters)
If there is one small blessing or one piece of my broken heart that is healed because we were placed in this world, it is knowing that other families will have access to drugs, continued research and studies, so they can live longer and we can end this disease. With a reauthorization of ACT for ALS, we have hope and drugs. Pat would want it that way.
So, Mr. President, thank you. Thank you for helping us realize this today on behalf of all those who live with ALS and their families.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Nevada.
Text printed in the Record (55 characters)
Anniversary of Route 91 Harvest Music Festival Shooting
Mr. President, I rise today ahead of the ninth anniversary of one of the darkest days Las Vegas has ever seen: the shocking tragedy of October 1, 2017, the largest mass shooting in American history.
Like many Las Vegas evenings, tens of thousands of visitors came to the Las Vegas Strip for a concert, the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival. It was a beautiful night out. I was home in Las Vegas.
And in the midst of the music, the dancing, and the fun, a deranged gunman opened fire on the festival, killing innocent concert goers and leaving so many injured and traumatized.
It only took 10 minutes for him to carry out this brutal attack, but the consequences of his actions remain with us for a lifetime. Fifty-eight innocent lives were taken on the night of October 1, and in the years since, we have lost two more individuals as a result of this horrific tragedy--families left without their loved ones, parents without children, children without parents.
We owe an endless debt of gratitude to those brave police officers, firefighters, paramedics, and others who selflessly ran into the chaos and confusion of that night just to help. On this dark day, we saw our city come together like never before to support the victims.
In the wake of the shooting, President Trump instituted a ban on bump stocks, which the 1 October gunman used to kill so many in just 10 minutes. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has since overturned this commonsense ban, and the epidemic of gun violence in this country continues to persist to this very day. This year alone, the United States has seen more than 350--350--mass shootings.
We are not powerless here in Congress. We can do something about the relentless gun violence plaguing our communities. We can do something. As we honor the memories of the innocent individuals who were brutally murdered 9 years ago, we must also recommit ourselves to that action to ensure that no other community ever experiences a tragedy like this again. The cost is forever, and it is too deep. We must come together and pass the bipartisan bill I helped to introduce to ban bump stocks before another community lives through a day like 1 October.
Las Vegas has shown that we can survive the darkest days by coming together as a community and supporting one another. This is why we will always be Las Vegas strong. I am proud of our community. I am proud of our resilience. We will continue to fight against gun violence.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Utah.
Mr. President, when Utah's pioneers first arrived in the Salt Lake Valley, they had almost nothing. They had no reservoirs, no pipelines, no pumps, no Federal grants, and no municipal bonds. Their most sophisticated earth-moving equipment ate hay. What they did have was a problem. There was not enough water where they needed it, so they moved it.
Even before Brigham Young entered the valley in July of 1847, members of the advance company diverted City Creek to soften the dry ground and irrigate crops. Within a year, thousands of acres were under irrigation. As settlements grew, Utahns did not simply accept the limits of the streams flowing conveniently past them. They built ditches and canals. They diverted mountain streams. They constructed the Jordan and Salt Lake City Canal that stretched, roughly, 28 miles across the valley. Eventually, they developed water exchanges, providing farmers with water from Utah Lake and the Jordan River in exchange for higher quality canyon water that could serve a growing community.
There is something important in that history lesson for us today. These were people with picks, shovels, horses, and oxen. They had almost no capital; yet they were willing to undertake enormous projects because they understood that the limited water available to them at that moment did not have to define the territory's future. The pioneers were bold. They thought big.
We need some of that thinking again. Utah is growing. The West is getting more crowded. We are in a pattern of drought. The Colorado River is under extraordinary pressure, and the Great Salt Lake reminds us that every gallon has competing demands. Conservation has to be part of the answer. Agriculture needs to become increasingly efficient. Cities should reuse water and eliminate unnecessary consumption. We need to be better stewards of the water we already have. But I don't believe conservation alone is a long-term water strategy for a rapidly growing State.
We should also be asking: Where is the next water, and how do we get it?
I recently met with a group of experts who were working on water in the Great Salt Lake, and I challenged them to think like pioneers. What are the big ideas? What are the ideas that sound a little crazy today but that might not sound so crazy 50 years from now?
For purposes of the discussion, I asked them to temporarily take money and even engineering implementations off the table. Before telling me why something couldn't be done, I wanted to hear what might be possible. The list quickly became long. What about desalination plants? What about bringing water from wetter parts of the country? What about ground water beneath the Great Salt Lake? Can we recover water that is currently stranded from the lake? Can we reduce evaporation? Can we develop crops that produce more with less water? Can better forest management help more winter snow actually reach the ground? Some of these ideas may not work. Some will be too expensive. Others may fail because of engineering, environmental, or legal problems. That is fine, but we should know they don't work because we took them seriously enough to find out.
Utah has done big things before. The Central Utah Project moves Colorado River Basin water across the Wasatch Mountains through a remarkable system of reservoirs, tunnels, aqueducts, and pipelines. It took generations to conceive, finance, and build. Before that came the canals, and before the canals came a ditch from City Creek.
We have a tendency to look back at what the pioneers did and accomplished and romanticize it. We celebrate their courage, put their pictures in museums, and tell their stories every July. I wonder if one of the best ways to honor them is to simply think and act more like they did. Imagine telling a Utah pioneer that constructing a 28-mile canal with picks, shovels, and horse-drawn equipment was too ambitious. Imagine telling them the valley could support only as many people as the existing water streams happened to accommodate.
They looked at what Utah had and started building the Utah they wanted their children to inherit. Our challenge is different, but I think our responsibility is much the same. None of this means we should build every project someone can draw on a map. We need good engineering, honest accounting, environmental responsibility, and respect for our neighboring States. We should conserve aggressively before spending enormous amounts of money to create or transport additional water, but we should not assume that today's water supply is all Utah will ever have.
The answer probably isn't one enormous project but, more likely, a combination of conservation, agricultural efficiency, reuse, watershed restoration, desalination, better storage, new technology, and perhaps, someday, bringing additional water into the Colorado River system. And there are probably good ideas we haven't thought of yet.
Utah has an extraordinary collection of engineers, entrepreneurs, capital providers, universities, lawmakers, and technology companies. I would like to see more of us working on this problem. We need our best minds to help us figure out water. Most importantly, we need to think beyond the next legislative session or election cycle. Water projects can take decades. We ought to be thinking 50 and even 100 years ahead.
The pioneers who diverted City Creek in 1847 could not have imagined millions of people living along the Wasatch Front or a modern Utah economy built around technology, manufacturing, and innovation. Fortunately, they built more for Utah than they could see, and we should too.
Our ancestors came to one of the driest places in America and built thriving communities because they were willing to move water where it was needed. Nearly two centuries later, we have resources and technology they could not have even imagined. We could use a little more of their ambition and dreaming. When Utahns look back at us 100 years from now, I hope they will say that we didn't just manage the water problems we inherited but that we started building the solutions they need.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Oregon.
Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act of 2026
Pages S5148–S5158 · Official textMr. President, they say an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and that is certainly true when it comes to wildfires and smoke. And as climate chaos makes the fire season longer and hotter and more dangerous, wildfires are ravaging States across our country, certainly including my home State of Oregon.
This year, at the beginning of fire season, the risk maps showed that the State of Oregon was the epicenter of the highest risk for the most time anticipated. Unfortunately, that crystal ball prepared by the experts turned out to be right. We had a record 2.5 million acres burn this summer. Well, we broke the 2 million acres last summer and the 2.5 million acres this summer. It wasn't that long ago when 1 million acres would have been an extraordinarily horrific fire year. Forests burning, grasslands burning, more lightning strikes, more wind, more drought, more dryness, hotter temperatures--all of it combined to create that extraordinarily destructive summer we have just gone through.
I will never forget 6 years ago the Labor Day fires, at the beginning of September, when we had a combination of lightning strikes and wind that brought, basically, a force up from the east, wind over the top of the Cascade Mountains and down every valley, and every valley was burning. We had six cities burn to the ground, and we had another six that were badly scorched. When you saw those cities, it looked like a bomb had gone off. I mean, everything was reduced to ashes, with maybe a cast-iron tub over here, with maybe a metal staircase or a pipe dangling over here, then on the ground a pool of metal when the wheels on cars would melt and run across the ground. It was just devastating to go to the fairgrounds--where thousands of refugees were headed--and hear of their harrowing escapes. Sometimes their cars were starting to melt and smoke as they drove through the fire. Others were seeking refuge in the streams.
These fires? They are terrible, and they fill the air with toxins--toxins from the burning buildings and the burning homes and burning vehicles that are filled with plastics and electronics. Who knows what else is in that smoke? That smoke is incredibly dangerous as well. That is why we need to pass the bipartisan Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act on which I am so pleased to partner with my colleague Senator Curtis from Utah.
This bill prepares our communities in two different ways.
First, it makes it easier for communities to do prescribed burns. Now, if I turned the clock back about 16 years, communities would say to me: We don't want those prescribed burns. We don't want that day or two of smoke.
But after the 2020 Labor Day fires, communities are like: We want to do the prescribed burns. We want them carefully monitored so that they do not escape and cause a larger fire, which has happened on rare occasions. We want to make sure they are done on days when there is enough humidity and so little wind and so little risk of wind that they can't possibly become something other than the prescribed burns.
They have to be meticulously planned, carefully controlled, and then they reduce so much fuel on the ground and provide a lot of protection thereafter. So prescribed burns are--along with thinning and mowing--significant ways to reduce the fuel load and reduce the devastation when there is a fire.
But here is the thing: a prescribed burn produces smoke, and that smoke may become a penalty under the Clean Air Act for our communities. So this bill solves that problem so that smoke from a prescribed fire does not create a penalty under the Clean Air Act.
Second, this bill helps communities prepare for smoke, to have locations that are safe for people, particularly people with lung problems, with asthma or emphysema or so forth or people who are particularly allergic to the content of the smoke to be able to get to places that have clean air through filtering. So that is essential.
And this bill incorporates the Smoke-Ready Communities Program based on the Smoke and Heat Ready Communities Act that I introduced before. It gives communities the tools and the resources to prepare for wildfire smoke and unhealthy air.
They say an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. That is a pretty good foundation for a bill--a bill, the Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act, that will give our communities the tools they need to prepare for wildfires and smoke pollution, and I would encourage that we adopt this bill today.
I yield to one of my colleagues.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from California.
Mr. President, colleagues, I am proud to join our colleagues from Utah and Oregon in bringing up this bill. I can't overstate both the importance and the urgency of the Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act, which is a result of more than a year of bipartisan negotiations and a measure that recently passed unanimously out of the Environment and Public Works Committee.
As my colleague from Oregon has begun to paint the picture, Western States--including Oregon, California, and others--are confronting a crisis of wildfires that aren't just growing larger and larger every year but more destructive every year and emitting massive amounts of toxic smoke.
Now, there is no silver bullet for solving the wildfire crisis, but we know that prescribed fires--experience tells us and the data tells us that prescribed fires are the most effective tools in reducing hazardous fuels and preventing catastrophic wildfires.
Will they continue to happen--fires? Yes, but if we can prevent them, that is ideal or at least let's mitigate their size, their scope, and the damage that they cause however we can.
But the problem that brings us to this measure is that while the EPA regulations have allowed prescribed fires to qualify as exceptional events since 2016, the Agency has never actually approved one, leaving States worried that using this critical tool--this provenly effective tool--to protect communities could jeopardize their air quality goals. By trying to do good and prevent fires or mitigate fires from a public safety standpoint, you are penalized on the air quality side of things.
So this bill creates a narrow, targeted pathway specifically for prescribed fires while preserving existing air quality standards for other exceptional events.
I want to thank my colleagues from Utah and Oregon for their partnership in this important bill, and kudos to Chairwoman Capito and Ranking Member Whitehouse on the committee who helped craft this measure as well.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Utah.
Mr. President, I, too, would like to give my colleagues a shout-out. Senator Padilla and Senator Merkley, thank you for being down here on the floor with me for this first UC of my Senate career. More importantly, thank you for your work on this bill.
And a shout-out to our colleagues. We share this commonality of Western State, and it is no secret that just as I speak today, Utah is in the midst of one of our worst fire seasons--over 1,200 fires over half a million acres in our State. And with these fires come devastating floods and other consequences. And every day the threat to our communities and our lands grows substantially more severe.
That is why it makes sense to not leave a critical tool like these controlled burns off the table. You both have described how well these prescribed burns help us channel and focus these forest fires. The data, as presented to me by the Forest Service, is clear: Wildfire prevention and containment are more successful in areas where prescribed burns took place. Yet States that proactively use prescribed burns can face regulatory consequences for the temporary emissions created by the very work that prevents far greater emissions in our environment.
Our bill, the Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act, provides States with greater certainty by ensuring that prescribed fires and other wildfire mitigation activities can be treated as exceptional events under the Clean Air Act.
The people of Utah are not looking for an emissions loophole. They are looking to protect their families, communities, and land. This is about recognizing that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
We have alluded to it today, all of us have. This bill passed through our Environment and Public Works Committee 19 to 0. This is exactly what people back home want us to do, to work up these bipartisan solutions. This reflects something I think we can all agree on: States should not be punished for taking responsible action to prevent catastrophic wildfires.
I appreciate our chairman and ranking member--once again, Senators Merkley, Padilla, also Senators Boozman, Kelly. Thank you for your work on this legislation.
I also urge my House colleagues to support WEPA and help us get this commonsense legislation across the finish line.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 620, S. 5045.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (150 characters)
A bill (S. 5045) to amend the Clean Air Act to modify the handling of air quality monitoring with respect to prescribed fires, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill which was reported from the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (S. 5045) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed as follows:
Text printed in the Record (7,769 characters)
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act of 2026".
SEC. 2. AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA INFLUENCED BY EXCEPTIONAL
EVENTS.
(a) In General.--Section 319(b) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7619(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking "In this subsection, the" and inserting "The"; and
(ii) by redesignating clauses (i) through (iii) as subclauses (I) through (III), respectively, and indenting appropriately;
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as clause (ii) and indenting appropriately;
(C) by striking the paragraph designation and heading and all that follows through "exceptional event." at the end of subparagraph (A)(iv) and inserting the following:
"(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
"(A) Exceptional event.--
"(i) In general.--The term `exceptional event' means an event--
"(I)(aa) that--
"(AA) affects air quality;
"(BB) is not reasonably controllable or preventable; and
"(CC) is an event caused by human activity that is unlikely to recur at a particular location or a natural event; or
"(bb) that is a prescribed fire; and "(II) that is--
"(aa) determined by the Administrator, through the process established in the regulations revised under paragraph (2)(B), to be an exceptional event; or
"(bb) deemed to be an exceptional event pursuant to a State petition deemed to be approved pursuant to paragraph (3)(B)(v)."; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
"(B) Prescribed fire.--
"(i) In general.--The term `prescribed fire' means a fire deliberately ignited in accordance with applicable law (including regulations) to burn wildland fuels in a natural or modified state under specified environmental conditions that are intended to allow the fire to be confined to a predetermined area and produce the fireline intensity and rate of spread required to attain planned resource management objectives.
"(ii) Inclusion.--The term `prescribed fire' includes cultural burning activities, as determined by an Indian tribe.";
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:
"(B) Revision of regulations.--
"(i) Proposed revisions.--Not later than 270 days after the date of enactment of the Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act of 2026, the Administrator, after consultation with Federal land managers, State air pollution control agencies, State foresters, State fish and wildlife agencies, and Indian tribes, shall publish in the Federal Register any necessary revisions to existing regulations promulgated under this section--
"(I) to reduce the burden and cost for States to demonstrate an exceptional event;
"(II) to clarify the eligibility of prescribed fires as exceptional events pursuant to the definition in paragraph (1)(A); and
"(III) to establish the procedure for the review of State petitions described in paragraph (3)(B)(iv).
"(ii) Final revisions.--Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Administrator publishes proposed revisions to regulations promulgated under this section under clause (i), and after providing an opportunity for interested persons to make oral presentations of views, data, and arguments regarding the proposed revisions, the Administrator shall finalize those revisions to govern air quality monitoring data influenced by exceptional events that are consistent with paragraph (3).";
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) by redesignating clauses (ii) through (v) as clauses (iii) through (vi), respectively;
(ii) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
"(ii) the principle that prescribed fire can play an important role in reducing the magnitude and frequency of wildfires;"; and
(iii) in clause (iv) (as so redesignated), by striking "manner, an appropriate" and inserting "manner in an appropriate"; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) in clause (ii), by inserting "or, for prescribed fire, be reasonably expected to exist," after "must exist";
(ii) in clause (iii), by striking "and" at the end;
(iii) in clause (iv)--
(I) by striking "with respect to exceedances" and inserting the following: "with respect to--
"(I) exceedances";
(II) in subclause (I) (as so designated), by striking the period at the end and inserting "; and"; and
(III) by adding at the end the following:
"(II) the designation, redesignation, classification, or reclassification of an area, the determination of attainment of a national ambient air quality standard, or other determinations by the Administrator for determining compliance with this Act; and"; and
(iv) by adding at the end the following:
"(v)(I) a State petition described in clause (iv) be approved, disapproved, or approved-in-part and disapproved-in-part by the Administrator by the date that is 1 year after the date on which the petition is submitted; and
"(II) if the Administrator does not act on a State petition described in clause (iv) by that date, the State petition be deemed approved unless the Administrator, through the process established in the regulations revised under paragraph (2)(B), subsequently determines that the event is not an exceptional event."; and
(4) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
"(4) Regional, national, or international exceptional events.--At the request of multiple State or local government agencies or Tribal authorities, the Administrator shall conduct analyses or otherwise collaborate with such agencies or authorities to lead the development of regional, national, or international exceptional event demonstrations when exceptional events impact multijurisdictional areas.".
(b) Savings Provision.--Nothing in this section or an amendment made by this section makes stationary source (as defined in section 51.491 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act)) emissions that did not qualify as an exceptional event (as defined in section 319(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7619(b)(1))) on the day before the date of enactment of this Act an exceptional event under that section after that date of enactment.
SEC. 3. SMOKE READY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM.
(a) Establishment.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (referred to in this section as the
"Administrator") may make competitive grants under section
103(b)(3) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7403(b)(3)) to
eligible entities for the assessment, prevention, control, or
abatement of wildfire smoke hazards in community buildings,
including school buildings (as defined in section 11 of the
Asbestos School Hazard Detection and Control Act of 1980 (20
U.S.C. 3610)), and related activities.
(b) Eligible Entities.--The entities eligible for a grant
under subsection (a) are--
(1) States;
(2) federally recognized Indian Tribes; and
(3) any entities eligible for grants under section
103(b)(3) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7403(b)(3)).
(c) Cost Share.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Federal
share of the cost of an activity carried out using a grant
under subsection (a) shall be not more than 90 percent.
(2) Waiver.--The Administrator may waive the cost-share
requirement under paragraph (1) if the facility that is the
subject of the activity for which the grant is provided is in
an economically distressed community.
(d) Limitation.--Of the amounts made available each fiscal
year for grants under this section, not more than 25 percent
may be awarded to recipients in any 1 State. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that if Senator Van Hollen or his designee makes a motion to discharge S. Res. 852 from the Foreign Relations Committee, the Senate vote on the motion to discharge at 7 p.m. today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Is there an objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. President, President Trump, who has failed to lower people's costs, last week launched a nationwide television advertisement campaign promoting himself. On televisions across the country right now, people are being inundated with all kinds of political ads. But the ending of these ads is unlike any other. If someone is watching this ad, right at the end, on the bottom of the screen, you find out that this publicity stunt isn't paid for by President Trump or one of his PACs or even one of his billionaire friends--no. This ad is paid for by you, the American taxpayer.
Estimates show that this ad already costs more than $2.5 million. New reports today reveal that the source of this Federal funding is U.S. Customs and Border Protection, a part of the Department of Homeland Security. The Department of Homeland Security should be working to tackle the enormous national security threats we face, like stopping fentanyl, not bankrolling a vanity project for the President.
I am glad that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have come out and said that these political ads should not be paid for with taxpayer dollars. Sadly, it takes strong bipartisan pushback as well as the loud and clear voice of the American people to get this administration to reverse course when it is breaking the law or doing something wrong.
Today we have an opportunity to start that process by sending such a message to the President. I have introduced a resolution that is quite simple. It just tells the President that he is wrong, that these ads need to be pulled down, and that they should not be paid for with taxpayer dollars.
The American people want their tax dollars to go toward helping them and keeping them safe, not propaganda campaigns for a President. He is welcome to run whatever ads he wants with his own riches; but with taxpayer dollars, money that people have worked hard to earn, he needs to follow the law.
At minimum, people deserve to know where their Member of Congress stands on this issue.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent, therefore, that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 921; further, that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Is there objection?
The Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, the message at the heart of these PSAs is a simple one: American values are worth defending against the failed ideologies of communism and socialism. If that is what has the Senator from New Hampshire concerned, I would suggest the concern says more about her side of the aisle than it does about the PSA.
Presidents of both parties have used public service announcements to speak directly to the American people for decades. Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt did it in World War I and World War II. Bill Clinton launched a national anti-drug campaign. George W. Bush bought Super Bowl air time. Barack Obama promoted ObamaCare. Joe Biden ran PSAs on vaccinations. I don't recall a single Democrat rushing to the floor to object to any of them. The only difference I can find is the message.
When a Democratic President tells Americans what to do, it is a public service. When this President tells Americans that liberty is worth defending, it is suddenly a problem. A reminder that freedom beats communism and socialism is patriotic, and no Member of this body should be offended by it.
If Senators want to debate how the government communicates with the public, let's do it the right way: through regular order, in committee, with hearings, and with one standard applied to every administration--not by unanimous consent aimed at a single President's message.
For these reasons, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Objection is heard.
The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mr. President, it is really disappointing that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have blocked a resolution that simply says these plainly political television ads should not be paid for with taxpayer dollars.
One of the ads is literally one of the President's campaign ads from 2024. It is clearly a campaign message, but he is making all of us pay for it at a time when he has sent grocery costs, rent costs, and gas costs soaring.
Any American who watches this ad can see that it is not a PSA like the White House claims. What is the public service message here? People know the difference between a PSA and a political ad.
Moreover, if we are going to talk about which side of the aisle is supporting communism and socialism, it is this President, who had the U.S. Government take a share--an interest--in a privately held company; it is this President, who welcomed the leader of the largest Communist Party in the world to the White House, fawning over him, having the military on their hands and knees straightening out a red carpet for him, while banning the free press from the White House and welcoming the communist press in.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle should stand together in opposing this clearly unlawful and wrong use of taxpayer money. This is an incredibly wealthy President with a huge war chest that can afford to fund whatever political messages he wants. It should not come at the cost of hard-earned American tax dollars.
So, despite the fact that we can't pass this resolution today, I hope that the administration listens to the bipartisan pushback on these ads and reverses course immediately.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Curtis)
The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. President, I have spent the last couple of years trying to learn as much as I can about artificial intelligence and its upside, and still long AI in terms of innovational brain. I think there are some real challenges.
I have to acknowledge, I did witness this afternoon something that was a little bit surreal. The President had brought together some of the leading leaders in the AI industry. And in a closed, quiet room, I guess they reached some level of moral agreement--whatever that means--that they are going to try to make sure things are safe.
As a matter a fact, they even went so far as to say all of the President's critique about concerns about AI being a hoax or about data centers not a problem are suddenly being solved because the President has renamed AI, "SI"--superintelligence.
I didn't know whether to laugh or cry to think that the greatest innovation in my lifetime--I was in the tech business before I came to politics--it will be bigger than my old industry, wireless, bigger than the internet, bigger than cloud computing is--and with all upsides, there are downsides--they are suddenly going to be solved by the name change. But that is kind of the status of our political debate.
Earlier today, I came down with two of my Democratic colleagues and said: As we get all these warnings from industry, from businesses that use AI tools, from national security, wouldn't it be a good idea to put some basic safety precautions in place?
We stripped away all of the others and said let's just have a safety board hearing. I know the Presiding Officer has interest in this topic. I think I have yet to talk to a Member that doesn't think some level of safety with this enormous innovation is appropriate.
Well, that is not going take place before we finish before the elections. So I am back again this afternoon to talk about another piece of the AI debate that certainly needs congressional action, and that is the whole question about how we build out and ensure consumers don't get stuck with the build-out of data centers.
Now, this is something I know a little bit about. Virginia is the capital of data centers in our country, and there is enormous concern from neighbors and communities. Many of the worst examples of data centers were built 15, 20 years ago, but the industry has moved forward. I give credit there.
But the angst about data centers--what I think is also reflective of the angst, generally, about AI--is not going away, no matter what the President wants to say. I would urge him to travel anywhere across Virginia, for that matter, anywhere across Kansas or Texas or anywhere else these data centers are being proposed because communities actually want to have a say in what happens in their backyard, what happens with their utility rates, what happens with their water usage, what happens with local communities signing nondisclosure agreements so the community doesn't even know what they are getting until after the deal is cut.
So I guess tomorrow, the Senate will turn their focus on the so-called Ratepayer Protection Act, which is supposed to answer all of these concerns about cost, about computing.
The challenge is--and it could be a starting point. But here is what the bill does. It says: States can consider adopting a Federal standard that would hold data centers responsible for rising electricity bills, and then they get 2 years to consider that.
Candidly, they could do that today. We have already taken some action in Virginia.
And what happens if nobody takes up that offer? Anything happen to these data centers? Anything happen to those communities? Well, nothing.
So I think we need real legislation on this. We need legislation that actually has some boundaries. This should not be optional. We have seen communities hit by skyrocketing electrical costs. We have seen communities where a lot of their water usage has gone up dramatically, and they are concerned about the water table.
We have seen these data centers sometimes literally intrude right into neighborhoods. And I have heard the pushback from communities all across our Commonwealth. As a matter a fact, even the community that has got the most, that has received the most economic benefits, they recently--Loudoun County--they recently put a pause.
I don't think we can pause. I don't think we can put the genie back in the bottle. But I would urge the Senate not to take this flimflam, do-nothing bill but actually take a look at my Data Center Tax Accountability and Disclosure Act, which I didn't dream up in the last couple of days but put forward much earlier this summer on an issue that I have been working on for a couple of years.
What we can't rely on is simply the good will of these hyperscalers and these companies. Some are well-intentioned; some are not. So we need to make sure we have got accurate information about power usage, water usage, setbacks, backup power, get rid of nondisclosure agreements.
My legislation will require--not invite--but require that information to come forward and put a penalty in place at a relatively small amount if they don't submit that.
But the real bite and the only thing that is really going to change this behavior--and, frankly, earn back some of the communities' trust--is if there is a tool. And, frankly, I have had ongoing discussions with most of the hyperscalers who are building out these data centers who, frankly, think my piece of legislation makes some sense.
So the second half of my legislation would say: If you don't meet Gold LEED or Platinum LEED standards, which are already established--if you don't show how you are bringing your own clean power or power, if you don't have criteria on water usage--and that has gotten better because more of these data centers now have circulatory systems, if you don't have setbacks from neighborhoods, if you use nondisclosure agreements, what it would say is: Well, if you are going to do all that and not meet those standards, then you shouldn't get bonus depreciation. I am not going to raise anybody's taxes, but we have given these hyperscalers, we have given these data center builders enormous tax benefits and bonus depreciation where they can write off the cost of these very expensive centers all in the first year. I don't want to take that away. I am not raising anybody's taxes, but I am saying you shouldn't get all the benefits upfront if you don't provide to the community some guarantees about water, power, setbacks, community involvement. If the community then wants to go over--a hyperscaler wants to come in and say: We will help provide--I think in Louisiana--some additional benefits to your schools, have at it. But you have got to set a Federal baseline so that communities don't feel they are getting suckered, and the ability to make sure we don't give away these tax benefits without that minimum guarantee, I think, has a lot of benefit. Just today, we learned that Microsoft saved about $10 billion in taxes on using accelerated depreciation, a bonus depreciation; Meta saved about $16 billion, $15.9 billion from using bonus depreciation. I have reached out to these companies. They understand that the game has changed. They have to be more engaged. I think many of the hyperscalers would meet these new standards, but unless we put some consequences, I think we are going to completely miss the boat. It is kind of like saying, even though the AI companies themselves are saying: Gosh, we are really worried about safety, none of the responsible ones realize they can simply say: Just trust us. The idea that these largest companies in the world--and I know the CEOs and many of them are good people. But the idea, after we all have experienced some of the ups and downs of social media, we are going to turn the same power over to the same group of CEOs and say: We are going to trust you to figure this all out on your own without any public input. I keep thinking back, would I ever climb on an airplane that hadn't had a safety inspection? That is what we are thinking about on overall AI safety and these models being released. But at least tomorrow, if the Senate takes up this Ratepayer Reduction Act, I hope and I would--I am not sure what I am going to do on the vote tomorrow. But I would say the Ratepayer Production Act is a figleaf. I know people will say, my colleagues might say: Well, why don't you take half a loaf? You know, I am pretty involved in every bipartisan action. You know, take half a loaf means you can keep working on it. But the underlying bill isn't half a loaf; it is the promise of maybe one slice of that bread 2 years down from now. The anger in my State and in every State across the country on this issue is not going to wait 2 years to have some kind of optional--optional, no penalty, but optional review where frankly the pitchforks are out already. So I hope that I can encourage my colleagues to join me in passing the Data Center Tax Accountability and Disclosure Act, one that I have already socialized within industry, one that would put some mandatory requirements but also put some real teeth in this very important issue. I know my colleagues coming want to raise other issues. I will yield the floor, but these issues are not going to disappear. And simply punting or saying to industry: Trust us--and I come from the tech industry--is not going to satisfy the concerns of the American people. The sooner we get to work on serious business, the sooner we can make sure that we benefit from all of this AI innovation that I do think lies in wait--because if we have a mistake or we have a challenge and something happens, all of this innovation could go away because the American people are already enormously suspect about AI. They are already enormously concerned at a 90-10 ratio about data centers. It is time for us to act and not simply punt. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. President, 86 percent--86 percent. I am here today to reiterate my support for the Stop Insider Trading Act and urge my colleagues to support this important bill.
Recent polling suggests that 86 percent of the American people support this bill.
You see, in order to make the best possible policy decisions, Members of Congress are provided access to information that most Americans are not. We receive briefings. We write legislation. We serve on committees of jurisdiction over major sections of our economy. But serving as a Member of Congress comes with a responsibility to put public interests ahead of personal gain. We have an obligation to put the interests of the people we represent ahead of our own interests.
No Member of Congress should profit from insider information. There is a reason that can be difficult: Members who write the rules are also subject to them. Allowing Members to actively trade individual stocks creates an obvious conflict of interest. Even when no law is broken, the appearance of a conflict is damaging. It is damaging to this institution. It is damaging to public trust. It is damaging to our Republic. You know, it is leadership 101: Avoid the appearance of impropriety.
Without a doubt, some serving in Congress today benefit financially from the current system, but that should not prevent Congress from supporting a change that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe is needed and necessary.
It bears repeating: Recent polling shows that 86 percent of Americans favor banning Members of Congress from trading stocks. Eighty-seven percent of Republicans, 88 percent of Democrats, and 81 percent of Independents support banning Members of Congress from trading stocks. Republicans and Democrats disagree on so many issues these days, but Americans across the political spectrum agree that their elected representatives should not be able to use the privileges of public office for personal financial gain. This sentiment is echoed across Indiana, I know. I regularly hear from Hoosiers who are troubled about those serving in Congress profiting from their positions.
Here is the bottom line: The American people should not have to wonder whether votes in Congress are influenced by what is best for the country or by what is best for the investment portfolios of those serving in Congress.
The Stop Insider Trading Act will help ensure that Congress plays by the same rules as everyone else. It would prevent Members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children from purchasing individual stocks and strengthen disclosure and enforcement requirements.
This legislation is a step in the right direction, and it is what the people we represent want us to do. Trust in Congress remains at an alltime low. Passing this bill supported by 86 percent of the American people will help restore some level of trust in Congress and those who serve.
Let's do the right thing. Let's support this 86 percent solution, and let's put an end to swamp trading today.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Montana.
Mr. President, I am here to address the resolution put forward by Senator Van Hollen. This is a misguided resolution. The Democrats are trying to distort reality for political gain.
Make no mistake, the sole objective here is not justice or accountability for Americans, it is to cut off security aid to our ally Israel in its time of need.
Of course, any loss, all loss of American life is a tragedy, and Ambassador Huckabee has called for an investigation into these deaths, and I am very confident this administration will get to the bottom of this issue. But this one-sided resolution shames one of our strongest allies and minimizes the Palestinian Authority's role in inciting terrorist violence, including against Americans, through their horrific "pay for slay" program, which unbelievably rewards terrorists with up to $200 million a year.
Rather than any serious attempt at accountability or justice, this is sadly another cynical ploy by Democrats to isolate our closest ally in the region and to turn Israel's righteous war of self-defense into a domestic political issue as we are now just a little over 30 days from election.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote no on this resolution so we can stand with our ally Israel as they beat back the scourge of Iranian-backed terrorism.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. President, I rise to speak on the human rights reporting resolution that will be before the body within about 90 minutes. I am a cosponsor of the bill. Because this resolution is a little bit unusual, I thought I would describe sort of the procedural context and the reason for the statute and then describe why I strongly support a resolution to direct the Department of State to give us a human rights report about Israeli activities on the West Bank, violence against folks on the West Bank and in particular violence against Americans on the West Bank, for which there has been as of yet little or no accountability.
This is a provision that is called a 502B resolution. Like some other resolutions that I brought to the floor in the last year, it is a privileged resolution, and the "privilege" means that a single Senator can file it seeking a human rights report on any nation. The resolution cannot be locked up in committee. Within a certain number of days, it ripens, and it is guaranteed a floor vote with a simple-majority passage threshold.
The theme that seems to unify these privileged resolutions is it is an effort of a Senator--even a single Senator--to shine a spotlight on and demand accountability from the Executive. Whether that is on the declaration of an emergency or the transfer of arms or the initiation of war or, in this case, the provision of U.S. aid, a Senator has the right to force a vote on the Senate to explore in this case the human rights record of any nation receiving U.S. aid.
This is not the first such resolution I have brought to the floor. I brought one to the floor 6 or 8 months ago to seek a human rights report on El Salvador because El Salvador was receiving all these deported individuals from America--not Salvadorans--and imprisoning them in a notorious prison. In that case, I sought information about the conditions of imprisonment. What was the deal between the United States and El Salvador? What is the human rights record of that prison? Can someone in the prison from the United States demonstrate that they are the wrong person, that they picked up the wrong person?
So this is the second such resolution I have helped bring to the floor, and I have about two dozen others that I have filed and that are pending--all the nations into which the President is sending folks pursuant to these third-country deportations. I believe it would be important for Congress to get the information about the transfers, about the cost, about the agreements, and about the human rights records.
So this is part of a larger strategy that was put into statute to enable Congress to test the human rights record of nations that are receiving U.S. aid.
In this instance, this resolution, which was initially cosponsored by Senators Van Hollen, Sanders, and I but now has a number of cosponsors, is specifically to seek a State Department report on the Israel human rights record about the treatment of folks on the West Bank. It lists a number of circumstances in which U.S. citizens--mostly Palestinian American but U.S. citizens--have been killed or injured on the West Bank, and there has been no accountability for that by the Israeli Government.
The circumstances on the West Bank are pretty dire. If you just go based upon Israeli media or Israeli human rights organizations, there have been significant public instances of attacks on Palestinian communities on the West Bank for which there has been no accountability. But the notice of these particular attacks has not just been limited to Israeli press or Israeli human rights organizations; international organizations have raised the same issue, but also, importantly, so have U.S. officials serving in Israel during multiple Democratic and Republican administrations.
For example, I have attended briefings where U.S. military officials posted in Israel have described instances of violence on the West Bank committed by Israelis and in some instances even Israeli security forces or Israeli IDF reservists. So the violence is not just private-on-private violence, but some of it is being facilitated and even encouraged or participated in by members of the Israeli Government, and that is reporting from the U.S. military.
Recently, President Trump's Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, whom I knew as Governor Huckabee because we served as Governors together 20 years ago, has similarly complained about violence against folks on the West Bank perpetrated by Israelis--in this case, Israeli settlers--and the lack of any accountability for that violence. Obviously, that should raise serious, serious concerns, but when the violence is also perpetrated against Americans who are there on the West Bank to study, there on the West Bank to visit their families, there on the West Bank to be human rights observers or journalists--when the violence is committed against Americans, we need to take specific steps to make sure we understand that there will be accountability.
That is what this resolution would do. It would require the Department of State, within a set period of time, to issue a human rights report that specifically addresses the questions that are listed in the resolution and particularly those questions that bear upon violence committed against Americans and what Israel can or will do about it.
Anything dealing with United States-Israel relations or the Middle East, frankly, is controversial because it is such a challenging area. And let's be clear, Israel is a friend. Israel is an ally. That friendship is between the American people and the Israeli people. It is between the American Nation and the State of Israel. That friendship is a friendship that is really important regardless of which leaders are in place.
This is a relationship that goes back to the United States' decision under President Truman to immediately recognize the nation of Israel once the U.N. decided in 1947 that there would be an Israel for the Jewish people and a Palestine for Palestinian people. President Truman immediately recognized the nation of Israel, and that is one of the reasons why Truman is one of my favorite Presidents.
However, "friendship and partnership" are not the same as "complete agreement." In fact, if you are not candid with your friends and if you can't have a friendship that can survive being candid with one another, it is not really a friendship. A friendship is only tested when you are candid with each other and find out whether the relationship lasts through disagreement. This is an area of pretty profound disagreement between many of us and that nation of Israel.
As I conclude, I would say that the reason this resolution is on the floor is because of a deep perception by many of us in this body that despite that friendship, we are not being listened to. We are not being listened to.
Many of us in both parties and administrations of both parties have raised this issue of violence against Palestinians on the West Bank over and over and over again with those in the Israeli Government that we have interacted with.
I know I have, in my visits to Israel over the years as mayor and Governor and Senator, in sessions we have had with Israeli leaders on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and in discussions we have had with Knesset members and others--I have specifically raised in person and by letter and now in joining in this resolution this issue of violence against people living on the West Bank and what needs to be done about it.
I will be blunt. Despite raising this issue privately in the way that you would maybe first want a dialogue with a friend--raising the issue and seeking assistance--and raising it multiple times, I have come to the conclusion that I am not being listened to. I have come to the conclusion that even though this is a friendship that matters and even though the United States is Israel's most important security partner, they are completely ignoring us when we raise important human rights issues such as this one.
So when a friend is speaking to you as a friend and urging you to do better--that is what friends do for one another--and the friend is being ignored, you end up making resolutions like the one we will vote on later a necessity.
So it is my hope that we will get a robust vote on the need for the State Department to fully lay out the human rights record and particularly what will be done to stop violence against all on the West Bank but especially what will be done to stop violence against Americans on the West Bank.
For that reason, I am very happy to join my colleague Senator Van Hollen and others, and I urge a "yes" vote on the resolution when it comes up later.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. President, it should not be controversial to say that Congress should know the circumstances of the deaths of our own citizens abroad in any country. It should be equally uncontroversial to say, in the spirit of transparency and oversight, that Congress must also be aware of human rights abuses anywhere abroad where billions of taxpayer dollars have been sent over the years.
Since 1993, the United States has provided $7.8 billion in bilateral assistance to the West Bank and Gaza. As Washington throws money every which way, Congress must at least ensure that those taxpayer dollars advance our core interests, let alone not reward those who seek to harm us or our allies.
Yet, despite American generosity, human rights abuses in the West Bank and Gaza, committed by the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, and other groups, have been well documented over the years.
In 2024, the State Department reported that Palestinian Authority officials engaged in unlawful or arbitrary killings, torture, arbitrary arrests, severe restrictions on the freedom of expression, persecution of journalists, and the recruitment or use of children in armed conflict and much more.
Of course, we can never forget the brutal attack perpetrated by Hamas on October 7, 2023, which killed some 1,200 innocent men, women, and children--among them, 46 citizens. A further 254 people were taken hostage, including 12 Americans, who endured unimaginable conditions.
One U.S.-Israeli citizen, Edan Alexander, survived 584 days in captivity and upon his release vowed to return to Israel to continue his service in the IDF, saying:
Text printed in the Record (63 characters)
My story does not end with survival. It continues with service.
Such acts of courage should inspire Congress to ensure that not one more taxpayer dime ever again goes to Palestinian governing entities that engage in human rights abuses and that directly threaten support or turn a blind eye to groups that target American citizens.
My bill is simple. It requires Palestinian governing entities to meet certain commonsense conditions before they receive any additional American assistance. Under my bill, U.S. foreign assistance to any Palestinian Government entity or international organization operating in the West Bank or Gaza which is funded by taxpayer dollars would be frozen unless said government entity meets some commonsense conditions. Namely, they must recognize the State of Israel, renounce terrorism and the October 7 attacks, remove individuals with terrorist ties from their security services, terminate all funding for anti-American and anti-Israel incitement, and honor previously agreed diplomatic agreements.
My bill would also strengthen congressional oversight by requiring that the State Department provide to Congress a report on human rights practices in the West Bank and Gaza and examine whether the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, or any other Palestinian governing entity continues to commit human rights abuses.
Funding Palestinian entities that do not recognize Israel's right to exist and fund anti-American and anti-Israel activities makes no sense.
At its core, this legislation establishes a principle of accountability. American taxpayers should know where their money is going, Congress should be able to oversee how it is being used, and foreign entities receiving the benefits of American assistance should be expected to meet clearly articulated standards.
I therefore ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of my bill, which is at the desk. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Is there an objection?
The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if the Senator from Kentucky wants to bring a bill to the floor to condemn the horrendous terror attacks perpetrated by Hamas on Israel of October 7, we will make common cause. We have done that as a body. Every single Senator in this body has made clear that Hamas committed despicable acts.
Like many others in this body, I have met with Israelis and Americans who lost loved ones on that horrible day. I have met with American citizens and Israeli citizens who whose loved ones were taken hostage that terrible day.
And that is why this body has condemned Hamas. Our government recognizes that they are a terrorist organization.
I think the Senator knows that not one penny of U.S. taxpayer dollars goes to Hamas, obviously. In fact, what the U.S. Government does is use all its powers to sanction Hamas.
One of the reasons some of us on the Democratic side were concerned about some of the cryptocurrency bills is because the method that Hamas uses to evade sanctions is cryptocurrency, and the bill that was brought to this floor did not close that loophole used by Hamas.
But make no mistake, the U.S. Government--Members of both sides--recognize that Hamas is a terrible organization. And, of course, not only do we not provide any U.S. assistance, we go after them with every sanction in the book. So let's be clear about that.
Let's be clear about what government entity has allowed some funds to flow to Hamas, and it was the Netanyahu government. It has been well documented. I have raised this issue within the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the Senator from Kentucky is part of.
It is Netanyahu who allowed moneys to flow from Hamas to the Qatari Government, and the Qatari Government only provided those payments with the approval of the Netanyahu government.
So I would be happy to join the Senator from Kentucky not only in condemning Hamas but also in condemning any country that allows funding to go to Hamas.
Now let's talk about the Palestinian Authority. Now, obviously, there are some in the rightwing in Israel that want to suggest the PA and Hamas are the same. I think most Members of this body recognize the PA, recognizes Israel's right to exist, that it has pursued and wanted to pursue a two-state solution for self-determination for Palestinians as well as for Israelis.
But I would be happy again to join the Senator in requiring a human rights report on the conduct of the Palestinian Authority. They have also engaged in abuses against their own people, the Palestinian people. And, in fact, we do do that, and the Senator from Kentucky just quoted from the State Department's human rights report with respect to the Palestinian Authority.
But what his resolution would also do is cut off all U.S. assistance in any form to the Palestinian Authority. And again, the Congress has already taken action to cut off economic assistance to the Palestinian Authority through the Taylor Force Act.
There is one area where we actually do have cooperation with the PA and that is through counterterrorism efforts. Counterterrorism efforts where the U.S. Security Coordinator for the West Bank actually works with the Palestinian Authority security forces to prevent terrorism in the West Bank. I don't know if the Senator is proposing that we cut off that assistance.
Just a few years ago, there was a bipartisan resolution to actually raise the level of the military rank of the U.S. Security Coordinator. It used to be General Fenzel, who did a really good job coordinating antiterrorism activities with the PA to prevent terrorist attacks on Israel.
But what the Senator is saying is, he wants to do a human rights report on PA conduct. Fine. Bring it up. I will support him on that. But that is not all this bill does. His bill essentially would cut off U.S. cooperation--antiterrorism cooperation--with the PA, something that would actually endanger Israelis and others on the West Bank. So it really makes no sense.
I agree that we should follow where every U.S. taxpayer dollar goes, and I can assure folks that not one penny goes to Hamas, and yet we sanction them. And as I said, there are already big restrictions on the flow of U.S. taxpayer assistance to the PA. There is a carve-out for antiterrorism cooperation.
So if the Senator from Kentucky wants to come back with a resolution condemning Hamas for maybe the second or third time, I am all in. If the Senator wants to require a more in-depth report on the conduct of the Palestinian Authority, I am all in.
But this resolution is written in a way that conflates Hamas with the Palestinian Authority. I think every Member of this body--even recognizing the shortcomings of the PA--recognizes that they are not a designated U.S. terror organization so I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The objection is heard.
The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. President, today the Senate will vote on an important resolution introduced by Senator Van Hollen--and I thank him for his work on this--introduced by myself and more than 20 of our colleagues.
In January 2024, I introduced the first 502B resolution on Israel that received 11 votes. I have a feeling that we are going to get a lot more votes tonight.
And the reason for that is that as the American people observe what is going on in Gaza, what is going on in the West Bank, they are becoming more and more disgusted and are demanding that the U.S. Congress act. My own view? No more military aid to the genocidal government of Netanyahu.
The resolution that we are debating tonight concerns the escalating violence in the occupied West Bank and the killing of American citizens there with zero repercussions. But we cannot talk about the West Bank without talking about what has gone on in Gaza.
For nearly 3 years, the world has watched the Netanyahu government wage a genocide in Gaza. It has now killed at least 74,000 Palestinians, most of whom are women and children. It has wounded over 170,000 Palestinians. In other words, more than 10 percent of the population of Gaza has either been killed or wounded in less than 3 years.
But it is not just the massive attack on human life that we have observed. In this 3-year period, Israel has laid waste to the territory of Gaza and has almost completely destroyed the infrastructure there. It has destroyed homes, hospitals, schools, and water systems, and it has used starvation as a weapon of war. Cities like Rafah have been reduced to rubble.
Leading human rights organizations--including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Israeli group B'Tselem--have concluded that what is happening in Gaza is a genocide.
Senior members of the Israeli Government have said openly that they want Palestinians out of Gaza. And even under a so-called cease-fire, the killing has not stopped; well over a thousand more people have been killed.
Much of this has been done with American bombs and American taxpayer dollars, which is why Congress must end all taxpayer support and aid for this genocidal government.
And while the world's attention has been on Gaza, this same government has been carrying out a slower but no less brutal campaign in the West Bank. As of last month, the U.N.--the United Nations--has documented more than 1,400 incidents of settler violence this year alone, affecting some 260 Palestinian communities. The U.N. says this violence has reached unprecedented levels.
Settlers cut villagers off from their wells and their orchards. They burn homes and cars. They beat people who cannot defend themselves. And too often, Israeli security forces stand by or even join in. Families who have farmed the same land for generations are being driven out. Former Israeli generals have called it what it is: ethnic cleansing.
Meanwhile, the Netanyahu government keeps expanding illegal settlements, including the E1 project designed to cut the West Bank in two. And the Trump administration, rather than confronting this violence, has lifted sanctions on violent settlers.
This violence does not even spare American citizens. Since January of 2022, nine Americans have been killed in the West Bank by Israeli settlers or security forces. Not one of those killings has led to real accountability.
This resolution is also about Palestinian children in Israeli military detention. Last year, Save the Children surveyed 165 children who had been held by Israeli authorities: 99 percent reported physical assault; 94 percent reported being denied medical care. These are children. For some 50 years, the Foreign Assistance Act has said that U.S. military assistance cannot go to a government that engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of human rights. Section 502B(c) of that law gives Congress the right to ask the State Department for information on the human rights record of any country receiving our aid.
Enough is enough. The United States cannot continue to bankroll this violence and look the other way, whether in Gaza or in the West Bank. It is time to end our complicity. I urge a "yes" vote and thank Senator Van Hollen for his leadership.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. President, I rise today to call up S. Res. 852, a resolution to require the State Department to provide Congress with information on the growing violence and human rights abuses taking place in the West Bank, including against American citizens.
I want to thank Senator Sanders, Senator Kaine, and 23 of our fellow Senators who are cosponsoring this effort; and I want to thank Senator Sanders for bringing that 502B resolution to the floor of the Senate back in January of 2024.
In just over 4 years, nine American citizens have been killed in the West Bank by violent Israeli settlers or members of the Israeli security forces, and there has been zero--zero--accountability, with no justice for their families and no one held accountable. The U.S. Government has repeatedly said that our No. 1 priority overseas is to protect American citizens. Yet, as violent Israeli settlers continue to terrorize civilians in the West Bank, American citizens have been killed time and again--in many cases with the complicity of the Government of Israel, the Netanyahu government.
It is long past time that we shined a light on these killings and all of the human rights abuses taking place in the West Bank to get answers. We need to get answers because we need accountability, and we need accountability to make sure that these killings end. They will continue so long as nobody is held to account.
I want to take a few minutes to tell my colleagues about these nine American citizens who have been killed by Israeli settlers or Israeli security forces in just over the last 4 years.
In January 2022, 70-year-old American citizen Omar, who ran a grocery store in Milwaukee for 40 years, was stopped at a checkpoint in the West Bank when Israeli soldiers dragged him from his car. They bound his hands behind his back, they gagged him, they blindfolded him, and they left him lying on the ground outside. He died of a stress-induced heart attack. No one has been held accountable.
In May 2022, Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, who lived in New Jersey as a child, was reporting near the Jenin refugee camp when she was shot in the head and killed by Israeli security forces. Shireen was known to millions as the "voice of a generation." When she was killed, she was wearing a bright blue vest, clearly identifying her as a journalist. No one has been held accountable.
In January 2024, a 17-year-old American citizen named Tawfic, who was born and raised in Louisiana, was shot in the head and killed while driving east of Ramallah. Reports indicate that an Israeli settler, an off-duty Israeli police officer, and an Israeli soldier were involved in the shooting. Nobody has been held accountable.
Just weeks later, another 17-year-old American boy, Mohammed, who was born in Florida, was shot twice in the head while driving near the town of Biddu. Israeli forces were reportedly responsible for his killing. No one has been held accountable.
In September 2024, 26-year-old American citizen Aysenur Eygi, who was raised in Seattle, was shot in the head by an Israeli soldier from approximately 200 meters. No one has been held accountable.
In April 2025, 14-year-old Amer from New Jersey was shot and killed by Israeli security forces at the entrance to the village of Turmus Ayya. Reports indicate that, when he was shot, he was shot 11 times by two different weapons. No one has been held accountable.
In July 2025, 20-year-old American citizen Saif, who was born and raised in Florida, was visiting family in the West Bank when he was beaten to death by violent Israeli settlers during an attack on the town. Eyewitnesses reported that settlers and Israeli security forces blocked an ambulance from reaching him for more than 2 hours.
Ambassador Huckabee called Saif's killing a "criminal and terrorist act." He even said: "There must be accountability."
So why has there been no accountability?
In August 2025, Khamis, who was a 40-year-old American citizen who lived in Chicago with his five children, died of smoke inhalation after violent Israeli settlers set fire to homes and cars during an attack in Silwad. No one has been held accountable.
And, in February of this year, Nasrallah, who was a 19-year-old American boy born in Philadelphia, was shot and killed by violent Israeli settlers during an attack on Palestinian farmers near Ramallah. No one has been held accountable.
Omar, Shireen, Tawfic, Mohammed, Aysenur, Amer, Saif, Khamis, and Nasrallah--nine American citizens dead and no accountability. Their families have waited months and years for answers. Many of us have been calling for action from the executive branch and for accountability from the Netanyahu government, year after year, with no results.
In March of this year, 30 Senators and I wrote to Secretary Rubio following some of the killings I just talked about. That was the second letter we had sent to this administration in 7 months regarding the killing of an American citizen in the West Bank.
In response to our earlier letter, the State Department told us:
Text printed in the Record (127 characters)
The United States calls for accountability in all cases where U.S. citizens are harmed abroad to help prevent future tragedies.
"To help prevent future tragedies," we call for accountability--no accountability in any of these nine cases.
It is clear that these calls for accountability are empty promises because what we are seeing is a consistent pattern in which Americans are being killed by violent Israeli settlers or Israeli security forces, with no justice and no accountability from any party, despite promises to take action by American officials.
This failure is not limited to the current administration. Many of us called upon the Biden administration for answers, just as we have pushed the Trump administration for answers and action. Back then, as now, we were met with statements of concern and told that the United States supports accountability. It just never insists on it, because concern is not enough when nine Americans are dead and not one person--not one--has been held accountable.
How many more Americans must die in the West Bank before this administration takes serious, credible steps to secure accountability? before the U.S. Government does its job and follows through when it says its top priority is to protect American citizens overseas?
Last year, Senator Merkley and I traveled to the region, where we met with families of American citizens--most of them under 18--who had been killed by violent settlers or the Israeli military. We sat across from parents and family members who had lost their children and loved ones. None of them--not one--had received any meaningful answers about what had happened to their loved ones who had been killed.
We also met the father of Mohammed, who was the 16-year-old American boy from Florida who had been jailed without charges for more than 6 months at the time of our meeting. Mohammed was ultimately held in pretrial detention for 9 months, where he was beaten, tortured, and denied contact with his family. He was finally released on Thanksgiving Day last year, but the mistreatment and detention of American citizens continue to this moment.
In June, 20-year-old Palestinian-American student Sama, whose family lives in Florida and Massachusetts, was detained during a series of raids targeting students at Birzeit University. She remains in an Israeli military prison.
In July, Adam, a 16-year-old Palestinian American whose family lives in Chicago, was arrested. His family paid his bail, and he was moments away from being released when Israeli authorities decided to hold him under an entirely new case. He remains in an Israeli military prison.
There are other cases of American citizens being held in Israeli military prisons as we speak. Reports from these prisons have revealed abusive and traumatic conditions for those detained, including children and teenagers. In fact, under the Israeli military court system, 16-and 17-year-olds are sentenced under provisions written for adults, while Israeli citizens and children living in those same territories are tried in Israeli civilian courts and under Israeli juvenile law.
Beyond those detained, many Americans continue to face violence and destruction throughout the West Bank, as Israeli settlers and soldiers act with impunity.
Just in August, 82-year-old Palestinian-American Khamis was hospitalized after Israeli soldiers attacked him. After the attack, the soldiers then confiscated bystander footage of the incident to cover up their violent actions. You can see the video for yourself.
Just this week, Israeli settlers attacked the home and destroyed the vehicles of a 78-year-old Palestinian American, Mustafa, and his wife.
Even those who have not been attacked or detained are living in fear, like Loui, a 46-year-old Palestinian-American businessman who traveled from Ohio to visit his family members in the West Bank after their home was surrounded and besieged by Israeli settlers.
The American Government has absolutely failed in its duty to secure any kind of accountability for the killings of and the arbitrary detention of and ongoing violence against these American citizens. If nothing changes, more American citizens will die. After all, the administration told us that one reason for accountability is to make sure this doesn't happen again. Yet there is no accountability, and without accountability, it will happen again. The failure of the United States and Israeli Governments to hold anyone responsible for these abuses has only paved the way for more abuses and more killings to follow.
If American citizens can be killed, harmed, or locked up with impunity, imagine what the conditions are for Palestinians in the West Bank who don't hold an American passport, including Palestinian children. Hundreds of Palestinian children are detained and prosecuted through the Israeli military court system every year. Those imprisoned can be as young as 12 years old, which is the age of criminal responsibility in the Israeli military legal system, but children as young as 5 years old have been temporarily detained, and a child as young as 3 years old was once arrested.
As of December 2025, the Israel Prison Service reported that it was holding 351 Palestinian children. Since October 7, 2023, Israeli authorities have continued to bar the Red Cross from visiting Palestinian detainees in Israeli detention facilities, despite the fact that international humanitarian law requires--requires--that the ICRC have access to Palestinian detainees in Israeli custody.
Human rights organizations have documented widespread reports of physical beatings, sexual violence, harassment, threats, and other cruel and degrading actions toward these children.
We have seen violent Israeli settlers attacking Palestinian civilians with impunity. They are pushing Palestinians off their land, burning cars and buildings and mosques, destroying crops and water systems, and assaulting residents in their own communities. Many members of the extremist Netanyahu government have encouraged this activity.
When Senator Merkley and I visited the West Bank last year, it was clear that the situation had worsened considerably, just since our previous trip in 2023. We saw more trailers and illegal settler outposts springing up across the West Bank. We saw more checkpoints and gates and walls imprisoning Palestinian communities.
In the mostly Christian town of Taybeh, we heard directly from residents about settler attacks and harassment, including an attack that happened on the day of our visit. We visited the historic church that settlers had attempted to damage.
These are not isolated incidents. According to the United Nations, last year alone, there were 1,828 settler attacks against Palestinian residents resulting in bodily injury or property damage.
In 2025, the Netanyahu government approved a record high 54 new official settlements, established 86 new outposts, and advanced plans for nearly 28,000 illegal settlement housing units.
The question is: When will the U.S. Government--whether the previous White House or the current White House--stop giving Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government a blank check to let this continue?
Secretary Rubio has said the United States is "concerned" about escalating settler violence in the West Bank.
Concern is not enough when nine American citizens have been killed. Concerns are not enough when we have American citizens in military detention. Concern is not enough when violent settlers are attacking Palestinian communities with impunity.
Just last night, violent settlers attacked a village of Palestinians, setting their homes on fire and destroying their property.
The State Department's response today?
Text printed in the Record (166 characters)
We condemn criminal violence by any party in the West Bank and support appropriate investigations, legal accountability, and judicial processes for those responsible.
Babble. Meaningless, empty statements when they are not accompanied by any demand for real accountability. They continue to call for accountability, but we never see it.
And that brings us to the resolution today because this resolution requires the Secretary of State to provide a report with all credible information available to the State Department concerning the killing of nine American citizens, who are named in the resolution and whose stories I share today.
It also requires an accounting of American citizens currently held in Israeli military prisons, including why they are being held, whether the American Embassy officials have visited them, the conditions of their detention, and whether there are credible reports that they have been mistreated.
Basic information, that is what we are demanding in this resolution.
The resolution requires they examine the detention of Palestinian children, including how many are held, the charges against them, whether they have access to legal counsel, whether they have experienced torture or other mistreatment, and how the standards governing their detention compare with American juvenile detention standards.
And above all, the resolution requires that the State Department tell Congress what the United States has actually done to protect U.S. citizens, to prevent further violence, to promote respect for human rights, and hold the perpetrators of these abuses accountable.
These are basic questions that Congress has both the right and the responsibility to ask of the executive branch.
The United States provides billions of American taxpayer dollars to the government of Israel every year. We have a duty to make sure that those funds are being used in accordance with our laws and our values.
Some of my colleagues may disagree with my assessment of the Netanyahu government's policies, although the record is clear regarding the fact that they have engaged in complicity in what is happening in the West Bank. And some may disagree about other aspects of what is happening here. But what this vote is about--what this vote is about there should be no disagreement about because it just requires the State Department to provide facts. That is what this administration does. And if the State Department believes that everything is just OK, that their investigations that are being conducted by the Government of Israel and that their expressions of concern are actually being acted upon, the administration should have no problem answering those basic facts and demanding the kind of accountability they say that we should call for.
So if the killing of nine Americans does not justify a report from our own State Department, I would ask my colleagues: What would? How many more Americans must be killed before the executive branch does its job?
These families deserve answers. The American people deserve answers. And the Palestinians who face these attacks every single day deserve an end to the violence and impunity once and for all.
I urge my colleagues to support S. Res. 852.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. President, I rise in support of this resolution. I want to thank my colleagues Senator Sanders and Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Senator Van Hollen, for your leadership on this particular resolution.
The situation in the Middle East, in Gaza and the West Bank, is deplorable. And before I start about what is occurring here in the West Bank, I just want to remind the American people that the dire situation in Gaza is getting worse. Mr. President, 92 percent of the people in Gaza, their shelter is a tent or a plastic cover. They still lack water. They still lack access to regular food, and the kids are not going to school.
And this is a Palestinian community that was very proud of one of the highest literacy rates and education rates in the world, despite the very difficult circumstances they face. That is really unacceptable.
But today we are here on this resolution that is about protecting Americans, 17 Americans who have been the victims of violence in the West Bank. And, today, this resolution is about the obligation that our State Department has--our government has--to protect American citizens abroad by demanding a report, by getting information, and by insisting on accountability.
So whatever one's position may be with respect to the hostilities in the Middle East, what this resolution is requiring is that the State Department do the job with respect to American deaths in the West Bank--the same request that we would make if this were another government, not Israel, and American citizens were the victims of violence in other countries. It is the basic responsibility of this U.S. Government to protect U.S. citizens.
That is what this is profoundly about. The failure for the State Department and our government to do the basic responsibility of citizen protection and accountability has to be wired up into the policy of this administration to look the other way when these things are happening.
It has been the policy of the United States to support a two-state solution. It is the policy of the Netanyahu government to occupy and ultimately annex the West Bank. And the result of that, there is, in many cases, settler violence towards citizens in the West Bank, in some cases Americans who are there. It also is the reason why, in many cases where this violence is occurring is very much in front of the eyes of the Israeli military, they are looking the other way and doing nothing to protect the victims.
This is not an argument that is made by folks like Senator Van Hollen and Senator Sanders and me, who are concerned about that violence. It is something that was recognized by our own Ambassador Mike Huckabee.
In July of 2025, Mr. Saifullah Kamel Musallet, a 20-year-old American from Florida--an American from Florida--who was visiting his family in the West Bank was beaten to death by violent Israeli settlers during a settler attack on the town of Sinjil. Eyewitness accounts report that settlers and Israeli forces impeded ambulance access for more than 2 hours.
And to his credit, Ambassador Huckabee called the killing of Mr. Musallet a "criminal and terrorist act," and stated "there must be accountability."
We agree.
I want to mention a couple of other cases. Shireen Abu Akleh, she was a journalist, a prominent reporter, a well-known reporter. She was shot. It was not a combat situation, but was shot by a sniper from nearly 200 meters away. She was standing calmly with other reporters wearing a press helmet and a press vest. She was shot in the head.
Another reporter Dylan Collins, a constituent from Vermont, a very accomplished photojournalist. He was not in the West Bank, but he was reporting from the Israeli-Lebanese border. He was also in a group of journalists, prominently stationed on an open hillside. They had the usual identification of "press" vest, blue helmets, in a vehicle clearly marked "press," where they were clearly visible. They were fired on by an Israeli tank and heavy machinegun fire.
There has been no significant investigation on the part of the Israeli Government to get to the bottom of how that happened.
Also, as we know, the Israeli Government now is detaining without charges dozens of Americans, as well as thousands of Palestinians--some of these include minors.
One of those was a 17-year-old young man, American, Abdalkareem, who is pictured here. He has been held under "administrative detention," and that means that under Israeli law authorities can hold him indefinitely without charge or without trial--without any intention of bringing him to trial.
We have been in touch with his father, who tells us that Abdalkareem was 17 when he was detained around 3 a.m. on June 29. He was in the process of completing high school exams.
He has since turned 18. This is a young man who had never been detained or arrested before. He is now being held in the Ofer prison, which has a terrible reputation for attending to the well-being of those who are imprisoned there. His detention is also based on undisclosed "secret" information that has not been shared with his lawyers or his family.
Embassy officials, who were finally allowed on July 23 to visit, and Abdalkareem reported being beaten during interrogation, and prison authorities would not even let the U.S. Embassy give this young man vitamins, scabies medication, or his schoolbooks. And he has not been allowed family contact.
The real question here is not what Israel is doing, but what the United States Government is not doing on behalf of its own citizens, some of whom have been killed, others of whom have been detained. So this resolution is asserting the will of Congress that our government do its job to protect American citizens. When they have been injured or they have been killed, to demand accountability and an investigation.
And it is certainly within the power of this government to use its influence so that Israel does comply with our law.
I urge all of our colleagues to stand up for the rights of all of our citizens to have the full protection of the U.S. Government.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The Senator from Maryland.
REQUESTING INFORMATION ON ISRAEL'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961--Motion to Discharge
Pages S5158–S5159 · Official textREQUESTING INFORMATION ON ISRAEL'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961--Motion to Discharge
Mr. President, pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 2304(c) and in accordance with section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, I move to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further consideration of S. Res. 852.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (211 characters)
Motion to discharge from the Committee on Foreign Relations, S. Res. 852, a resolution requesting information on Israel's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays are ordered.
Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Vermont Senator Welch, thank Senator Sanders, who was here earlier, Senator Kaine, and all of our colleagues who have cosponsored a very important resolution demanding accountability--demanding accountability in the killings of nine American citizens on the West Bank in just the last 4 years. And as both the Biden administration and the Trump administration have said, if we don't get accountability, then these killings will continue with impunity.
So this is about saving American citizens' lives. It is also a recognition that if we can't get accountability for American citizens, imagine how hard it is for a Palestinian to get accountability for human rights abuses committed against them--and about the Americans being currently detained in Israeli military prisons and the hundreds of Palestinian kids being detained as we speak.
So this is a resolution that simply requires a report--a report on what the U.S. Government is doing to protect its own citizens. I would hope that every Member of this body would support a resolution that does that and calls for a review of the human rights situation and conditions on the West Bank.
So with that, Mr. President, I would ask that the previously scheduled vote begin immediately.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The question is on agreeing to the motion to discharge.
The yeas and nays were previously ordered.
The clerk will call the roll. The senior assistant executive clerk called the roll.
The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Cassidy) and the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan).
The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 51, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (784 characters)
Alsobrooks Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Blunt Rochester Booker Cantwell Coons Cortez Masto Duckworth Durbin Gallego Gillibrand Hassan Heinrich Hickenlooper Hirono Kaine Kelly Kim King Klobuchar Lujan Markey Merkley Murphy Murray Ossoff Padilla Paul Peters Reed Rosen Sanders Schatz Schiff Schumer Shaheen Slotkin Smith Van Hollen
Warner Warnock Warren Welch Whitehouse Wyden
Armstrong Banks Barrasso Blackburn Boozman Britt Budd Capito Collins Cornyn Cotton Cramer Crapo Cruz Curtis Daines Ernst Fetterman Fischer Graham Grassley Hagerty Hawley Hoeven Husted Hyde-Smith Johnson Justice Kennedy Lankford Lee Lummis Marshall McConnell McCormick Moody Moran Moreno Murkowski Ricketts Risch Rounds Schmitt Scott (FL) Scott (SC) Sheehy Thune Tillis Tuberville Wicker Young
Cassidy Sullivan
The motion was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Lummis)
The Senator from South Dakota.
Legislative Session
Page S5159 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Wind Energy Mitigation Agreements
Page S5159 · Official textMadam President, for over a year, the Department of Defense has stopped signing wind energy mitigation agreements through its Siting Clearinghouse, which is negatively impacting energy projects in Iowa. The reason the Pentagon Office of Energy, Installations, and Environment has provided for halting mitigation agreements is that the Department is reevaluating its process, analyzing threats to national security.
I agree that the Department of Defense must ensure projects do not put national security at risk. That said, the Department has been "reevaluating the process" for over a year. We have the most capable military and intelligence in the world. The Pentagon has the ability to identify and mitigate risks in a timelier fashion--especially given that wind energy projects are nothing new, nor are these agreements. Given the current administration's hostility to wind energy, it makes me wonder if this reevaluation is being used as an excuse to hamstring these projects.
In addition to the capabilities the Pentagon has, not all wind energy projects pose the same concerns to national security based on the location of the project. For example, Iowa is a landlocked State. The projects underway in Iowa are not going to have the same level of national security concern as, say, a project where there are several major Active-Duty military installations, global shipping ports, and international border access points.
I have raised concerns with the Pentagon and administration officials and have spoken directly with Secretary Hegseth about the importance of these projects for Iowa. I stressed that the mitigation agreement process must restart in a timely manner. Unfortunately, I have not been given an answer from the Pentagon on June, July, and September 2026 inquiries. This is unacceptable.
Congress established the Siting Clearinghouse through the fiscal year 2011 National Defense Authorization Act, to evaluate and explore impacts and mitigation options related to alternative energy production to preserve military missions. Since its establishment, energy projects have been able to work with the Siting Clearinghouse to mitigate any concerns raised and agree on the most appropriate path forward.
Wind energy is extremely important in Iowa. Iowa is a top leader in wind power capacity and share of total electricity generation. Delays in new wind energy projects mean holdups in energy generation and independence, which can lower energy prices for consumers. Unfortunately, the Department of Defense does not seem to recognize the importance of timely action.
I am supportive of provisions in the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act that would put tighter timelines on the Pentagon for completing these agreements. It is important that wind energy projects can continue and that the bureaucratic redtape blocking Iowa wind projects is disposed of soon.
CREC-2026-09-29-pt1-PgS5159-3
Page S5159 · Official textMadam President, I rise today to recognize John McKenzie, who will retire from his role as the President and CEO of the Indiana Credit Union League at the end of this year. Throughout his career, John has led many key initiatives to benefit Indiana's credit unions, their leaders, their employees, and the 2.8 million credit union members in Indiana.
His work has involved strengthening the credit unions' advocacy effectiveness, including the 1991 battle to preserve the independence of the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund, the 1998 effort to protect field of membership expansion for Federal credit unions, protecting Federal tax exemption and interchange income, and State-level work to help pass legislation to expand State-chartered credit union field of membership options.
The Indiana Credit Union League's service capability and commitment to collaboration have grown during John's tenure as a result of many efforts, including building a card services program and establishing a self-insured association health plan, both of which have provided millions of dollars in total cost savings to participating credit unions and, at the same time, built the organization's financial strength. He was also at the forefront of developing the State's shared branching network, where the league continues to provide managerial and operational support for 300 locations statewide.
John came to the league in 1986 after working as executive vice president of the State's corporate credit union, arriving at a time when the organization had under $1 million in retained earnings, and he has overseen the growth to nearly $40 million, reinforcing the financial strength of the league and its ability to support Hoosier credit unions.
His other contributions to the credit union system have included leading fundraising efforts among credit unions to establish the Indiana Military Veterans Hall of Fame and to serve on that board, serving on the Credit Union National Association Board for the benefit of credit unions across the country, and working with the World Council of Credit Unions to host representatives from around the world, which resulted in receiving the Distinguished Service Award.
I am glad that, on October 2, 2026, John will be inducted into the Indiana Credit Union Hall of Fame.
He will retire from the Indiana Credit Union League at the end of this year, after 40 years of legacy building that will benefit Indiana credit unions, the league, and credit union members long into the future.
Recognizing Ludlow's Steakhouse
Pages S5159–S5160 · Official textMadam President, as chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, each week I recognize an outstanding Iowa small business that exemplifies the American entrepreneurial spirit. This week, it is my privilege to recognize Ludlow's Steakhouse of Wayne County, IA, as the Senate Small Business of the Week.
For more than two decades, Ludlow's Steakhouse has been a staple of the Wayne County community. Ron and Maureta Redmon first opened the restaurant in 2004 and in 2013, they sold the business to Craig and Brenda Onstot. In 2017, Truett and Sheena Pershy took ownership. Under their leadership, Ludlow's has expanded its menu and launched a catering business. From custom-cut aged steaks, seafood, pasta, sandwiches, and more, Ludlow's offers something for everyone to enjoy. In 2022, Ludlow's was named runner-up in the Iowa Pork Producer's Association's Best Breaded Pork Tenderloin Contest, earning statewide recognition for its food.
In 2024, the Pershys relocated the restaurant to an 18,000-square-foot former American Legion building. Following major renovations, they transformed the building into a destination for dining, lodging, and community gatherings. Today, the property brings Ludlow's Steakhouse, the Brick Tavern, the Brick Event Center, and the Brick Suites together under one roof.
Truett credits Sheena's continued support as instrumental to the growth of the business, and together, they are proud of the team they have built. Ludlow's currently employs 22 people, including Iowans who work at the restaurant while attending high school. Truett and Sheena take pride in giving their employees an opportunity to develop valuable skills and work experience before they graduate.
That commitment to people extends throughout Wayne County. As members of the City of Corydon Chamber of Commerce, Ludlow's supports local schools and regularly donates to community fundraisers and benefits. Whether providing a young person with their first job, supporting a local cause, or creating a place where neighbors can gather, Truett, Sheena, and their employees continue to give back to the community that has supported Ludlow's over the past two decades.
I am pleased to recognize Truett and Sheena Pershy and the entire Ludlow's Steakhouse team for their dedication to Corydon and Wayne County. I look forward to seeing their continued success and wish them the very best in the years ahead.
Recognizing North Lumber & Home Center
Page S5160 · Official textMadam President, as chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, each week I recognize and outstanding Iowa small business that exemplifies the American entrepreneurial spirit. This week, it is my privilege to recognize North Lumber & Home Center of Decatur County, IA, as Senate Small Business of the Week.
For more than four decades, North Lumber & Home Center has helped provide the materials and supplies that keep homes, farms, and businesses across southern Iowa running. Sally Dykes and her family purchased North Lumber from its previous owners in 1980. The family has since grown North Lumber into North Lumber & Home Center, expanding its inventory and operations to better serve customers throughout Decatur County and the surrounding communities.
Today, Sally runs the business alongside her son Tony Dykes. The mother and son duo and their five North Lumber employees have continued to find ways to expand the business under Sally's ownership. North Lumber moved into a larger building 5 years ago, remodeling the space while keeping the original building for additional storage. In 2025, the business expanded again with the construction of 60-by-104 storage building to accommodate its growing inventory. In 2002, the family opened Southern Iowa Building Center in Lamoni, which also employs five people. In recognition of their contribution to the area, the two businesses were jointly named the Decatur County Business of the Year in 2023.
For Sally and Tony, serving southern Iowa extends well beyond the lumberyard. North Lumber & Home Center supports local school basketball, football, and baseball programs, as well as Central Trail Future Farmers of America, the Boy Scouts, performing arts boosters, after-prom events, Little League, and career and technology education at Central Decatur Schools. The business has also supported the Decatur County Sheriff's National Night Out, the Leon and Grand River rodeos, the Leon Queen Contest, local cancer fundraising efforts, and Friends of Decatur County Hospital. Their generosity has even reached beyond Iowa, including a donation supporting a Lamoni livestock relief effort bound for Oklahoma in March 2026.
I am pleased to recognize Sally, Tony, and the teams at North Lumber & Home Center and Southern Iowa Building Center for their generosity and commitment to helping Decatur County grow. I look forward to their continued success and wish them the very best in the years ahead.
Remembering Charlene Patton
Page S5160 · Official textMadam President, I rise today to honor Kansan Charlene Patton, a tireless advocate for American agriculture who passed away on September 20, 2026.
As a U.S. Senator representing a farm State, I often find myself educating my colleagues and other officials in Washington, DC, about the vital role agriculture plays in our economy, our communities, and our tables. Agricultural advocacy is an important responsibility, and few Kansans fulfilled that mission more fully than Charlene Patton.
As we mourn her passing, my thoughts are with her family, friends, colleagues, and the many Kansans whose lives she touched.
For more than 50 years, Charlene dedicated her career to advancing nutrition education and promoting the critical role of agriculture. From her service with the Kansas Department of Agriculture to her work with the Kansas Soybean Commission and the Kansas Wheat Commission, she became one of Kansas agriculture's most recognizable and trusted voices. She shared her expertise through media appearances, educational programs, cookbooks, and her contribution in developing the "From the Land of Kansas" trademark program.
Her morning segment, "Cooking with Charlene," was viewed by many Kansans over the years. For more than five decades, her demonstrations aired on WIBW-TV, where she combined practical cooking advice with lessons about Kansas agriculture, helping viewers better understand the connection between the food on their tables and the farmers who produce it.
Through her work and television appearances on WIBW-TV, KAKE-TV and KOAM-TV, she shared recipes, nutritional education and agricultural insights with audiences across the State. Her work brought Kansas agriculture into kitchens, making it relatable and accessible to generations of Kansans.
Her passion for agriculture, food, and community service was rooted in her experience with 4-H. As both a member and later an adult volunteer serving Jefferson County, Shawnee County, and the State organization, she dedicated her time to help develop future generations of food and nutritional leaders.
Charlene's legacy extends far beyond the recipes she shared or the programs she championed. She helped generations of Kansans better understand the value of Agriculture, encouraged healthy family meals, and helped increase appreciation for the hard-working producers who feed our Nation.
On behalf of the U.S. Senate, I am grateful for Ms. Patton's lifetime of service, advocacy, and dedication to Kansas agriculture. Her contributions will continue to be felt through the communities she strengthened, the lives she touched, and the lasting impact she leaves on the State of Kansas.
Tribute to Clay Lacy
Pages S5160–S5161 · Official textMadam President, today, I want to recognize Clay Lacy, a Kansan whose distinguished career of dedication, innovation and service has made him one of the most accomplished and influential aviators in the history of American flight.
Clay Lacy grew up on a farm near Wichita--the Air Capital of the World--and from an early age, he knew he wanted to fly. Inspired by his grandmother and early aviation mentors, Clay pursued his passion with dedication. He learned to fly by the age of 12 and went on to earn his flight instructor certificate. In 1952, he joined United Airlines as a copilot. Just 1 year later, he joined the California Air National Guard, serving our Nation as a military aviator flying the F-86 Sabre fighter jet.
Over a career that spanned more than seven decades, Clay has accumulated more than 55,000 flight hours and flown hundreds of different aircraft. In addition to his service as a United Airlines captain and military aviator, Clay distinguished himself as a test pilot, air racer, and entrepreneur. In 1968, he founded Clay Lacy Aviation, the first executive jet management company on the West Coast, helping establish a new standard for business aviation.
Clay's spirit of innovation extended far beyond his work as a pilot. His passion for aviation inspired him to pioneer new techniques in aerial cinematography. Through Astrovision, an air-to-air camera system he developed, Clay revolutionized the way aircraft were filmed and photographed, contributing to some of the most iconic aviation imagery featured in motion pictures, television, and advertising.
Just as importantly, Clay has used his success to create opportunities for others. Through his philanthropy and the work of the Clay Lacy Foundation, he has supported aviation education and expanded educational opportunities for young people across the country.
Clay's extraordinary contributions to aviation have been recognized with numerous honors. In 2010, he was inducted into the National Aviation Hall of Fame, followed by his induction into the Kansas Aviation Hall of Fame in 2011. He has also received the Federal Aviation Administration's Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award, the United Airlines Historical Foundation's William S. Arnott Legacy Award, the National Business Aviation Association's Meritorious Service to Aviation Award, and many other distinguished honors.
On November 10, 2026, Clay will receive the Kansas Aviation Museum Lifetime Achievement Award in recognition of his storied career, his contributions to the aviation industry, and the lasting legacy of a Wichita-born aviator whose influence has reached around the globe. Clay Lacy has devoted his life to advancing the aviation industry he has loved and cherished since he was a young boy. His remarkable career reflects not only a passion for flight, but also a commitment to innovation, service, mentorship, and giving back to the next generation.
I thank Clay for his steadfast service to the aviation industry, our Nation, and the State of Kansas. His extraordinary contributions will continue to inspire generations of aviators and Kansans for years to come.
Tribute to Albey Brock
Page S5161 · Official textMadam President, I rise today to honor County Judge-Executive Albey Brock for his 19 years of service to the people of Bell County, KY. Since 2007, Albey has presided over Bell County's Fiscal Court, working closely with constituents on local initiatives while creating and administering the county budget. He is a proud eastern Kentuckian whose longtime dedication and service to the region warrants recognition.
Over the years, I have worked with Albey on numerous initiatives to ensure eastern Kentuckians have access to critical infrastructure. During the pandemic, I partnered with Albey to secure Federal funding for the Middlesboro-Bell County Airport which sustained the airport's daily operations, protected jobs, and offset additional costs. We also worked together on conservation efforts to secure Fern Lake so the people of Middlesboro and residents throughout the county have access to a significant water source and attraction at Cumberland Gap National Park.
Our work didn't stop there. Albey and I also worked together to secure Pineville Hospital's future when it threatened to be closed. Through all these partnerships and collaborative efforts, Albey repeatedly demonstrated his commitment to the future of his community and its economic interests.
In the time I have known him, Albey has been a fierce advocate for eastern Kentucky. From his advocacy efforts at the national level on behalf of coal miners to making sure his constituents benefit from local economic development, he has a keen eye for the human impact of policy decisions. As a county judge-executive, this skill is one of the most important, and I applaud his impressive dedication to his neighbors.
At the same time, he has worked to promote eastern Kentucky economic development, showing up when it matters. This includes the Mountain Laurel Festival--Kentucky's oldest, continuous festival--held every year in Bell County. I have been able to attend on several occasions, and it is always good to see Albey out in the community. Not only does he show up, but Albey also knows how to deliver results for the people he represents, and I am grateful for his hard work.
Through it all, Albey has made decisions with consideration for his immediate community and worked to improve not just his county, but the region at large as well. As his time leading Bell County comes to an end, I want to take a moment today to honor his service. I wish him the best in this next chapter of his life, and I am sure he looks forward to spending more time with his wife Bitha as they enjoy time with their children and grandchildren.
Tribute to Ballard Cassady
Pages S5161–S5162 · Official textMadam President, I rise today to pay tribute to a friend who has led the Kentucky Bankers Association for more than 40 years, president and CEO Ballard Cassady. Ballard stepped down at the end of July, and his career and leadership at the helm of this organization deserve significant praise. I ask my colleagues to please join me in honoring Ballard and applauding his four decades of service to KBA and to the people of Kentucky.
Growing up in Pikeville, Ballard learned the value and importance of hard work from his first jobs picking strawberries and bailing hay. He also learned from his father that acquiring a good education could help him make a living. So he went off to Transylvania University and got his bachelor's degree in business administration. With a solidified interest in business, Ballard then decided to go straight through and earn his master's in business administration from Vanderbilt. After several years leading Citizens Bank of Pikeville and a stint in public service, Ballard took on the role of president at KBA. To those who know him, it is no surprise that Ballard assumed such a prestigious role so early in his career. Since he started in 1986, he has represented Kentucky's banks exceptionally well.
Ballard's steadfast leadership has been marked by his comprehensive understanding of KBA's member banks and communicating their priorities to others. As a former banker himself, he recognizes how much these organizations do for their region, especially in rural counties. There is no doubt he shows up to work every day ready to fight for their concerns. And I am so glad he has been there representing them along the way.
Ballard often says that local banks are the backbone of their communities. I couldn't agree more. From the pandemic to historic flooding and devastating tornadoes, Kentucky has seen more than its fair share of natural disasters in the last several years. When these misfortunes strike, banks are part of the frontline of recovery, immediately working to distribute loans and Federal funds to help businesses get back up on their feet. If it weren't for these institutions, recovery would take much longer--time that hard-working Kentuckians can't waste. Thanks to Ballard's community-oriented leadership, the Commonwealth's banks have stepped up to the plate time and again to take care of their communities during difficult times. And Ballard is vocal and proud of the work they have done.
While his advocacy work at KBA has been top notch, Ballard is also a great person and a fixture throughout the Commonwealth. His involvement includes service on the board of trustees for the Wisconsin Graduate School of Banking and the Louisiana State University Banking School of the South, where he focuses his efforts in education.
I have enjoyed visiting with him over the years in Washington, DC, and also back home in Kentucky. We share a firm belief in the power of free enterprise, and Ballard knows that communities flourish when capital has less restrictions. I am so glad KBA has had Ballard on their side for the last four decades. There is no doubt they are better off thanks to his tireless efforts and his resounding support for the services they provide to Kentuckians.
Ballard, while the KBA will be in good hands upon your departure, know that your service and devotion to the community leaves a lasting legacy. I know that your wife Marcia, children Molly, Cash, and Jacob, and all of your grandchildren are so proud of you. Thank you for your dedication to businesses throughout the Commonwealth, and I wish you well in this next chapter of your life.
Tribute to Bob Quick
Page S5162 · Official textMadam President, I rise today to pay tribute to a true leader of business in central Kentucky, president and CEO of Commerce Lexington, Bob Quick. Bob marked 25 years of service to the organization earlier this year and retired at the end of July. Bob deserves significant recognition for the positive change he has implemented in the Lexington business community, so I ask my colleagues to please join me in honoring and celebrating his more than 25 years of dedicated service.
Before coming to Lexington in 2001, Bob had previously served as executive vice president of the Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce and also president of the Evansville, Indiana Chamber of Commerce. Already a seasoned chamber veteran, he was impressed by what Lexington offered him and his family, and he knew he could find a way to make a difference as well.
Bob immediately got to work. Under his leadership, he oversaw the 2004 merger of Lexington's economic and workforce development organizations, streamlining the process for promoting business development in the region. Commerce Lexington, Inc., was the chamber's new name, and its founding ushered in a new age for the city and its future success in economic development and growth. Since then, Bob has successfully led nearly 2,000 members of the Lexington chamber in its efforts to shape business policy. His accomplishments have not gone unnoticed.
Commerce Lex has received numerous awards during Bob's leadership. These include being named the Chamber of the Year and Economic Development Organization of the Year. Bob's work has also led to the Greater Lexington Region being named a top place for business and industry. His leadership in promoting greater regional collaboration through trust and relationship building is one of his lasting legacies. His involvement in those efforts led to the creation of the regional public policy group, improvements in regional infrastructure in central Kentucky, elevated regional marketing efforts and events like the Greater Lexington Washington, DC, Fly-In and the Regional Summit--all integral to advancing the region's economic success over the years.
Bob is a driven professional, and his impact continues to put Lexington in a better position, but it is clear that where Bob distinguishes himself most is through his character. He is a positive force in the lives of so many and all those around him benefit from his presence and steady leadership. Often quick to credit others, Bob's peers praise him for leading with grace and dignity. They have seen how well he connects with people and always seeks to collaborate with local leaders on important projects.
I have had the pleasure of visiting with Bob during numerous occasions back home in the Commonwealth and in Washington, DC. It is evident that he cares deeply for the Lexington community and has dedicated a lot of effort to making sure the city punches above its weight, which supports the Commonwealth as a whole. There is no doubt Bob has succeeded in this goal, and the greater Lexington community continues to grow thanks to his work.
In addition to his role at Commerce Lexington, Bob has served central Kentucky as a board member for several other organizations, including the Lexington Industrial Foundation, Bluegrass Sports Commission, and Downtown Lexington Partnership Board. He has also helped represent Lexington's interests on a wider scale through regional organizations focused on sustainability, business competition, and policy groups. There are few areas where Bob is not actively involved in making positive change.
I know Bob's wife Julie and his entire family are so proud of him for his hard work and dedicated service, and I am glad they are a staple of the Lexington community.
There are two types of leaders: those who seek to make a point and those who actively make a difference. I am certain Bob is a difference-maker. Lexington is better off thanks to Bob Quick and his hard work in the community. Once again, I would ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating him on a successful career and thanking him for his 25 years of service to Commerce Lexington.
Tribute to Gary Moore
Page S5162 · Official textMadam President, I rise today to honor my friend Gary Moore, county judge-executive of Boone County, KY, and former president of the Kentucky Association of Counties. Gary was first elected in 1998, and after 27 years of service, he will be retiring with a long list of achievements deserving of recognition.
Gary's exposure to public service began at a young age. His father served as Pendleton County Sheriff, inspiring Gary with his love for helping others. It is clear to me that Gary adopted his father's work ethic and commitment to his community.
This commitment extended beyond the borders of Boone County to the entire Commonwealth. I was proud to work alongside Gary when he served as president of the Kentucky Association of Counties, helping chart a course for the future of Kentucky. It was also my privilege to administer Gary's oath of office when he became president of the National Association of Counties.
On the regional level, Gary completed a term as president of the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments. These roles are far more than titles; they reflect dedication to collaboration at the State, regional, and national levels and are a testament to the leadership skills I have long known Gary to possess. Inside Boone County, he worked diligently to protect the health and prosperity of his community, which includes his work fighting the opioid epidemic that has plagued the lives of so many of our neighbors. I am grateful to have had him as a partner in this fight, and we continue to make progress each and every day.
As one of the fastest growing counties in the Commonwealth, Boone County has faced increasing demands on its transportation infrastructure. Recognizing these needs, we worked together to deliver meaningful improvements. I was proud to help in this effort by securing Federal investments to improve interstate highways 75 and 71, providing commuters with much-needed updates. Gary has also worked tirelessly with community members to improve the local road system, particularly along the Limaburg Road Corridor. These infrastructure projects strengthened access to the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Airport, facilitating further economic development while enhancing safety for hard-working Kentuckians who drive to work every day. There is no doubt Judge Moore has left Boone County better than he found it, and I am thankful for his dedication.
A lifelong Kentuckian and a fine public servant, Gary has spent his career in service to his community and to our Commonwealth at large. Today, I honor his work and wish him the best as he enjoys retirement alongside his wife Linda, spending time with their children and grandchildren.
TRIBUTE TO TIM NeCASTRO
Pages S5162–S5163 · Official textMadam President, I rise today to honor Tim NeCastro on the occasion of his retirement as president and chief executive officer of Erie Insurance, effective December 31, 2026, capping a distinguished 30-year career with the company.
An Erie native and graduate of Cathedral Preparatory School and Gannon University, Mr. NeCastro joined Erie Insurance in 1996 following his work at the Plastek Group and Ernst & Young. He rose through roles in finance, services, and sales, led the company's expansion into Kentucky in 2014. He was named president and CEO in 2016. Under his leadership, Erie Insurance grew to nearly $13 billion in premium and more than 7 million policies in force across 12 States and the District of Columbia, celebrated the company's 100th anniversary in 2025, and remains the largest employer and only Fortune 500 company headquartered in Erie County, PA.
Mr. NeCastro's impact extends well beyond the company he led. As founding board president of the Erie Downtown Development Corporation and board chairman of Infinite Erie, he has helped drive more than a billion dollars in transformational investment in his hometown. He has also served the community through leadership roles with the Mazzini Charitable Foundation, the Erie Community Foundation, Team Pennsylvania, the American Property Casualty Insurance Association, the Pennsylvania Society, and the Robert Irvine Foundation.
Alongside his wife Lisa, Mr. NeCastro has been a devoted supporter of causes across the region, leading the campaign that raised $18.5 million to renovate and expand the expERIEnce Children's Museum and currently cochairing United Way of Erie County's Uniting for Education endowment campaign to support local students. Following his retirement as CEO, he will continue to serve the Erie community as president of the Erie Insurance Foundation.
On behalf of the people of Pennsylvania, I congratulate Tim NeCastro on a remarkable career and thank him for three decades of service to Erie Insurance, his tireless work to revitalize his hometown, and his lasting commitment to Pennsylvania. I wish him and Lisa the very best in retirement.
Recognizing Col. Bill Newsom's Aged Kentucky Country Ham and Newsom's Old Mill Store
Page S5163 · Official textRECOGNIZING COL. BILL NEWSOM'S AGED KENTUCKY COUNTRY HAM AND NEWSOM'S OLD MILL STORE
Madam President, as a member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I enjoy highlighting Kentucky businesses that represent the very best of the American entrepreneurial spirit. Today, I am proud to recognize Col. Bill Newsom's Aged Kentucky Country Ham and Newsom's Old Mill Store of Princeton, KY.
Western Kentucky has a tradition of doing things the old-fashioned way, and you would be hard-pressed to find a better example than Newsom's Old Mill Store in Princeton. The shop opened its doors on New Year's Day back in 1917, founded by H.C. Newsom. More than a century later, it is still right where it started--serving the local community and curing some of the finest hams in the country.
Today, the shop is run by H.C.'s granddaughter Nancy Newsom Mahaffey, though most folks around Caldwell County simply know her as The Ham Lady. Nancy learned the trade directly from her father Colonel Bill Newsom, and she hasn't varied the original blueprint. In an era where most food production is rushed, Newsom's still does it by hand: pork, salt, brown sugar, slow hickory smoke, and the patience to let the seasonings do the heavy lifting.
In 2009, one of Nancy's 2-year-aged hams was invited to hang in Spain at the famous Jamon Museum, the first and only American country ham ever given that distinction. Their dry-cured ham and prosciutto have fed guests at Presidential inaugurations and earned praise from food critics across the country.
When you walk into the store at 208 East Main Street today it feels like stepping back in time. The shelves are packed with local sorghum, homemade chow-chow, jams, and candies. More importantly, when you call to ask a question or place an order, Nancy and her team still pick up the phone themselves. Her guiding rule has always been simple: "We make service personal."
Congratulations to Nancy Newsom Mahaffey and everyone at Newsom's Old Mill Store. Thank you for keeping a great Kentucky tradition alive, and I wish you many more years of success.
Messages from the President
Page S5163 · Official textMessages from the President of the United States were communicated to the Senate by Mr. Buckner, one of his secretaries.
Executive Messages Referred
Page S5163 · Official textAs in executive session Presiding Officer laid before the Senate messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry nominations which were referred to the Committee on Armed Services. (The messages received today are printed at the end of the Senate proceedings.)
Message from the House
Page S5163 · Official textAt 2:20 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Mrs. Alli, one of its reading clerks, announced that the Speaker has signed the following enrolled bills:
Text printed in the Record (666 characters)
S. 240. An act to amend the Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2010 to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes.
S 283. An act to require the Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and the Administrator of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to develop a standard methodology for identifying the country of origin of seafood to support enforcement against illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, and for other purposes.
S. 2403. An act to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to provide a clear definition of adequate consideration for certain closely held stock, and for other purposes.
The enrolled bills were subsequently signed by the President pro tempore (Mr. Grassley). The message also announced that pursuant to section 732(a) of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act, the Minority Leader appoints the following individual to the Independent Mexico Labor Expert Board: Mr. Eric Gottwald of Baltimore, Maryland.
Measures Read the First Time
Page S5163 · Official textThe following bills were read the first time:
Text printed in the Record (276 characters)
S. 5602. A bill to prohibit the use of Federal funds for the planning and construction of any structure or monument at Memorial Circle at Columbia Island/Lady Bird Johnson Park in the District of Columbia.
S. 5603. A bill to prohibit the demolition of Presidential memorials.
Enrolled Bills Presented
Page S5163 · Official textThe Secretary of the Senate reported that on today, September 29, 2026, she had presented to the President of the United States the following enrolled bills:
Text printed in the Record (289 characters)
S. 195. An act to amend the Visit America Act to promote music tourism, and for other purposes.
S. 766. An act to require an annual report of taxpayer-funded projects that are over budget and behind schedule.
S. 2398. An act to reauthorize the Kay Hagan Tick Act, and for other purposes.
Executive and Other Communications
Pages S5163–S5165 · Official textThe following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as indicated:
Text printed in the Record (11,953 characters)
EC-4900. A communication from the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, transmitting, a draft bill entitled, "Veterans Health, Benefits, and Administration Programs Act of 2027"; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
EC-4901. A communication from the General Counsel to Inspector General, Railroad Retirement Board, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to the Office of Inspector General's budget request for fiscal year 2028; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
EC-4902. A communication from the Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting, pursuant to section 3(d)(3) of the Arms Export Control Act, the certification of a proposed authorization for the re-export of defense articles, including technical data, and defense services to the Ukraine in the amount of $50,000,000 or more (Transmittal No. DDTC 26-090); to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
EC-4903. A communication from the Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting, pursuant to section 36(b)(5)(C) of the Arms Export Control Act, the notification of enhancements or upgrades from the level of sensitivity of technology or capability (RSAT Case 26-1J); to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
EC-4904. A communication from the Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting, pursuant to section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, the Air Force's proposed letter(s) of offer and acceptance to the Government of Greece for defense articles and services estimated to cost $101 million (RSAT Case 26-86); to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
EC-4905. A communication from the Acting Secretary of Labor, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Department of Labor's Agency Financial Report for fiscal year 2025; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
EC-4906. A communication from the Administrator, Specialty Crops Program, Department of Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Softwood Lumber Board Assessment Rate Clarification and Changes to Membership" (Docket No. AMS-SC-25-0023) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 25, 2026; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-4907. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace Over Hyannis, Massachusetts" ((RIN2120-AA66)(Docket No. FAA-2026-10899)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4908. A communication from the Branch Chief, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Amendment 122 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; Pacific Cod Trawl Cooperative Program; Correction" (RIN0648-BL08) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 14, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4909. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; MD Helicopters, LLC Helicopters; Amendment 39-23466" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2025-3987)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4910. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes; Amendment 39-23457" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-4662)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4911. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes; Amendment 39-23460" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-4663)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4912. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream Aerospace LP (Type Certificate Previously Held by Israel Aircraft Industries, Ltd.) Airplanes; Amendment 39-23461" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-4654)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4913. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Deutschland Ltd & Co KG Engines; Amendment 39-23459" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-2287)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4914. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; International Aero Engines AG Engines; Correction; Amendment 39-23446" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2025-2555)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4915. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Clovis, New Mexico, and Portales, New Mexico" ((RIN2120-AA66)(Docket No. FAA-2026-3238)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4916. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Revocation of Class E Airspace; Point Pleasant, West Virginia" ((RIN2120-AA66)(Docket No. FAA-2026-7824)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4917. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & Whitney Division Engines; Amendment 39-23451" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-2724)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4918. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments; Amendment No. 4233" ((RIN2120-AA65)(Docket No. 31681)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4919. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airspace Designations; Incorporation by Reference; Amendment No. 71-58" ((RIN2120-AA66)(Docket No. FAA-2026-8845)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4920. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes; Amendment 39-23458" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-8793)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4921. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes; Amendment 39-23452" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-8787)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4922. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; ATR-GIE Avions de Transport Regional Airplanes; Amendment 39-23456" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-8792)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4923. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes; Amendment 39-23462" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2025-3439)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4924. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes; Amendment 39-23464" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-7201)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4925. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Bell Textron Canada Limited Helicopters; Amendment 39-23465" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-4658)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4926. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes; Amendment 39-23463" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-1329)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4927. A communication from the Manager of Legal Litigation and Support, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.
Text printed in the Record (10,160 characters)
Airplanes; Amendment 39-23455" ((RIN2120-AA64)(Docket No. FAA-2026-4632)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4928. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Laguna Madre, South Padre Island, Texas" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1094)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4929. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; York River, Yorktown, Virginia" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1125)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4930. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Lake Erie, Oregon, Ohio" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1160)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4931. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Calcasieu River Channel, Lake Charles, Louisiana" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1193)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4932. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Rocket Test Site, Rio Grande River, Boca Chica, Texas" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1159)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4933. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Lake St. Clair Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1080)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4934. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Safety Zone; Lake St. Clair, Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1096)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4935. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Bay Bridge Paddle; Chesapeake Bay, Annapolis, Maryland" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1126)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4936. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Maumee River, Toledo, Ohio" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1081)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4937. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Fort Myers Beach, Florida" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1028)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4938. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Special Local Regulation; Allegheny River Mile Markers 0-3.5 and Ohio River Mile Marker 0-3, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania" ((RIN1625-AA08)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1147)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4939. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Outer Harbor, Buffalo, New York" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1150)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4940. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Savannah River, Clyo, Georgia" ((RIN1625-AA11)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1095)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4941. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Safety Zone; Key West Main Ship Channel, and Fleming Key Cut, Key West, Florida" ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1146)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4942. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Special Local Regulation; Maumee River, Toledo, Ohio" ((RIN1625-AA08)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1161)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4943. A communication from the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Fort Pierce, Florida" ((RIN1625-AA09)(Docket No. USCG-2026-1140)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
EC-4944. A communication from the Acting Branch Chief of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Clarifying the Scope of `Applicable Requirements' under State Operating Permit Programs and the Federal Operating Permit Program" (FRL No. 9118 .1-02-OAR) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-4945. A communication from the Acting Branch Chief of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Air Plan Approval; Kentucky; Campbell-Clermont Area Maintenance Plan for the 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS" (FRL No. 13461-02-R4) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-4946. A communication from the Acting Branch Chief of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Air Plan Approval; Alabama; Transportation Conformity" (FRL No. 13404-02-R4) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 23, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-4947. A communication from the Acting Branch Chief of the Regulatory Management Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Sodium Salt of Acifluorfen; Pesticide Tolerance" (FRL No. 13147-01-OCSPP) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 28, 2026; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
EC-4948. A communication from the Acting Branch Chief of the Regulatory Management Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Marine Protection: Modification to Expand Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites Offshore of Corpus Christi, Texas" (FRL No. 13119-02-R6) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 28, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-4949. A communication from the Acting Branch Chief of the Regulatory Management Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Rescission of Title V Emergency Affirmative Defense Rule; Correction" (FRL No. 8961.2-02-OAR) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 28, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
EC-4950. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Estate Tax Closing Letter User Fee Update" (RIN1545-BS10) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 28, 2026; to the Committee on Finance.
EC-4951. A communication from the Chief of Staff, Media Bureau, Federal Communication Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Television Broadcast Stations, Norwell, Massachusetts" ((DA 26-1023)(MB Docket No. 26-29)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 28, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Petitions and Memorials
Pages S5165–S5168 · Official textThe following petitions and memorials were laid before the Senate and were referred or ordered to lie on the table as indicated:
Text printed in the Record (8,958 characters)
POM-98. A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho requesting that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and any other federal agencies partaking in the federal permitting process to clean Camas Creek, promptly process and authorize the forthcoming permit application; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Whereas, the Camas National Wildlife Refuge (Camas NWR) lies in southeast Idaho and contains approximately 11,000 acres of land managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; and
Whereas, the Mud Lake Wildlife Management Area (Mud Lake WMA) is adjacent to the Camas NWR and contains approximately 11,500 acres of land managed by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game; and
Whereas, the Camas NWR is hydraulically connected to the Mud Lake WMA through Camas Creek, which flows through the Camas NWR, eventually ending in Mud Lake; and
Whereas, historically, Mud Lake was seasonally flooded when Camas Creek would overflow and create temporary wetlands,
which would progressively recharge the aquifer lying underground; and
Whereas, currently, agricultural fields now occupy areas that were historically covered by seasonal wetlands; and
Whereas, such agricultural operations are dependent on valid, existing water rights to appropriate water from or near Mud Lake; and
Whereas, over the years, Camas Creek has become obstructed by willows and sedimentation building up such that water is not being properly delivered to the Mud Lake water users; and
Whereas, the federal permitting process to simply clean the Camas Creek is a slow, cumbersome process, which would further injure Idaho water right holders; and
Whereas, state permitting processes are much less onerous and time-consuming while achieving the same level of protection; and
Whereas, both the Camas NWR and the Mud Lake WMA are managed as wildlife sanctuaries for migratory and non-migratory birds and big and small game animals; and
Whereas, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game has successfully managed the Mud Lake WMA for decades, with the assistance of federal Pittman-Robertson wildlife restoration funds; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the members of the First Regular Session of the Sixty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the Senate and the House of Representatives concurring therein, that the Legislature requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and any other federal agencies partaking in the federal permitting process to clean Camas Creek, promptly process and authorize the forthcoming permit application. Be it further,
Resolved that the Legislature requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game work together to transfer ownership and administration of the Camas National Wildlife Refuge to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game for incorporation into the Mud Lake Wildlife Management Area so that the entire area can be more effectively and efficiently managed. Be it further,
Resolved that the Secretary of the Senate be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Congress, to the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States, and to the incoming director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
POM-99. A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho requesting that Idaho's Governor, Attorney General, and congressional delegation work cooperatively with incoming cabinet officials to ensure they implement laws and regulations consistent with the President's agenda and to facilitate the permitting of critical mineral development and processing production of these minerals; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Whereas, the Legislature of the State of Idaho recognizes the importance of the domestic mining industry to the nation's manufacturing, technology, agriculture, and food security; and
Whereas, Idaho contains a number of critical minerals such as molybdenum, cobalt, antimony, copper, phosphate, rare earths, uranium, gold, and silver. Because these minerals cannot be produced synthetically, they must be mined and processed. Outside of the United States, most of these minerals are produced by countries whose interests are not aligned with the United States and/or do not require minimum environmental standards; and
Whereas, Idaho has a number of mines, considerable mineral exploration, and several phosphate processing facilities that are the backbone of state and local economies. These operations provide high-quality products for the United States, such as phosphate fertilizer for national food security, and thousands of high-paying jobs and also support many other vital local community industries and services; and
Whereas, over the past decade, Idaho companies have expended millions of dollars to improve the environment and implement best-in-industry practices and innovative solutions to protect Idaho's natural resources. Such efforts have been effective and successful; and
Whereas, the Legislature applauds the current administration for its commitment to cut bureaucratic red tape, expedite permitting on federally managed lands, and ensure that domestic companies can continue to operate and mine in a predictable and cost-effective manner, thus benefiting the country's economy; and
Whereas, the federal government is vital to the continuation of the mining and mineral industry as most of these critical mineral deposits are located on federally managed lands. Idaho companies need efficient and predictable permitting processes for mines and processing facilities, including mine permits and land exchanges and acquisitions. Unfortunately, well-intended environmental laws have been weaponized by certain groups to delay, thwart, and end domestic mining and mineral processing production. These misguided efforts have caused bureaucratic inaction and overreach resulting in environmental studies and administrative records that can reach upwards of 100,000 pages and take decades to complete; and
Whereas, after these exhaustive administrative processes are completed, companies still face uncertainty given the prospect of costly litigation, unfavorable court decisions, and presidential administrations that may altogether decline to defend these critical decisions. The tension caused by the byzantine and antiquated administrative process has reached the United States Supreme Court through the Amicus Brief of the State of Idaho, et al., in State of Utah v. United States of America, Docket No. 220160; and
Whereas, there are several federal agencies involved in the permitting and oversight of mineral development and processing, including the United States Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, By the members of the First Regular Session of the Sixty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the Senate and the House of Representatives concurring therein, that the Idaho Legislature requests that Idaho's Governor, Attorney General, and congressional delegation work cooperatively with incoming cabinet officials to ensure they implement laws and regulations consistent with President Trump's agenda and to facilitate the permitting of critical mineral development and processing production of these minerals; and be it further
Resolved, That the Legislature requests that Idaho's Governor, Attorney General, and congressional delegation work with the current administration to examine the relevant federal statutes, such as the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., and the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., and take any and all legislative, executive, and judicial action necessary to remove roadblocks that impede the production and processing of critical minerals in Idaho. This request also extends to state agencies that are involved in the leasing, permitting, and regulation of the mining and mineral processing industry; and be it further
Resolved, That the Idaho Legislature recognizes the critical tipping point in this country's efforts to domestically produce vital goods and services. It appreciates past efforts and requests the continued and focused efforts of Idaho's Governor, Attorney General, and congressional delegation to ensure that Idaho's mining and mineral processing industry continues to remain a vital cornerstone of the state's economic makeup; and be it further
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the President of the United States, the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States in Congress Assembled, and to the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States.
POM-100.
Text printed in the Record (11,928 characters)
A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho commending the approval of the Stibnite Gold Project and encouraging the administration and the State of Idaho to dedicate the necessary attention and resources to ensure the Stibnite Gold Project completes necessary permitting and enters into development without undue delay; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Whereas, Idaho, The Gem State, hosts abundant mineral resources that have been and continue to be an integral part of Idaho's economy and American prosperity; and
Whereas, the Stibnite Mining District in central Idaho is rich with gold, antimony, tungsten, and silver and has hosted mining activity for nearly a century after it was discovered at the turn of the 20th century; and
Whereas, during World War II, the mine site produced approximately half of the tungsten and up to 90% of the antimony for the United States war effort; and
Whereas, because the mine was abandoned before modern regulations guaranteed cleanup, the Stibnite Mining District was left with severe environmental legacies that continue to degrade water quality and the environment of Idaho; and
Whereas, today, the Stibnite Mining District still holds a significant reserve of 4.8 million ounces of gold and 148 million pounds of antimony; and
Whereas, the United States has urgent national defense needs for a secure antimony supply; and
Whereas, Perpetua Resources' Stibnite Gold Project has the only identified domestic reserve of antimony, which could satisfy about 35% of domestic antimony demand in the first six years of production and fulfill long-term United States defense needs for antimony trisulfide; and
Whereas, currently, China, Russia, and Tajikistan control 90% of the world's antimony supply; and
Whereas, in 2024, the Chinese Communist Party restricted all antimony exports to the United States; and
Whereas, Perpetua Resources designed the redevelopment of the Stibnite Mining District to improve the environmental conditions previously left behind and took great care to incorporate the needs and perspectives of Idaho communities into the design of the Stibnite Gold Project, including making project modifications to address the concerns of nearby residents, to accommodate recreation interests, to reduce the project footprint, and to leave environmental conditions better than they are today; and
Whereas, Perpetua Resources will invest approximately $2.2 billion in the construction of the Stibnite Gold Project, which will
include upgrades to Idaho's power and road infrastructure, employ over 500 people annually throughout the mining operations, and spend more than $220 million annually in operational expenses throughout the life of the mine, supporting Idaho's local and state economy; and
Whereas, Perpetua Resources has already invested over $19 million in early site cleanup activities to help improve water quality in the region; and
Whereas, Perpetua Resources has and will continue to dedicate valuable resources back to Idaho's local communities and pave the way for responsible mining projects in the State of Idaho; and
Whereas, after nearly a decade of consultation, scientific evaluation, and analysis, including the evaluation and analysis of reasonable alternatives, the United States Forest Service issued a Final Record of Decision supporting Perpetua Resources' proposed mine plan on January 3, 2025; and
Whereas, the critical minerals produced by the Stibnite Gold Project will be vital to our nation's energy and national security and the State of Idaho has coordinated the permitting process between state agencies; and
Whereas, the Final Record of Decision found that mining operations and closure activities will open currently inaccessible habitat for salmon and other fish species, improve water quality and river habitat, and uplift environmenta1 conditions, including cleaning up various legacy contamination at the abandoned mine site; and
Whereas, the selection of the Burntlog Route as the primary mine access route prioritizes transportation safety, reduces potential impacts to the residents of Yellow Pine, utilizes existing routes as much as possible, and reduces potential risks to Idaho's scenic rivers and wetlands; and
Whereas, Perpetua Resources will provide financial assurances to the State of Idaho and the federal government to ensure environmental reclamation for the Stibnite Gold Project is completed; and
Whereas, this Final Record of Decision solidifies America's unwavering dedication to secure a domestic mineral supply chain while also exhibiting environmental stewardship: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, by the members of the First Regular Session of the Sixty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the Senate and the House of Representatives concurring therein, that the Legislature commends the approval of the Stibnite Gold Project and encourages the Trump administration and the State of Idaho to dedicate the necessary attention and resources to ensure the Stibnite Gold Project completes necessary permitting and enters into development without undue delay; and be it further
Resolved, That the Legislature requests that Idaho state and federal agencies complete careful and expeditious permitting for critical and strategic mineral projects in the United States; and be it further
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the President of the United States, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Congress, the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Commanding General of the Army Corps of Engineers, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Governor of Idaho, and to the Idaho Governor's Office of Energy and Mineral Resources.
____
POM-101. A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho respectfully urges the United States Congress to establish a dedicated federal reimbursement or block grant program to assist states in covering the costs of educating students residing in the United States regardless of immigration status and that such funding should be designed to supplement, not supplant, existing Title I and Title III ESEA allocations and should reflect actual per-pupil expenditures incurred by the State of Idaho; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Whereas, the State of Idaho is constitutionally obligated to maintain a general, uniform, and thorough system of public, free common schools; and
Whereas, federal immigration policy and enforcement are powers vested exclusively in the United States Congress; and
Whereas, pursuant to the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982), states are required to provide access to public K-12 education to students residing within their borders regardless of immigration status; and
Whereas, the fiscal responsibility for complying with such federal constitutional requirements rests primarily with state and local governments, without a dedicated federal funding stream tied to immigration status or lawful presence; and
Whereas, the average per-pupil expenditure in the State of Idaho is approximately $11,000 per student per year, and the aggregate cost to Idaho of educating students whose presence in the United States is governed by federal immigration policy represents a significant and ongoing financial commitment borne primarily by state and local taxpayers; and
Whereas, students requiring English language acquisition services, remedial instruction, and supplemental academic supports often generate additional instructional costs beyond base per-pupil funding; and
Whereas, federal funding under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), intended to support low-income students, and Title III of ESEA, intended to support English learners, does not fully reimburse states or school districts for the actual costs of providing required services; and
Whereas, the allocation formulas under Title I and Title III of ESEA are not designed to offset the full fiscal impact on states arising from federal immigration policy decisions or constitutional requirements; and
Whereas, Idaho's local school districts must balance constitutional educational obligations with limited state and local revenues, creating measurable budgetary pressures that may affect staffing levels, class sizes, and program offerings for all students; and
Whereas, principles of fiscal federalism support the proposition that when federal policy decisions generate substantial financial obligations for states, the federal government should provide commensurate funding support. Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the members of the Second Regular Session of the Sixty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the House of Representatives and the Senate concurring therein, that:
(1) The Idaho Legislature respectfully urges the Congress of the United States to establish a dedicated federal reimbursement or block grant program to assist states in covering the costs of educating students residing in the United States regardless of immigration status. Such funding should be designed to supplement, not supplant, existing Title I and Title III ESEA allocations and should reflect actual per-pupil expenditures incurred by the State of Idaho;
(2) Congress should review and revise federal education funding formulas to ensure that states disproportionately impacted by federal immigration policy receive equitable fiscal support; and
(3) Congress should commission a comprehensive fiscal impact study evaluating the aggregate cost to states of complying with federal constitutional and immigration-related educational obligations. Be it further
Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Secretary of State of the United States, and the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States.
POM-102. A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho supporting federal efforts to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and urging the United States Congress to fully cooperate with these efforts; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution reserves to the states powers not delegated to the federal government, and education is not enumerated as a responsibility of the federal government; and
Whereas, the U.S. Department of Education's creation in 1980 has led to significant federal overreach in education through burdensome regulations and one-size-fits-all mandates, many left unfunded despite the department's annual budget of $60 billion; and
Whereas, as the least regulated state in the nation, Idaho would welcome the opportunity to extend its red tape reduction efforts to the field of public education where it is desperately needed; and
Whereas, states and local communities possess unique knowledge of their students' educational needs and are best positioned to develop the curriculum and policies that reflect their values and priorities; and
Whereas, President Trump has publicly expressed a desire to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and rightfully put the states back in charge of education; and
Whereas, the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education is not only a constitutional necessity, but will also cause taxpayer dollars to be spent more efficiently and lead to better student outcomes.
Text printed in the Record (11,131 characters)
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the members of the Second Regular Session of the Sixty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the House of Representatives and the Senate concurring therein, that the Legislature supports federal efforts to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and urges the United States Congress to fully cooperate with these efforts. Be it further
Resolved that the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Congress and to the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States.
POM-103. A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho strongly urging the United States Congress to pass and fully fund legislation that fulfills the federal commitment to provide up to 40% of the national average per-pupil expenditure for the excess cost of educating children with disabilities under IDEA; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Whereas, in 1975, Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act,
now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), guaranteeing that children with disabilities receive a free, appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment; and
Whereas, before the enactment of IDEA, many children with disabilities were placed in restrictive settings and provided only minimal food, clothing, and shelter. The children's families were not afforded the opportunity to take part in planning or placement decisions for their child; and
Whereas, with IDEA's passage, Congress committed to provide up to 40% of the national average per-pupil expenditure in federal funding toward the "excess cost" of educating children with disabilities. This formula has remained a central feature of IDEA funding; and
Whereas, in the nearly 50 years since IDEA's passage, the federal government has never met this 40% funding commitment; and
Whereas, according to the Congressional Research Service and other analyses, current federal IDEA funding covers only a fraction of the 40% originally committed in the law. Federal IDEA funding in Idaho is approximately 12%; and
Whereas, the continual shortfall in federal IDEA funding has placed a growing financial burden on taxpayers, school districts, families, and state legislatures, undermining the law's promise and limiting resources available for students with disabilities; and
Whereas, parents, advocates, and legislators have repeatedly advocated for legislation requiring Congress to meet its long-standing commitment through mandatory, regular increases in IDEA funding; and
Whereas, students with disabilities become adults within communities, and improved outcomes for students with disabilities strengthen the community by preparing them to contribute as members of the future workforce, engaged citizens, and parents of future generations; and
Whereas, in recent reintroductions, the IDEA Full Funding Act has garnered bipartisan support and broad backing from national organizations, reinforcing the urgency of fulfilling the original federal commitment; and
Whereas, fully funding IDEA is not only a moral and legal obligation but also a wise financial investment because stable and adequate federal support helps esnure high-quality special education services, improves outcomes for students with disabilities, and relieves pressure on taxpayers and state and local education budgets. Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the members of the Second Regular Session of the Sixty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the House of Representatives and the Senate concurring therein, that the Idaho Legislature strongly urges the United States Congress to pass and fully fund legislation that fulfills the federal commitment to provide up to 40% of the national average per-pupil expenditure for the excess cost of educating children with disabilities under IDEA. The Legislature encourages Idaho's congressional delegation to support increasing mandatory, sustained federal IDEA funding so that the 40% target is reached within a reasonable, defined timeline. The Legislature calls on the President of the United States to endorse fully funding IDEA and to propose in the President's annual budget the mandatory increases necessary to meet the 40% commitment. Be it further
Resolved that the Legislature directs the Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction to provide an annual overview of how federal IDEA funding supports Idaho's commitment to high-quality, inclusive special education services, including examples of effective practices, innovative supports, and areas where increased federal investment would enhance sustainability and long-term program strength. Be it further
Resolved that the Legislature encourages the United States Department of Education to provide clear, accessible information about nationwide and statewide IDEA funding levels that will help Idaho continue to plan proactively, celebrate progress, and advocate for Congress to fulfill the long-standing federal funding commitment. Be it further
Resolved that the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of Congress, to the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States, to the President of the United States, to the Idaho Superintendent of Public Instruction, and to the United States Secretary of Education.
POM-104. A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho encouraging the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to continue collaboration with Idaho and other state insurance regulators to provide clear guidance regarding federal and state oversight responsibilities related to Medicare Advantage plans and guidance regarding changes to producer compensation structures after plan approval and its impact on consumer access and market stability; to the Committee on Finance.
Whereas, Idaho seniors and other Medicare beneficiaries rely on access to affordable Medicare and prescription drug coverage that meets their health care needs; and
Whereas, federal law provides a limited annual enrollment period during which Medicare beneficiaries must select health coverage options for the upcoming plan year; and
Whereas, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) oversees Medicare Advantage plans, including plan approval, bid review, and federal program requirements; and
Whereas, the Idaho Department of Insurance regulates insurer licensure, solvency, and market conduct within the State of Idaho, including Medicare Supplement products and insurance producer activity; and
Whereas, effective Medicare oversight relies on clear coodination between federal regulators and state insurance regulators; and
Whereas, CMS and the Idaho Department of Insurance maintain a memorandum of understanding allowing cooperation and information sharing regarding violations of applicable laws, rules, and guidance; and
Whereas, maintaining stability and predictability in Medicare Advantage plan availability is essential to protecting Medicare beneficiaries during the annual enrollment period; and
Whereas, Medicare beneficiaries have limited time during the annual enrollment period to make informed decisions regarding their health care coverage options; and
Whereas, Medicare beneficiaries often rely on licensed insurance producers to assist with plan selection, and sudden changes to producer compensation structures may reduce consumer access to informed guidance during the annual enrollment period; and
Whereas, insurers seeking to offer Medicare Advantage plans in Idaho must submit bids to CMS and receive approval to offer plans while complying with applicable federal and state requirements; and
Whereas, insurance companies are required to actuarially develop their rates using appropriate justification; and
Whereas, sudden limitations, withdrawal of plan availability, or market conduct that discourages enrollment during the annual enrollment period may disrupt consumer choice and market stability for Medicare beneficiaries; and
Whereas, before the 2025 open enrollment period, certain companies, after actuarially pricing, voluntarily applying for, and being awarded the Medicare contract, attempted to dissuade or steer consumers away from their products; and
Whereas, certain companies withdrew their enrollment applications, denied access to Idaho seniors and those who qualify for Medicare, and created market disruption, and
Whereas, the Idaho Department of Insurance issued a bulletin identifying these practices as unfair trade practices under Idaho law; and
Whereas, due to some companies continuing to operate in a harmful manner to Idaho seniors, Medicare recipients, and to the Medicare market, the Idaho Department of Insurance issued cease and desist orders; and
Whereas, it is the public policy of the State of Idaho that insurers operating within the state comply with all applicable laws governing licensure, solvency, and trade practices, and that Medicare beneficiaries have meaningful access to approved coverage options; and
Whereas, it is further the public policy of the State of Idaho that insurance companies who apply to offer coverage should not engage in practices that discourage enrollment or limit plan availability after approval to offer such coverage. Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the members of the Second Regular Session of the Sixty-eighth Idaho Legislature, the House of Representatives and the Senate concurring therein, that the Idaho Legislature supports the ongoing efforts of the Idaho Department of Insurance to protect Idaho Medicare beneficiaries and promote a stable and fair insurance marketplace. Be it further
Resolved that the Legislature encourages the Idaho Department of Insurance to continue working with CMS to ensure Idaho Medicare beneficiaries are protected against unfair or disruptive market practices. Be it further
Resolved that the Legislature requests CMS to continue collaboration with Idaho and other state insurance regulators and to provide clear guidance regarding federal and state oversight responsibilities related to Medicare Advantage plans. Be it further
Resolved that the Legislature requests CMS to provide guidance regarding changes to producer compensation structures after plan approval and its impact on consumer access and market stability. Be it further
Resolved that the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives be, and she is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Memorial to the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, and to the congressional delegation representing the State of Idaho in the Congress of the United States.
Introduction of Bills and Joint Resolutions
Pages S5168–S5169 · Official textThe following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:
Text printed in the Record (7,902 characters)
S. 5573. A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide that educational programs classified as Theology and Religious Vocations or Philosophy and Religious Studies at educational institutions that qualify for the religious exemption under title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 are not subject to ineligibility for title IV assistance based on low earning outcomes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. KIM (for himself and Ms. Murkowski):
S. 5574. A bill to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out a program of distribution of newborn supply kits to mothers of newborn infants, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
By Mr. MERKLEY (for himself, Mr. Whitehouse, Ms.
Warren, and Mr. Welch):
S. 5575. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to establish criminal penalties for gratuities given to State and local public officials; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Schatz, and Mr. Kim):
S. 5576. A bill to establish the Artificial Intelligence Safety Board, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Ms. HIRONO:
S. 5577. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to provide grants to upgrade or convert small-capacity cesspools for households in the State of Hawaii; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
By Ms. HIRONO:
S. 5578. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to establish the Hawaiian Islands Program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
By Ms. SMITH (for herself and Ms. Klobuchar):
S. 5579. A bill to authorize a grant program for educational institutions to analyze, digitize, and map historic records relating to housing information, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Ms. SMITH (for herself and Ms. Klobuchar):
S. 5580. A bill to establish a grant program to provide amounts to public housing agencies to install automatic sprinkler systems in public housing, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Ms. ROSEN (for herself and Mrs. Blackburn):
S. 5581. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the manner in which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs calculates the average employment rate of veterans participating in the VET TEC high technology program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Ms. ROSEN (for herself and Mrs. Blackburn):
S. 5582. A bill to reauthorize and improve a grant program to assist institutions of higher education in establishing, maintaining, improving, and operating Student Veteran Centers; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Ms. Klobuchar):
S. 5583. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the small agri-biodiesel producer credit; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. SCHMITT:
S. 5584. A bill to amend section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify the meaning of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Mr. PADILLA (for himself and Mr. Scott of South
Carolina):
S. 5585. A bill to require a pilot program to support members of the Armed Forces and military families transitioning to civilian life, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mr. Cassidy):
S. 5586. A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct surveys of non-retail pharmacy drug prices, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mr. HICKENLOOPER (for himself, Mr. Tillis, Ms.
Rosen, Mr. Sheehy, and Mr. Cramer):
S. 5587. A bill to establish a National Critical Minerals Council within the Executive Office of the President to develop and coordinate the implementation of a national critical mineral and material strategy for the United States, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
By Mr. BOOZMAN (for himself, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr.
Armstrong, and Ms. Blunt Rochester):
S. 5588. A bill to require the Secretary of the Army to issue a general ecological restoration permit under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
By Mr. PAUL:
S. 5589. A bill to prohibit United States foreign assistance to the Palestinian Authority and other Palestinian governing entities in the West Bank and Gaza unless certain conditions are met, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
By Mr. BANKS:
S. 5590. A bill to require the Secretary of Defense to submit a plan to identify, prioritize, and remediate the presence of certain equipment and computational facilities owned or controlled by a foreign adversary in the electric grid of the United States, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself and Mr. Boozman):
S. 5591. A bill to improve support for personnel of the Veterans Crisis Line and to clarify authorities relating to crisis response protocols, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
By Mr. MERKLEY:
S. 5592. A bill to establish a loan program for first-time homebuyers, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
By Mr. SCHMITT:
S. 5593. A bill to prevent the removal of children for sex-rejecting interventions; to the Committee on Finance.
By Mrs. GILLIBRAND:
S. 5594. A bill to establish the Data Protection Agency, protect the privacy of individuals, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
By Mr. BANKS:
S. 5595. A bill to establish a War Reserve Stock Program for Taiwan, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
By Mr. BANKS:
S. 5596. A bill to modify provisions related to diversity, equity, and inclusion; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. BANKS:
S. 5597. A bill to promote the use of standardized testing at military service academies and DoDEA schools; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. BANKS:
S. 5598. A bill to provide for an audit and mitigation of covered cellular modules in the Department of Defense systems and infrastructure; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. BANKS:
S. 5599. A bill to remove conditions on the use of certain land conveyed by the Department of the Army to the State of Indiana; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. ARMSTRONG (for himself, Mr. Kim, Mr. Cornyn, and
Ms. Cortez Masto):
S. 5600. A bill to reauthorize the Traumatic Brain Injury program; considered and passed.
By Mr. BANKS (for himself and Mrs. Gillibrand):
S. 5601. A bill to require the Secretary of Defense to establish reporting requirements and voluntary guidance for large artificial intelligence contractors; to the Committee on Armed Services.
By Mr. MERKLEY (for himself, Mr. King, Mr. Reed, and
Mr. Van Hollen):
S. 5602. A bill to prohibit the use of Federal funds for the planning and construction of any structure or monument at Memorial Circle at Columbia Island/Lady Bird Johnson Park in the District of Columbia; read the first time.
By Mr. MERKLEY (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mr.
Whitehouse, Mr. Reed, and Mr. Van Hollen):
S. 5603. A bill to prohibit the demolition of Presidential memorials; read the first time.
By Mr. SCHATZ (for himself, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Welch):
S.J. Res. 218. A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constiution of the United States to abolish the electoral college and to provide for the direct election of the President and Vice President of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Submission of Concurrent and Senate Resolutions
Pages S5169–S5170 · Official textThe following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated:
Text printed in the Record (3,979 characters)
By Mr. BANKS (for himself and Mr. Merkley):
S. Res. 917. A resolution expressing support for the designation of September as "Dystonia Awareness Month" to promote public awareness and understanding of dystonia; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. GALLEGO:
S. Res. 918. A resolution establishing the Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
By Mr. PADILLA (for himself, Mr. Merkley, Ms.
Murkowski, Ms. Cortez Masto, and Mr. Peters):
S. Res. 919. A resolution honoring the leadership of Lonnie G. Bunch III, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution and recognizing his career as a public servant and the enduring value of the Smithsonian Institution to the people of the United States; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
By Mr. SCHATZ (for himself, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Reed, Mr.
Van Hollen, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Wyden, Mr. King, Mr.
Merkley, Ms. Hirono, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Murphy, Mr. Booker, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Markey, Mr.
Whitehouse, Mr. Warnock, Mr. Fetterman, and Mr.
Lujan):
S. Res. 920. A resolution expressing concern about the growing problem of book banning, and the proliferation of threats to freedom of expression in the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
By Ms. HASSAN:
S. Res. 921. A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the advertisements promoting President Donald Trump that aired in September 2026, which included the direct language "paid for by the U.S. Government," should not be paid for by the United States government; to the Committee on Appropriations.
By Mr. HOEVEN (for himself and Mr. Warnock):
S. Res. 922. A resolution designating October 26, 2026, as the "Day of the Deployed."; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. BOOZMAN (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Ms.
Alsobrooks, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Budd, Ms. Collins, Mr.
Coons, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Durbin,
Ms. Ernst, Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Hagerty,
Mr. Heinrich, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. King, Mr.
Lankford, Mr. Marshall, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Merkley,
Mr. Moran, Mr. Risch, Mr. Schiff, Mrs. Shaheen, Ms.
Smith, Mr. Warnock, Mr. Lujan, Ms. Duckworth, Mr.
Hoeven, and Mr. Sullivan):
S. Res. 923. A resolution expressing support for the designation of October 4 through October 10, 2026, as "National 4-H Week"; considered and agreed to.
By Mrs. SHAHEEN (for herself, Ms. Collins, Mr.
Blumenthal, Ms. Blunt Rochester, Ms. Cantwell, Mr.
Coons, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Hassan, Mr. Hickenlooper, Ms.
Hirono, Mr. Kaine, Mr. King, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr.
Markey, Mr. Reed, Ms. Smith, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr.
Warner, Mr. Welch, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden):
S. Res. 924. A resolution designating October 7, 2026, as "Energy Efficiency Day" in celebration of the economic and environmental benefits that have been driven by private sector innovation and Federal energy efficiency policies; considered and agreed to.
By Mrs. MOODY (for herself and Ms. Baldwin):
S. Res. 925. A resolution designating September 2026 as "National Spinal Cord Injury Awareness Month"; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. REED (for himself, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Van Hollen,
Mr. Heinrich, Mr. King, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Hirono, Mr.
Scott of South Carolina, Mr. Tuberville, Mr.
Lankford, Mr. Wicker, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Cornyn,
Mrs. Capito, Mr. Whitehouse, Mrs. Shaheen, Mrs.
Britt, and Ms. Collins):
S. Res. 926. A resolution designating September 2026 as "National Literacy Month"; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr.
Lankford, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr.
Lujan, Ms. Warren, and Mrs. Capito):
S. Res. 927. A resolution designating the week beginning October 18, 2026, as "National Character Counts Week"; considered and agreed to.
By Mr. THUNE (for himself and Mr. Schumer):
S. Res. 928. A resolution to authorize testimony, document production, and representation by the Senate Legal Counsel in the case of United States v. Terry; considered and agreed to.
Additional Cosponsors
Pages S5170–S5172 · Official textAt the request of Mrs. Britt, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Marshall) was added as a cosponsor of S. 424, a bill to amend the Federal securities laws to enhance 403(b) plans, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Grassley, the name of the Senator from New Hampshire (Ms. Hassan) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1057, a bill to modify the requirements for transfers of United States defense articles and defense services among the Baltic states. At the request of Mr. Banks, the name of the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. McCormick) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1253, a bill to establish the Office of the Special Inspector General for Unlawful Discrimination in Higher Education within the Department of Education. At the request of Mr. Cotton, the name of the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1255, a bill to require the Secretary of the Interior to reissue certain regulations relating to the taking of double-crested cormorants at aquaculture facilities, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Klobuchar, the name of the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Gallego) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1410, a bill to provide for health coverage with no cost-sharing for additional breast screenings for certain individuals at greater risk for breast cancer. At the request of Mr. Banks, the name of the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. McCormick) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1569, a bill to modify the criteria for recognition of accrediting agencies or associations for institutions of higher education. At the request of Mr. Ossoff, the name of the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Reed) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1879, a bill to amend chapter 131 of title 5, United States Code, to require Members of Congress and their spouses and dependent children to place certain assets into blind trusts, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Warren, the name of the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2006, a bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to prohibit discrimination in the Armed Forces on the basis of gender identity, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Klobuchar, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Marshall) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2238, a bill to prevent the theft of catalytic converters and other precious metal car parts, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Thune, the name of the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2426, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide pharmacy payment of certain services. At the request of Mr. Kelly, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2448, a bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to improve dependent coverage under the TRICARE Young Adult Program. At the request of Mr. Daines, the name of the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2461, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the Small Business Act to expand the availability of employee stock ownership plans in S corporations, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Banks, the name of the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. McCormick) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2702, a bill to require local educational agencies, State educational agencies, and other governmental education entities to respect the rights of parents regarding gender transition, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Collins, the name of the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3267, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for Medicare coverage of blood-based dementia screening tests. At the request of Mr. Blumenthal, the name of the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3466, a bill to improve health care provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Warner, the name of the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3505, a bill to amend the Black Lung Benefits Act to ease the benefits process for survivors of miners whose deaths were due to pneumoconiosis. At the request of Mr. McCormick, the names of the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Kennedy) were added as cosponsors of S. 3524, a bill to amend title 54, United States Code, to modify certain cost-sharing requirements for grant programs under the American Battlefield Protection Program, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Blumenthal, the name of the Senator from California (Mr. Schiff) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3654, a bill to improve housing and environmental health and safety protections for members of the Armed Forces and their families residing in military family housing, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Cotton, the name of the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3708, a bill to amend the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands to make that Act applicable to hardrock minerals, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Lee, his name was added as a cosponsor of S. 3889, a bill to restore and clarify the intent of the Federal interest rate exportation parity for State-chartered banks by allowing States to opt out of preemption only with respect to loans made by their own chartered institutions, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Daines, the names of the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Kennedy) were added as cosponsors of S. 3940, a bill to amend the Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994 to require the Secretary of the Treasury to testify before Congress, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Gillibrand, the name of the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3958, a bill to amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to transition Puerto Rico to the supplemental nutrition assistance program, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Moody, the name of the Senator from South Carolina (Ms. Graham) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4176, a bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to direct State medicaid fraud control units to investigate and prosecute instances of beneficiary fraud. At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4213, a bill to require data center operators to submit to States or the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Secretaries of Energy and Agriculture reports on data center energy and water use, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Rosen, the name of the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4318, a bill to amend title 39, United States Code, to extend the authority of the United States Postal Service to issue a semipostal stamp to raise funds for breast cancer research. At the request of Mrs. Shaheen, the name of the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez Masto) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4387, a bill to study the extent to which individuals are more at risk of maternal morbidity or mortality as a result of being a victim of intimate partner violence. At the request of Mrs. Moody, the name of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Armstrong) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4428, a bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require the use of an identity fraud detection system in reviewing Free Applications for Federal Student Aid. At the request of Mr. Schatz, the names of the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fetterman) were added as cosponsors of S. 4545, a bill to amend the America COMPETES Act to establish certain scientific integrity policies for Federal agencies that fund, conduct, or oversee scientific research, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Markey, the names of the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) and the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Peters) were added as cosponsors of S. 4814, a bill to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to designate Haiti for temporary protected status. At the request of Mrs. Murray, the name of the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4817, a bill to strengthen protections against child labor violations, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Heinrich, the names of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Peters), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner), the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz) and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Cassidy) were added as cosponsors of S. 4933, a bill to award a Congressional Gold Medal, collectively, to the individuals who fought for or with the United States against the armed forces of Imperial Japan in the Pacific theater and became prisoners of war from December 8, 1941, to August 15, 1945. At the request of Mr. Kaine, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5046, a bill to prohibit the transfer of certain offices and functions of the Department of Education to other Federal agencies, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Banks, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Marshall) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5127, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income certain compensation to clinical trial participants, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Hirono, the name of the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Blumenthal) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5189, a bill to amend title 10, United States Code, and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994, to codify and clarify gender neutral standards for members of certain Armed Forces, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Lujan, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5321, a bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to require coverage of, and expand access to, home and community-based services under the Medicaid program, to award grants for the creation, recruitment, training and education, retention, and advancement of the direct care workforce and to award grants to support family caregivers, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Moreno, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5383, a bill to amend the Controlled Substances Act to schedule MGM-15 and MGM-16 as schedule I controlled substances, and to amend the controlled Substances Act to schedule synthetic 7-hydroxymitragynine, and Mitragynine Pseudoindoxyl, as a Schedule I above a specific threshold under the controlled substance act, and to expand enforcement actions against drug manufacturers and distributors of emerging synthetic opioids, commonly known as gas station heroin. At the request of Mr. Padilla, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Kim) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5491, a bill to prohibit the intimidation of election officials and election workers. At the request of Mr. Bennet, the names of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Kim) and the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) were added as cosponsors of S. 5533, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an exclusion from gross income for AmeriCorps educational awards. At the request of Mrs. Murray, the name of the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5539, a bill to require group health plans and group or individual health insurance coverage to provide coverage for over-the-counter contraceptives. At the request of Mrs. Murray, the name of the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5546, a bill to provide women with increased access to preventive and life-saving cancer screening. At the request of Mr. Reed, the name of the Senator from New Mexico (Mr.
Heinrich) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5549, a bill to support educators. At the request of Mr. Padilla, the name of the Senator from California (Mr. Schiff) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5559, a bill to provide for the basic needs of students at institutions of higher education. At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand) was added as a cosponsor of S.J. Res. 213, a joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement of the Department of Homeland Security relating to "Establishing a Fixed Time Period of Admission and an Extension of Stay Procedure for Nonimmigrant Academic Students, Exchange Visitors, and Representatives of Foreign Information Media". At the request of Mrs. Shaheen, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 841, a resolution celebrating the 35th anniversary of the independence of Ukraine from the former Soviet Union. At the request of Mr. Van Hollen, the name of the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Warnock) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 852, a resolution requesting information on Israel's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
Senate Resolution 917--Expressing Support for the Designation of September as "Dystonia Awareness Month" to Promote Public Awareness and Understanding of Dystonia
Page S5172 · Official textSENATE RESOLUTION 917--EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE DESIGNATION OF SEPTEMBER AS "DYSTONIA AWARENESS MONTH" TO PROMOTE PUBLIC AWARENESS AND UNDERSTANDING OF DYSTONIA Mr. BANKS (for himself and Mr. Merkley) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (2,578 characters)
Whereas dystonia is a neurological movement disorder that causes excessive, involuntary muscle contractions, resulting in abnormal muscle movements and body postures;
Whereas dystonia affects an estimated 250,000 to 300,000 individuals in the United States, though the true number may be higher due to underdiagnosis and misdiagnosis;
Whereas dystonia can affect people of all ages, genders, and backgrounds, and may appear as a standalone condition or as a symptom of other neurological disorders;
Whereas there are multiple forms of dystonia, including focal, segmental, and generalized dystonias, that may impact a person's ability to walk, speak, see, or perform daily tasks;
Whereas dystonia can cause significant physical disability, social isolation, emotional distress, and financial hardship for individuals and families;
Whereas, although there is no cure for dystonia, treatments such as botulinum toxin injections, oral medications, deep brain stimulation, and supportive therapies can help manage symptoms and improve quality of life;
Whereas greater awareness and understanding of dystonia will lead to earlier diagnosis, expanded research, improved treatments, and better support for individuals and families living with this condition;
Whereas medical researchers and clinicians are working diligently to increase awareness and advance knowledge of dystonia through outreach, education, and scientific study;
Whereas servicemembers and veterans may experience dystonia as a result of traumatic brain injury, exposure to certain medications, or other service-related conditions, underscoring the importance of research, treatment access, and care within the health systems of the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs; and
Whereas the Peer Reviewed Medical Research Program of the Department of Defense has awarded competitive research grants supporting studies on dystonia, reflecting the recognition of its impact on the health of servicemembers, veterans, and the general population: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) expresses support for the designation of September as "Dystonia Awareness Month";
(2) recognizes the need for further research to discover new treatments and a cure for dystonia;
(3) commends the efforts of medical professionals and researchers who work to improve the lives of individuals with dystonia; and
(4) encourages the people of the United States to observe Dystonia Awareness Month with appropriate programs and activities to raise public awareness and understanding of dystonia.
Senate Resolution 918--Establishing the Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence
Pages S5172–S5174 · Official textMr. GALLEGO submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration:
Text printed in the Record (10,747 characters)
Resolved,
SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS.
In this resolution:
(1) Artificial intelligence.--The term "artificial intelligence" has the meaning given that term in section 5002 of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020 (15 U.S.C. 9401).
(2) Artificial intelligence system.--The term "artificial intelligence system" means any machine-based system that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers from the input it receives how to generate outputs, including predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions, that can influence physical or virtual environments.
(3) Select committee.--The term "Select Committee" means the Select Committee on
Artificial Intelligence established by section 2.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT.
(a) In General.--There is established a select committee of the Senate, to be known as the "Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence".
(b) Duration.--The Select Committee shall be established during the 120th Congress and shall continue in existence unless otherwise provided by the Senate.
SEC. 3. MEMBERSHIP.
(a) Composition.--The Select Committee shall be composed of not more than 13 Senators, appointed by the President pro tempore of the Senate.
(b) Appointments.--In making recommendations under subsection (a), the President pro tempore of the Senate shall consider the qualifications, experience, and expertise of Senators with respect to artificial intelligence and matters within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee.
(c) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the membership of the Select Committee--
(1) shall not affect the powers of the Select Committee; and
(2) shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment.
(d) Leadership.--
(1) Chairperson.--The majority leader of the Senate shall designate a member of the Select Committee from the majority party to serve as Chairperson of the Select Committee.
(2) Ranking minority member.--The minority leader of the Senate shall designate a member of the Select Committee from the minority party to serve as ranking minority member of the Select Committee.
(e) Subcommittees.--The Select Committee may establish such subcommittees as it considers necessary to carry out its responsibilities under this resolution, subject to the Standing Rules of the Senate and the rules of the Select Committee.
SEC. 4. PURPOSE AND JURISDICTION.
(a) In General.--The Select Committee is authorized and directed--
(1) to conduct investigations and continuing studies of the development, deployment, use, and governance of artificial intelligence, including emerging capabilities and risks across the artificial intelligence ecosystem;
(2) to examine the national security, defense, intelligence, cybersecurity, and foreign policy implications of artificial intelligence, including international competition, cooperation, and threats to the security of the United States;
(3) to examine the economic and labor implications of artificial intelligence, including effects on employment, job displacement, productivity, workforce development, and the competitiveness of the United States;
(4) to examine risks to children and consumers from artificial intelligence, including issues relating to consumer protection, privacy, data security, civil rights, civil liberties, discrimination, and the safety of artificial intelligence products and services;
(5) to examine the implications of artificial intelligence for critical infrastructure, energy generation and consumption, water resources, and the environment;
(6) to examine the development, procurement, deployment, and use of artificial intelligence by Federal departments and agencies, including existing oversight mechanisms and the adequacy of applicable Federal laws and regulations;
(7) to examine the adequacy of existing Federal authorities, standards, testing procedures, and safeguards relating to artificial intelligence, including the identification of potential gaps in Federal oversight;
(8) to examine international approaches to artificial intelligence governance and opportunities for international cooperation, including the development of common standards, information-sharing mechanisms, and safeguards;
(9) to assess and develop appropriate legislative safeguards, recommendations, and proposals pertaining to artificial intelligence; and
(10) to examine such other matters relating to artificial intelligence as the Select Committee considers necessary to carry out the purposes set forth in paragraphs (1) through (9).
(b) Legislative Jurisdiction.--
(1) In general.--The Select Committee may consider and report to the Senate proposed legislation and other matters relating to artificial intelligence that are referred to the Select Committee in accordance with the Standing Rules of the Senate and applicable orders of the Senate.
(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this resolution shall be construed to divest any standing committee of the Senate of its existing jurisdiction or to require the exclusive referral of any proposed legislation or other matter to the Select Committee.
SEC. 5. POWERS.
(a) In General.--For purposes of carrying out this resolution, the Select Committee may--
(1) conduct investigations and inquiries into any matter within its jurisdiction;
(2) authorize and issue subpoenas for the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, documents, electronic files, and other relevant materials;
(3) administer oaths to witnesses;
(4) sit and act at such times and places within the United States, whether the Senate is in session, has recessed, or has adjourned, as it considers appropriate;
(5) hold hearings, take testimony, and receive evidence as it considers necessary;
(6) take depositions and other testimony, including through authorized members or employees of the Select Committee, in accordance with applicable Senate rules;
(7) procure the services of individual consultants, technical experts, and consulting organizations as necessary to carry out its responsibilities, subject to applicable law and Senate rules;
(8) request information, documents, reports, and briefings from Federal departments and agencies concerning matters within its jurisdiction;
(9) make recommendations and report legislation and other matters within its jurisdiction, subject to section 4(b); and
(10) establish subcommittees and delegate responsibilities to such subcommittees, consistent with this resolution and applicable Senate rules.
(b) Subpoenas.--Subpoenas shall be authorized and issued under the signature of the Chairperson of the Select Committee, or by a designee of the Chairperson, and may be served by any person designated by the Chairperson.
(c) Rules of Procedure.--
(1) In general.--The Select Committee may adopt such rules of procedure as it considers necessary to carry out its responsibilities, provided that such rules are not inconsistent with the Standing Rules of the Senate or other applicable orders of the Senate.
(2) Contents.--The rules adopted under paragraph (1) may address--
(A) the scheduling and conduct of meetings, hearings, and other committee proceedings;
(B) quorum requirements for conducting committee business, consistent with applicable Senate rules;
(C) procedures for receiving testimony, taking depositions, and considering evidence;
(D) procedures for considering and reporting legislation, recommendations, and other matters;
(E) the establishment and operation of subcommittees; and
(F) such other matters relating to the internal administration and operation of the Select Committee as the Select Committee considers appropriate.
SEC. 6. INFORMATION ACCESS AND AGENCY REPORTING.
(a) Access to Information.--The Select Committee may request and receive from the President and the heads of Federal departments and agencies information, documents, reports, and briefings relevant to matters within its jurisdiction, consistent with applicable law and Senate rules.
(b) Agency Reporting.--The Select Committee may request that the heads of relevant Federal departments and agencies provide periodic reports or briefings concerning--
(1) significant developments in artificial intelligence capabilities, deployment, and emerging risks;
(2) the development, procurement, and use of artificial intelligence by Federal departments and agencies;
(3) significant artificial intelligence-related threats to national security, cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, or public safety;
(4) Federal activities relating to artificial intelligence testing, evaluation, standards, and oversight; and
(5) such other matters relating to artificial intelligence as the Select Committee considers appropriate.
(c) Access by Members.--Each member of the Select Committee shall have access to information, records, reports, and other materials obtained by the Select Committee in the course of carrying out its responsibilities, subject to applicable law, Senate rules, and requirements governing the protection of classified or otherwise sensitive information.
(d) Coordination With Other Committees.--The Select Committee may consult and coordinate with standing and select committees of the Senate--
(1) on matters relating to artificial intelligence that fall within their respective jurisdictions, including through joint hearings, briefings, and the exchange of information, consistent with applicable Senate rules; and
(2) in obtaining and reviewing information relevant to matters within their respective jurisdictions, consistent with applicable Senate rules and requirements governing the protection of classified or otherwise sensitive information.
SEC. 7. CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND SECURITY.
(a) In General.--The Select Committee shall establish procedures for the receipt, handling, storage, use, and disclosure of classified information and other sensitive information obtained in carrying out its responsibilities, consistent with applicable law and Senate rules.
(b) Personnel Requirements.--An employee, consultant, contractor, or detailed employee of the Select Committee may be granted access to classified information only if the individual--
(1) possesses any security clearance required for access to such information;
(2) has executed any confidentiality agreement or acknowledgment required under applicable Senate rules and security procedures; and
(3) complies with applicable requirements governing the protection of classified information.
(c) Protection of Information.--Nothing in this resolution shall be construed to authorize the public disclosure of classified information or other information protected from disclosure by applicable law or Senate rules.
SEC. 8.
Text printed in the Record (4,298 characters)
STAFF AND PERSONNEL.
(a) In General.--The Select Committee may employ and compensate such professional, administrative, technical, and other personnel as the Select Committee considers necessary to carry out its responsibilities, subject to applicable law and Senate rules.
(b) Staff Resources.--
(1) Equal access.--The Chairperson and ranking member of the Select Committee shall have equal access to staffing resources and technical expertise necessary to carry out the responsibilities of the Select Committee.
(2) Distribution of funding.--Of the funds made available to the Select Committee for personnel, 50 percent shall be under the control of the Chairperson and 50 percent shall be under the control of the ranking member of the Select Committee.
(3) Shared administrative and technical personnel.--The Chairperson and ranking member of the Select Committee shall jointly determine the allocation of shared administrative and technical personnel, consistent with the equal allocation of personnel resources under paragraph (2).
(c) Technical Expertise.--The Select Committee may employ or retain individuals with expertise in artificial intelligence, computer science, cybersecurity, national security, economics, labor, consumer protection, privacy, and other matters relevant to its jurisdiction.
(d) Detailed Personnel.--
(1) In general.--With the prior consent of the Federal department or agency concerned and the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate, the Select Committee may use, on a reimbursable or nonreimbursable basis, the services of personnel of such department or agency.
(2) Sources of personnel.--Personnel detailed under paragraph (1) may include personnel from Federal departments and agencies with expertise relevant to the responsibilities of the Select Committee.
(3) Supervision and security.--Personnel detailed under this subsection shall be subject to the supervision of the Select Committee and applicable Senate requirements concerning confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and access to classified or otherwise sensitive information.
SEC. 9. FUNDING AND EXPENDITURES.
(a) Authorization.--For purposes of carrying out this resolution, the Select Committee may make expenditures from the contingent fund of the Senate, subject to applicable law, Senate rules, and the approval of the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate.
(b) Permissible Expenditures.--Expenditures authorized under subsection (a) may include--
(1) compensation of personnel employed by the Select Committee;
(2) procurement of the services of consultants, technical experts, and consulting organizations;
(3) expenses associated with hearings, investigations, depositions, and other committee proceedings;
(4) acquisition of equipment, technology, and other resources necessary to carry out the responsibilities of the Select Committee; and
(5) such other administrative and operational expenses as are necessary to carry out this resolution.
(c) Budget.--The Chairperson and ranking member of the Select Committee shall jointly develop and submit the budget of the Select Committee for consideration and approval in accordance with applicable Senate rules and procedures.
(d) Allocation of Resources.--Funds made available to the Select Committee for personnel shall be allocated in accordance with section 7(b).
SEC. 10. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
(a) In General.--The Select Committee may submit to the Senate reports, findings, and recommendations concerning matters within its jurisdiction, including recommendations for legislative or administrative action.
(b) Legislative Proposals.--The Select Committee may develop and submit legislative proposals relating to artificial intelligence and may consider and report legislation referred to it in accordance with section 4(b).
(c) Coordination.--The Select Committee may transmit its findings and recommendations to standing and select committees of the Senate with jurisdiction over the matters addressed in such findings and recommendations.
(d) Protection of Information.--Any report submitted under this section shall be prepared and made available in a manner consistent with applicable requirements governing the protection of classified or otherwise sensitive information.
Senate Resolution 919--Honoring the Leadership of Lonnie G. Bunch Iii, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution and Recognizing His Career as a Public Servant and the Enduring Value of The...
Page S5174 · Official textMr. PADILLA (for himself, Mr. Merkley, Ms. Murkowski, Ms. Cortez Masto, and Mr. Peters) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration:
Text printed in the Record (3,834 characters)
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III is a steadfast public servant who has announced that he will retire from the Smithsonian Institution after nearly 4 decades of distinguished service;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III is the 14th Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution since its founding 180 years ago in 1846;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III made history as the first African American and first historian to serve as Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III, since 2019, has led the Smithsonian Institution during a time of great growth and success;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III, for 7 years, has led the world's largest museum, education and research complex--which includes 21 museums, 20 libraries, the National Zoo, numerous research centers, and multiple education units and centers--and during that time the Smithsonian Institution has welcomed over 100 million visitors to its museums and the National Zoo;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III spearheaded the Smithsonian Institution's fundraising campaign, the largest of a cultural institution, surpassing the Smithsonian Institution's $2.5 billion fundraising goal 1 year ahead of schedule;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III has guided the Smithsonian Institution's continued expansion, including congressional authorization of 2 new Smithsonian museums, the National Museum of the American Latino and the American Women's History Museum;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III helped secure the Smithsonian Institution's Arts and Industries Building on the National Mall as the permanent home for the National Museum of the American Latino;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III led the Smithsonian Institution in celebrating the 250th anniversary of the United States, curating the Smithsonian's American Aspirations exhibit to commemorate the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the aspirational ideals of our Nation's founding;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III, prior to being appointed Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, served as the Founding Director of the National Museum of African American History and Culture, steering the museum from its initial concept to its opening on the National Mall on September 24, 2016, and in the 10 years since, the museum has welcomed more than 13 million visitors and become one of the Smithsonian Institution's most visited locations;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III has stewarded the Smithsonian Institution on an independent, nonpartisan basis, never wavering in his commitment to defending the independence and integrity of the Institution, ensuring that it continues to preserve and tell America's full story;
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III has remained steadfast in his commitment to excellence and upheld the Smithsonian Institution's missions and values, guaranteeing that it remains a national treasure; and
Whereas Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III's legacy as a public servant will continue long after his retirement, forever memorialized by his contributions to the Smithsonian Institution, which visitors from the United States and around the world will continue to enjoy for generations to come: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) honors the decades of distinguished service and accomplishments of Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution Lonnie G. Bunch III;
(2) congratulates Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III on his upcoming retirement and thanks him for his service to the people of the United States; and
(3) reaffirms the value of the Smithsonian Institution as an institution dedicated to accurately increasing and diffusing knowledge around the world to both preserve America's full history and contribute to scholarship concerning historical, cultural, and scientific matters.
Senate Resolution 920--Expressing Concern About the Growing Problem of Book Banning, and the Proliferation of Threats to Freedom of Expression in the United States
Pages S5174–S5176 · Official textMr. SCHATZ (for himself, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Reed, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Wyden, Mr. King, Mr. Merkley, Ms. Hirono, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Booker, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Markey, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Warnock, Mr. Fetterman, and Mr. Lujan) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:
Text printed in the Record (10,642 characters)
Whereas the overwhelming majority of voters in the United States oppose book bans;
Whereas an overwhelming majority of voters in the United States support educators teaching about the civil rights movement, the history and experiences of Native Americans, enslaved Africans, immigrants facing discrimination, and the ongoing effects of racism;
Whereas an overwhelming majority of Americans are confident that the public schools of their communities select appropriate books for students to read;
Whereas, in 1969, the Supreme Court of the United States held in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate";
Whereas, in 1982, a plurality of the Supreme Court of the United States wrote in Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982), that schools may not remove library books based on "narrowly partisan or political grounds", as this kind of censorship will result in "official suppression of ideas";
Whereas the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects freedom of speech and the freedom to read and write;
Whereas Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers";
Whereas PEN America has identified more than 10,000 instances of individual books banned between July 2025 and June 2026;
Whereas books banned between July 2025 and June 2026 include more than 6,000 unique titles, censoring the works of more than 3,000 authors, illustrators, and translators;
Whereas the majority of book bans were enacted without following the best practice guidelines for book challenges outlined by the American Library Association, the National Coalition Against Censorship, and the National Council of Teachers of English;
Whereas the unimpeded sharing of ideas and the freedom to read are essential to a strong democracy;
Whereas books do not require readers to agree with topics, themes, or viewpoints, but instead allow readers to explore and engage with differing perspectives to form and inform their own views;
Whereas suppressing the freedom to read and denying access to literature, history, and knowledge are repressive and anti-democratic tactics used by authoritarian regimes against their people;
Whereas book bans violate the rights of students, families, residents, and citizens based on the political, ideological, and cultural preferences of the specific individuals or groups imposing the bans;
Whereas book bans have multifaceted, harmful consequences on--
(1) students, who have a right to access a diverse range of stories and perspectives, especially students from historically marginalized backgrounds whose communities are often targeted by thought control measures;
(2) educators and librarians, who are operating in some States in an increasingly punitive and surveillance-oriented environment and experience a chilling effect in their work;
(3) authors whose works are targeted and suppressed;
(4) parents who want their children to attend public schools that remain open to curiosity, discovery, and the freedom to read; and
(5) community members who want free access to a range of uncensored information and knowledge from their public libraries;
Whereas classic and award-winning literature and books that have been part of school curricula for decades have been challenged, removed from libraries pending review, or outright banned from schools, including--
(1) "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley;
(2) "The Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood;
(3) "Anne Frank's Diary: The Graphic Adaptation" adapted by Ari Folman;
(4) "Their Eyes Were Watching God" by Zora Neal Hurston; and
(5) "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee;
Whereas books, particularly those written by and about outsiders, newcomers, and individuals from marginalized backgrounds, are facing a heightened risk of being banned;
Whereas, according to PEN America, a disproportionate number of books banned or otherwise restricted in the United States have LGBTQ+ characters or themes that recognize the equal humanity and dignity of all individuals despite differences, including--
(1) "And Tango Makes Three" by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell; and
(2) "This Book Is Gay" by Juno Dawson;
Whereas many books, both fiction and nonfiction, that have been targeted for bans or restrictions in the United States are books about race or racism, or that feature characters of color, including--
(1) "The Story of Ruby Bridges" by Robert Coles and illustrated by George Ford;
(2) "Letter from Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King Jr.;
(3) "Thank You, Jackie Robinson" by Barbara Cohen;
(4) "Malala: A Hero For All" by Shana Corey;
(5) "Fry Bread: A Native American Family Story" by Kevin Noble Maillard;
(6) "Hair Love" by Matthew A. Cherry;
(7) "Good Trouble: Lessons From the Civil Rights Playbook" by Christopher Noxon; and
(8) "We Are All Born Free: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Pictures" by Amnesty International;
Whereas the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund has reported a dramatic surge in challenges at libraries and schools to the inclusion of graphic novels that depict the diversity of civic life in the United States and the painful and complex history of racism, homophobia, anti-Asian bias, and antisemitism embedded in the human experience, including--
(1) "New Kid" by Jerry Craft;
(2) "Maus" by Art Spiegelman;
(3) "American Born Chinese" by Gene Luen Yang; and
(4) "Drama" by Raina Telgemeier;
Whereas books addressing death, grief, mental illness, and suicide are targeted alongside nonfiction books that discuss feelings and emotions written for teenage and young adult audiences that frequently confront these topics;
Whereas, during congressional hearings on April 7, 2022, May 19, 2022, and September 12, 2023, students, parents, teachers, librarians, and school administrators testified to the chilling and fear-spreading effects that book bans have on education and the school environment;
Whereas, since 2021, State legislation censoring certain content within schools and libraries has been enacted across the country, resulting in more than 30,000 book bans;
Whereas an increasing amount of book censorship goes unreported and may be higher than is able to be reported due to mass removals implementing vaguely-written State legislation and a lack of transparency about district-based removals;
Whereas, according to PEN America, from July 2025 to June 2026, 24 States across the country limited access to certain books for limited or indefinite periods of time, including--
(1) Florida, where at least 2,304 books have been banned or restricted in 33 school districts;
(2) Texas, where at least 1,781 books have been banned or restricted in 7 school districts;
(3) Tennessee, where at least 1,622 books have been banned or restricted in 8 school districts;
(4) Idaho, where at least 150 books have been banned or restricted in 1 school district; and
(5) Iowa, where at least 113 books have been banned or restricted in 4 school districts;
Whereas the President of the United States has repeatedly expressed support for the censorship of certain subjects such as gender, sexuality, and race through public statements and executive orders;
Whereas, following these executive orders in 2025, Department of Defense Education Activity (referred to in this preamble as "DoDEA") schools removed books related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, "gender ideology", and anything that would suggest "that America's founding documents are racist or sexist", resulting in the censorship of classroom instruction and student activities, as well as the removal of at least 596 books in DoDEA schools;
Whereas, following the same executive orders, the Department of Defense directed all military academies to identify and remove books from their libraries that include themes related to race, "gender ideology", and other "divisive concepts" that the Administration considers "incompatible with the department's core mission", which led to the temporary removal of nearly 400 books from the Nimitz Library of the United States Naval Academy, including "I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings" by Maya Angelou;
Whereas grants administered by the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and other Federal agencies have been terminated or revoked for using language related to race, gender, and LGBTQ+ identity or addressing social inequality;
Whereas the President of the United States has further signed executive orders targeting the Smithsonian Institution, an independent Federal trust instrumentality of the United States which has served as a global model for scholarship and public engagement documenting the full and complex history of the United States, for promoting "improper ideology"; and
Whereas the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education has claimed book bans are a "hoax", ended investigations of alleged discrimination related to book banning, and fired the staff person in charge of addressing the book banning crisis: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) supports the designation of the week of October 4 through October 10, 2026, as "Banned Books Week";
(2) expresses concern about the spreading problem of book banning and the proliferating threats to freedom of expression in the United States;
(3) reaffirms the commitment of the United States to supporting the freedom of expression of writers that is protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution and the freedom of all individuals in the
United States to read books without government censorship;
(4) calls on local governments and school districts to follow best practice guidelines when addressing challenges to books;
(5) calls on local governments and school districts to protect the rights of students to learn and the ability of educators and librarians to teach, including by providing students with the opportunity to read a wide array of books reflecting the full breadth and diversity of viewpoints and perspectives; and
(6) calls for the repeal of executive orders and rescission of directives that have enacted content-based and viewpoint-based restrictions on the freedom to read and learn in United States public schools and libraries.
Senate Resolution 921--Expressing the Sense of the Senate That the Advertisements Promoting President Donald Trump That Aired in September 2026, Which Included the Direct Language "Paid for by The...
Page S5176 · Official textSENATE RESOLUTION 921--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE ADVERTISEMENTS PROMOTING PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP THAT AIRED IN SEPTEMBER 2026, WHICH INCLUDED THE DIRECT LANGUAGE "PAID FOR BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT," SHOULD NOT BE PAID FOR BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Ms. HASSAN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations:
Text printed in the Record (257 characters)
Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the advertisements promoting President Donald Trump that aired in September 2026, which included the direct language "paid for by the U.S. Government," should not be paid for by the United States government.
Senate Resolution 922--Designating October 26, 2026, as the "Day of the Deployed."
Page S5176 · Official textSENATE RESOLUTION 922--DESIGNATING OCTOBER 26, 2026, AS THE "DAY OF THE DEPLOYED." Mr. HOEVEN (for himself and Mr. Warnock) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (2,754 characters)
Whereas more than 2,000,000 individuals serve as members of the Armed Forces of the United States, including the reserve components of the Armed Forces;
Whereas several hundred thousand members of the Armed Forces have served in more than 200 countries in every region of the world;
Whereas, since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, more than 2,000,000 members of the Armed Forces have deployed to the area of operations of the United States Central Command;
Whereas, in the 25 years following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, members of the Armed Forces deployed in multiple major conflicts and countless operations throughout the world, and their service and bravery helped protect the United States from further terrorist attacks;
Whereas the United States is kept strong and free by the loyal military personnel of the Armed Forces, which includes the active duty and reserve components, who protect the precious heritage of the United States through their declarations and actions;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces have deployed to the Middle East to defend the security interests of the United States, deter aggression, prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and promote stability in the region;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces serving at home and abroad have courageously answered the call to duty to defend the ideals of the United States and to preserve peace and freedom around the world;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces are called upon to respond to an increasingly complex and wide-ranging set of global threats to the United States;
Whereas the courage, professionalism, and sacrifice of these deployed forces represent the highest traditions of the United States military;
Whereas the United States remains committed to easing the transition from deployment abroad to service at home for members of the Armed Forces and the families of the members;
Whereas members of the Armed Forces personify the virtues of patriotism, dedication, courage, and steadfast service;
Whereas the families of members of the Armed Forces make important and significant sacrifices for the United States; and
Whereas the Senate has designated October 26 as the "Day of the Deployed" since 2011: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates October 26, 2026, as the "Day of the Deployed";
(2) honors the deployed members of the Armed Forces of the United States and the families of the members;
(3) calls on the people of the United States to reflect on the service of those members of the Armed Forces, wherever the members serve, past, present, and future; and
(4) encourages the people of the United States to observe the "Day of the Deployed" with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
Senate Resolution 923--Expressing Support for the Designation of October 4 Through October 10, 2026, as "National 4-H Week"
Page S5176 · Official textSENATE RESOLUTION 923--EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE DESIGNATION OF OCTOBER 4 THROUGH OCTOBER 10, 2026, AS "NATIONAL 4-H WEEK" Mr. BOOZMAN (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Budd, Ms. Collins, Mr. Coons, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Ernst, Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Hagerty, Mr. Heinrich, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. King, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Marshall, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Moran, Mr. Risch, Mr. Schiff, Mrs. Shaheen, Ms. Smith, Mr. Warnock, Mr. Lujan, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Hoeven, and Mr. Sullivan) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (2,035 characters)
Whereas 4-H is the largest youth development organization in the United States, supporting nearly 6,000,000 young people across the United States;
Whereas 4-H helps young people become confident, independent, resilient, and compassionate leaders;
Whereas 4-H is delivered by the Cooperative Extension System, a community of more than 110 land-grant colleges and universities across the United States that provides experiences for young people to learn through hands-on projects in the important areas of health, science, agriculture, and civic engagement;
Whereas the National Institute of Food and Agriculture of the Department of Agriculture serves as the Federal partner of 4-H in collaboration with land-grant colleges and universities, the Cooperative Extension System, and National 4-H Council;
Whereas National 4-H Week showcases the incredible ways 4-H provides opportunities for all young people and highlights the remarkable members of 4-H in all 50 States and across the globe who work each day to make a positive impact on other individuals;
Whereas the 4-H network of nearly 500,000 volunteers and 3,500 professionals provides caring and supportive mentoring to all members of 4-H, helping members to grow into true leaders, entrepreneurs, and visionaries; and
Whereas members of 4-H will celebrate National 4-H Week during the week of October 4 through October 10, 2026: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) supports the designation of October 4 through October 10, 2026, as "National 4-H Week";
(2) recognizes the important role of 4-H as the youth development program of the Cooperative Extension System and the Department of Agriculture;
(3) encourages all citizens to recognize 4-H for the significant impact the organization and members have made and continue to make by empowering youth with the skills needed to lead for a lifetime; and
(4) celebrates the work of 4-H in developing engaged, healthy, and productive citizens who are "Beyond Ready" for work and life in a world of change.
Senate Resolution 924--Designating October 7, 2026, as "Energy Efficiency Day" in Celebration of the Economic and Environmental Benefits That Have Been Driven by Private Sector Innovation And...
Pages S5176–S5177 · Official textMrs. SHAHEEN (for herself, Ms. Collins, Mr. Blumenthal, Ms. Blunt Rochester, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Coons, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Hassan, Mr. Hickenlooper, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Kaine, Mr. King, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Markey, Mr. Reed, Ms. Smith, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Warner, Mr. Welch, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (2,707 characters)
Whereas October has been designated as "National Energy Awareness Month";
Whereas improvements in energy efficiency technologies and practices, along with policies of the United States enacted since the 1970s, have resulted in energy savings of more than 80,000,000,000,000,000 British thermal units and energy cost avoidance of more than $1,000,000,000,000 annually;
Whereas energy efficiency has enjoyed bipartisan support in Congress and in administrations of both parties for more than 50 years;
Whereas bipartisan legislation enacted since the 1970s to advance Federal energy efficiency policies includes--
(1) the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.);
(2) the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-12; 101 Stat. 103);
(3) the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13201 et seq.);
(4) the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801 et seq.);
(5) the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17001 et seq.);
(6) the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 (Public Law 114-11; 129 Stat. 182);
(7) the Energy Act of 2020 (Public Law 116-260; 134 Stat. 2418); and
(8) the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58; 135 Stat. 429);
Whereas energy efficiency has long been supported by a diverse coalition of businesses (including manufacturers, utilities, energy service companies, and technology firms), public interest organizations, environmental and conservation groups, and State and local governments;
Whereas, since 1980, the United States has more than doubled its energy productivity, realizing twice the economic output per unit of energy consumed;
Whereas more than 2,300,000 individuals in the United States are currently employed across the energy efficiency sector, as the United States has doubled its energy productivity, and business and industry have become more innovative and competitive in global markets;
Whereas the Department of Energy is the principal Federal agency responsible for renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency efforts;
Whereas cutting energy waste saves the consumers of the United States billions of dollars on utility bills annually; and
Whereas energy efficiency policies, financing innovations, and public-private partnerships have contributed to a reduction in energy intensity in Federal facilities by nearly 50 percent since the mid-1970s, which results in direct savings to United States taxpayers: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates October 7, 2026, as "Energy Efficiency Day"; and
(2) calls on the people of the United States to observe Energy Efficiency Day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.
Senate Resolution 925--Designating September 2026 as "National Spinal Cord Injury Awareness Month"
Page S5177 · Official textMrs. MOODY (for herself and Ms. Baldwin) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (1,820 characters)
Whereas approximately 311,560 individuals in the United States live with spinal cord injuries, which cost society billions of dollars in health care costs and lost wages;
Whereas there are approximately 18,482 new spinal cord injuries in the United States each year;
Whereas more than 42,000 individuals with spinal cord injuries are veterans;
Whereas motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of spinal cord injuries;
Whereas almost half of all spinal cord injuries sustained by individuals 30 years of age or younger occur as a result of a vehicular accident;
Whereas the average remaining years of life for individuals living with spinal cord injuries has not improved significantly since the 1980s;
Whereas there is an urgent need to develop new neuroprotection, pharmacological, and regeneration treatments to reduce, prevent, and reverse paralysis; and
Whereas increased awareness and support for research are key factors in improving outcomes for individuals living with spinal cord injuries, enhancing the quality of life of individuals with spinal cord injuries, and ultimately curing paralysis: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates September 2026 as "National Spinal Cord Injury Awareness Month";
(2) supports the goals and ideals of National Spinal Cord Injury Awareness Month;
(3) continues to support research to find better treatments, therapies, and a cure for spinal cord injuries;
(4) supports clinical trials for new therapies that offer promise and hope to individuals living with paralysis; and
(5) commends the dedication of national, regional, and local organizations, researchers, doctors, volunteers, and people across the United States who are working to improve the quality of life of individuals living with spinal cord injuries and their families.
Senate Resolution 926--Designating September 2026 as "National Literacy Month"
Page S5177 · Official textMr. REED (for himself, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Heinrich, Mr. King, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Wicker, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Whitehouse, Mrs. Shaheen, Mrs. Britt, and Ms. Collins) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (2,508 characters)
Whereas reading is a cornerstone for personal growth, economic opportunity, and a strong society;
Whereas recent assessments, such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress, report unacceptably poor student reading proficiency, highlighting the need for effective literacy instruction;
Whereas the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies estimates that 28 percent or 59,000,000 adults in the United States perform at the lowest proficiency level in literacy;
Whereas educational disparities persist among students in various States and districts, particularly impacting students of color, those from low-income backgrounds, and English learners;
Whereas citizens who struggle to achieve reading proficiency are less likely to graduate high school or be employed and are more likely to be incarcerated;
Whereas low literacy has a significant impact on the economy of the United States, with an estimated loss of over $2,000,000,000,000 in productivity and earnings, as well as $106,000,000,000 to $238,000,000,000 in additional health care costs;
Whereas reading proficiency is linked to economic mobility and overall life success;
Whereas an interdisciplinary body of research, known as the science of reading, demonstrates the effectiveness of evidence-based reading strategies in improving literacy outcomes;
Whereas access to reading materials and robust content knowledge is essential for literacy success, with disparities affecting millions of children, particularly those from low-income households and communities of color;
Whereas evidence-based reading strategies include reading instruction and interventions based on rigorous scientific research that have demonstrated effectiveness in improving literacy development and skills in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension; and
Whereas the Federal Government currently invests in literacy education through programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (29 U.S.C. 3271 et seq.), and the Museum and Library Services Act (20 U.S.C. 9101 et seq.): Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates September 2026 as "National Literacy Month"; and
(2) calls on the Federal Government, States, localities, schools, libraries, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and the people of the United States to observe National Literacy Month with appropriate programs and activities.
Senate Resolution 927--Designating the Week Beginning October 18, 2026, as "National Character Counts Week"
Pages S5177–S5178 · Official textMr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Lankford, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Lujan, Ms. Warren, and Mrs. Capito) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (3,491 characters)
Whereas the well-being of the United States requires that the young people of the United States become an involved, caring citizenry of good character;
Whereas the character education of children has become more urgent, as violence by and against youth increasingly threatens the physical and psychological well-being of the people of the United States;
Whereas, more than ever, children need strong and constructive guidance from their families and their communities, including from schools, youth organizations, religious institutions, and civic groups;
Whereas the character of a nation is only as strong as the character of its individual citizens;
Whereas the public good is advanced when young individuals are taught the importance of good character and the positive effects that good character can have in personal relationships, in school, and in the workplace;
Whereas scholars and educators agree that individuals do not automatically develop good character and that, therefore, institutions and individuals that influence youth must make conscientious efforts to help young individuals develop the essential traits and characteristics that comprise good character;
Whereas, although character development is, first and foremost, an obligation of families, the efforts of faith communities, schools, and youth, civic, and human service organizations also play an important role in fostering and promoting good character;
Whereas Congress encourages students, teachers, parents, youth, and community leaders to recognize the importance of character education in preparing young individuals to play a role in determining the future of the United States;
Whereas effective character education is based on core ethical values, which form the foundation of a democratic society;
Whereas examples of character are trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, citizenship, and honesty;
Whereas elements of character transcend cultural, religious, and socioeconomic differences;
Whereas the character and conduct of youth reflect the character and conduct of society, and, therefore, every adult has the responsibility to teach and model ethical values, and every social institution has the responsibility to promote the development of good character;
Whereas Congress encourages individuals and organizations, especially those that have an interest in the education and training of
the young individuals in the United States, to adopt the elements of character, which are intrinsic to the well-being of individuals, communities, and society;
Whereas many schools in the United States recognize the need, and have taken steps, to integrate the values of their communities into teaching activities; and
Whereas the establishment of "National Character Counts Week", during which individuals, families, schools, youth organizations, religious institutions, civic groups, and other organizations focus on character education, is of great benefit to the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) designates the week beginning October 18, 2026, as "National Character Counts Week"; and
(2) calls upon the people of the United States and interested groups--
(A) to embrace the elements of character identified by local schools and communities, such as trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship; and
(B) to observe National Character Counts Week with appropriate ceremonies, programs, and activities.
Senate Resolution 928--To Authorize Testimony, Document Production, and Representation by the Senate Legal Counsel in the Case of United States V. Terry
Page S5178 · Official textMr. THUNE (for himself and Mr. Schumer) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:
Text printed in the Record (1,601 characters)
Whereas, in the case of United States v. Terry, No. 1:24-cr-427, pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the prosecution has requested the production of testimony and documents from Camilla Vogt, an employee of the office of Senator John Hickenlooper;
Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(1) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 288b(a) and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent current or former employees of the Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request for evidence relating to their official responsibilities;
Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the Senate; and
Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That Camilla Vogt, an employee of the office of Senator Hickenlooper is authorized to provide testimony and documents in the case of United States v. Terry, except concerning matters for which a privilege or objection should be asserted.
Sec. 2. The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to represent Ms. Vogt in connection with the testimony authorized in section one of this resolution.
Text of Amendments
Pages S5178–S5183 · Official textSA 6839. Ms. MURKOWSKI (for Mr. Schatz (for himself and Ms. Murkowski)) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 3383, to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (9,737 characters)
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Unlocking Native Lands and Opportunities for Commerce and Key Economic Developments Act of 2025".
SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF TRIBAL LEASES AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY
ACROSS INDIAN LAND.
(a) Leases of Trust or Restricted Lands.--The first section of the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539, chapter 615; 25 U.S.C. 415) (commonly known as the "Long-Term Leasing Act"), is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), in the second sentence, by inserting ", land held in trust for any other Indian tribe included on the most recent list published by the Secretary pursuant to section 104(a) of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5131(a))" after "Chehalis Reservation";
(2) by striking "That (a) any" and inserting the following:
"SECTION 1. LEASES OF TRUST OR RESTRICTED LANDS.
"(a) Authorized Purposes; Term; Approval by Secretary.--Any"; and
(3) in subsection (h)(1)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking "and the term of the lease does not exceed--" and inserting a period; and
(B) by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B).
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 2 of the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539, chapter 615; 25 U.S.C. 415a) (commonly known as the "Long-Term Leasing Act"), is amended by inserting "of the Interior" after "Secretary" each place it appears.
(c) Modifications of Rights-of-Way Across Indian Land.--The Act of February 5, 1948 (62 Stat. 17, chapter 45), is amended--
(1) in the first section (62 Stat. 17, chapter 45; 25 U.S.C. 323), by striking "That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, empowered to" and inserting the following:
"SECTION 1. RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR ALL PURPOSES ACROSS INDIAN
LAND.
"(a) Rights-of-Way.--The Secretary of the Interior may";
(2) in section 2 (62 Stat. 18, chapter 45; 25 U.S.C. 324), by striking "organized under the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984), as amended; the Act of May 1, 1936 (49 Stat. 1250); or the Act of June 26, 1936 (49 Stat. 1967),"; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
"SEC. 8. TRIBAL GRANTS OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY.
"(a) Rights-of-Way.--
"(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), an Indian tribe may grant a right-of-way over and across the Tribal land of the Indian tribe for any purpose.
"(2) Authority.--A right-of-way granted under paragraph (1) shall not require the approval of the Secretary of the Interior or a grant by the Secretary of the Interior under the section 1 if the right-of-way granted under paragraph (1) is executed in accordance with a Tribal regulation approved by the Secretary of the Interior under subsection (b).
"(b) Review of Tribal Regulations.--
"(1) Tribal regulation submission and approval.--
"(A) Submission.--An Indian tribe seeking to grant a right-of-way under subsection (a) shall submit for approval a Tribal regulation governing the granting of rights-of-way over and across the Tribal land of the Indian tribe.
"(B) Approval.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Interior shall have the authority to approve or disapprove any Tribal regulation submitted under subparagraph (A).
"(2) Considerations for approval.--
"(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall approve a Tribal regulation submitted under paragraph (1)(A), if the Tribal regulation--
"(i) is consistent with any regulations (or successor regulations) issued by the Secretary of the Interior under section 4;
"(ii) provides for an environmental review process that includes--
"(I) the identification and evaluation of any significant impacts the proposed action may have on the environment; and
"(II) a process for ensuring--
"(aa) that the public is informed of, and has a reasonable opportunity to comment on, any significant environmental impacts of the proposed action identified by the Indian tribe under subclause (I); and
"(bb) the Indian tribe provides a response to each relevant and substantive public comment on the significant environmental impacts identified by the Indian tribe under subclause (I) before the Indian tribe approves the right-of-way.
"(B) Statutory exemptions.--The Secretary of the Interior, in making an approval decision under this subsection, shall not be subject to--
"(i) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
"(ii) section 306108 of title 54, United States Code; or
"(iii) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
"(3) Review process.--
"(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Indian tribe submits a Tribal regulation to the Secretary of the Interior under paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary of the Interior shall--
"(i) review the Tribal regulation;
"(ii) approve or disapprove the Tribal regulation; and
"(iii) notify the Indian tribe that submitted the Tribal regulation of the approval or disapproval.
"(B) Written documentation.--If the Secretary of the Interior disapproves a Tribal regulation submitted under paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary of the Interior shall include with the disapproval notification under subparagraph (A)(iii) written documentation describing the basis for the disapproval.
"(C) Extension.--The Secretary of the Interior may, after consultation with the Indian tribe that submitted a Tribal regulation under paragraph (1)(A), extend the 180-day period described in subparagraph (A).
"(4) Federal environmental review.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3), if an Indian tribe carries out a project or activity funded by a Federal agency, the Indian tribe may rely on the environmental review process of the applicable Federal agency rather than any Tribal environmental review process required under this subsection.
"(c) Documentation.--An Indian tribe granting a right-of-way under subsection (a) shall provide to the Secretary of the Interior--
"(1) a copy of the right-of-way, including any amendments or renewals; and
"(2) if the right-of-way allows for compensation to be made directly to the Indian tribe, documentation of payments that are sufficient, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, as to enable the Secretary of the Interior to discharge the trust responsibility of the United States under subsection (d).
"(d) Trust Responsibility.--
"(1) In general.--The United States shall not be liable for losses sustained by any party to a right-of-way granted under subsection (a).
"(2) Authority of the secretary.--
"(A) In general.--Pursuant to the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to fulfill the trust obligation of the United States to the applicable Indian tribe under Federal law (including regulations), the Secretary of the Interior may, on reasonable notice from the applicable Indian tribe and at the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, enforce the provisions of, or cancel, any right-of-way granted by the Indian tribe under subsection (a).
"(B) Authority.--The enforcement or cancellation of a right-of-way under subparagraph (A) shall be conducted using regulatory procedures issued under section 6.
"(e) Compliance.--
"(1) In general.--An interested party, after exhaustion of any applicable Tribal remedies, may submit a petition to the Secretary of the Interior, at such time and in such form as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, to review the compliance of an applicable Indian tribe with a Tribal regulation approved by the Secretary of the Interior under subsection (b).
"(2) Violations.--If the Secretary of the Interior determines that a Tribal regulation was violated after conducting a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the Interior may take any action the Secretary of the Interior determines to be necessary to remedy the violation, including rescinding the approval of the Tribal regulation and reassuming responsibility for approving rights-of-way through the trust land of the applicable Indian tribe.
"(3) Documentation.--If the Secretary of the Interior determines that a Tribal regulation was violated after conducting a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the Interior shall--
"(A) provide written documentation, with respect to the Tribal regulation that has been violated, to the appropriate interested party and Indian tribe;
"(B) provide the applicable Indian tribe with a written notice of the alleged violation; and
"(C) prior to the exercise of any remedy, including rescinding the approval for the applicable Tribal regulation or reassuming responsibility for approving rights-of-way through the trust land of the applicable Indian tribe, provide the applicable Indian tribe with--
"(i) a hearing that is on the record; and
"(ii) a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation.
"(f) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section affects the application of any Tribal regulations issued under Federal environmental law.
"(g) Effect of Tribal Regulations.--An approved Tribal regulation under subsection (b) shall not preclude an Indian tribe from, in the discretion of the Indian tribe, consenting to the grant of a right-of-way by the Secretary of the Interior under the section 1.
"(h) Terms of Right-of-Way.--The compensation for, and terms of, a right-of-way granted under subsection (a) will be determined by--
"(1) negotiations by the Indian tribe; or
"(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.
"(i) Jurisdiction.--The grant of a right-of-way under subsection (a) does not waive the sovereign immunity of the Indian tribe or diminish the jurisdiction of that Indian tribe over the Tribal land subject to the right-of-way, unless otherwise provided in--
"(1) the grant of the right-of-way; or
"(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.".
______
SA 6840. Mr. VAN HOLLEN (for himself, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr. Booker, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Welch) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 9340, to amend the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to establish a Federal standard relating to the recovery of the full, incremental costs of upgrades that serve large-load customers, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (10,212 characters)
Redesignate section 2 as section 4. Insert after section 1 the following:
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) because of current energy policies and electricity market structures, households and businesses are subsidizing data center development, paying the way for data centers through rising energy bills;
(2) recent analysis indicates that data centers are set to more than double their electricity consumption, accounting for 6.7 percent to 12 percent of all energy demand by 2028, which is causing electricity prices to increase for ratepayers;
(3) ratepayers should not be forced to take on the financial risks and costs of new infrastructure investments needed to support projected data center energy demands;
(4) data center owners and operators should be held accountable for the increased energy costs that data centers are causing;
(5)(A) the uniquely large size, rapidly increasing pace, and uncertain nature of projected energy demand from data centers are impacting both grid reliability and the affordability of electricity;
(B) energy demand from data centers is also significantly impacting interstate commerce by putting a strain on the electric grid and causing reliability issues and energy costs to rise across State lines; and
(C) therefore, increased Federal oversight is necessary to ensure that the interconnection of data centers to the electric grid does not create reliability or affordability risks;
(6) data centers directly affect the transmission system and can increase transmission costs, regardless of whether they are connected directly to transmission facilities;
(7) any policy solutions seeking to hold data center owners and operators accountable as described in paragraph (4) should also seek to minimize the climate and environmental impacts of data center development while creating good-paying jobs;
(8) the Commission has authority, pursuant to the mandates to ensure just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory rates (as established under sections 205 and 206 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824d, 824e) (including the standards developed under those sections)) and grid reliability (as established under section 215 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 824o) (including the standards developed under that section)), to require grid operators to create "load queues" for data centers that incentivize certain practices, including payment for required system upgrades and voluntary load flexibility;
(9) grid operators, as part of their mandate to provide reliable transmission service, have the authority to create load queues specific to data centers that delay or deny interconnection in order to ensure reliability, and it is not "unduly discriminatory" to do so under the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.) because data centers, as a single customer class, constitute enough new load to overwhelm the electric grid if their interconnection to the electric grid is left unchecked; and
(10)(A) some States are implementing processes to create rate classes specific to data centers, which are necessary to protect ratepayers from unfair costs and unnecessary risk, given the uncertain nature of data center energy demand projections and the high costs associated with the energy demands of data centers; and
(B) rate classes specific to data centers should be adopted more broadly across all States to help ensure that, across the United States, energy system cost increases caused by data centers are paid for by data center owners and operators.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Commission.--The term "Commission" means the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
(2) Covered interconnection entity.--The term "covered interconnection entity" means--
(A) an Independent System Operator (as defined in section 3 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796));
(B) a Regional Transmission Organization (as defined in that section); and
(C) a transmitting utility (as defined in that section) that is responsible for managing data center load interconnection requests (or the appropriate regional grid planning entity for the transmitting utility (as determined by the Commission)).
(3) Data center.--The term "data center" means any facility, or group of facilities with the same owner located in the same utility area, that--
(A) primarily contains electronic equipment used to host information and information systems accessed by other systems or by users on other devices both in and outside of the State in which the facility or group of facilities is located;
(B) may be--
(i) a free-standing structure; or
(ii) a facility that--
(I) is within a larger structure; and
(II) uses environmental control equipment to maintain the proper conditions for the operation of electronic equipment;
(C) has an energy demand greater than 50 megawatts;
(D) meets such other criteria as the Commission determines to be appropriate for purposes of this Act, including anticircumvention provisions; and
(E) is not owned by the Federal Government.
(4) Data center load queue.--The term "data center load queue" means a load queue that--
(A) relates specifically to data center load interconnection requests; or
(B) relates to requests made by distribution utilities or load-serving entities (as those terms are defined in section 217(a) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824q(a))) to study impacts on the transmission system caused by the interconnection of data centers.
(5) Data center owner or operator.--The term "data center owner or operator" means any person, including a corporation, that owns, builds, or operates a data center.
(6) Facility used to mine cryptocurrency.--The term "facility used to mine cryptocurrency" means any facility, or group of facilities with the same owner located in the same utility area, that--
(A) is used to mine or create cryptocurrencies or other blockchain-based digital assets;
(B) may be--
(i) a free-standing structure; or
(ii) a facility that--
(I) is within a larger structure; and
(II) uses environmental control equipment to maintain the proper conditions for the operation of electronic equipment; and
(C) meets such other criteria, such as a minimum peak electricity demand, as the Commission determines to be appropriate for purposes of this Act.
(7) Labor organization.--The term "labor organization" has the meaning given the term in section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 152).
(8) Labor peace agreement.--The term "labor peace agreement" means a written agreement between an employer and a labor organization through which the employer guarantees that--
(A) the employer will be neutral regarding any of the employees of the employer seeking to be represented by the labor organization; and
(B) if employees seek to be represented by a labor organization, the employer shall recognize the labor organization as the exclusive bargaining representative on a showing that a majority of the employees choose to be represented by the labor organization.
(9) Load growth.--The term "load growth" means increasing demand for electricity.
(10) Load interconnection request.--The term "load interconnection request" means the request of a data center owner or operator to connect, or study the feasibility of connecting, a data center to the electric grid, whether at the transmission or distribution level.
(11) Organic load growth.--
(A) In general.--The term "organic load growth" means load growth that is attributable to increases in demand associated with economic or population growth, including with respect to hospitals, educational institutions, advanced manufacturing facilities, residential homes, electric vehicles, and other facilities, as determined by the Commission.
(B) Exclusion.--The term "organic load growth" does not include load growth that is attributable to--
(i) data centers; or
(ii) facilities used to mine cryptocurrency.
(12) Project labor agreement.--The term "project labor agreement" means a pre-hire collective bargaining agreement with 2 or more labor organizations of which building and construction employees are members that--
(A) establishes the terms and conditions of employment for a specific construction project; and
(B) is an agreement described in subsections (e) and (f) of section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 158).
(13) Qualifying battery energy storage system.--The term "qualifying battery energy storage system" means a utility-scale battery energy storage system that is connected to the electric grid and paid for by a data center owner or operator, including through a power purchase agreement or other bilateral contract, regardless of whether the battery energy storage system is onsite or offsite with respect to the data center.
(14) Qualifying load flexibility agreement.--The term "qualifying load flexibility agreement" means an agreement between a covered interconnection entity and 1 or more data center owners or operators--
(A) that--
(i) is implemented by the covered interconnection entity; and
(ii) complies with the minimum standards and guidelines established by the Commission under section 5(c); and
(B) pursuant to which--
(i) data centers may be interrupted by the covered interconnection entity; and
(ii) to the extent that the covered interconnection entity determines that load shedding, curtailments, or other grid protection is needed, data center service interruptions shall occur--
(I) before service interruptions for other grid users; and
(II) before emergency conditions occur, as defined in the emergency procedures established by the interconnection entity.
(15) Registered apprenticeship program.--The term "registered apprenticeship program" means an apprenticeship program registered under the Act of August 16, 1937 (commonly known as the "National Apprenticeship Act") (50 Stat. 664, chapter 663; 29 U.S.C. 50 et seq.), that meets the standards of parts 29 and 30 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act).
(16) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Energy.
Insert after section 4 (as so redesignated) the following:
SEC. 5.
Text printed in the Record (9,659 characters)
DATA CENTER LOAD QUEUES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall issue a rule requiring all covered interconnection entities to create, for the purpose of addressing reliability and affordability concerns from new data center loads, regardless of whether those loads are connecting directly to the transmission system or through a distribution utility, a data center load queue system--
(1) that gives priority for interconnection to data centers (including data center owners and operators) that, by implementing each of the strategies described in subsection (b), offset their electricity demand on the electric grid, reducing costs for all ratepayers, while also mitigating local air and noise pollution and providing good-paying job opportunities; and
(2) pursuant to which data centers are connected to the electric grid in a manner that does not interfere with serving organic load growth, which may include delaying or denying interconnection for a data center if the applicable covered interconnection entity determines that such interconnection is likely to adversely affect--
(A) the reliability or resource adequacy of the electric grid; or
(B) the affordability of electricity or electric capacity for users of the electric grid that are not data centers.
(b) Strategies Described.--The strategies referred to in subsection (a)(1) are the following:
(1) Bringing new, additional supply resources to the electric grid that--
(A) are designated for the service of, and paid for by, the data center owner or operator, including through a power purchase agreement or another bilateral contract;
(B) are deliverable to the location where the new data center is interconnecting;
(C) are maintained for the lifetime of the data center;
(D) have at least enough capacity--
(i) to fully serve the new data center; or
(ii) to serve that portion of the capacity need of the new data center that is not offset by 1 or more qualifying battery energy storage systems, virtual power plants, or qualifying load flexibility agreements;
(E) have a generation output that--
(i) is substantially similar to the temporal load profile of the data center during peak demand; or
(ii) is sufficient to fill any gaps in the temporal load profile of the data center during peak demand that are not offset by 1 or more qualifying battery energy storage systems, virtual power plants, or qualifying load flexibility agreements; and
(F) are low- or no-carbon forms of generation.
(2) Incorporating low- or no-carbon backup generation, which excludes diesel generation and may include behind-the-meter battery energy storage systems.
(3) Ensuring that, in the construction of the data center and any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2)--
(A) all laborers and mechanics employed by the data center owner or operator and contractors and subcontractors of the data center owner or operator, in the performance of construction, shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on projects of a character similar in the locality in which the construction project is located, as most recently determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code; and
(B) all contractors and subcontractors of the data center owner or operator use registered apprentices participating in registered apprenticeship programs.
(4) Ensuring that the operator of any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) agrees that the operator will use a labor peace agreement for the operation and maintenance of the energy supply resource.
(c) Qualifying Load Flexibility Agreements.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall establish minimum standards and guidelines for qualifying load flexibility agreements.
(2) Requirements.--The standards and guidelines established under paragraph (1) shall--
(A) reduce costs for ratepayers by minimizing the need for the build out of new generation and transmission; and
(B) ensure that qualifying load flexibility agreements can be effectively implemented by the covered interconnection entity.
(d) Priority.--For purposes of priority in a data center load queue under subsection
(a)(1), with respect to forms of generation described in paragraphs (1)(F) and (2) of subsection (b), priority shall be determined using a sliding scale pursuant to which additional priority is given for forms of generation having lower carbon intensity, such that the lower the carbon intensity of the applicable form of generation, the higher the priority given to the applicable data center in the data center load queue.
(e) Effect of Certain Agreements.--
(1) Contractor or subcontractor.--Any individual contractor or subcontractor of the data center owner or operator that is a signatory to a pre-hire collective bargaining agreement described in subsections (e) and (f) of section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 158) that covers construction work on the data center and any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid shall be deemed to be in compliance with subsection (b)(3).
(2) Project labor agreement.--If a project labor agreement is used to construct a data center and any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid, the data center (including the data center owner and operator) shall be deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of subsection (b)(3).
(f) Labor Standards.--With respect to the labor standards specified in subsection (b)(3)(A), the Secretary of Labor shall have the authority and functions set forth in Reorganization Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (64 Stat. 1267; 5 U.S.C. App.) and section 3145 of title 40, United States Code.
(g) Deadline for Compliance.--The Commission shall ensure compliance with the rule issued under subsection (a) by the date that is 1 year after the date on which the rule is issued.
(h) Prohibition.--On and after the effective date of the final rule issued under subsection (a), a data center that is not already interconnected with the electric grid may not interconnect with the electric grid unless the data center has fully advanced through the applicable data center load queue system created under that subsection.
SEC. 6. LOCAL TRANSMISSION COST ALLOCATION.
Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall direct each public utility (as defined in section 201(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824(e))) to file 1 or more tariff amendments pursuant to section 205 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 824d) that--
(1) allocate to each interconnecting data center local transmission upgrade costs that, but for the existence of the data center, would not be needed; and
(2) require data centers to pay transmission rates applicable to their rate class that reflect the embedded cost of the integrated grid, not including those local transmission upgrade costs that are required to be allocated to specific data centers under paragraph (1).
SEC. 7. CREATION OF APPROPRIATE RATE CLASSES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a program to provide grants and technical assistance to State regulatory authorities (as defined in section 3 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602)) and nonregulated electric utilities (as defined in that section) considering the standard established by paragraph (22) of section 111(d) of that Act (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)) to assist in the creation of appropriate rate classes to ensure that costs relating to the energy demands of data centers, including costs of generation, transmission, and distribution network upgrades, are not borne or subsidized by customers that are not data centers.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section.
SEC. 8. LOAD AND INTERCONNECTION FORECASTING.
(a) Technical Assistance.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a program to provide technical assistance to support the forecasting by covered interconnection entities of long-term load projections, particularly with respect to improving forecasting associated with data center load interconnection requests.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this subsection.
(b) Transparency and Disclosure.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to improve the forecasting of electricity demand and data center load interconnection requests by covered interconnection entities across the United States, the Commission shall establish transparency and disclosure requirements for data center load interconnection requests, including load interconnection requests occurring at the transmission level and load interconnection requests occurring at the distribution level.
(2) Requirement.--The requirements established under paragraph (1) shall seek to reduce duplicative, speculative, and other requests that impede accurate forecasting, including by imposing new transparency and information-sharing requirements for utilities and covered interconnection entities to implement with respect to data center load interconnection requests, as the Commission determines to be appropriate.
______
SA 6841. Mr. KELLY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4784, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (7,011 characters)
At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:
SEC. 1094. BILATERAL RAPID RESPONSE PROTOCOL.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the "Nicholas Douglas Quets United States-Mexico Rapid Response for Victims of Crime Act".
(b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On October 18, 2024, while traveling from Arizona along the southern border in the Mexican state of Sonora near Puerto Penasco, Nicholas Quets was attacked and shot by armed criminals associated with the Sinaloa Cartel at an unauthorized cartel-controlled highway checkpoint, resulting in the tragic death of the 31-year-old American.
(2) The brutal murder of Nicholas Quets reflects the ongoing threat posed by transnational criminal organizations and cartel violence in the region.
(3) The violence perpetrated by drug cartels and other criminal organizations endangers innocent civilians, undermines the rule of law, and threatens the safety of United States citizens traveling abroad.
(4) Bilateral coordination in investigations like that of Nicholas Quets' death can often be delayed or incomplete, which may deny the administration of justice for victims and their families.
(5) Each year, millions of United States citizens travel to Mexico for tourism, work, and family purposes.
(6) In certain cases involving serious crimes, including homicide, kidnapping, and organized criminal violence, delays or gaps in coordination between authorities may hinder investigations and the delivery of justice for victims and their families.
(7) Enhanced bilateral coordination, communication, and investigative cooperation is essential to ensure effective responses to serious crimes involving United States citizens in Mexico.
(c) Statement of Policy.--It shall be the policy of the United States to collaborate in bilateral rapid response to ensure efficient communication and coordination between United States and Mexican authorities when responding to serious crimes involving United States citizens in Mexico.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term "appropriate congressional committees" means--
(A) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(B) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; the
(D) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
(2) Protocol.--The term "Protocol" means the bilateral rapid response protocol for serious crimes committed against United States citizens in Mexico that may be established pursuant to subsection (e).
(3) Serious crime.--The term "serious crime" has the meaning given such term in section 103(14) of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (34 U.S.C. 11103(14))
(e) Establishment.--In order to carry out the policy described in subsection (c), the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General, may engage with the Government of Mexico to negotiate and establish a bilateral rapid response protocol for serious crimes committed against United States citizens in Mexico.
(f) Purpose.--The Protocol is intended to facilitate timely coordination between United States and Mexican authorities in responding to and investigating serious crimes committed against United States citizens in Mexico.
(g) Recommended Elements.--In negotiating the Protocol, the Secretary of State may include procedures that provide--
(1) mechanisms for the prompt notification of relevant United States and Mexican authorities when a serious crime involving a United States citizen occurs;
(2) secure and reliable communication channels between designated law enforcement and .059diplomatic authorities in both countries;
(3) procedures to ensure the timely securing of crime scenes and the protection of relevant physical evidence;
(4) agreed-upon standards and procedures for preserving and documenting evidence in a manner that supports potential prosecutions in either country's jurisdiction;
(5) procedures to facilitate the timely sharing of investigative leads, intelligence, and forensic information between United States and Mexican authorities, consistent with the laws of each country;
(6) the designation of appropriate points of contact within the Government of Mexico and procedures to facilitate requests for international extradition and timely coordination for extradition to United States;
(7) the designation of appropriate points of contact within relevant United States and Mexican agencies responsible for coordinating responses to incidents covered by the Protocol;
(8) the designation of a point of contact within the United States Government responsible for communicating with the victim or the victim's family and providing timely updates regarding available assistance and investigative developments, as appropriate and consistent with the need to protect the integrity of any ongoing investigation, prosecution, or other law enforcement proceeding;
(9) appropriate substantive and procedural safeguards for the protection of privacy and civil liberties with respect to information shared pursuant to the Protocol;
(10) procedures for coordination between United States consular officials and Mexican authorities regarding support for victims and their families; and
(11) opportunities for joint training, planning, or exercises to ensure effective implementation of the Protocol.
(h) Progress Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter until the Protocol is established, the Secretary of State shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that describes--
(1) the progress made toward negotiating the Protocol;
(2) the status of cooperation with the Government of Mexico relating to crimes against United States citizens while they are in Mexico; and
(3) any additional legislative or diplomatic steps the Secretary determines would improve coordination and accountability in such cases.
(i) Implementation Report.--Not later than 180 days after the establishment of the Protocol, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of State shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that describes--
(1) the status of the implementation of such protocol;
(2) actions taken by United States and Mexican authorities under the protocol;
(3) the extent to which the protocol has improved coordination in covered cases; and
(4) any recommendations for improving the protocol.
(j) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be construed--
(1) to limit the sovereignty of the United States or of Mexico;
(2) to require the Government of Mexico to adopt investigative procedures inconsistent with existing Mexican law;
(3) to alter the existing authorities of United States law enforcement or consular officials; or
(4) to limit or otherwise affect any right or protection afforded to an individual under the Constitution or laws of the United States.
SA 6842. Mr. KELLY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4784, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (8,577 characters)
At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:
SEC. 1094. BORDER TRAVEL SAFETY.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the "Nicholas Douglas Quets Border Travel Safety Act".
(b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On October 18, 2024, while traveling from Arizona along the southern border in the Mexican state of Sonora near Puerto Penasco, Nicholas Quets was attacked and shot by armed criminals associated with the Sinaloa Cartel at an unauthorized cartel-controlled highway checkpoint, which resulted in the tragic death of the 31-year-old American.
(2) The brutal murder of Nicholas Quets reflects the ongoing threat posed by transnational criminal organizations and cartel violence in the region.
(3) Nicholas Quets was shot while traveling along the Altar-Caborca highway (Federal Highway 2) in Sonora, which is frequently listed under a "Reconsider Travel" advisory due to cartel activity in the area.
(4) The Department of State issues Travel Advisories to inform United States citizens and other travelers of safety and security risks in foreign countries and regions.
(5) Department of State Travel Advisories identify certain foreign regions, including areas near United States land borders, that present elevated safety or security risks due to criminal activity, violence, kidnapping, or other threats.
(6) Individuals entering or departing the United States through land ports of entry may not be aware that nearby areas identified in Department of State Travel Advisories pose heightened safety or security risks.
(7) Clear and visible signage at land ports of entry and surrounding areas would improve traveler awareness of such risks and promote public safety.
(c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that clear and visible signage displaying travel advisories at land ports of entry along the land boundary between the United States and Mexico are necessary to improve traveler awareness of safety or security risks due to criminal activity, violence, kidnapping, or other threats.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term "appropriate congressional committees" means--
(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate;
(B) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives; and
(D) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
(2) Travel advisory.--The term "Travel Advisory" means the country-specific or region-specific safety advisory issued by the Department of State to inform travelers of security risks abroad.
(e) Warning Signage for Travelers Near Land Ports of Entry Along the Southern Border.--
(1) Establishment.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Administrator of the General Services Administration, shall establish and carry out a program to install and maintain warning signage informing travelers of dangerous areas or routes near the southern border of the United States that have been identified in relevant Department of State Travel Advisories.
(2) Responsibilities of secretary of state.--The Secretary of State shall--
(A) identify areas or routes near the United States land border with Mexico that are designated as dangerous in any Department of State Travel Advisory;
(B) provide the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection with updated advisory information necessary for the content of warning signage; and
(C) provide the Secretary of Homeland Security with the appropriate content and messaging of such signage.
(3) Coordination.--In carrying out this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall coordinate with the Secretary of State, appropriate State transportation and public safety agencies, and relevant State, local, and tribal government officials.
(f) Placement of Signage.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall, to the maximum extent practicable, install, maintain, and update warning signage described in this section.
(2) Locations.--Warning signage developed pursuant to this section shall--
(A) be placed--
(i) at appropriate land ports of entry along the United States international boundary with Mexico;
(ii) on appropriate roadways and routes approaching, and in areas immediately adjacent to, such ports of entry where travelers are likely to cross the international boundary;
(iii) at any additional locations determined appropriate by the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with State and local transportation authorities, to ensure adequate traveler awareness;
(iv) in locations that are clearly visible to motorists and pedestrians; and
(v) in sufficient proximity to allow travelers to make informed travel decisions; and
(B) include the words "pursuant to the Nicholas Douglas Quets Border Travel Safety Act".
(3) Coordination with state and local authorities.--In placing signage pursuant to this subsection, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate with, and may enter into agreements, as may be necessary, with--
(A) State departments of transportation;
(B) local government officials; and
(C) other appropriate authorities responsible for roadway infrastructure near the international border of the United States.
(4) Content of signage.--Signage required under this section shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
(A) clearly warn travelers of nearby areas or routes identified as dangerous in Department of State Travel Advisories;
(B) provide a reference to additional safety information, including the Department of State travel advisory website or a QR code linking to such information;
(C) be displayed in a format that can be swiftly and easily updated to reflect changes to applicable Department of State Travel Advisories, and may include risk indicators and incident alerts from the Department of State;
(D) be displayed in English and Spanish, and any additional languages the Secretary, in consultation with the Department of State, determines appropriate; and
(E) include any other safety information the Secretary of State determines appropriate.
(g) Reviews and Updates.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall--
(A) annually review warning signage to ensure accuracy and visibility; and
(B) update such signage as necessary to reflect changes in Department of State Travel Advisories.
(2) Identification of critical changes.--The Secretary of State shall notify the Secretary of Homeland Security whenever critical changes have occurred that require warning signage to be updated.
(h) Reports to Congress.--
(1) Implementation report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that describes--
(A) the implementation of the signage program required under this section;
(B) the locations where signage has been installed;
(C) plans for updating such signage; and
(D) any recommendations for improving traveler awareness of dangerous areas identified in Travel Advisories.
(2) GAO report.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that--
(A) describes the efficacy of the travel advisory warnings for travelers; and
(B) indicates whether there are modernizations to warning delivery that the Department of State or the Department of Homeland Security could undertake to ensure travelers have adequate awareness to potential travel-related dangers.
(i) No Additional Appropriations.--
(1) No additional funds authorized.--No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section.
(2) Use of existing resources.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State shall carry out their respective responsibilities under this section using amounts otherwise appropriated or made available to their respective departments.
(j) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this Act may be construed as authorizing the use of force against Mexico or any entity or individual within Mexico.
______
SA 6843. Mr. THUNE (for Mr. Peters) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 528, to reauthorize the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, and for other purposes; as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
Text printed in the Record (481 characters)
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Act of 2026" or the "GLRI Act of 2026".
SEC. 2. GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE.
Section 118(c)(7)(J) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(7)(J)) is amended by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:
"(i) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this paragraph $475,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2030.".
______
SA 6844. Mr. THUNE (for Ms. Cortez Masto) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1574, to amend the Stored Communications Act to include Tribal courts as courts of competent jurisdiction; as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
Text printed in the Record (4,426 characters)
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Tribal Access to Electronic Evidence Act".
SEC. 2. TRIBAL COURTS AS COURTS OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION
UNDER STORED COMMUNICATIONS ACT.
(a) Definitions.--Section 2711 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking "or" at the end;
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
"(C) a Tribal court; or"; and
(D) in subparagraph (D), as so redesignated, by striking "and" at the end; and
(2) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
"(4) the term `governmental entity' means a department or agency of--
"(A) the United States;
"(B) any State or political subdivision thereof; or
"(C) any Indian Tribe or political subdivision thereof;
"(5) the term `Indian Tribe' means any Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, community, component band, or component reservation individually identified (including parenthetically) on the most recent list published by the Secretary of the Interior under section 104 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5131); and
"(6) the term `Tribal court' means a court of general criminal jurisdiction of an Indian Tribe authorized by the law of that Indian Tribe to issue search warrants.".
(b) Required Disclosure of Customer Communications or Records.--Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking the first sentence and inserting the following:
"(1) In storage 180 days or less.--A governmental entity may require the disclosure by a provider of electronic communication service of the contents of a wire or electronic communication, that is in electronic storage in an electronic communications system for 180 days or less, only pursuant to a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction--
"(A) issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure;
"(B) in the case of a State court, issued using State warrant procedures;
"(C) in the case of a court-martial or other proceeding under chapter 47 of title 10 (the Uniform Code of Military Justice), issued under section 846 of that title, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the President); or
"(D) in the case of a Tribal court, issued using warrant procedures that comply with section 202(a)(2) of Public Law 90-284 (commonly known as the `Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968') (25 U.S.C. 1302(a)(2)).
"(2) In storage more than 180 days.--"; and
(B) in paragraph (2), as so designated, by striking "one hundred and eighty days" and inserting "180 days";
(2) in subsection (b)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking "using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure" and all that follows through "prescribed by the President)" and inserting "in accordance with subsection (a)(1)"; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking "or State" each place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal"; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking "using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure" and all that follows through "prescribed by the President)" and inserting "in accordance with subsection (a)(1)"; and
(B) in paragraph (2), in the undesignated matter following subparagraph (F), by striking "or State" each place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal".
(c) Delayed Notice.--Section 2705(a)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking "or State" each place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal".
(d) Civil Action.--Section 2707(g) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the second sentence, by inserting "Tribal," after "State,".
(e) Wrongful Disclosure of Video Tape Rental or Sale Records.--Section 2710 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2)(C), by inserting after "an equivalent State warrant," the following: "a warrant issued by a Tribal court using warrant procedures that comply with section 202(a)(2) of Public Law 90-284 (commonly known as the `Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968') (25 U.S.C. 1302(a)(2)),"; and
(2) in subsection (d), by striking "a State, or a political subdivision of a State" and inserting "a State or a political subdivision thereof, or an Indian Tribe or a political subdivision thereof".
Text of Senate Amendment 6839
Pages S5178–S5179 · Official textSA 6839. Ms. MURKOWSKI (for Mr. Schatz (for himself and Ms. Murkowski)) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 3383, to amend the Act of August 9, 1955, to make improvements to that Act, and for other purposes; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (9,729 characters)
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Unlocking Native Lands and Opportunities for Commerce and Key Economic Developments Act of 2025".
SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF TRIBAL LEASES AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY
ACROSS INDIAN LAND.
(a) Leases of Trust or Restricted Lands.--The first section of the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539, chapter 615; 25 U.S.C. 415) (commonly known as the "Long-Term Leasing Act"), is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), in the second sentence, by inserting ", land held in trust for any other Indian tribe included on the most recent list published by the Secretary pursuant to section 104(a) of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5131(a))" after "Chehalis Reservation";
(2) by striking "That (a) any" and inserting the following:
"SECTION 1. LEASES OF TRUST OR RESTRICTED LANDS.
"(a) Authorized Purposes; Term; Approval by Secretary.--Any"; and
(3) in subsection (h)(1)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking "and the term of the lease does not exceed--" and inserting a period; and
(B) by striking subparagraphs (A) and (B).
(b) Technical Correction.--Section 2 of the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 539, chapter 615; 25 U.S.C. 415a) (commonly known as the "Long-Term Leasing Act"), is amended by inserting "of the Interior" after "Secretary" each place it appears.
(c) Modifications of Rights-of-Way Across Indian Land.--The Act of February 5, 1948 (62 Stat. 17, chapter 45), is amended--
(1) in the first section (62 Stat. 17, chapter 45; 25 U.S.C. 323), by striking "That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, empowered to" and inserting the following:
"SECTION 1. RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR ALL PURPOSES ACROSS INDIAN
LAND.
"(a) Rights-of-Way.--The Secretary of the Interior may";
(2) in section 2 (62 Stat. 18, chapter 45; 25 U.S.C. 324), by striking "organized under the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984), as amended; the Act of May 1, 1936 (49 Stat. 1250); or the Act of June 26, 1936 (49 Stat. 1967),"; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
"SEC. 8. TRIBAL GRANTS OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY.
"(a) Rights-of-Way.--
"(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), an Indian tribe may grant a right-of-way over and across the Tribal land of the Indian tribe for any purpose.
"(2) Authority.--A right-of-way granted under paragraph (1) shall not require the approval of the Secretary of the Interior or a grant by the Secretary of the Interior under the section 1 if the right-of-way granted under paragraph (1) is executed in accordance with a Tribal regulation approved by the Secretary of the Interior under subsection (b).
"(b) Review of Tribal Regulations.--
"(1) Tribal regulation submission and approval.--
"(A) Submission.--An Indian tribe seeking to grant a right-of-way under subsection (a) shall submit for approval a Tribal regulation governing the granting of rights-of-way over and across the Tribal land of the Indian tribe.
"(B) Approval.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of the Interior shall have the authority to approve or disapprove any Tribal regulation submitted under subparagraph (A).
"(2) Considerations for approval.--
"(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall approve a Tribal regulation submitted under paragraph (1)(A), if the Tribal regulation--
"(i) is consistent with any regulations (or successor regulations) issued by the Secretary of the Interior under section 4;
"(ii) provides for an environmental review process that includes--
"(I) the identification and evaluation of any significant impacts the proposed action may have on the environment; and
"(II) a process for ensuring--
"(aa) that the public is informed of, and has a reasonable opportunity to comment on, any significant environmental impacts of the proposed action identified by the Indian tribe under subclause (I); and
"(bb) the Indian tribe provides a response to each relevant and substantive public comment on the significant environmental impacts identified by the Indian tribe under subclause (I) before the Indian tribe approves the right-of-way.
"(B) Statutory exemptions.--The Secretary of the Interior, in making an approval decision under this subsection, shall not be subject to--
"(i) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
"(ii) section 306108 of title 54, United States Code; or
"(iii) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
"(3) Review process.--
"(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Indian tribe submits a Tribal regulation to the Secretary of the Interior under paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary of the Interior shall--
"(i) review the Tribal regulation;
"(ii) approve or disapprove the Tribal regulation; and
"(iii) notify the Indian tribe that submitted the Tribal regulation of the approval or disapproval.
"(B) Written documentation.--If the Secretary of the Interior disapproves a Tribal regulation submitted under paragraph (1)(A), the Secretary of the Interior shall include with the disapproval notification under subparagraph (A)(iii) written documentation describing the basis for the disapproval.
"(C) Extension.--The Secretary of the Interior may, after consultation with the Indian tribe that submitted a Tribal regulation under paragraph (1)(A), extend the 180-day period described in subparagraph (A).
"(4) Federal environmental review.--Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3), if an Indian tribe carries out a project or activity funded by a Federal agency, the Indian tribe may rely on the environmental review process of the applicable Federal agency rather than any Tribal environmental review process required under this subsection.
"(c) Documentation.--An Indian tribe granting a right-of-way under subsection (a) shall provide to the Secretary of the Interior--
"(1) a copy of the right-of-way, including any amendments or renewals; and
"(2) if the right-of-way allows for compensation to be made directly to the Indian tribe, documentation of payments that are sufficient, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, as to enable the Secretary of the Interior to discharge the trust responsibility of the United States under subsection (d).
"(d) Trust Responsibility.--
"(1) In general.--The United States shall not be liable for losses sustained by any party to a right-of-way granted under subsection (a).
"(2) Authority of the secretary.--
"(A) In general.--Pursuant to the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to fulfill the trust obligation of the United States to the applicable Indian tribe under Federal law (including regulations), the Secretary of the Interior may, on reasonable notice from the applicable Indian tribe and at the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, enforce the provisions of, or cancel, any right-of-way granted by the Indian tribe under subsection (a).
"(B) Authority.--The enforcement or cancellation of a right-of-way under subparagraph (A) shall be conducted using regulatory procedures issued under section 6.
"(e) Compliance.--
"(1) In general.--An interested party, after exhaustion of any applicable Tribal remedies, may submit a petition to the Secretary of the Interior, at such time and in such form as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, to review the compliance of an applicable Indian tribe with a Tribal regulation approved by the Secretary of the Interior under subsection (b).
"(2) Violations.--If the Secretary of the Interior determines that a Tribal regulation was violated after conducting a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the Interior may take any action the Secretary of the Interior determines to be necessary to remedy the violation, including rescinding the approval of the Tribal regulation and reassuming responsibility for approving rights-of-way through the trust land of the applicable Indian tribe.
"(3) Documentation.--If the Secretary of the Interior determines that a Tribal regulation was violated after conducting a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the Interior shall--
"(A) provide written documentation, with respect to the Tribal regulation that has been violated, to the appropriate interested party and Indian tribe;
"(B) provide the applicable Indian tribe with a written notice of the alleged violation; and
"(C) prior to the exercise of any remedy, including rescinding the approval for the applicable Tribal regulation or reassuming responsibility for approving rights-of-way through the trust land of the applicable Indian tribe, provide the applicable Indian tribe with--
"(i) a hearing that is on the record; and
"(ii) a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation.
"(f) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this section affects the application of any Tribal regulations issued under Federal environmental law.
"(g) Effect of Tribal Regulations.--An approved Tribal regulation under subsection (b) shall not preclude an Indian tribe from, in the discretion of the Indian tribe, consenting to the grant of a right-of-way by the Secretary of the Interior under the section 1.
"(h) Terms of Right-of-Way.--The compensation for, and terms of, a right-of-way granted under subsection (a) will be determined by--
"(1) negotiations by the Indian tribe; or
"(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.
"(i) Jurisdiction.--The grant of a right-of-way under subsection (a) does not waive the sovereign immunity of the Indian tribe or diminish the jurisdiction of that Indian tribe over the Tribal land subject to the right-of-way, unless otherwise provided in--
"(1) the grant of the right-of-way; or
"(2) the regulations of the Indian tribe.".
Text of Senate Amendment 6840
Pages S5179–S5181 · Official textSA 6840. Mr. VAN HOLLEN (for himself, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr. Booker, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Welch) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 9340, to amend the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to establish a Federal standard relating to the recovery of the full, incremental costs of upgrades that serve large-load customers, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (10,212 characters)
Redesignate section 2 as section 4. Insert after section 1 the following:
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) because of current energy policies and electricity market structures, households and businesses are subsidizing data center development, paying the way for data centers through rising energy bills;
(2) recent analysis indicates that data centers are set to more than double their electricity consumption, accounting for 6.7 percent to 12 percent of all energy demand by 2028, which is causing electricity prices to increase for ratepayers;
(3) ratepayers should not be forced to take on the financial risks and costs of new infrastructure investments needed to support projected data center energy demands;
(4) data center owners and operators should be held accountable for the increased energy costs that data centers are causing;
(5)(A) the uniquely large size, rapidly increasing pace, and uncertain nature of projected energy demand from data centers are impacting both grid reliability and the affordability of electricity;
(B) energy demand from data centers is also significantly impacting interstate commerce by putting a strain on the electric grid and causing reliability issues and energy costs to rise across State lines; and
(C) therefore, increased Federal oversight is necessary to ensure that the interconnection of data centers to the electric grid does not create reliability or affordability risks;
(6) data centers directly affect the transmission system and can increase transmission costs, regardless of whether they are connected directly to transmission facilities;
(7) any policy solutions seeking to hold data center owners and operators accountable as described in paragraph (4) should also seek to minimize the climate and environmental impacts of data center development while creating good-paying jobs;
(8) the Commission has authority, pursuant to the mandates to ensure just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory rates (as established under sections 205 and 206 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824d, 824e) (including the standards developed under those sections)) and grid reliability (as established under section 215 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 824o) (including the standards developed under that section)), to require grid operators to create "load queues" for data centers that incentivize certain practices, including payment for required system upgrades and voluntary load flexibility;
(9) grid operators, as part of their mandate to provide reliable transmission service, have the authority to create load queues specific to data centers that delay or deny interconnection in order to ensure reliability, and it is not "unduly discriminatory" to do so under the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.) because data centers, as a single customer class, constitute enough new load to overwhelm the electric grid if their interconnection to the electric grid is left unchecked; and
(10)(A) some States are implementing processes to create rate classes specific to data centers, which are necessary to protect ratepayers from unfair costs and unnecessary risk, given the uncertain nature of data center energy demand projections and the high costs associated with the energy demands of data centers; and
(B) rate classes specific to data centers should be adopted more broadly across all States to help ensure that, across the United States, energy system cost increases caused by data centers are paid for by data center owners and operators.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Commission.--The term "Commission" means the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
(2) Covered interconnection entity.--The term "covered interconnection entity" means--
(A) an Independent System Operator (as defined in section 3 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796));
(B) a Regional Transmission Organization (as defined in that section); and
(C) a transmitting utility (as defined in that section) that is responsible for managing data center load interconnection requests (or the appropriate regional grid planning entity for the transmitting utility (as determined by the Commission)).
(3) Data center.--The term "data center" means any facility, or group of facilities with the same owner located in the same utility area, that--
(A) primarily contains electronic equipment used to host information and information systems accessed by other systems or by users on other devices both in and outside of the State in which the facility or group of facilities is located;
(B) may be--
(i) a free-standing structure; or
(ii) a facility that--
(I) is within a larger structure; and
(II) uses environmental control equipment to maintain the proper conditions for the operation of electronic equipment;
(C) has an energy demand greater than 50 megawatts;
(D) meets such other criteria as the Commission determines to be appropriate for purposes of this Act, including anticircumvention provisions; and
(E) is not owned by the Federal Government.
(4) Data center load queue.--The term "data center load queue" means a load queue that--
(A) relates specifically to data center load interconnection requests; or
(B) relates to requests made by distribution utilities or load-serving entities (as those terms are defined in section 217(a) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824q(a))) to study impacts on the transmission system caused by the interconnection of data centers.
(5) Data center owner or operator.--The term "data center owner or operator" means any person, including a corporation, that owns, builds, or operates a data center.
(6) Facility used to mine cryptocurrency.--The term "facility used to mine cryptocurrency" means any facility, or group of facilities with the same owner located in the same utility area, that--
(A) is used to mine or create cryptocurrencies or other blockchain-based digital assets;
(B) may be--
(i) a free-standing structure; or
(ii) a facility that--
(I) is within a larger structure; and
(II) uses environmental control equipment to maintain the proper conditions for the operation of electronic equipment; and
(C) meets such other criteria, such as a minimum peak electricity demand, as the Commission determines to be appropriate for purposes of this Act.
(7) Labor organization.--The term "labor organization" has the meaning given the term in section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 152).
(8) Labor peace agreement.--The term "labor peace agreement" means a written agreement between an employer and a labor organization through which the employer guarantees that--
(A) the employer will be neutral regarding any of the employees of the employer seeking to be represented by the labor organization; and
(B) if employees seek to be represented by a labor organization, the employer shall recognize the labor organization as the exclusive bargaining representative on a showing that a majority of the employees choose to be represented by the labor organization.
(9) Load growth.--The term "load growth" means increasing demand for electricity.
(10) Load interconnection request.--The term "load interconnection request" means the request of a data center owner or operator to connect, or study the feasibility of connecting, a data center to the electric grid, whether at the transmission or distribution level.
(11) Organic load growth.--
(A) In general.--The term "organic load growth" means load growth that is attributable to increases in demand associated with economic or population growth, including with respect to hospitals, educational institutions, advanced manufacturing facilities, residential homes, electric vehicles, and other facilities, as determined by the Commission.
(B) Exclusion.--The term "organic load growth" does not include load growth that is attributable to--
(i) data centers; or
(ii) facilities used to mine cryptocurrency.
(12) Project labor agreement.--The term "project labor agreement" means a pre-hire collective bargaining agreement with 2 or more labor organizations of which building and construction employees are members that--
(A) establishes the terms and conditions of employment for a specific construction project; and
(B) is an agreement described in subsections (e) and (f) of section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 158).
(13) Qualifying battery energy storage system.--The term "qualifying battery energy storage system" means a utility-scale battery energy storage system that is connected to the electric grid and paid for by a data center owner or operator, including through a power purchase agreement or other bilateral contract, regardless of whether the battery energy storage system is onsite or offsite with respect to the data center.
(14) Qualifying load flexibility agreement.--The term "qualifying load flexibility agreement" means an agreement between a covered interconnection entity and 1 or more data center owners or operators--
(A) that--
(i) is implemented by the covered interconnection entity; and
(ii) complies with the minimum standards and guidelines established by the Commission under section 5(c); and
(B) pursuant to which--
(i) data centers may be interrupted by the covered interconnection entity; and
(ii) to the extent that the covered interconnection entity determines that load shedding, curtailments, or other grid protection is needed, data center service interruptions shall occur--
(I) before service interruptions for other grid users; and
(II) before emergency conditions occur, as defined in the emergency procedures established by the interconnection entity.
(15) Registered apprenticeship program.--The term "registered apprenticeship program" means an apprenticeship program registered under the Act of August 16, 1937 (commonly known as the "National Apprenticeship Act") (50 Stat. 664, chapter 663; 29 U.S.C. 50 et seq.), that meets the standards of parts 29 and 30 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of this Act).
(16) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Energy.
Insert after section 4 (as so redesignated) the following:
SEC. 5.
Text printed in the Record (9,651 characters)
DATA CENTER LOAD QUEUES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall issue a rule requiring all covered interconnection entities to create, for the purpose of addressing reliability and affordability concerns from new data center loads, regardless of whether those loads are connecting directly to the transmission system or through a distribution utility, a data center load queue system--
(1) that gives priority for interconnection to data centers (including data center owners and operators) that, by implementing each of the strategies described in subsection (b), offset their electricity demand on the electric grid, reducing costs for all ratepayers, while also mitigating local air and noise pollution and providing good-paying job opportunities; and
(2) pursuant to which data centers are connected to the electric grid in a manner that does not interfere with serving organic load growth, which may include delaying or denying interconnection for a data center if the applicable covered interconnection entity determines that such interconnection is likely to adversely affect--
(A) the reliability or resource adequacy of the electric grid; or
(B) the affordability of electricity or electric capacity for users of the electric grid that are not data centers.
(b) Strategies Described.--The strategies referred to in subsection (a)(1) are the following:
(1) Bringing new, additional supply resources to the electric grid that--
(A) are designated for the service of, and paid for by, the data center owner or operator, including through a power purchase agreement or another bilateral contract;
(B) are deliverable to the location where the new data center is interconnecting;
(C) are maintained for the lifetime of the data center;
(D) have at least enough capacity--
(i) to fully serve the new data center; or
(ii) to serve that portion of the capacity need of the new data center that is not offset by 1 or more qualifying battery energy storage systems, virtual power plants, or qualifying load flexibility agreements;
(E) have a generation output that--
(i) is substantially similar to the temporal load profile of the data center during peak demand; or
(ii) is sufficient to fill any gaps in the temporal load profile of the data center during peak demand that are not offset by 1 or more qualifying battery energy storage systems, virtual power plants, or qualifying load flexibility agreements; and
(F) are low- or no-carbon forms of generation.
(2) Incorporating low- or no-carbon backup generation, which excludes diesel generation and may include behind-the-meter battery energy storage systems.
(3) Ensuring that, in the construction of the data center and any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2)--
(A) all laborers and mechanics employed by the data center owner or operator and contractors and subcontractors of the data center owner or operator, in the performance of construction, shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on projects of a character similar in the locality in which the construction project is located, as most recently determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code; and
(B) all contractors and subcontractors of the data center owner or operator use registered apprentices participating in registered apprenticeship programs.
(4) Ensuring that the operator of any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (2) agrees that the operator will use a labor peace agreement for the operation and maintenance of the energy supply resource.
(c) Qualifying Load Flexibility Agreements.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall establish minimum standards and guidelines for qualifying load flexibility agreements.
(2) Requirements.--The standards and guidelines established under paragraph (1) shall--
(A) reduce costs for ratepayers by minimizing the need for the build out of new generation and transmission; and
(B) ensure that qualifying load flexibility agreements can be effectively implemented by the covered interconnection entity.
(d) Priority.--For purposes of priority in a data center load queue under subsection
(a)(1), with respect to forms of generation described in paragraphs (1)(F) and (2) of subsection (b), priority shall be determined using a sliding scale pursuant to which additional priority is given for forms of generation having lower carbon intensity, such that the lower the carbon intensity of the applicable form of generation, the higher the priority given to the applicable data center in the data center load queue.
(e) Effect of Certain Agreements.--
(1) Contractor or subcontractor.--Any individual contractor or subcontractor of the data center owner or operator that is a signatory to a pre-hire collective bargaining agreement described in subsections (e) and (f) of section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 158) that covers construction work on the data center and any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid shall be deemed to be in compliance with subsection (b)(3).
(2) Project labor agreement.--If a project labor agreement is used to construct a data center and any new energy supply resource that the data center brings to the electric grid, the data center (including the data center owner and operator) shall be deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of subsection (b)(3).
(f) Labor Standards.--With respect to the labor standards specified in subsection (b)(3)(A), the Secretary of Labor shall have the authority and functions set forth in Reorganization Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (64 Stat. 1267; 5 U.S.C. App.) and section 3145 of title 40, United States Code.
(g) Deadline for Compliance.--The Commission shall ensure compliance with the rule issued under subsection (a) by the date that is 1 year after the date on which the rule is issued.
(h) Prohibition.--On and after the effective date of the final rule issued under subsection (a), a data center that is not already interconnected with the electric grid may not interconnect with the electric grid unless the data center has fully advanced through the applicable data center load queue system created under that subsection.
SEC. 6. LOCAL TRANSMISSION COST ALLOCATION.
Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall direct each public utility (as defined in section 201(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824(e))) to file 1 or more tariff amendments pursuant to section 205 of that Act (16 U.S.C. 824d) that--
(1) allocate to each interconnecting data center local transmission upgrade costs that, but for the existence of the data center, would not be needed; and
(2) require data centers to pay transmission rates applicable to their rate class that reflect the embedded cost of the integrated grid, not including those local transmission upgrade costs that are required to be allocated to specific data centers under paragraph (1).
SEC. 7. CREATION OF APPROPRIATE RATE CLASSES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a program to provide grants and technical assistance to State regulatory authorities (as defined in section 3 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2602)) and nonregulated electric utilities (as defined in that section) considering the standard established by paragraph (22) of section 111(d) of that Act (16 U.S.C. 2621(d)) to assist in the creation of appropriate rate classes to ensure that costs relating to the energy demands of data centers, including costs of generation, transmission, and distribution network upgrades, are not borne or subsidized by customers that are not data centers.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this section.
SEC. 8. LOAD AND INTERCONNECTION FORECASTING.
(a) Technical Assistance.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a program to provide technical assistance to support the forecasting by covered interconnection entities of long-term load projections, particularly with respect to improving forecasting associated with data center load interconnection requests.
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this subsection.
(b) Transparency and Disclosure.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, to improve the forecasting of electricity demand and data center load interconnection requests by covered interconnection entities across the United States, the Commission shall establish transparency and disclosure requirements for data center load interconnection requests, including load interconnection requests occurring at the transmission level and load interconnection requests occurring at the distribution level.
(2) Requirement.--The requirements established under paragraph (1) shall seek to reduce duplicative, speculative, and other requests that impede accurate forecasting, including by imposing new transparency and information-sharing requirements for utilities and covered interconnection entities to implement with respect to data center load interconnection requests, as the Commission determines to be appropriate.
Text of Senate Amendment 6841
Pages S5181–S5182 · Official textSA 6841. Mr. KELLY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4784, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (7,011 characters)
At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:
SEC. 1094. BILATERAL RAPID RESPONSE PROTOCOL.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the "Nicholas Douglas Quets United States-Mexico Rapid Response for Victims of Crime Act".
(b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On October 18, 2024, while traveling from Arizona along the southern border in the Mexican state of Sonora near Puerto Penasco, Nicholas Quets was attacked and shot by armed criminals associated with the Sinaloa Cartel at an unauthorized cartel-controlled highway checkpoint, resulting in the tragic death of the 31-year-old American.
(2) The brutal murder of Nicholas Quets reflects the ongoing threat posed by transnational criminal organizations and cartel violence in the region.
(3) The violence perpetrated by drug cartels and other criminal organizations endangers innocent civilians, undermines the rule of law, and threatens the safety of United States citizens traveling abroad.
(4) Bilateral coordination in investigations like that of Nicholas Quets' death can often be delayed or incomplete, which may deny the administration of justice for victims and their families.
(5) Each year, millions of United States citizens travel to Mexico for tourism, work, and family purposes.
(6) In certain cases involving serious crimes, including homicide, kidnapping, and organized criminal violence, delays or gaps in coordination between authorities may hinder investigations and the delivery of justice for victims and their families.
(7) Enhanced bilateral coordination, communication, and investigative cooperation is essential to ensure effective responses to serious crimes involving United States citizens in Mexico.
(c) Statement of Policy.--It shall be the policy of the United States to collaborate in bilateral rapid response to ensure efficient communication and coordination between United States and Mexican authorities when responding to serious crimes involving United States citizens in Mexico.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term "appropriate congressional committees" means--
(A) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(B) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; the
(D) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
(2) Protocol.--The term "Protocol" means the bilateral rapid response protocol for serious crimes committed against United States citizens in Mexico that may be established pursuant to subsection (e).
(3) Serious crime.--The term "serious crime" has the meaning given such term in section 103(14) of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (34 U.S.C. 11103(14))
(e) Establishment.--In order to carry out the policy described in subsection (c), the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Attorney General, may engage with the Government of Mexico to negotiate and establish a bilateral rapid response protocol for serious crimes committed against United States citizens in Mexico.
(f) Purpose.--The Protocol is intended to facilitate timely coordination between United States and Mexican authorities in responding to and investigating serious crimes committed against United States citizens in Mexico.
(g) Recommended Elements.--In negotiating the Protocol, the Secretary of State may include procedures that provide--
(1) mechanisms for the prompt notification of relevant United States and Mexican authorities when a serious crime involving a United States citizen occurs;
(2) secure and reliable communication channels between designated law enforcement and .059diplomatic authorities in both countries;
(3) procedures to ensure the timely securing of crime scenes and the protection of relevant physical evidence;
(4) agreed-upon standards and procedures for preserving and documenting evidence in a manner that supports potential prosecutions in either country's jurisdiction;
(5) procedures to facilitate the timely sharing of investigative leads, intelligence, and forensic information between United States and Mexican authorities, consistent with the laws of each country;
(6) the designation of appropriate points of contact within the Government of Mexico and procedures to facilitate requests for international extradition and timely coordination for extradition to United States;
(7) the designation of appropriate points of contact within relevant United States and Mexican agencies responsible for coordinating responses to incidents covered by the Protocol;
(8) the designation of a point of contact within the United States Government responsible for communicating with the victim or the victim's family and providing timely updates regarding available assistance and investigative developments, as appropriate and consistent with the need to protect the integrity of any ongoing investigation, prosecution, or other law enforcement proceeding;
(9) appropriate substantive and procedural safeguards for the protection of privacy and civil liberties with respect to information shared pursuant to the Protocol;
(10) procedures for coordination between United States consular officials and Mexican authorities regarding support for victims and their families; and
(11) opportunities for joint training, planning, or exercises to ensure effective implementation of the Protocol.
(h) Progress Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter until the Protocol is established, the Secretary of State shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that describes--
(1) the progress made toward negotiating the Protocol;
(2) the status of cooperation with the Government of Mexico relating to crimes against United States citizens while they are in Mexico; and
(3) any additional legislative or diplomatic steps the Secretary determines would improve coordination and accountability in such cases.
(i) Implementation Report.--Not later than 180 days after the establishment of the Protocol, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of State shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that describes--
(1) the status of the implementation of such protocol;
(2) actions taken by United States and Mexican authorities under the protocol;
(3) the extent to which the protocol has improved coordination in covered cases; and
(4) any recommendations for improving the protocol.
(j) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in this section may be construed--
(1) to limit the sovereignty of the United States or of Mexico;
(2) to require the Government of Mexico to adopt investigative procedures inconsistent with existing Mexican law;
(3) to alter the existing authorities of United States law enforcement or consular officials; or
(4) to limit or otherwise affect any right or protection afforded to an individual under the Constitution or laws of the United States.
Text of Senate Amendment 6842
Pages S5182–S5183 · Official textSA 6842. Mr. KELLY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4784, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
Text printed in the Record (8,569 characters)
At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following:
SEC. 1094. BORDER TRAVEL SAFETY.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the "Nicholas Douglas Quets Border Travel Safety Act".
(b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On October 18, 2024, while traveling from Arizona along the southern border in the Mexican state of Sonora near Puerto Penasco, Nicholas Quets was attacked and shot by armed criminals associated with the Sinaloa Cartel at an unauthorized cartel-controlled highway checkpoint, which resulted in the tragic death of the 31-year-old American.
(2) The brutal murder of Nicholas Quets reflects the ongoing threat posed by transnational criminal organizations and cartel violence in the region.
(3) Nicholas Quets was shot while traveling along the Altar-Caborca highway (Federal Highway 2) in Sonora, which is frequently listed under a "Reconsider Travel" advisory due to cartel activity in the area.
(4) The Department of State issues Travel Advisories to inform United States citizens and other travelers of safety and security risks in foreign countries and regions.
(5) Department of State Travel Advisories identify certain foreign regions, including areas near United States land borders, that present elevated safety or security risks due to criminal activity, violence, kidnapping, or other threats.
(6) Individuals entering or departing the United States through land ports of entry may not be aware that nearby areas identified in Department of State Travel Advisories pose heightened safety or security risks.
(7) Clear and visible signage at land ports of entry and surrounding areas would improve traveler awareness of such risks and promote public safety.
(c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that clear and visible signage displaying travel advisories at land ports of entry along the land boundary between the United States and Mexico are necessary to improve traveler awareness of safety or security risks due to criminal activity, violence, kidnapping, or other threats.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term "appropriate congressional committees" means--
(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate;
(B) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives; and
(D) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives.
(2) Travel advisory.--The term "Travel Advisory" means the country-specific or region-specific safety advisory issued by the Department of State to inform travelers of security risks abroad.
(e) Warning Signage for Travelers Near Land Ports of Entry Along the Southern Border.--
(1) Establishment.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Administrator of the General Services Administration, shall establish and carry out a program to install and maintain warning signage informing travelers of dangerous areas or routes near the southern border of the United States that have been identified in relevant Department of State Travel Advisories.
(2) Responsibilities of secretary of state.--The Secretary of State shall--
(A) identify areas or routes near the United States land border with Mexico that are designated as dangerous in any Department of State Travel Advisory;
(B) provide the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection with updated advisory information necessary for the content of warning signage; and
(C) provide the Secretary of Homeland Security with the appropriate content and messaging of such signage.
(3) Coordination.--In carrying out this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall coordinate with the Secretary of State, appropriate State transportation and public safety agencies, and relevant State, local, and tribal government officials.
(f) Placement of Signage.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall, to the maximum extent practicable, install, maintain, and update warning signage described in this section.
(2) Locations.--Warning signage developed pursuant to this section shall--
(A) be placed--
(i) at appropriate land ports of entry along the United States international boundary with Mexico;
(ii) on appropriate roadways and routes approaching, and in areas immediately adjacent to, such ports of entry where travelers are likely to cross the international boundary;
(iii) at any additional locations determined appropriate by the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with State and local transportation authorities, to ensure adequate traveler awareness;
(iv) in locations that are clearly visible to motorists and pedestrians; and
(v) in sufficient proximity to allow travelers to make informed travel decisions; and
(B) include the words "pursuant to the Nicholas Douglas Quets Border Travel Safety Act".
(3) Coordination with state and local authorities.--In placing signage pursuant to this subsection, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate with, and may enter into agreements, as may be necessary, with--
(A) State departments of transportation;
(B) local government officials; and
(C) other appropriate authorities responsible for roadway infrastructure near the international border of the United States.
(4) Content of signage.--Signage required under this section shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
(A) clearly warn travelers of nearby areas or routes identified as dangerous in Department of State Travel Advisories;
(B) provide a reference to additional safety information, including the Department of State travel advisory website or a QR code linking to such information;
(C) be displayed in a format that can be swiftly and easily updated to reflect changes to applicable Department of State Travel Advisories, and may include risk indicators and incident alerts from the Department of State;
(D) be displayed in English and Spanish, and any additional languages the Secretary, in consultation with the Department of State, determines appropriate; and
(E) include any other safety information the Secretary of State determines appropriate.
(g) Reviews and Updates.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall--
(A) annually review warning signage to ensure accuracy and visibility; and
(B) update such signage as necessary to reflect changes in Department of State Travel Advisories.
(2) Identification of critical changes.--The Secretary of State shall notify the Secretary of Homeland Security whenever critical changes have occurred that require warning signage to be updated.
(h) Reports to Congress.--
(1) Implementation report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that describes--
(A) the implementation of the signage program required under this section;
(B) the locations where signage has been installed;
(C) plans for updating such signage; and
(D) any recommendations for improving traveler awareness of dangerous areas identified in Travel Advisories.
(2) GAO report.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall submit a report to the appropriate congressional committees that--
(A) describes the efficacy of the travel advisory warnings for travelers; and
(B) indicates whether there are modernizations to warning delivery that the Department of State or the Department of Homeland Security could undertake to ensure travelers have adequate awareness to potential travel-related dangers.
(i) No Additional Appropriations.--
(1) No additional funds authorized.--No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section.
(2) Use of existing resources.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State shall carry out their respective responsibilities under this section using amounts otherwise appropriated or made available to their respective departments.
(j) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this Act may be construed as authorizing the use of force against Mexico or any entity or individual within Mexico.
Text of Senate Amendment 6843
Page S5183 · Official textSA 6843. Mr. THUNE (for Mr. Peters) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 528, to reauthorize the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, and for other purposes; as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
Text printed in the Record (473 characters)
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Act of 2026" or the "GLRI Act of 2026".
SEC. 2. GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE.
Section 118(c)(7)(J) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(7)(J)) is amended by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:
"(i) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this paragraph $475,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2030.".
Text of Senate Amendment 6844
Page S5183 · Official textSA 6844. Mr. THUNE (for Ms. Cortez Masto) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1574, to amend the Stored Communications Act to include Tribal courts as courts of competent jurisdiction; as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
Text printed in the Record (4,426 characters)
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Tribal Access to Electronic Evidence Act".
SEC. 2. TRIBAL COURTS AS COURTS OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION
UNDER STORED COMMUNICATIONS ACT.
(a) Definitions.--Section 2711 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking "or" at the end;
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
"(C) a Tribal court; or"; and
(D) in subparagraph (D), as so redesignated, by striking "and" at the end; and
(2) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
"(4) the term `governmental entity' means a department or agency of--
"(A) the United States;
"(B) any State or political subdivision thereof; or
"(C) any Indian Tribe or political subdivision thereof;
"(5) the term `Indian Tribe' means any Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, community, component band, or component reservation individually identified (including parenthetically) on the most recent list published by the Secretary of the Interior under section 104 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5131); and
"(6) the term `Tribal court' means a court of general criminal jurisdiction of an Indian Tribe authorized by the law of that Indian Tribe to issue search warrants.".
(b) Required Disclosure of Customer Communications or Records.--Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking the first sentence and inserting the following:
"(1) In storage 180 days or less.--A governmental entity may require the disclosure by a provider of electronic communication service of the contents of a wire or electronic communication, that is in electronic storage in an electronic communications system for 180 days or less, only pursuant to a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction--
"(A) issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure;
"(B) in the case of a State court, issued using State warrant procedures;
"(C) in the case of a court-martial or other proceeding under chapter 47 of title 10 (the Uniform Code of Military Justice), issued under section 846 of that title, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the President); or
"(D) in the case of a Tribal court, issued using warrant procedures that comply with section 202(a)(2) of Public Law 90-284 (commonly known as the `Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968') (25 U.S.C. 1302(a)(2)).
"(2) In storage more than 180 days.--"; and
(B) in paragraph (2), as so designated, by striking "one hundred and eighty days" and inserting "180 days";
(2) in subsection (b)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking "using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure" and all that follows through "prescribed by the President)" and inserting "in accordance with subsection (a)(1)"; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking "or State" each place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal"; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking "using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure" and all that follows through "prescribed by the President)" and inserting "in accordance with subsection (a)(1)"; and
(B) in paragraph (2), in the undesignated matter following subparagraph (F), by striking "or State" each place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal".
(c) Delayed Notice.--Section 2705(a)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking "or State" each place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal".
(d) Civil Action.--Section 2707(g) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the second sentence, by inserting "Tribal," after "State,".
(e) Wrongful Disclosure of Video Tape Rental or Sale Records.--Section 2710 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2)(C), by inserting after "an equivalent State warrant," the following: "a warrant issued by a Tribal court using warrant procedures that comply with section 202(a)(2) of Public Law 90-284 (commonly known as the `Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968') (25 U.S.C. 1302(a)(2)),"; and
(2) in subsection (d), by striking "a State, or a political subdivision of a State" and inserting "a State or a political subdivision thereof, or an Indian Tribe or a political subdivision thereof".
Authority for Committees to Meet
Page S5183 · Official textMr. President, I have four requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.
Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:
The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, at 9 a.m., to conduct a hearing.
The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet durihg the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.
The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, at 3 p.m., to conduct a closed briefing.
The Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, at 4 p.m., to conduct a hearing.
Measures Read the First Time--S. 5602 and S. 5603
Pages S5183–S5184 · Official textMadam President, I understand that there are two bills at the desk, and I ask for their first reading en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will read the bills by title for the first time.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (279 characters)
A bill (S. 5602) to prohibit the use of Federal funds for the planning and construction of any structure or monument at Memorial
Circle at Columbia Island/Lady Bird Johnson Park in the District of Columbia.
A bill (S. 5603) to prohibit the demolition of Presidential memorials.
I now ask for a second reading, and I object to my own request, all en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The objection having been heard, the bills will receive their second reading on the next legislative day.
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Act of 2025
Page S5184 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be discharged from further consideration of S. 528 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (94 characters)
A bill (S. 528) to reauthorize the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Peters substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 6843), in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to as follows:
Text printed in the Record (659 characters)
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Act of 2026" or the "GLRI Act of 2026".
SEC. 2. GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE.
Section 118(c)(7)(J) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(7)(J)) is amended by striking clause
(i) and inserting the following:
"(i) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this paragraph $475,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2027 through 2030.".
The bill (S. 528), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Tribal Access to Electronic Evidence Act
Page S5184 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 1574 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (117 characters)
A bill (S. 1574) to amend the Stored Communications Act to include Tribal courts as courts of competent jurisdiction.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Cortez Masto substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 6844), in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to as follows:
Text printed in the Record (4,660 characters)
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Tribal Access to Electronic Evidence Act".
SEC. 2. TRIBAL COURTS AS COURTS OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION
UNDER STORED COMMUNICATIONS ACT.
(a) Definitions.--Section 2711 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking "or" at the end;
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
"(C) a Tribal court; or"; and
(D) in subparagraph (D), as so redesignated, by striking
"and" at the end; and
(2) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
"(4) the term `governmental entity' means a department or
agency of--
"(A) the United States;
"(B) any State or political subdivision thereof; or
"(C) any Indian Tribe or political subdivision thereof;
"(5) the term `Indian Tribe' means any Indian or Alaska
Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, community,
component band, or component reservation individually
identified (including parenthetically) on the most recent
list published by the Secretary of the Interior under section
104 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994
(25 U.S.C. 5131); and
"(6) the term `Tribal court' means a court of general
criminal jurisdiction of an Indian Tribe authorized by the
law of that Indian Tribe to issue search warrants.".
(b) Required Disclosure of Customer Communications or
Records.--Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking the first sentence and inserting the
following:
"(1) In storage 180 days or less.--A governmental entity
may require the disclosure by a provider of electronic
communication service of the contents of a wire or electronic
communication, that is in electronic storage in an electronic
communications system for 180 days or less, only pursuant to
a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction--
"(A) issued using the procedures described in the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure;
"(B) in the case of a State court, issued using State
warrant procedures;
"(C) in the case of a court-martial or other proceeding
under chapter 47 of title 10 (the Uniform Code of Military
Justice), issued under section 846 of that title, in
accordance with regulations prescribed by the President); or
"(D) in the case of a Tribal court, issued using warrant
procedures that comply with section 202(a)(2) of Public Law
90-284 (commonly known as the `Indian Civil Rights Act of
1968') (25 U.S.C. 1302(a)(2)).
"(2) In storage more than 180 days.--"; and
(B) in paragraph (2), as so designated, by striking "one
hundred and eighty days" and inserting "180 days";
(2) in subsection (b)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking "using the procedures
described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure" and
all that follows through "prescribed by the President)" and
inserting "in accordance with subsection (a)(1)"; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking "or State" each
place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal"; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking "using the procedures
described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure" and
all that follows through "prescribed by the President)" and
inserting "in accordance with subsection (a)(1)"; and
(B) in paragraph (2), in the undesignated matter following
subparagraph (F), by striking "or State" each place it
appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal".
(c) Delayed Notice.--Section 2705(a)(1)(B) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by striking "or State" each
place it appears and inserting ", State, or Tribal".
(d) Civil Action.--Section 2707(g) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended, in the second sentence, by inserting
"Tribal," after "State,".
(e) Wrongful Disclosure of Video Tape Rental or Sale
Records.--Section 2710 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2)(C), by inserting after "an
equivalent State warrant," the following: "a warrant issued
by a Tribal court using warrant procedures that comply with
section 202(a)(2) of Public Law 90-284 (commonly known as the
`Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968') (25 U.S.C. 1302(a)(2)),";
and
(2) in subsection (d), by striking "a State, or a
political subdivision of a State" and inserting "a State or
a political subdivision thereof, or an Indian Tribe or a
political subdivision thereof".
The bill (S. 1574), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Claiming Age Clarity Act
Pages S5184–S5185 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 5284 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (198 characters)
A bill (H.R. 5284) to require the Social Security Administration to make changes to the social security terminology used in the rules, regulation, guidance, or other materials of the Administration.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 5284) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Expanding Access to Capital for Rural Job Creators Act
Page S5185 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1190 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (148 characters)
A bill (H.R. 1190) to amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to expand access to capital for rural-area small businesses, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 1190) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Dennis John Benigno Traumatic Brain Injury Program Reauthorization Act of 2026
Pages S5185–S5186 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 5600, which is at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (67 characters)
A bill (S. 5600) to reauthorize the Traumatic Brain Injury program.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read the third time.
I know of no further debate on the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
If there is no further debate on the bill, the bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the bill pass?
The bill (S. 5600) was passed, as follows:
Text printed in the Record (8,676 characters)
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Dennis John Benigno Traumatic Brain Injury Program Reauthorization Act of 2026".
SEC. 2. THE BILL PASCRELL, JR., NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR
TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY SURVEILLANCE AND
REGISTRIES.
(a) Prevention of Traumatic Brain Injury.--Section 393B of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 280b-1c) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting "and prevalence" after "incidence";
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting "and reduction of associated injuries and fatalities" before the semicolon;
(B) in paragraph (2), by inserting "and related risk factors" before the semicolon; and
(C) in paragraph (3)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking "2020" each place it appears and inserting "2030"; and
(ii) in subparagraph (A)--
(I) in clause (i), by striking "; and" and inserting a semicolon;
(II) by redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iv);
(III) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
"(ii) populations at higher risk of traumatic brain injury, including populations whose increased risk is due to occupational or circumstantial factors;
"(iii) causes of, and risk factors for, traumatic brain injury; and"; and
(IV) in clause (iv), as so redesignated, by striking "arising from traumatic brain injury" and inserting ", which may include related mental health and other conditions, arising from traumatic brain injury, including"; and
(3) in subsection (c), by inserting ", and other relevant Federal departments and agencies" before the period at the end.
(b) National Program for Traumatic Brain Injury Surveillance and Registries.--Section 393C of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 280b-1d) is amended--
(1) by amending the section heading to read as follows: "the bill pascrell, jr., national program for traumatic brain injury surveillance and registries";
(2) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting "to identify populations that may be at higher risk for traumatic brain injuries, to collect data on the causes of, and risk factors for, traumatic brain injuries," after "related disability,";
(B) in paragraph (1), by inserting ", including the occupation of the individual, when relevant to the circumstances surrounding the injury" before the semicolon; and
(C) in paragraph (4), by inserting "short- and long-term" before "outcomes";
(3) by striking subsection (b);
(4) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b);
(5) in subsection (b), as so redesignated, by inserting "and evidence-based practices to identify and address concussion" before the period at the end; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
"(c) Availability of Information.--The Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shall make publicly available aggregated information on traumatic brain injury and concussion described in this section, including on the website of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Such website, to the extent feasible, shall include aggregated information on populations that may be at higher risk for traumatic brain injuries and strategies for preventing or reducing risk of traumatic brain injury that are tailored to such populations.".
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 394A of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 280b-3) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking "1994, and" and inserting "1994,"; and
(2) in subsection (b), by striking "2020 through 2024" and inserting "2027 through 2031".
SEC. 3. STATE GRANT PROGRAMS.
(a) State Grants for Projects Regarding Traumatic Brain Injury.--Section 1252 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-52) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2)--
(A) by inserting ", taking into consideration populations that may be at higher risk for traumatic brain injuries" after "outreach programs"; and
(B) by inserting "Tribal," after "State,";
(2) in subsection (e)(3)(B)--
(A) by striking "(such as third party payers, State agencies, community-based providers, schools, and educators)"; and
(B) by inserting "(such as third party payers, State agencies, community-based providers, schools, and educators)" after "professionals";
(3) in subsection (h), by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting the following:
"(1) American indian consortium; state.--The terms `American Indian consortium' and `State' have the meanings given such terms in section 1253.
"(2) Traumatic brain injury.--
"(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the term `traumatic brain injury'--
"(i) means an acquired injury to the brain;
"(ii) may include--
"(I) brain injuries caused by anoxia due to trauma; and
"(II) damage to the brain from an internal or external source that results in infection, toxicity, surgery, or vascular disorders not associated with aging; and
"(iii) does not include brain dysfunction caused by congenital or degenerative disorders, or birth trauma.
"(B) Revisions to definition.--The Secretary may revise the definition of the term `traumatic brain injury' under this paragraph, as the Secretary determines necessary, after consultation with States and other appropriate public or nonprofit private entities."; and
(4) in subsection (i), by striking "2020 through 2024" and inserting "2027 through 2031".
(b) State Grants for Protection and Advocacy Services.--Section 1253(l) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d-53(l)) is amended by striking "2020 through 2024" and inserting "2027 through 2031".
SEC. 4. REPORT TO CONGRESS.
Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (referred to in this Act as the "Secretary") shall submit to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report that contains--
(1) an overview of populations who may be at higher risk for traumatic brain injury, such as individuals affected by domestic violence or sexual assault and public safety officers, as defined in section 1204 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10284);
(2) an outline of existing surveys and activities of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on traumatic brain injuries and any steps the agency has taken to address gaps in data collection related to such higher risk populations, which may include leveraging surveys such as the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey to collect data on traumatic brain injuries;
(3) an overview of any outreach or education efforts to reach such higher risk populations; and
(4) any challenges associated with reaching such higher risk populations.
SEC. 5. STUDY ON LONG-TERM SYMPTOMS OR CONDITIONS RELATED TO
TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY.
(a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with stakeholders and the heads of other relevant Federal departments and agencies, as appropriate, shall conduct, either directly or through a contract with a nonprofit private entity, a study to--
(1) examine the incidence and prevalence of long-term or
chronic symptoms or conditions in individuals who have
experienced a traumatic brain injury;
(2) examine the evidence base of research related to the
chronic effects of traumatic brain injury across the
lifespan;
(3) examine any correlations between traumatic brain injury
and increased risk of other conditions, such as dementia and
mental health conditions;
(4) assess existing services available for individuals with
such long-term or chronic symptoms or conditions; and
(5) identify any gaps in research related to such long-term
or chronic symptoms or conditions of individuals who have
experienced a traumatic brain injury.
(b) Public Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall--
(1) submit to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of Representatives a report detailing
the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the study
described in subsection (a); and
(2) in the case that such study is conducted directly by
the Secretary, make the report described in paragraph (1)
publicly available on the website of the Department of Health
and Human Services.
Mr. THUNE. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Resolutions Submitted Today
Page S5186 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions, which are at the desk: S. Res. 922, S. Res. 923, S. Res. 924, S. Res. 925, S. Res. 926, S. Res. 927, and S. Res. 928.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolutions en bloc.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolutions were agreed to.
The preambles were agreed to.
(The resolutions, with their preambles, are printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
Honoring the Life and Service of United States Marine Corps Veteran Nicholas Douglas Quets, Expressing Condolences to His Family, and Condemning Cartel Violence
Page S5186 · Official textHONORING THE LIFE AND SERVICE OF UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS VETERAN NICHOLAS DOUGLAS QUETS, EXPRESSING CONDOLENCES TO HIS FAMILY, AND CONDEMNING CARTEL VIOLENCE
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 662.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the resolution by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (188 characters)
A resolution (S. Res. 662) honoring the life and service of United States Marine Corps veteran Nicholas Douglas Quets, expressing condolences to his family, and condemning cartel violence.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolution (S. Res. 662) was agreed to.
The preamble was agreed to. (The resolution, with its preamble, is printed in the Record of March 26, 2026, under "Submitted Resolutions.")
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom Reauthorization Act of 2026
Page S5186 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1744 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (159 characters)
A bill (H.R. 1744) to extend and authorize annual appropriations for the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom through December 31, 2028.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 1744) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Authorizing the Secretary of the Army to Convey to the State of North Carolina a Certain Parcel of Real Property Located at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on Which the State Shall Construct a Veterans...
Page S5186 · Official textAUTHORIZING THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY TO CONVEY TO THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA A CERTAIN PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT FORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINA, ON WHICH THE STATE SHALL CONSTRUCT A VETERANS' STATE HOME
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 10159 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Text printed in the Record (255 characters)
A bill (H.R. 10159) to authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey to the State of North Carolina a certain parcel of real property located at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on which the State shall construct a veterans' State home, and for other purposes.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 10159) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Orders for Wednesday, September 30, 2026
Page S5186 · Official textMadam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:15 a.m. on Wednesday, September 30; that following the prayer and pledge, 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 with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; further, that notwithstanding rule XXII, the cloture motions filed during Monday's session of the Senate ripen at 11:30 a.m.; finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during Wednesday's session of the Senate, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
The PRESIDING OFFICER
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Adjournment Until 10:15 A.m. Tomorrow
Page S5186 · Official textMadam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.
There being no objection, the Senate, at 8:16 p.m., adjourned until Wednesday, September 30, 2026, at 10:15 a.m.
Nominations
Pages S5186–S5187 · Official textExecutive nominations received by the Senate:
Text printed in the Record (959 characters)
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTION 601:
REAR ADM. BENJAMIN G. REYNOLDS THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT AS VICE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS AND APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTIONS 601 AND 8035:
VICE ADM. JOHN B. SKILLMAN THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES NAVY TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTION 601:
REAR ADM. BENJAMIN R. NICHOLSON
THE FOLLOWING NAMED OFFICER FOR APPOINTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES SPACE FORCE TO THE GRADE INDICATED WHILE ASSIGNED TO A POSITION OF IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY UNDER TITLE 10, U.S.C., SECTION 601:
LT. GEN. DAVID N. MILLER, JR.