Wednesday, September 23, 2026

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. President, the people who oversee the post office now want to run college sports. What could go wrong? The U.S. Congress has been called upon during one of the more important times in our history to make difficult decisions about the future of our country. We have navigated wars, economic downturns, and natural disasters. These are the kinds of nationwide issues the Federal Government should address. The Founders never intended for the Federal Government, though, to usurp the authority of your local school board or your homeowners association. I don't think it ever occurred to them that Congress would one day be in charge of dictating the rules for college sports. Yet, with gas at over $4 a gallon, a persistent war with Iran, $40 trillion in debt, the Senate has decided that the most urgent thing now is to dictate how college sports are run from Washington. It came to this decision, of course, after acknowledging that government caused the very problems this bill purports to fix. This is the exact scenario the great Harry Brown described when he said: Government--you know, they know how to break your legs and then hand you a crutch and say, see, if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk. I come to the floor today to offer an amendment that would avoid the Federal takeover of college sports. Unlike the underlying bill, my amendment rejects the idea that politicians should run college sports. My amendment would put the trust in the schools, the students, the coaches, and the conferences to run their own sports. You see, the whole problem originated because the government, through the courts, took the power away from the NCAA. My amendment accomplishes this goal simply by granting an antitrust exemption so that the NCAA, the conferences, the college students, and the schools can make their own deals without unelected judges or politicians micromanaging every detail of compensation and eligibility. Jason Russell, a journalist with Reason magazine, perhaps summed up this bill's Federal takeover of college sports best when he wrote:

Text printed in the Record (522 characters)

The backers of the bill believe politicians, not the NCAA, should decide how many transfers are allowed. They think politicians, not conferences, should set a compensation cap on how much schools can pay athletes. They think politicians, not athletes and businesses, should get to decide [what a legitimate private contract does]. They think politicians, not the colleges, should decide how many schools are in the Big Ten and SEC. They think politicians, not coaches, should decide when a coach is allowed to leave a job.

This is not the job of the Federal Government. These decisions should be made privately by an association. The NCAA always did this until the courts interfered with them, calling them a monopoly and taking away their just power to govern themselves. Jason Russell goes on to write:

Text printed in the Record (479 characters)

[This bill presumes that] politicians, not athletes or agents, should get to decide what agent fees are. They think politicians should empower medical personnel, not athletes or coaches, to have "autonomous, unchallengeable" power to decide if an athlete plays or sits. They even think politicians, not the NFL or broadcasters, should get to decide when professional football games are on TV. They think politicians should have a say in the length of the college football season.

Christopher A. Coons (D-DE)

This bill is the culmination of a slow march toward Federal control of college sports that began almost 140 years ago in the courts. In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. It is a piece of antitrust legislation, but quite quickly, antitrust became a weapon against businesses of all sizes. A brief review of the antitrust cases shows you the ridiculous nature of antitrust law. One of the most ridiculous examples of antitrust as a weapon of government came in 1967. In Utah Pie Company v. Continental Baking Company, the Court determined that a bakery violated antitrust laws by selling its pies too cheaply. Now, you would be forgiven for being confused if you thought monopolies were where someone controlled the market and raised your price. The government sued Utah Pie Company for selling its pies too cheaply. Not long after that, in 1969, the government sued IBM for dominating the computer market by innovating too quickly. Now, I thought monopolies were going to prevent competition. There would be no innovation. They would block new innovation because they didn't want someone to get into their territory. Instead, they accused IBM of innovating too frequently. So antitrust law is full of the government going after people for charging too little and innovating too much. The world is upside down, and antitrust law is a perfect example of the illogic of the government. The logic of antitrust became so contorted that the FTC accused cereal makers of maintaining a shared monopoly on the theory that the brands blocked competition by being so popular, they flooded the store shelves with their product. After 10 years of litigation, the FTC dismissed the case, ruling the staff failed to prove the shared monopoly charges. They were being accused of being too competitive. They were putting too many products on the store shelves. So you had like six or eight cereal makers making so many cereals that they said: You are blocking competition by introducing too many products. These are the absurdities of antitrust laws. This is the antitrust law that ended up destroying college sports. When you see the mess that is college sports, don't think it just happened and now government has to come in and fix it. Government created the problem. Government took antitrust law, used it against NCAA, neutered them, and said: You can no longer make your rules. So when it is the government's fault, maybe we should get rid of the government problem, not add more government to try to solve the problems. Antitrust laws granted the courts the ability to intrude on private contracts and dictate how people should run their businesses or their associations, like the NCAA, and courts have grown increasingly comfortable using that power, increasing the scope of antitrust law with each case. For over 100 years, this country has left regulation of sports where it belongs: with the institutions and individuals and voluntary associations that have always run college sports. Until 1984, college athletics were excluded from antitrust law because antitrust law didn't deal with noncommercial amateur pursuits. But in 1984, the Court decided that the NCAA couldn't impose television broadcasting restrictions on college football games. Well, why not? It is a volunteer association. If you don't want to be in the NCAA, don't be in it. Form your own association. Have your own rules. But there is an advantage to being in it because people watch the NCAA, watch the Final Four, and they watch the March Madness. So it is that tradeoff. You get something, but in order to get it, you accepted, voluntarily, the rules--that is, until the Court came in, messed everything up, and neutered the NCAA. Rather than recognizing that there may have been an underlying reason for the restrictions, the Court threw out the restrictions and began the slippery slope we are on today. That case in 1984 established college athletics as a commercial enterprise, but it wasn't until 2015 that the courts really sank their fangs into college athletics. In 2015, the court decided that the NCAA could not require students to maintain their amateur status by refusing payments for the use of their name, image, and likeness. The court decided that eligibility rules for a private association are best decided by the government, not the members of the association. This is a real tragedy, and the reason I bring it up today is not because college sports is so messed up by the government. When you let antitrust law pervade private associations, you get rid of all of the rules that people voluntarily accept. It is no different than your homeowners association. It has all these rules. You voluntarily accept them if you want to be part of that particular neighborhood. It is the same way with the NCAA. But they can't make the rules anymore because the courts said: You are a monopoly. You are no longer allowed to. All of the problems in college sports can be laid at the foot of antitrust law. You can say it is the courts, but it is really Congress. Congress passed these ridiculous laws, and for 150 years, they have been used in a ridiculous way. In fact, to this day, antitrust laws protect Big Business against Small Business. If five doctors get together and they say "Well, we want to get our annual fee or our exam fee to be $100" and they are in separate practices that come together, the government will sue them for antitrust even though they are trying to use their leverage to negotiate a higher price with a billion-dollar company. The insurance companies are protected from doctors organizing or nurses organizing or hospitals organizing even though they are the big player. The big bully is the insurance company, but they are protected by antitrust and the small business people are punished. This is the history of antitrust law. In 2015, the court finally decided that the NCAA could not require students to maintain their amateur status. This NIL--name, image, and likeness--you can't have rules against it. You are a monopoly. No more rules. So it is the Wild West, and it is chaos now. Nobody says it is not chaos. But the chaos was created by the antitrust laws. The chaos was created by the government. The court decided that eligibility rules for a private association would be decided by the government, not the members of the association. Since 2015, a flurry of cases has decided issues as parochial as how much individual athletes are paid out of broadcast revenues and how long student-athletes are eligible to play, when they can transfer, who they can play for, how old they are, what injuries they can play with. It is really not the government's business to be involved. Government has shirked its real duties--which are paramount, which are of great national importance--to focus on something it knows nothing about. And mark my words, this won't be the end of it. Sports has commissioners--a commissioner of baseball. Who is going to be the commissioner of college sports? Will we be back here in another year with people lobbying us to tweak the eligibility rules, tweak the transfer rules? As important as college sports are to students and institutions, they aren't something Congress should micromanage. Athletes and institutions should be free to make choices about who they work for, who they play for, and what rules they should be subject to. This bill manages to interfere with college athletics at nearly every level. It limits the ability of certain employees to freely leave one school and accept a job at another. It decides how students may go about licensing their name, image, and likeness. It even decides when the transfer students are eligible to play. The bill actually forbids a return to the historic model of amateur sports where athletes are not paid. I am old enough to remember when amateur sports was lauded. You remember when we beat the Russians. We beat them with amateurs. It was commendable. They put all their professionals out there, and we beat them with amateurs. But people knew what it was to be amateurs. People who remember Bobby Jones remember and respect that Bobby Jones didn't take money. There was something admirable about someone so pure that they didn't. There was always something more admirable--not that money is bad, not that the NFL and NBA are bad. Look, our basketball players go after a year anyway. They are playing 1 year and going to the NBA. Some of them are going directly from high school, and that is their business. There is always this avenue to make money, but now what we have done with this bill is we have micromanaged this, and in the bill, it actually forbids anybody from preventing amateurs from being paid. You will no longer--it was probably a lost dream anyway, but this bill prevents the NCAA from ever going back to having true amateur sports where they aren't paid. The bill would also set up a Commission on the future of college athletics. A legislative Commission--this is where we will get to the commissioner of college sports--will recommend new rule changes to Congress in the future. It seems that we already have an institution that does this; it is called the NCAA. Congress should not mire itself in another endless cycle of solving problems it caused. We should address the root cause, which is the antitrust law, that got us here. I have several bills to get rid of some of these old antitrust laws that I think actually favor Big Business over Small Business. One of the antitrust laws says that if you buy more in bulk from someone--so if you are a hardware store and you buy 5 hammers or you are Walmart that buys 5,000 hammers, there is a law that says you are not allowed to give discounts to big suppliers. Well, that is ridiculous. It goes against all economics. So what I am offering is an amendment that would actually solve the problem faced by college sports. My amendment would not create all the new rules for it. It would simply reverse the previous antitrust interference and prevent future interference by exempting college sports from antitrust laws. Now, the interesting thing is, in order to pass their bill, they actually do a little bit of exemption from antitrust laws. They do a little, though, and then in place of that, they replace it with congressionally dictated laws. What I would do is just get rid of antitrust laws. NCAA would have their power back again, and they would be able to make these rules. It might be that NIL probably still continues, but it would be a negotiated settlement and NCAA would do it. This would ensure conferences, colleges, and athletes are free to negotiate and enter into agreements that benefit everyone without the heavy hand of government dictating what parties could offer or accept. It would also prevent Congress from imposing rules governing such minutiae as eligibility for transfer students as a threshold for reporting name, image, and likeness income. I love college sports as much as anyone, which is why I think the best way we could protect college sports is to stop sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong. Now, we have the bill before us, and you would think, in a country like ours that prizes democracy in a republic, we would have debate, we would be able to present my amendment, and it would either pass or fail on its merits. So what we will do is ask to bring my amendment down for a vote, and it is going to be rejected. And that is disappointing that we are going to do this whole thing where we take over college sports and any dissent will be muted and there will be no attempts to alter the bill. The bill has been written in private, but there will be no ability for anyone to amend this bill. That is a disappointment. So what I will be asking for is permission to have a vote on my amendment. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up my amendment No. 6758.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Is there an objection? The majority whip.

John Barrasso (R-WY)

Mr. President, reserving the right to object. College sports are one of the last great institutions in America that still bring people together. Today, all across our country, fans see the institution falling apart. Rosters are being rebuilt every year through an unrestricted transfer market. Schools are locked in an arms race of ever-increasing NIL spending. Coaches spend as much time recruiting their own players as they are preparing for opponents. Eligibility rules are no longer determined by clear standards but by lawsuits, by court orders, and by last-minute injunctions. It is why the Senate has now overwhelmingly voted three times to advance the bill called the Protect College Sports Act. We will finish that bill this week and send it to the House and then, hopefully, on to the President for his signature. Senator Paul has identified one of the critical problems. The antitrust laws applied to the collegiate sports system are currently the reason why sports are governed by court order rather than by fair, enforceable rules for all. The Protect College Sports Act provides the NCAA with the ability to govern, but any antitrust protection is narrow, and it comes with guardrails. My understanding is that Senator Cruz and Senator Cantwell are discussing a package of possible amendment votes, and this is one of them. Let's give them the opportunity to work through the process and see if we can get votes on Senator Paul's amendment as well as other amendments. And as they work on it, let's give them a little bit more time for that reason. And for that reason, Mr. President, I object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Objection is heard. The minority whip.

Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)

Mr. President, for 25 years I have come to the Senate floor with a simple request--for Congress to protect children who know no other home than the United States of America. I first made this request after I heard from a constituent, a young high school graduate in Chicago and a brilliant, brilliant piano prodigy. She was brought to the United States when she was 2 years old. She didn't know how to fill out her college applications because of her undocumented status. I couldn't believe, when we looked up the law, that our Nation had no path to citizenship for a young person like her so I introduced a bill to change it. Shortly afterward, I received a call from my colleague Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah. He said that he was working on similar legislation. I asked him if we could join forces, and we did. Together, Senator Hatch and I introduced the DREAM Act. Now, isn't that how Congress is supposed to work? Two senators of opposing parties, who didn't agree on much, came together to work on legislation to provide a pathway to legal status for these young people brought to the United States as children. These young people came to be known as Dreamers. Since I first introduced the DREAM Act, I have come to the Senate floor over 150 times to share the stories of these Dreamers, who, today, are doctors, nurses, business owners, educators, parents, and so many other professions. I have pushed for this legislation to make them legal in the eyes of the law, to be included in bipartisan efforts like the 2013 Gang of 8 immigration bill which passed the Senate with 68 votes. Over the years, the DREAM Act has passed the Senate and it has passed the House, but never at the same time so that we couldn't send it to the President's desk to have it signed into law. As I near the end of my time in the Senate, Congress continues to fail these young people who are American in every sense of the word, not just to me but to the vast majority of the country. The American people have heard about the DREAM Act for many years. Eighty-one percent of the American people support citizenship for Dreamers--81 percent--including 56 percent of Republicans. Despite its overwhelming popularity, the DREAM Act is still stuck in Congress. And so, instead of celebrating legislation, establishing a legal pathway for these Dreamers, I come to the floor today to highlight my 153rd Dreamer story. This is Karen Montes Gaga, who arrived in Seattle from Mexico when she was 3 years old. She loves school, dreamed of becoming a teacher one day. In high school, she was an honor student and a tutor to her peers, but she knew her options beyond high school were limited. Without legal status, she could never get the education she needed to become a teacher. Then DACA was announced by President Obama. Karen jumped at the chance to enroll in the program and go back to school. So that you understand what DACA is, it says to young undocumented people like Karen that they have to--every 2 years--apply for a work permit and go through a criminal background check and pay what is now a $600 fee every 2 years. So there is no question about people harboring criminals under the DREAM Act or DACA today. There is a criminal background check required every 2 years. She immediately enrolled in college classes after qualifying for DACA and obtained her bachelor's degree in education. But she didn't stop there. Karen went on to receive her master's in education curriculum and instruction. Karen has now been a proud elementary school teacher for almost a decade. She serves on her school's leadership team. She has been nominated twice for the Teacher of the Year Award. As a DACA recipient, Karen, of course, is responsible for renewing that work permit every 2 years. But there is a problem. This year, she filed in a timely manner and expected her most recent renewal to be like every other one for the last 14 years she has been qualified for DACA, but this renewal process was different. The Trump administration failed to process her DACA renewal in time, even though she had filed it months in advance. As a result, Karen's work permit expired, and she was forced to walk out and leave behind her classroom, abandoning her students in the middle of an academic year for months at a time. In a world of rising costs and inflation, losing a single paycheck could be the difference in keeping a roof over your head and food on the table. But you know what Karen is most worried about? Her 27 students that she had to leave behind. Let me quote her:

Text printed in the Record (228 characters)

It is so heartbreaking because, as any teacher will tell you, it is more than a job. It is a responsibility. It is a commitment that I make each school year to the children that depend on me every single day and I was not there.

Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)

That is whom this administration and Republicans are failing: a teacher--a teacher--who is committed to instilling strong values and work ethic into her students and whose heart was broken when she could not. To my Republican colleagues, I ask you, if you went out looking for the worst of the worst, would you choose Karen? If you wanted to remove from the United States rapists, murders, terrorists, child predators, would you identify Karen as one of those people? Of course not. Karen put it best when she said:

Text printed in the Record (94 characters)

Behind every pending application number there is a person, a family, a story and this is mine.

Richard J. Durbin (D-IL)

There is still time to help Dreamers in the final months of the 119th Congress. To all my Republican colleagues, please join me and Senator Murkowski in standing up for these young people who epitomize the meaning of the American dream. Stand up for Karen, stand up for her students, and stand up for what is right. I may be leaving this Senate in a few months, but I am not leaving this fight. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Delaware.

Mr. President, I don't know about your family, but when mine gathers for Thanksgiving every year, regardless of political view, faith, politics, region, what brings us together is college sports. Somewhere between passing the turkey and catching up on each other's lives, we turn on the TV, and, usually, there are a couple of games going on. This points to something that I think is relevant at this moment: College sports are uniquely American and help bring Americans together. More than 1,000 American colleges and universities have teams of all kinds, playing everything from soccer and rugby to rowing and badminton. Twenty years ago, a young quarterback named Joe Flacco played for the University of Delaware. He transferred there for the chance to become a starter and become part of a growing and winning team. He led the University of Delaware to the FCS championship. He set 20 school records, and then he went on to be the Super Bowl MVP with the Baltimore Ravens. Today, that story would not happen. Today, transfers to and from colleges, particularly in football, are happening at an unbelievable pace. My favorite team Notre Dame has played two other teams in the last 3 weeks wherein a majority of their players had just transferred in. We have heard from coaches and fans and players that this transfer portal being open endlessly without consequence, the cloud of agents hovering over and driving this behavior, the unreliability of coaches and their transferring in the middle of the season, and the lack of clear standards around eligibility--meaning, some as old as 27, 28, 29 go pro or play in Europe and then come back--has changed a lot of the core of the college sports experience. One of the real positives is that college student-athletes, after years of litigation, have won the right to their fair share of the significant revenue generated by a few college sports, mostly football and basketball; but now that there are endless changes in transfer and eligibility and terms and conditions of play, college sports are in crisis. It doesn't take a diehard sports fan to see that college sports are currently broken: the collapse, the evaporation, of the Pac-12--one of the major conferences; an arms race to raise money and pay for players, for coaches, for facilities. This year, 70 of the schools in the Power 4 conferences will together generate over $7 billion in revenue from ads, from merchandise, from supporters, but they are all running at a deficit. In most universities, the model is this: If you have got a nationally prominent football team or basketball team that brings in a lot of revenue, that revenue pays for all of your other sports, the nonrevenue sports. Things like rugby or wrestling, rowing or track get supported in their facilities, in their coaches, in their training from the revenue of the big sports--football and basketball--that draw a lot of eyeballs and a lot of support. Now it is not working. Schools like the University of Delaware and Delaware State University have reached out to me to say they are spending more than they can sustain to recruit and retain talent, to develop their team, to invest in their facilities, and with student-athletes transferring every year, it is really hard to build a culture and to coach a team. So, to find the money to chase athletes, coaches, and facilities, universities have begun cutting sports, and they have begun with women's sports and Olympic sports. There are so many examples. Washington State cut most of their track and field program. Georgia Tech eliminated swimming. Cal Poly cut back on swimming. Grand Canyon, a nationally ranked men's volleyball program, has been eliminated. I have a dozen more in front of me. When we lose these opportunities for college athletes, we lose something that is uniquely American. There are more than 500,000 college student-athletes, but in the rest of the world, this isn't a thing. In Europe and in Asia, the experience of going to college, to a university, doesn't include everybody coming into a huge stadium and cheering on their world-class basketball team or football team. That just doesn't happen. And what are the advantages of playing college sports? You learn about resilience, about toughness, about team play, about strategy. In the United States, a majority of the women who are C-suite executives played college sports. I went to a small liberal arts college where a majority of the student body played a varsity sport, and it changed the culture of campus. It engaged all sides of a person to be able to compete athletically and excel academically. To stem the current crisis in college sports, to stabilize the field, and to give us an opportunity to move forward, Senators Maria Cantwell and Ted Cruz--the chair and the ranking of the Commerce Committee--have worked tirelessly together. One of my main points today is to congratulate them and their staff for their amazing work on this. I have been honored to join with them and with Senator Schmitt in putting together and advancing the Protect College Sports Act. Last week, it got 77 votes in this Chamber, and you might have noticed it is rare for there to be anything genuinely bipartisan. In the State of Iowa--and I note my colleague has just joined me, and I will conclude in a few minutes here--when there is a game between the Cyclones and the Hawkeyes, that is a big weekend. In many of the States in our country, college football contests are bigger than elections, and in some ways, as I said at the beginning, that is a welcome diversion from the work we do here. I wanted to briefly explain my focus in working on negotiating this bill and why I strongly support it and think it is a great outcome. I looked at it as if I had a child who was playing college sports. What would I want them to get in terms of protection? compensation? transparency? This bill enshrines the name, image, likeness--or NIL--compensation in law. The court settlement that college athletes currently have, it makes it statutory, and it adds another fund--so, in total, $43 million--for the biggest programs to recruit and to retain. There is a dedicated $5 million fund for Olympic and women's sports. This is not public money from the U.S. Congress. This is money that has been raised and administered by State universities and by major colleges. It protects student-athletes from predatory agents. It requires that they be registered and certified, that there be an accessible database of NIL agreements, and that they charge no more than a 5-percent fee. Right now, with the gold rush of NIL, there are folks claiming their agents are showing up at the doors of standout high school athletes in rural parts of our country and selling them a bill of goods. This would protect college athletes. It guarantees the scholarships. How many times have you heard the story of someone who accepted an offer to play at a leading school because they were going to get to go to college for free? After playing half a season, they get injured, and they lose their scholarship or they decide to leave the sport or they decide to pick a different class or major than the coach wants. This guarantees, for 10 years, the opportunity to learn and study based on the scholarship offer made by a university. If you are hurt on the field, the decision about return to play has to be made by medical personnel whose professional responsibility is to the player and can't be overruled by coaches. Lastly--and I thought this was incredible--is wraparound healthcare coverage while in school; 5 years of postgraduate coverage for any sports-related injuries and a lifetime medical trust for any serious injury that develops later in life, like brain trauma or brain injury. These protections are available for all NCAA student-athletes--all, a half a million, not just the few in the highest visibility, highest revenue programs. So there are a few things that aren't in this bill. It keeps the door open for future collective bargaining. It does provide a new private right of action--the opportunity to sue, to protect yourself and enforce your rights that are created under this statute. And there is a new student-athlete ombudsman to make sure that athletes understand their rights and how to pursue their remedies. This bill will bring stability to a collapsing college sports system. No more conference chaos. No more coaches transferring midseason. And it will make for stronger teams where athletes know each other, and the coaches and the fans know who they are coaching and who they are cheering for. Look, most of the more than half a million NCAA athletes will never go pro, but they need to get and use their college degree. They will potentially suffer lasting physical consequences of their play, and this protects them and protects their future. By putting boundaries around transfers and eligibility, this bill stabilizes college sports. In conclusion, it is rare to find an issue that brings together tens of millions of Americans and that brings together Democrats and Republicans in this body. This isn't about political party or even what team you cheer for. It is about the future of young Americans who will engage and entertain and motivate all of us as we watch them throughout the year compete, but it will also protect. So my hope is that we will pass this bill before we adjourn because it will strengthen the path to college through sports. When our families gather at Thanksgiving this year, I hope the conversation is about the bright future of American college sports, which have been protected by a strong bipartisan compromise. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Iowa.

Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing Feasibility Act

Page S4892 · Official text

Joni Ernst (R-IA)

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Delaware for bringing up our Iowa State Cyclones and our University of Iowa Hawkeyes. We had the Cy-Hawk game just 2 weekends ago. Unfortunately, my Cyclones fell to the Iowa Hawkeyes. But God bless Coach Kirk Ferentz and his Iowa Hawkeyes. It was another great game for all of Iowa. Mr. President, I am here today to talk a little bit more about our national and economic security of the United States. This has really been the focus of my career--protecting that national and economic security. In 1940, the United States became the "Arsenal of Democracy," and our country came together to quickly accelerate production of weapons, vehicles, food, and supplies that enabled the allies to defeat the axis powers. Americans in factories, farms, small businesses, and across the country did what was necessary to make what was needed. Instead of internalizing the lesson that our ability to make these critical items in the United States led to great success, we spent much of the last 50 years off-shoring our jobs and our manufacturing capabilities. This is something China, Russia, and other nefarious actors around the world have been all too happy to accommodate and to take on themselves. Today, we have only one active facility producing cannon barrels. Today, we rely 100 percent on foreign sources for 12 critical minerals essential to our military and our economy. During COVID, we saw what happened when supply chains are strained. There was a global shortage of microchips, which upended manufacturers' ability to make everything from cars to computers. At the same time, moms in the Midwest had to worry about finding baby formula due to supply chain issues at both the production and shipping levels. Put simply: We have lost the ability to make what we need right here at home. In the event of a conflict with one of our near-peer adversaries, supply chains will be challenged, and the United States will have to make what it needs. Thank goodness President Trump, his administration, and Congress have been taking steps to put us on the right track and bring back the manufacturing capabilities we need here at home. My bipartisan Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing Feasibility Act builds on these efforts. My bill, which has already passed the Senate unanimously, directs the Secretary of Commerce to identify critical goods that are currently being imported and find ways to help domestic producers manufacture them in the rural areas and shovel-ready industrial sites. Rural Iowans are ready to roll up their sleeves and build the factories and processing facilities we need to secure our supply chains. We can and need to make things here. But you can't fix vulnerabilities you can't see, which is why my bill gives Congress and the executive branch the visibility necessary to identify gaps and then close them. I am grateful to Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks for introducing the House version of this bill, and for the House of Representatives passing the bill unanimously. Now it is time for the Senate to act and send this bill to the President's desk. Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1721 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the bill by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

Text printed in the Record (200 characters)

A bill (H.R. 1721) to direct the Secretary of Commerce to conduct a study on the feasibility of manufacturing in the United States products for critical infrastructure sectors, and for other purposes.

There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.

Joni Ernst (R-IA)

Mr. 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. 1721) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. I yield the floor.

Protect College Sports Act of 2026

Pages S4892–S4897 · Official text

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Utah.

Mike Lee (R-UT)

Mr. President, American voters deserve to have an election system that they can trust. Fair, safe, secure elections are a key hallmark of any society's ability to be able to claim the status of democratic self-rule. If you don't have safe, secure, independent, reliable elections, you have a widespread set of problems that will cascade and ultimately constrain liberty. Americans intuitively understand this. But at the moment, our elections are far less secure than they should be. Why? Well, because so much of it operates on the honor system. Now, an honor system is great. It works well if you are dealing with a smaller group of people, a closed-loop system in which everyone knows everyone else. And the honor system works well also if you don't have a real risk of somebody claiming to be someone they are not and if they don't have the ability to inflict harm on those who play by the rules. It is one of many reasons why there are a whole host of activities that, in our common experience, necessarily require someone to prove that they are who they claim to be. You experience this anytime you go to the bank, when you go to the doctor, to the pharmacy, when you are picking up theater tickets at will call--all kinds of circumstances. And, you know, one of the more familiar ones for Americans who routinely travel by plane is that when going through TSA, you have to prove who you are as well. If you leave the country, whether by land or by sea or by air or some other means, you are likely going to need a passport when you leave the country and when you come back into the country. These are all just a few--many circumstances in which it matters whether you are who you claim to be, so much so that it is important that you do more than just say: Trust me. I am who I claim to be. In the context of voting, sometimes we will refer to this as self-attestation, which is just a fancy way of saying it is the honor system: Trust me. I am who I claim to be. But, look, with good reason, it is not sufficient, self-attestation. "Trust me. I am who I claim to be" isn't enough when you board a commercial flight, when you purchase alcohol, or even when you attend the Democratic National Convention. Those are just a few of the circumstances where they don't allow you to operate on the honor system because they know that it matters whether you are who you claim to be. Now, even for something as simple and relatively low stakes as obtaining the coveted never-ending pasta pass from the Olive Garden--even there, they don't allow the honor system. Even there, you have got to produce ID to show that you are who you claim to be. It should not be any easier for someone to get away with voter fraud at a polling location on voting day than it is to cheat the Olive Garden through its never-ending pasta pass--and yet that is exactly where we are today. We allow the honor system. Even though we have laws that prohibit things like noncitizen voting, those laws have been rendered difficult--essentially impossible--to enforce, as against those who would abuse self-attestation in countless circumstances. Those are being revealed; those are becoming known. That thing that they claim never happens--voter fraud or noncitizen voting--just keeps happening over and over and over again--especially for something that many like to claim never happens. Well, it does, and we need to take steps to prevent it from happening. That is why I introduced the SAVE America Act. The SAVE America Act has two fundamental objectives--two very basic unassailable objectives: Let's make it easy to vote and let's make it hard to cheat. We have got to have both of those. The SAVE America Act does that through two different mechanisms: One, it requires, at the time of a new voter registration, for you to establish that you are, in fact, a U.S. citizen. And, second, it requires that on election day, at the time of voting, you show up with a photo ID--with a photo identification--so that you can prove that you are who you claim to be. Both of these things would make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. You have to have both of them. If you just make it easy to vote and don't make it hard to cheat, you are going to have that much more incentive and opportunity for someone to cheat, and we don't want that in this country. Americans overwhelmingly support voter ID laws for that reason. We are talking 83 percent of Americans, give or take a percentage point or two, depending on the poll. But Americans, by a margin of more than 4 to 1, favor voter ID laws, and we need one here. Now, with the SAVE America Act, we have heard some objections; we have heard some arguments. Nearly all of those arguments focus on the first component of the SAVE America Act. And at times when the SAVE America Act has been the pending business before the Senate floor, as it was just a few months ago, the arguments that we heard--probably somewhere between 95 and 99 percent of the arguments--coming from Democrats against the SAVE America Act were focused on the voter registration component: having to establish proof of citizenship beyond self-attestation at the time of a new voter registration. Now, those arguments were ill-founded. In every single circumstance, they were founded in something that resulted from a mischaracterization of law, a mischaracterization of fact, or, in many circumstances, both. They were not well founded, but they were often and strongly expressed. It is one of the reasons why my friend and colleague, the Senator from Ohio, Senator Jon Husted and I were talking one day, a few months ago, and decided: Let's try an experiment. Let's see what would happen. Given that nearly every one of their arguments coming from the other side of the aisle against the SAVE America Act is focused not on the voter ID component but, rather, on the voter-registration proof-of-citizenship component, let's run with something. Let's introduce something that would just contain the voter ID component of the SAVE America Act--this, after all, would help us figure out where the weaknesses are, what can pass and what can't pass--given that they almost never have argued against voter ID while opposing the SAVE America Act. And, in fact, many, if not most, of my Democrat colleagues in the U.S. Senate, at one point or another, in the very recent past--many of them this year, in fact--have said that they support voter ID laws. So let's introduce something that just focuses on the voter ID component of the SAVE America Act. Now, this bill--and, again, this overall approach--is one that Americans overwhelmingly support. We are talking 83, 84 percent of all Americans--Democrat, Republican, Independent, everybody mixed in. They support this. Why? Well, because it is good common sense. Everybody understands it. There are myriad circumstances in which it matters whether you are who you claim to be, and nowhere is that more important to the proper functioning of our constitutional Republic than it is in the context of voting and having secure elections. We have also seen that the need for these things has been enhanced dramatically in recent years, not only with the flood of noncitizens entering this country--we have now got, I think, between 30 and 35 million noncitizens residing in this country. It is now easier than ever for them, especially in light of the Supreme Court's botched interpretation of the National Voter Registration Act. Over the strong dissent of Justice Alito, the Supreme Court essentially told the States that absent new Federal legislation--legislation in the form of the SAVE America Act--self-attestation is essentially sufficient in that circumstance. So Americans overwhelmingly accept this. This is a rare issue. Now, bipartisanship is not itself all that rare, but bipartisanship to this degree--we are talking 83, 84 percent of all Americans agreeing with something like this--is significant. That doesn't happen every day. What is even more unusual, though, is when you have an issue where 83, 84 percent of all Americans strongly support a position, as they do in the case of voter ID laws, but then that overwhelming support doesn't match what elected Federal lawmakers believe. So it is not 83 or 84 percent that Members of this body support that. No, it is much closer to 50-50, and it breaks down almost perfectly along partisan lines. So there is a real disparity here. Americans overwhelmingly support voter ID, but in this body, it is a different matchup. But, look, what we have done is we have taken the least controversial part of the SAVE America Act, put it into this legislation sponsored by Senator Jon Husted, drawn from my bill, the SAVE America Act, just the voter ID component, the most popular form of it--the argument that very, very few Democrats have focused on when opposing the SAVE America Act--and let's push this forward. It is also significant that my friend and colleague Senator Husted was himself a former top elections official in the State of Ohio. He understands the importance of voter ID and wants to move that forward, and I applaud and congratulate him for his many efforts in support of the SAVE America Act and this narrower subset of this, which he has introduced. It is unthinkable, really, that any lawmaker--Democrat, Republican, or otherwise--would oppose something like this. And you have to wonder why--why oppose it? Why oppose it any more than you would claim that it would be unfair that you can't withdraw money from a bank account without ID or you can't board an aircraft without a photo ID? This approach, the self-attestation approach--the "trust me, bro" approach--does not, should not, must not be allowed to work in the context of our sacred elections. It is not good for America to not have these laws in place. It is especially bad for America when, in some States--including and especially the State of California--not only do they not require voter ID, but, as I understand it, they have a law in place that imposes a penalty--I believe it is a criminal penalty--if you even ask someone about an ID on election day at a voting place. This is crazy. It is upside down. It is backward. So we need a Federal voter ID law, and we can pass one right now. We can pass one right now, and we must. To that end, Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 547, S. 5271; 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 (Mr. Ricketts)

Is there objection? The Senator from California.

Alex Padilla (D-CA)

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, let me remind us all, colleagues, that we, as of today, are 41 days from the midterm elections; or, as I like to refer to it, it is simply the last day to vote, because a lot of people in States across the country take advantage of their right and opportunity to vote early, in person, like people in Virginia did beginning this last weekend. Many people in States across the country, including in my home State of California, exercised their right and option to vote by mail. I will get back to that in a minute. The point is, in a growing number of States, the midterm election is already underway. People in North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Alabama are already receiving their ballots in the mail. In Virginia, South Dakota, Minnesota, Vermont, and Illinois, voters are already going to the polls to vote in person early. In the next couple of weeks, additional States will begin. Nine more States will have begun their early voting. In my home State of California, ballots will be mailed to every registered voter in the State. So, again, the bottom line here is the 2026 midterm election has already begun; it is in full swing. So let's not be fooled about this attempt to pass a piece of the SAVE Act. No. 1, the substance. It is not just a voter ID bill. It is a bill--and the timing is curious--that seeks to create chaos and confusion over vote-by-mail and absentee voting. The other part is, indeed, the timing and its implications, trying to change the rules--because this bill, if signed into law, would go immediately into effect, creating chaos in the middle of an election that is already underway. But don't just take my word for it. Let me quote the Republican Lieutenant Governor of Utah, who says that this is "violating our constitutional right to a secret ballot." Why? Because the requirement to include a copy of your driver's license when you are voting by mail undermines the notion of a secret ballot in America. Let me quote the Republican Governor of Ohio, who says that a very similar bill that reached his desk in the State of Ohio represented "a significant burden." And, again, it is not just a potential or theoretical significant burden for some election sometime in the future. It would go into effect immediately, causing chaos and confusion and a burden for election administrators, who wouldn't even know how to begin to comply with this for an election that is already underway. Let me go even further and reference the Supreme Court's recent actions when they blocked President Trump's Executive order on vote-by-mail and what he was trying to do, giving authority and direction to the U.S. Postal Service to determine which voters get their ballots and which don't. Even Justice Kavanaugh, with whom I disagree on much--but even Justice Kavanaugh--said it was in part because changing the rules so close to an election "would be arbitrary and capricious." That was a couple of weeks ago that this ruling came out. If at that time the Supreme Court deemed it too close to an election, we are even closer now. And so, again, there is not nearly the time to properly, responsibly implement it, even if you agreed with this bad policy. Let me make a case for what is really going on here, all this talk about changing the rules around elections. This administration, including the President himself, has been trying nonstop to interfere and change the rules on the elections for a long time now, and those efforts have been successfully pushed back. I expect him to continue these threats and attempts--not just between now and election day--probably on election day and postelection day, if history is any indicator. Why? First of all, it is a desperate attempt to hold onto power because the writing is on the wall. In poll after poll, approval ratings, et cetera, show that Donald Trump is going to be in for a rough night this November. But it is also an attempt to distract. You would think that he--or we--could be spending more time on trying to bring down costs for working families. But, no, for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the unauthorized war in Iran, the price on everything is not just not going down; it keeps going up--the price of gas that people put into their passenger cars to get to and from work or wherever they need to go. The cost of diesel is also at record levels and being passed on to consumers in terms of increased costs on everything else--groceries, clothing, consumer electronics, and more. The threat to the economy is so bad that the Federal Reserve has not only not lowered interest rates as Donald Trump has practically demanded; they have taken a recent step to increase interest rates for the first time in 3 years to try to rein in inflation. So nothing is getting cheaper, nothing is getting easier, and a recent report showed that the administration's tariffs--again, the war in Iran; the trade wars that are unnecessary; and bad economic decisions--are taking a toll on American families: $4,200 per household in increased costs because of higher prices. And now the President has, once again, threatened our Canadian neighbors with endless tariffs. Look at healthcare. The average cost of employer-provided healthcare is expected to increase by at least 11 percent. What happened to the so-called "Liberation Day" of last April? President Trump promised that these tariffs would bring back manufacturing, make Americans more wealthy, pay down the Nation's debt, create jobs, and lower prices for consumers. That sure sounded good, but it couldn't be further from the truth. None of that has happened. Actually, the exact opposite has come to bear. But, again, instead of focusing on those issues, we are once again taking precious time on the Senate floor and talking about unnecessary changes to how people should be able to vote or not vote--maybe that is their ultimate objective--for an election that is already underway. Just because your team is losing at halftime doesn't mean you can call a timeout and change the rules or change the referees, trying to change the outcome. So let's dispense with this measure and get back to the real work at hand. Mr. President, I would therefore ask the Senator to modify his request so that instead of S. 5271 and notwithstanding rule XXII, the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of S. 5390, the End Trump's Tariff Tax Act and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Does the Senator so modify his request?

Mike Lee (R-UT)

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I appreciate the insight offered by my friend and colleague, the distinguished senior Senator of the State of California. He is someone I enjoy working with on multiple committees. He is a brilliant scholar and statesman, and I appreciate his arguments today. Now, I want to point out what we didn't hear in his argument. At no point do we have any effort to address the merits of this legislation, the merits of voter ID laws. Instead, what we have heard from Senate Democrats so far this year on this issue has been: This isn't necessary. We don't need it. It is needless as voter fraud doesn't happen. That has, of course, been proven very much false in recent months. Then they moved on to arguments like: Well, requiring voter ID laws would harm rural Americans or urban Americans. And then one day it is: It will harm older Americans. Another day, it is younger Americans. At times, they called them racist or sexist, which is odd because arguing that women are less likely to have and be able to produce a photo ID or that members of this or that race are able to do that doesn't make any sense. It doesn't comport with our common experience, with our common understanding. People of all races, people of both sexes, people in rural America and urban America and suburban America and everything in between, they have photo IDs because in this day and age, you have to have photo IDs. That is what they have been arguing so far this year. Now, today, what we did hear, most of what we just heard from my friend and colleague, one of the U.S. Senate's most gifted minds, was: Well, it is too late--too late. You can't change the rules midstream because early voting has already happened. Well, this is convenient after they have argued over and over and over again: We don't need this and it is wrong and it is racist and it is sexist. Now, the argument has shifted to: Well, it is too late. Sorry. You lose. So they have secured the delay and gotten us now to the point where we are just weeks before the election. Early voting is already commencing in certain parts of the country. And now the argument is: Sorry. Too late. So I would love to find out from my colleague from California, does this mean he would be willing to accept this legislation, to pass it, to pass it today, right now, if only we included a delayed implementation clause such that the effective date would occur at some point after this November's midterm election? I would love to know that, and I am hoping, at the conclusion of my brief remarks now, that he will tell us that. Then he moves on and asks the question: What is really going on, having never made any argument against the merits of this legislation. He makes it about time, and then he moves on and tries to attribute ill motives to me, to Senator Husted, to Senate Republicans, and to the Trump administration for supporting this; ill motives founded on sowing fear, uncertainty, and doubt, creating chaos in the elections, dogs and cats living out in the streets, a scene right out of the Book of Revelation. This doesn't make any sense, especially given that we could remedy that if only he would agree to just a simple delayed implementation measure. And even if we didn't, what is the worst case scenario if we passed this right now and the House of Representatives passed it tomorrow with an immediate effective date? The worst thing that can happen is that people show up on election day and they are asked to pull out a document that they produce several times a month; in many cases, several times a week; or, in some cases, several times each day every day. It is not that big of a deal; in fact, our election security depends on it and, frankly, should require it. Finally, then my friend and colleague the distinguished Senator from California tries yet again to distract attention away from this knowing, understanding perhaps, that this is supported by 83-84 percent of all Americans--Democrat, Independent, and everything in between. And it seems it is almost right out of "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure," where they are confronting an enemy, and not knowing what else to do, they say: Look, it is the Goodyear Blimp. And while the guy they are arguing with turns to look for the Goodyear Blimp, which is not, in fact, there, they run in the other direction. He then tries to make it about tariffs and asks that instead of this, we consider and we pass this bill S. 5390, which I saw for the first time only minutes ago, that has absolutely nothing to do with anything addressed by this legislation I am trying to pass here today, nothing to do with election security. Fine, let's talk about tariffs on another occasion, but that is not what we are talking about here. This is a distraction. It is a distraction away from something that the American people expect and demand us to do something about. So for these reasons, I cannot, I will not, I must not agree to those terms that we are just going to set this aside and move on to and pass this tariff bill that has nothing to do with election security. On that basis, I object and hope that my friend and colleague will tell us whether he is willing to agree to this legislation with delayed implementation mechanisms.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Is there objection to the original request?

Alex Padilla (D-CA)

Mr. President, I object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The objection is heard. The Senator from Kansas.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that myself, Senator Cassidy, and Senator Paul be permitted to speak prior to the scheduled recess.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. President, thanks for letting us come to the floor, and I do appreciate my colleague Senator Bill Cassidy being here with me today as well. Could you imagine you are in the market and you need a new car, you need a new truck, and you really need it badly--you don't have a way to get to and from work--so you get online and you look at the different models out there and be expected to make a purchase without knowing what the cost of that truck or that car was? Well, that is the way healthcare is right now. We expect consumers to have all the healthcare delivered to them, and months later they get a bill for it. We think that patients deserve pricetags just like consumers do in every other form of business. You think about the challenges of America today. Certainly the cost of living is upfront, and it is personal. And one of the big drivers of that cost is healthcare, health insurance. We have seen it go from 13 percent up to 18 percent of GDP. We have seen the cost of healthcare for a family go from maybe $500 a month a decade or two ago and now it is probably over $2,000 a month. So certainly the cost of healthcare, in so many ways, is driving inflation. This matters. It matters to the patients. It matters to the employers that are paying for the health insurance or a big portion of it. It matters to the Federal Government. If you are trying to balance the budget, if we could get the cost of healthcare under control, that would help us get toward a balanced budget. I mean, my goodness, it is a $7 trillion budget. Maybe $2 trillion, two-sevenths of our Federal budget, is on healthcare. So if there were more pricetags, it would help bring the cost of healthcare down; actually, about $1,000 a month. If patients had pricetags, it could bring down the cost of healthcare $1,000 a month. Our bill, as you may know, came out of committee 22 to 1, good bipartisan support. Our bill has real teeth to it as well. Our belief is just like in all forms of business, transparency helps consumers. And that is what we are asking here. We are not asking anything different than any other business. We want total transparency so patients can look at the different prices. A healthcare provider would have to give their cost upfront, not an estimate; a real price upfront as well. And, again, I just can't emphasize enough that this is bipartisan. It is ready to move, and that this is so important to the American consumer. I will stop there, and I will yield to my colleague from Louisiana.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Louisiana.

Bill Cassidy (R-LA)

Mr. President, I rise in support of the Patients Deserve Price Tags Act. Free markets empower people to live freely. When there is information held by a monopoly which cannot--and I, the consumer, can't figure out what that information is, it takes away my freedom of choice; it takes away my economic freedom because I am going to end up paying a price perhaps far higher than what I should. Right now, that is happening. People providing healthcare don't have to provide the pricetag to the employer paying for the insurance or the employee who may be accessing that care in their deductible or outside the policy. It is impacting people. Mortgage and health insurance--the price of being insured can be $29,000 a year for a family of four--$29,000 a year if you include the deductible with the cost of the premium, including the employer's share. So what we are trying to do is do something about that by giving the patient the power, giving her economic freedom by saying: This is how much it costs at this place, and this is how much it costs at that place. Let's put a point on it. A pediatrician orders an x ray for a child, a chest x ray. If you go down the hall, it may cost $500, and if you go across the street, it may cost $75. Right now, it is incredibly difficult for that mother to know. What we imagine is that with this information being made available, it would be made available not just to those who would pull the information together, but they, in turn, would make it available for the mom with the baby, and she could say: Oh, chest x ray for my child--$500 here and $75 across the street. I am going across the street. I can promise you, when you do that, the place charging $500 is going to begin lowering the rate. This is about doing something positive for patients. Senators Marshall and Hickenlooper and the HELP Committee majority and minority staff put together the Patients Deserve Price Tags Act, and, again, it gives the patient power. As Roger pointed out, it passed 21 to 1 out of the HELP Committee--bipartisan support to give patients power. I will give you one more example. Ten years ago, a friend of mine told me--this was 10 years ago--that if he converted atrial fibrillation in his office, it cost $130. If you went to the hospital and had the same procedure done, it was $13,000. Now, shouldn't the patient know? Because even if she is only paying a 20-percent copay, 20 percent of $130 is a lot better than 20 percent of $13,000. This could be the difference between a family able to pay their other bills. Ultimately, this will lower premiums because obviously if the cost of healthcare goes down, the cost of premiums should go down. It gives employers access to deidentified health claims data so that if, by the way, the insurance--if the doctor is charging $30,000 but is only paid $3,000 but the insurer bills the business $10,000, the business should know that. They paid a lot more than what the doctor charged. The business owner should know that, and right now, the business owner cannot know that. The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act is the first step to delivering what Americans asked for: healthcare they can afford, control in their hands, economic freedom. If Congress is serious about decreasing healthcare costs, we should pass this by unanimous consent today and send it to the President's desk. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Kansas.

Mr. President, I certainly want to echo my gratitude to my colleague Senator Hickenlooper for his help with this bill and his staff and my staff and the HELP Committee staff as well, all of the work they have done on this bill--bill that will bring immediate relief to everybody across the country. Real examples: An MRI of your knee might be, in one place, $300, and in another one, it might be $3,000. A hip replacement in one facility might be $15,000 but $150,000 in another location. We are not making those numbers up; that is the discrepancy you are going to hear about. Look, patients deserve pricetags. Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 522, S. 2355; further, that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to, 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

Is there objection? The Senator from Kentucky.

Reserving the right to object, this legislation is well-intended but also misguided. It doesn't address the root problem and, in all likelihood, will not lower any healthcare prices. Congress has spent almost a decade pondering price transparency, regulations, and implementing them to some extent. Even with all this effort, current price transparency tools are only used by less than 20 percent of patients. Patients in general ignore prices. Why? Because they are disconnected from the price. They don't pay. Someone else pays the bill. Prices are opaque because the patient is separated from the direct payment by a third party. For almost all patients, prices are fixed by a third party--either insurance or government, Medicare, Medicaid. Mandated transparency, when an insurance company is in the middle, has actually no effect on prices. Imagine it this way: About half of the country has Medicare, the other 10 or 20 percent has Medicaid, and then there is private insurance. There are about 5 percent of Americans who have no insurance. Now, transparency might make a difference there, but it actually already does. If you have to pay cash, everybody knows the price. Nobody will go in anywhere. If you are paying for something out of pocket, the prices are completely transparent and everywhere. An example is LASIK surgery. LASIK surgery is done to correct vision so you don't have to wear glasses. The prices are on billboards all around town. If you call the receptionist or anybody where you have to pay cash for an elective procedure, the receptionist will tell you on the phone what the price is. The one they won't tell you the price on is the gallbladder, if you have your gallbladder removed, because that has been negotiated with a third party, the insurance company. There is a price, and you are not going to, if you know the price, go get a better price. If they tell you at the hospital that the price is $500 but your insurance pays for the gallbladder, that is what it pays at the other hospital. If it pays $600 and you know the price and you go one versus the other--you don't get to negotiate the price. The price is already fixed. The government sets the prices, too, so if you know what the price is that Medicare is going to pay, it doesn't do anything. Nobody can change the price; it is actually mandated by law.

So the problem really is that prices are fixed almost all the time. It is not lack of transparency; it is that prices are fixed. Now, there is a part of the market that actually does work. It is called elective, which means not covered by insurance. It also works to a certain extent if you are willing to pay at that time. I go to a local HCA hospital on occasion, and when I pay, they say: If you will pay now, we will give you a 25-percent discount by immediate pay. So there are parts of the system that do work. But the opaqueness is because you are not paying. The opaqueness is because a third party is paying, and that really is where the system is broken. So there is almost nobody choosing any healthcare based on price other than the 5 percent or those who are in the elective market, the 5 percent who don't have insurance or in the elective market. Even if you have a high deductible but you still have insurance, all your prices under the deductible have already been negotiated. You may not know what it is going to cost, that it is going to be $500 for the gallbladder or whatever the surgery is going to cost you--you don't know those prices, but they have already been negotiated. If we tell you, if we mandate that they tell you and then they tell you, you aren't going to be able to go to another hospital and get a cheaper price because it has already been negotiated. The insurance company has already negotiated this with the hospitals. So this is well-intended, but it is just not going to work, and it just adds one more government mandate and is not a good idea. I would argue that the mandated transparency regulations will actually have limited effect even in the best-case scenario because over 95 percent of the healthcare market involves insurance or government middlemen already. Healthcare prices have continued to rise 5 to 10 percent annually because of the root cause of the problem: insurance and third-party payments. We also don't seem to have enough leverage as patients to get a better price. There is something that we could do, and it is a bill that I have had out there for years and that I would be happy to get behind a unanimous consent effort, and this is something called association healthcare or health association. The way they would work is this: Instead of an accountant and three employees trying to get insurance for four people, you join a buying group--this would be like Amazon, Sam's Club, Costco--and then a large group would negotiate, not for individual policies but for a group policy. It takes a change in our labor laws. We change the ERISA law to let you do this. Then you would be able to dial up Amazon, get on Amazon, and if Amazon had 40 million members that wanted to buy insurance, 1 person at Amazon would call up probably the CEO of UnitedHealthcare and negotiate a rate. So what we would do is grant you leverage. It doesn't cost anything, doesn't mandate anything, and lets you do what you want. It gets rid of aspects of our labor law that prevent this. It would let anybody join a buying group or co-op to buy their insurance. Now, understandably, the insurance companies are opposed to this. We haven't been able to get it out of committee. And one of the reasons is the Democrats largely oppose this because they say: Well, we are kind of for it, but we have to mandate what the insurance is. This has been the thing going all the way back to ObamaCare. When you mandate what is in insurance, you elevate the cost of it. So if we let the market take care of it, let people come together in co-ops to buy insurance, you could drive prices down. This window dressing won't work because the prices are already fixed, and knowing what the prices are won't bring the prices down. Employers already do some of this negotiation for you. There are examples. Lowe's Home Improvement has negotiated a $325 MRI at facilities in the highest tier. There are websites that will help you out if you don't have insurance. The only people who really benefit by some of these price transparencies would be people without insurance, but there are some. For example, there is a website you can go to where you can get an MRI on Sundays. If you live in a big city and you will drive an hour outside the big city and you want to get your MRI and you will spend an hour driving and do it on Sunday afternoon at 3 o'clock when the volume is really low, you can get a discount. There are websites that will direct you there. But until Congress is serious about reducing the Federal Government's role in healthcare, reducing the subsidization, allowing people to join co-ops--that is when we will actually get the price down. But this bill actually won't do it. I think it adds mandates, and it ultimately actually might increase the price of healthcare as we add one more cost to the insurance companies and those who have to provide healthcare. So, therefore, I object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The objection is heard. The Senator from Kansas.

Mr. President, certainly I agree on many of the points my colleague made, and certainly I am in favor of expanding association healthcare plans. The goal of that is more competition, and that is all we are trying to create. My colleague says this won't work, but transparency works in every other industry. I think it is well documented that our bill would save $1,000 per month. Here is the big fallacy in his argument. He is right that the insurance companies have negotiated these rates. So within one community, this insurance company has negotiated one rate with a surgery center, one rate with the hospital, one rate with an imaging center. So all I say is the patient deserves to see what that negotiated rate is, and then they can compare it. So it is like we agree, but he disagrees with the final step here: We want patients to know what that negotiated price is. A real example: Getting a hip replaced at a surgical hospital might cost $15,000 or $20,000, but at the hospital down the street, it might be $150,000. The same way with an x ray. Going to the hospital, you know, the x ray--the MRI might be $3,000 there but $300 down at the imaging center. So I agree that those prices have been negotiated, but I want to make sure it is in the hands of the consumers. Could you imagine driving down the street and gas stations--you didn't know how much the gas was going to be? Of course you wouldn't be able to make a good consumer choice. So that is all we are asking, is full transparency in healthcare just like in every other industry. I yield the floor.

Recess

Page S4897 · Official text

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Under the previous order, the Senate stands in recess until 2:15 p.m.

Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:43 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Mr. Banks).

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR (Executive Session)

Page S4897 · Official text

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Under the previous order, the Senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report.

The senior assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Angela Veronica Colmenero, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas.

Vote on Colmenero Nomination (Executive Session)

Pages S4897–S4898 · Official text

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Colmenero nomination?

Kevin Cramer (R-ND)

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.

John Barrasso (R-WY)

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Montana (Mr. Daines), the Senator from Iowa (Ms. Ernst), and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis). Further, if present and voting: the Senator from Iowa (Ms. Ernst) would have voted "yea." The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 47, as follows:

Text printed in the Record (1,020 characters)

Armstrong Banks Barrasso Blackburn Boozman Britt Budd Capito Cassidy Collins Cornyn Cotton Cramer Crapo Cruz Curtis 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 Sullivan Thune Tuberville Wicker Young Alsobrooks Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Blunt Rochester Booker Cantwell 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 Daines Ernst Tillis The nomination was confirmed. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). Under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Legislative Session

Page S4898 · Official text

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Under the previous order, the Senate will resume legislative session. The Senator from New Hampshire.

Mr. President, well, one issue that I hope will be at the top of the agenda when President Trump meets with Xi Jinping on Thursday is China's support for Iran. Two months ago, Iranian ballistic missiles struck the housing area at the U.S. airbase in Jordan. That attack killed three American soldiers and wounded four more. United States officials told the Wall Street Journal--and we can see this mockup of that article--that Iran got high-resolution satellite imagery of that base from Chinese entities before the attack. Unfortunately, this wasn't a surprise because senior Trump officials had warned for months that Chinese companies were giving Iran imagery that could be used to target American personnel. In May, the administration sanctioned several Chinese companies over precisely that activity. Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff recently returned from the Middle East, where they saw the damage Iran's attacks have done to United States facilities. It is not only satellite imagery that Iran relies on to carry out attacks against Americans. China also provides a critical economic lifeline to Iran. According to the Treasury Department, 90 percent of Iran's oil exports go to China. That is billions of dollars in revenue for the Iranian regime, and much of that oil is sold in defiance of United States sanctions, through shadow fleets, front companies, and Chinese refineries. That money supports Iran's military, its weapons programs, and its terrorist proxies. China is also a source of the parts and materials that Iran needs to build its weapons. The United States Treasury Department has repeatedly sanctioned Chinese and Hong Kong companies for supplying components for Iran's ballistic missiles and attack drones. Those are the same types of weapons that Iran is using to attack American forces. This cannot be treated as a side issue. When President Trump sits across from President Xi at the White House, he should use his leverage to do three things: first, to stop Chinese companies from giving Iran satellite imagery and targeting support; second, stop Chinese networks from supplying parts for Iran's missiles and drones; and third, stop the purchase and trade of sanctioned Iranian oil. If we want to bring this war to an end, we need to cut off the outside support that allows Iran to keep fighting, and that starts with China. The administration should enforce our sanctions against the Chinese entities helping Iran, and if China doesn't stop, Congress should impose additional consequences. I hope the President will also think about the weapon that Congress gave him when we passed the Russia sanctions bill because it allows us to tariff the Chinese companies that are purchasing Russian oil and gas. China is the No. 1 purchaser of Russian oil and gas, so they are the top funder of the war in Ukraine as well as being one of the top funders of the war in Iran. So I hope the President will take this opportunity to use the tools that we have given him and to point out to President Xi that China needs to start behaving differently. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from New Mexico.

New Mexico Land Grant-Mercedes Historical or Traditional Use Cooperation and Coordination Act

Pages S4898–S4901 · Official text

Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM)

Mr. President, I rise today to ask my colleagues to support the passage of my New Mexico Land Grant-Mercedes Historical or Traditional Use Cooperation and Coordination Act. Land grant communities in New Mexico have cared for our lands, sustained our communities, and preserved our traditions that are deeply rooted in our State's history and culture. But for too long these communities have faced unnecessary barriers when working with the Federal Government. My legislation is simple. It strengthens cooperation and coordination between land grant-merced communities and the Federal Government. It provides much needed clarity on Federal processes and ensures that historical and traditional uses are considered in Federal planning. This is about making sure the people who have cared for these lands for generations have a voice in the decisions that affect our communities, our livelihoods, and our traditions. This legislation has been years in the making and has earned bipartisan, bicameral support. It was among the last bills I passed as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives in December of 2020. It then passed the Senate in December 2022. In December of last year, it was reported unanimously out of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management have provided testimony in support of this legislation at recent committee hearings, and I am proud to have worked alongside New Mexico's land grant communities and the New Mexico Land Grant Council on this effort. This legislation recognizes the important role that land grant-merced communities have played in New Mexico for hundreds of years and helps preserve the connection for generations to come. I urge my colleagues to once again support this legislation so we can finally get this done. Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 476, S. 1363.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the bill by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

Text printed in the Record (303 characters)

A bill (S. 1363) to provide for greater cooperation and coordination between the Federal Government and the governing bodies and community users of land grant-mercedes in New Mexico relating to historical or traditional uses of certain land grant-mercedes on Federal public land, and for other purposes.

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources with an amendment, as follows: (The part of the bill intended to be stricken is in boldfaced brackets, and the part of the bill intended to be inserted is in italic.)

Text printed in the Record (11,998 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 "New Mexico Land Grant-Mercedes Historical or Traditional Use Cooperation and Coordination Act". SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Community user.--The term "community user" means an heir (as defined under the laws of the State) of a qualified land grant-merced. (2) Federal land.-- (A) In general.--The term "Federal land" means any land [or interest in land owned by the United States] under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned. (B) Exclusions.--The term "Federal land" does not include-- (i) land within the boundary of an Indian reservation; (ii) land held in trust or in restricted status by the United States for the benefit of-- (I) an Indian Tribe; or (II) an individual Indian; or (iii) land held in fee by an Indian or Indian Tribe that is subject to restrictions on alienation by the United States. (3) Governing body.--The term "governing body" means the board of trustees authorized under State law with the control, care, and management of a qualified land grant-merced. (4) Historical or traditional use.--The term "historical or traditional use" means the following long-established and habitual uses conducted by a qualified land grant-merced on Federal land for noncommercial benefit and for the benefit of the qualified land grant-merced: (A) The use of water in accordance with all applicable Federal and State laws (including regulations). (B) Gathering herbs in small quantities. (C) Gathering wood products in small quantities. (D) Gathering flora or botanical products in small quantities. (E) Grazing, to the extent that grazing has traditionally been carried out on Federal land, as determined by the Secretary concerned, in coordination with the New Mexico Land Grant Council. (F) Subsistence hunting or fishing that is conducted in accordance with State law. (G) Soil or rock gathering in small quantities. (H) The use and maintenance of an existing monument or shrine. (I) The use and maintenance of an existing cemetery by a qualified land grant-merced. (J) Any other long-established and habitual use conducted by a qualified land grant-merced for noncommercial benefit that-- (i) has a sustainable use by the qualified land grant-merced, as determined by the Secretary concerned, in coordination with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; (ii) supports the long-term integrity of the qualified land grant-merced, as determined by the Secretary concerned, in coordination with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; and (iii) is agreed to in writing by the Secretary concerned and the New Mexico Land Grant Council. (5) Indian tribe.--The term "Indian Tribe" means the governing body of any individually identified and federally recognized Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, community, affiliated Tribal group, or component reservation included on the most recent list published pursuant to section 104(a) of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5131(a)). (6) Memorandum of understanding.--The term "memorandum of understanding" means a memorandum of understanding entered into or extended, renewed, or revised under section 3(a)(1). (7) Noncommercial benefit.--The term "noncommercial benefit" means a benefit from a use, the primary purpose of which is not the sale of a good or service. (8) Qualified land grant-merced.--The term "qualified land grant-merced" means a community land grant issued under the laws or customs of the Government of Spain or Mexico that-- (A) is recognized under New Mexico Statutes Chapter 49, Articles 1 and 4 (or a successor statute); and (B)(i) has a record of historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; or (ii) has a patented exterior boundary that is or was previously located on or adjacent to Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned. (9) Secretary concerned.--The term "Secretary concerned" means the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior, respectively. (10) State.--The term "State" means the State of New Mexico. SEC. 3. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER LAND USE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR HISTORICAL OR TRADITIONAL USES OF QUALIFIED LAND GRANT-MERCEDES; REDUCTION OR WAIVER OF CERTAIN FEES. (a) Memorandum of Understanding.-- (1) In general.--The Secretary concerned, acting through the appropriate officials of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior in the State, in consultation with Indian Tribes, shall-- (A) not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, enter into an initial memorandum of understanding with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; and (B) subject to the requirements of this section, on the expiration of the initial memorandum of understanding entered into under subparagraph (A) or any successor memorandum of understanding entered into under this subparagraph-- (i) enter into a successor memorandum of understanding with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; or (ii) extend or renew, with any revisions determined to be appropriate by the Secretary concerned and the New Mexico Land Grant Council, the expired memorandum of understanding. (2) Applicable requirements and authorizations.-- (A) In general.--A memorandum of understanding shall-- (i) provide for enhanced cooperation and coordination between the Secretary concerned and qualified land grant-mercedes; (ii) provide for the Secretary concerned, acting through the appropriate officials of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, to enter into subsidiary agreements with qualified land grant-mercedes for specific projects consistent with the memorandum of understanding; and (iii) be consistent with, and subject to-- (I) applicable Federal laws (including regulations); (II) applicable land use plans; and (III) valid existing rights. (B) Permits and other land use authorizations.--A memorandum of understanding shall include-- (i) a description of the types of historical or traditional uses that-- (I) a community user or a governing body of a qualified land grant-merced may conduct for noncommercial benefit on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; and (II) require a permit or other land use authorization from the Secretary concerned; (ii) a citation to, and description of, any administrative procedures for obtaining the permit or other land use authorization under clause (i); (iii) a description of-- (I) the types of fees, including cost recovery fees and land use fees, that may be associated with a permit or other land use authorization under clause (i); and (II) if applicable, the process to request a reduction or waiver of the fees described in subclause (I) under regulations promulgated by the Secretary concerned; (iv) a description of the process for determining the permissible use of motorized and nonmotorized vehicles and equipment by a community user or the governing body of a qualified land grant-merced for noncommercial historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; (v) a description of the process for determining the permissible use of mechanized vehicles or equipment by a community user or governing body of a qualified land grant-merced for historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; (vi) a description of the process for determining the permissible use of nonnative material by a community user or the governing body of a qualified land grant-merced for any of the uses described in subparagraphs (C) and (D) on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; (vii) a description of any applicable restrictions and prohibitions on historical or traditional uses conducted by a qualified land grant-merced on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; and (viii) a description of the process, in accordance with applicable law, for consulting with 1 or more Indian Tribes that would be directly affected by a proposed historical or traditional use on Federal land by a qualified land grant-merced. (C) Routine maintenance and minor improvements.--A memorandum of understanding shall address authorization of routine maintenance and minor improvements of infrastructure used by a qualified land grant-merced in connection with a historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned, including-- (i) cleaning, repair, or replacement-in-kind of infrastructure; (ii) maintenance of a trail, road, cattle guard, culvert, or fence; (iii) maintenance of a monument or shrine; (iv) maintenance of a community cemetery by a qualified land grant-merced; (v) maintenance of a livestock well, water line, water storage container, or water tank; and (vi) any other routine maintenance or minor improvement associated with historical or traditional uses identified by the New Mexico Land Grant Council during the development of the memorandum of understanding. (D) Major improvements.--A memorandum of understanding may describe the process for authorizing major improvements of infrastructure of a qualified land grant-merced in connection with a historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned, including-- (i) construction or expansion of a community water or wastewater system of a qualified land grant-merced; (ii) construction or major repair of a livestock well, water line, water storage container, or water tank of a qualified land grant-merced; (iii) major repair of a monument or shrine of a qualified land grant-merced; (iv) installation of a cattle guard; (v) construction of a trail, road, or fence; (vi) construction or expansion of a community cemetery by a qualified land grant-merced; and (vii) any other major improvement associated with historical or traditional uses, as determined by the Secretary concerned. (E) Notice and comment.--A memorandum of understanding shall describe the policies and procedures for notice and comment on land management planning decisions and major Federal actions that could affect historical or traditional uses of Federal land by a qualified land grant-merced, and methods of providing the notice, including notice-- (i) online; (ii) in print; and (iii) by mail or email to the New Mexico Land Grant Council and Indian Tribes, including through a listserv that would include qualified land grant-mercedes, the New Mexico Land Grant Council, and Indian Tribes. (3) Development, execution, and implementation of memorandum of understanding.-- (A) Role of the new mexico land grant council.--The New Mexico Land Grant Council may represent qualified land grant-mercedes in developing, executing, and implementing a memorandum of understanding. (B) Role of governing bodies of qualified land grant-mercedes.--The Secretary concerned may invite representatives of governing bodies of qualified land grant-mercedes to participate in meetings and provide input during the development of a memorandum of understanding. (4) Limitation.--A memorandum of understanding-- (A) shall describe the process for a qualified land grant-merced to obtain authorizations for historical or traditional uses through existing authorities, subject to existing Federal laws (including regulations) and applicable permit and land use authorization requirements; but (B) shall not directly approve or authorize a historical or traditional use described in subparagraph (A). (b) Fees for Qualified Land Grant-Mercedes.--Where the Secretary concerned is authorized to reduce or waive land use fees or consider the

Text printed in the Record (6,650 characters)

fiscal capacity of the applicant in determining whether to reduce or waive a fee for a land use permit, the Secretary shall consider-- (1) the socioeconomic conditions of community users of a qualified land grant-merced; and (2) the annual operating budget of the governing body of the qualified land grant-merced. SEC. 4. CONSIDERATION AND INCLUSION OF PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO HISTORICAL OR TRADITIONAL USES IN LAND USE PLANNING. In developing, maintaining, and revising land use plans pursuant to section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712) and section 6 of the National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1604), as applicable, the Secretary concerned shall, in accordance with applicable law, and, as determined to be appropriate by the Secretary concerned, include a section in the applicable land use plan that considers and evaluates the impact of other uses in the land use plan on historical or traditional uses by qualified land grant-mercedes. SEC. 5. EFFECT. Nothing in this Act-- (1) modifies, limits, expands, or otherwise affects any treaty-reserved right, or any other right of, or obligation to, any Indian Tribe, including treaties or agreements with the United States, Executive orders, statutes, regulations, or case law, that is recognized on or after the date of enactment of this Act by any other means; (2) affects the authority of the State to regulate water use in accordance with all Federal and State laws (including regulations); (3) affects the authority of the State to regulate the management of game and fish, in accordance with all Federal and State laws (including regulations); (4) affects any valid existing rights, or valid permitted authorized uses of, Federal land; or (5) creates any implicit or explicit right to any type of use of Federal land. Mr. LUJAN. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment be 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 committee-reported amendment was agreed to. The bill (S. 1363), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows: 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 "New Mexico Land Grant-Mercedes Historical or Traditional Use Cooperation and Coordination Act". SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Community user.--The term "community user" means an heir (as defined under the laws of the State) of a qualified land grant-merced. (2) Federal land.-- (A) In general.--The term "Federal land" means any land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned. (B) Exclusions.--The term "Federal land" does not include-- (i) land within the boundary of an Indian reservation; (ii) land held in trust or in restricted status by the United States for the benefit of-- (I) an Indian Tribe; or (II) an individual Indian; or (iii) land held in fee by an Indian or Indian Tribe that is subject to restrictions on alienation by the United States. (3) Governing body.--The term "governing body" means the board of trustees authorized under State law with the control, care, and management of a qualified land grant-merced. (4) Historical or traditional use.--The term "historical or traditional use" means the following long-established and habitual uses conducted by a qualified land grant-merced on Federal land for noncommercial benefit and for the benefit of the qualified land grant-merced: (A) The use of water in accordance with all applicable Federal and State laws (including regulations). (B) Gathering herbs in small quantities. (C) Gathering wood products in small quantities. (D) Gathering flora or botanical products in small quantities. (E) Grazing, to the extent that grazing has traditionally been carried out on Federal land, as determined by the Secretary concerned, in coordination with the New Mexico Land Grant Council. (F) Subsistence hunting or fishing that is conducted in accordance with State law. (G) Soil or rock gathering in small quantities. (H) The use and maintenance of an existing monument or shrine. (I) The use and maintenance of an existing cemetery by a qualified land grant-merced. (J) Any other long-established and habitual use conducted by a qualified land grant-merced for noncommercial benefit that-- (i) has a sustainable use by the qualified land grant-merced, as determined by the Secretary concerned, in coordination with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; (ii) supports the long-term integrity of the qualified land grant-merced, as determined by the Secretary concerned, in coordination with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; and (iii) is agreed to in writing by the Secretary concerned and the New Mexico Land Grant Council. (5) Indian tribe.--The term "Indian Tribe" means the governing body of any individually identified and federally recognized Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, community, affiliated Tribal group, or component reservation included on the most recent list published pursuant to section 104(a) of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 5131(a)). (6) Memorandum of understanding.--The term "memorandum of understanding" means a memorandum of understanding entered into or extended, renewed, or revised under section 3(a)(1). (7) Noncommercial benefit.--The term "noncommercial benefit" means a benefit from a use, the primary purpose of which is not the sale of a good or service. (8) Qualified land grant-merced.--The term "qualified land grant-merced" means a community land grant issued under the laws or customs of the Government of Spain or Mexico that-- (A) is recognized under New Mexico Statutes Chapter 49, Articles 1 and 4 (or a successor statute); and (B)(i) has a record of historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; or (ii) has a patented exterior boundary that is or was previously located on or adjacent to Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned. (9) Secretary concerned.--The term "Secretary concerned" means the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of the Interior, respectively. (10) State.--The term "State" means the State of New Mexico. SEC. 3.

Text printed in the Record (9,860 characters)

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER LAND USE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR HISTORICAL OR TRADITIONAL USES OF QUALIFIED LAND GRANT-MERCEDES; REDUCTION OR WAIVER OF CERTAIN FEES. (a) Memorandum of Understanding.-- (1) In general.--The Secretary concerned, acting through the appropriate officials of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior in the State, in consultation with Indian Tribes, shall-- (A) not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, enter into an initial memorandum of understanding with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; and (B) subject to the requirements of this section, on the expiration of the initial memorandum of understanding entered into under subparagraph (A) or any successor memorandum of understanding entered into under this subparagraph-- (i) enter into a successor memorandum of understanding with the New Mexico Land Grant Council; or (ii) extend or renew, with any revisions determined to be appropriate by the Secretary concerned and the New Mexico Land Grant Council, the expired memorandum of understanding. (2) Applicable requirements and authorizations.-- (A) In general.--A memorandum of understanding shall-- (i) provide for enhanced cooperation and coordination between the Secretary concerned and qualified land grant-mercedes; (ii) provide for the Secretary concerned, acting through the appropriate officials of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, to enter into subsidiary agreements with qualified land grant-mercedes for specific projects consistent with the memorandum of understanding; and (iii) be consistent with, and subject to-- (I) applicable Federal laws (including regulations); (II) applicable land use plans; and (III) valid existing rights. (B) Permits and other land use authorizations.--A memorandum of understanding shall include-- (i) a description of the types of historical or traditional uses that-- (I) a community user or a governing body of a qualified land grant-merced may conduct for noncommercial benefit on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; and (II) require a permit or other land use authorization from the Secretary concerned; (ii) a citation to, and description of, any administrative procedures for obtaining the permit or other land use authorization under clause (i); (iii) a description of-- (I) the types of fees, including cost recovery fees and land use fees, that may be associated with a permit or other land use authorization under clause (i); and (II) if applicable, the process to request a reduction or waiver of the fees described in subclause (I) under regulations promulgated by the Secretary concerned; (iv) a description of the process for determining the permissible use of motorized and nonmotorized vehicles and equipment by a community user or the governing body of a qualified land grant-merced for noncommercial historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; (v) a description of the process for determining the permissible use of mechanized vehicles or equipment by a community user or governing body of a qualified land grant-merced for historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; (vi) a description of the process for determining the permissible use of nonnative material by a community user or the governing body of a qualified land grant-merced for any of the uses described in subparagraphs (C) and (D) on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; (vii) a description of any applicable restrictions and prohibitions on historical or traditional uses conducted by a qualified land grant-merced on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned; and (viii) a description of the process, in accordance with applicable law, for consulting with 1 or more Indian Tribes that would be directly affected by a proposed historical or traditional use on Federal land by a qualified land grant-merced. (C) Routine maintenance and minor improvements.--A memorandum of understanding shall address authorization of routine maintenance and minor improvements of infrastructure used by a qualified land grant-merced in connection with a historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned, including-- (i) cleaning, repair, or replacement-in-kind of infrastructure; (ii) maintenance of a trail, road, cattle guard, culvert, or fence; (iii) maintenance of a monument or shrine; (iv) maintenance of a community cemetery by a qualified land grant-merced; (v) maintenance of a livestock well, water line, water storage container, or water tank; and (vi) any other routine maintenance or minor improvement associated with historical or traditional uses identified by the New Mexico Land Grant Council during the development of the memorandum of understanding. (D) Major improvements.--A memorandum of understanding may describe the process for authorizing major improvements of infrastructure of a qualified land grant-merced in connection with a historical or traditional use on Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned, including-- (i) construction or expansion of a community water or wastewater system of a qualified land grant-merced; (ii) construction or major repair of a livestock well, water line, water storage container, or water tank of a qualified land grant-merced; (iii) major repair of a monument or shrine of a qualified land grant-merced; (iv) installation of a cattle guard; (v) construction of a trail, road, or fence; (vi) construction or expansion of a community cemetery by a qualified land grant-merced; and (vii) any other major improvement associated with historical or traditional uses, as determined by the Secretary concerned. (E) Notice and comment.--A memorandum of understanding shall describe the policies and procedures for notice and comment on land management planning decisions and major Federal actions that could affect historical or traditional uses of Federal land by a qualified land grant-merced, and methods of providing the notice, including notice-- (i) online; (ii) in print; and (iii) by mail or email to the New Mexico Land Grant Council and Indian Tribes, including through a listserv that would include qualified land grant-mercedes, the New Mexico Land Grant Council, and Indian Tribes. (3) Development, execution, and implementation of memorandum of understanding.-- (A) Role of the new mexico land grant council.--The New Mexico Land Grant Council may represent qualified land grant-mercedes in developing, executing, and implementing a memorandum of understanding. (B) Role of governing bodies of qualified land grant-mercedes.--The Secretary concerned may invite representatives of governing bodies of qualified land grant-mercedes to participate in meetings and provide input during the development of a memorandum of understanding. (4) Limitation.--A memorandum of understanding-- (A) shall describe the process for a qualified land grant-merced to obtain authorizations for historical or traditional uses through existing authorities, subject to existing Federal laws (including regulations) and applicable permit and land use authorization requirements; but (B) shall not directly approve or authorize a historical or traditional use described in subparagraph (A). (b) Fees for Qualified Land Grant-Mercedes.--Where the Secretary concerned is authorized to reduce or waive land use fees or consider the fiscal capacity of the applicant in determining whether to reduce or waive a fee for a land use permit, the Secretary shall consider-- (1) the socioeconomic conditions of community users of a qualified land grant-merced; and (2) the annual operating budget of the governing body of the qualified land grant-merced. SEC. 4. CONSIDERATION AND INCLUSION OF PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO HISTORICAL OR TRADITIONAL USES IN LAND USE PLANNING. In developing, maintaining, and revising land use plans pursuant to section 202 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712) and section 6 of the National Forest Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1604), as applicable, the Secretary concerned shall, in accordance with applicable law, and, as determined to be appropriate by the Secretary concerned, include a section in the applicable land use plan that considers and evaluates the impact of other uses in the land use plan on historical or traditional uses by qualified land grant-mercedes. SEC. 5. EFFECT. Nothing in this Act-- (1) modifies, limits, expands, or otherwise affects any treaty-reserved right, or any other right of, or obligation to, any Indian Tribe, including treaties or agreements with the United States, Executive orders, statutes, regulations, or case law, that is recognized on or after the date of enactment of this Act by any other means; (2) affects the authority of the State to regulate water use in accordance with all Federal and State laws (including regulations); (3) affects the authority of the State to regulate the management of game and fish, in accordance with all Federal and State laws (including regulations); (4) affects any valid existing rights, or valid permitted authorized uses of, Federal land; or (5) creates any implicit or explicit right to any type of use of Federal land. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico. Mr. LUJAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. JUSTICE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Redesignating a Playground in the New River Gorge National Park and Preserve in the State of West Virginia as the "Hearts of Gold Playground"

Pages S4901–S4902 · Official text

REDESIGNATING A PLAYGROUND IN THE NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE IN THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA AS THE "HEARTS OF GOLD PLAYGROUND"

James C. Justice (R-WV)

Mr. President, you know, we are dealing with some tough stuff, aren't we, all over the place. Whether it be the war in Iran or whatever it may be, we deal with tough stuff here every day, every single day. But just imagine this one. Imagine coming home to one of your children and knowing that today--today--you got the prognosis and they have childhood cancer. It can't get any tougher than that. No matter what any of us say, it can't possibly get any tougher than that. I would tell you that my bill, S. 2933, with Senator Capito and Congressman Miller, that we have all jumped on to try to support in every way--it deals about something that is so simple, so, so elementary today. You know, in my State, we have an unbelievable national park in the New River Gorge, and they have a playground there. All we are doing is asking just this: that we rename that playground for all those children--all those children--that absolutely have cancer and are fighting for their lives in every way and all the unbelievable families that are really hurting. The name we want it to be is "Hearts of Gold Playground." It seems so simple, because hearts of gold--think about this: the little gold ribbon. It stands for something that right now is going on all across this country and all across the world. This doesn't have anything to do with swings and slides and everything; it has to do with just absolutely what should touch all of our hearts. Cancer is unthinkable. We have made strides that are off the chart, and every day that goes by, we are a day closer to absolutely curing cancer forever more and eradicating it from our lives. Won't it be an incredible day? With all that being said, the great part about this is we don't have to have food fights, do we? We don't have to pick sides between Republicans and Democrats. We only absolutely need to move forward on goodness--real, real, live goodness. When I was a Governor not long ago, I had the opportunity in September--I think it was on September 13, 2023. I had the opportunity to make in West Virginia a proclamation--you know, that was just a followup to what we already had--make in West Virginia a Childhood Cancer Awareness Month in the month of September. You know, we signed into legislation a thing that absolutely had a new license plate--that had on this license plate "West Virginia, Cure Childhood Cancer." We have done some good things, but today--today--let's get on with unanimous consent to doing something really, really special that maybe a few--that maybe a lot will be there and absolutely feel really good about the moment we stood up for them in every way. God bless all those that are fighting this dreaded disease, all the great families, and all those incredible children. Mr. President, with that being said, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 645, S. 2933.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the bill by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

Text printed in the Record (238 characters)

A bill (S. 2933) to redesignate a playground in the New River Gorge National Park and Preserve in the State of West Virginia as the "Hearts of Gold Playground: In Honor of West Virginia Children and Families Impacted by Childhood Cancer".

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.

James C. Justice (R-WV)

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 (S. 2933) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed as follows:

Text printed in the Record (1,051 characters)

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION OF THE "HEARTS OF GOLD PLAYGROUND: IN HONOR OF WEST VIRGINIA CHILDREN AND FAMILIES IMPACTED BY CHILDHOOD CANCER" IN THE NEW RIVER GORGE NATIONAL PARK AND PRESERVE, WEST VIRGINIA. (a) Redesignation.--The primary playground located in the Grandview area south of the amphitheater at New River Gorge National Park and Preserve in the State of West Virginia shall be known and designated as the "Hearts of Gold Playground: In Honor of West Virginia Children and Families Impacted by Childhood Cancer". (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the playground referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the "Hearts of Gold Playground: In Honor of West Virginia Children and Families Impacted by Childhood Cancer". Mr. JUSTICE. How about that? Good stuff. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.

Romance Scam Prevention Act

Page S4902 · Official text

Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

Mr. President, each year, Americans lose roughly $1.3 billion to online romance scams. The victims are overwhelmingly senior citizens. They go online, thinking they are going to be able to find some companionship. They meet somebody. Often, this is on a dating site. They think that what they have made is a genuine connection because they are chatting online with this individual, but what is actually happening is they are communicating with a fraudster the entire time. Often, these victims--as I said, many of them are older. They are senior citizens. These victims will lose their entire lifesavings before they realize or before their friends and their family realize what has actually happened. Here is the thing that is so important to realize. These scam artists are not amateurs. In fact, they are often part of a transnational criminal organization that traffics individuals in developing countries with the promise of getting a high-paying job. With their passports stolen, these individuals, who are victims, are often transported to what are called fraud dens, and they are forced to pay back their debt to these transnational criminal organizations by working overtime to defraud our senior citizens here in the United States. It is really quite amazing. These are scam artists. They are part of transnational criminal organizations. They lure people into being trafficked. They promise those individuals high-paying jobs in other countries, and then they take their passports and put them to work in these fraud dens. And there, they are defrauding U.S. citizens. These scams are well financed, they are very sophisticated, and more often than not, they are using AI and other technology to dupe American consumers. Scams are proliferating in the virtual space. We are seeing much of this in online dating platforms, and we do think these online dating platforms have the ability and the responsibility to notify their users when they are interacting with a bad actor. By taking this simple step, the Romance Scam Prevention Act would protect our seniors from fraud and strike at the heart of one of the most lucrative financial streams for some of the most heinous criminal networks in the world. I want to thank Representative Valadao and his staff for their commitment to protecting our seniors and championing this important legislation, and I thank my colleagues here in the Senate who have also supported it. Notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 438, H.R. 2481.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the bill by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

Text printed in the Record (153 characters)

A bill (H.R. 2481) to require online dating service providers to provide fraud ban notifications to online dating servicemembers, and for other purposes.

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.

Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

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. 2481) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.

Protect College Sports Act of 2026

Pages S4902–S4912 · Official text

Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

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

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schmitt)

Without objection, it is so ordered.

John W. Hickenlooper (D-CO)

Mr. President, 2 years ago, Baby KJ was born with a rare, often fatal genetic disorder, and today he is walking and talking. How? Researchers at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and the University of Pennsylvania--funded by the National Institutes of Health--saved his life with the world's first personalized gene-editing therapy. And, today, CHOP seeks the next miracle--the next miracle cure--at its Morgan Center for Research & Innovation, which I visited last week. Now, these breakthroughs are possible because NIH funds foundational science that saves lives and lowers the cost of disease. Federal research and private enterprise have made American medicine the envy of the world, and AI is accelerating that discovery like never before. And, yet, at this most exciting moment in medical history, I fear we will surrender our lead to China through underinvestment and mismanagement. This summer, the White House rightly called for a new golden age of American science. Reaching that critical goal takes more Federal R&D investment and long-overdue reform. Now, we as Conservatives should recognize that basic research--like national security--is a public good that private capital rarely funds, and government fills the gap with funding long-term, high-risk work. I know those of us who believe deeply in fiscal discipline may hear a call for more Federal R&D spending and ask: Why--why, especially at a time of enormous deficit and debt? And that is the right question. The Federal Government should not spend more simply for the sake of spending more. But funding basic research saves lives. It lowers the cost of disease, it creates new industries, and it strengthens America's competitiveness. And if we do this right, this investment will more than pay for itself. And nowhere--nowhere--is that case more clear than in medical science. The Federal Government spends $7 trillion a year. Yet, less than 1 percent of that goes to NIH research, and that sliver delivers outsized returns. NIH's Diabetes Prevention Program, for example, cut type 2 diabetes by 58 percent. NIH-supported eye disease research halved legal blindness from wet macular degeneration, saving roughly $28.5 billion. And CAR T-cell therapy, pioneered at Penn with NIH support, reengineered patients' T cells to attack cancer-producing, decade-long remissions and replacing years and years of costly treatments. The list goes on and on. And, nationally, every NIH dollar also generates $2.50 in economic activity. In Pennsylvania, for example, NIH research sustains over 21,000 jobs and generates more than $5 billion annually. Now, earlier this year, NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya and I saw how researchers in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are using artificial intelligence to detect cancer, to speed drug recovery, and to make surgery far more precise--amazing--amazing to see what is happening. And, yet, America's global leadership is slipping. China is closing the gap. They have increased R&D spending from 36 percent of what we spend in the United States to parity in 2024. And, meanwhile, we are underinvesting in discovery. Federal R&D fell from 1.9 percent of GDP in 1964 to 0.6 percent of GDP in 2024. And since 2003, the NIH budget has shrunk by more than 10 percent, adjusted for inflation. Sadly, we have also let politics intrude on science. The Biden administration NIH, for example, gave CHOP--the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia--$155,000 to develop training on "structural racism" and "intersectional microaggressions." Such initiatives abuse taxpayer money, and they undermine the public trust. Finally, NIH has become opaque and bureaucratic. Nearly 1 in 3 grant dollars goes to overhead. Taxpayers can't easily see researchers' financial ties to industry, and young scientists--young scientists with some of the biggest, boldest ideas--they often have to wait until the age of 42 to receive major funding from NIH. Each of these failures has a fix. First, rather than cut NIH by 40 percent, as OMB proposed last year, we should double the $48 billion budget within 5 years. Now, I understand these are big numbers, but if these dollars yield discoveries that trim our $5.3 trillion health bill by just 1 percent, they will more than pay for themselves. And, more importantly, they will demonstrate that this AI revolution, it truly helps everyone. Second, we must prioritize merit-based science. This administration rightly reassessed grants lacking merit, and it canceled nearly 1,400 midstream--many over diversity, equity, and inclusion language that was in their proposals. Now, while some of these grants deserve to be canceled, some were legitimate research with buzzwords that were inserted to get approval from the Biden administration. On half of those grants alone, taxpayers had already spent $1.3 billion for work that will never be finished. So rather than waste that investment, we should let those researchers revise their applications for legitimate research and keep working. And that is why last week, I led five Senate Republican colleagues in a letter, urging the administration to do just that. Third, we must demand accountability. We must replace NIH's costly overhead with one that rewards efficiency, makes institutions compete for infrastructure dollars, and gives the smaller research centers a fair shot at receiving those grants. I will soon introduce the Sunshine for Researchers Act to require federally funded researchers to disclose their industry ties. And my bipartisan NIH Mentorship Modernization Act, introduced with Senator Coons, would help retain these amazing great, young scientists. At this critical--critical--moment, incrementalism is our greatest enemy. America was built by pilgrims and pioneers who dared to push beyond the known. We must summon that spirit again by investing boldly, by prioritizing science, and by reforming relentlessly. And if we dare--if we dare--KJ's story can be the beginning of a new golden age of American science that burns bright for decades to come. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Hawaii.

Brian Schatz (D-HI)

Mr. President, when the people building AI warn us about the potential for their models to cause serious harm, we must take them seriously. And this is not a question of whether you like progress or even how likely you think the worst-case scenario is. This is a question of who is in charge of this technology, whether we are going to ensure that people remain in control or if--for some inexplicable reason--we are going to allow machines to rapidly and continuously get more powerful than us, knowing full well the risks. The good news is that nothing is inevitable at this stage. What we do or don't do right now will decide what happens next with this technology. And so Congress must not leave town without taking action to reduce catastrophic risk. We can argue about everything else later--what to do about AI's energy use, what to do about the future of work, what to do about intellectual property, and all of that. But, first--first--we need to address the risk that is right in front of us. I know my colleagues have proposals in this space, and I am also working on legislation with Senator Warner. But the bottom line is this: We have to act now. And I want to be clear, if there is no movement in the coming days to seriously address this issue, Senator Warner and I will be back on here on the floor, attempting to pass bills to get this done. People are counting on us to protect them, and there is no excuse for inaction. Mr. President, in recent weeks, Hawaii experienced two separate hurricanes, which destroyed homes and roads, closed schools and offices, and left thousands of people in the dark. Ninety percent of the island of Kauai lost power during Hurricane Lala earlier this month--that is how extensive the damage was--and crews are still working to restore people. People on Hawaii Island, meanwhile, are still picking up the pieces from Hurricane Lala last month, which damaged 267 homes; washed out roads, bridges, and even a cemetery; and left people without power and water. And, now, the State is bracing for yet another storm. According to the National Hurricane Center, this one could bring life-threatening, catastrophic flooding and mudslides across parts of Hawaii Island and Maui. It has been one storm after another this year. We grieve those who died in the storms, and, as always, we are so grateful to the neighbors, the first responders, the linemen, the State and local officials who have been working together to help people in need. In the hours after the storm--in the hours after the storm--people brought over shovels to clear debris from streets and driveways and checked in on neighbors, while their own power was out. And in the days following, crews worked around the clock to restore power as quickly as possible. That is what we do in Hawaii. We take care of each other. That is the aloha spirit. And as response gives way to recovery, we will do everything we can to make sure Federal support is available for as long as it is needed. But, today, I want to talk about something that I have been reluctant to raise in my 14 years in the U.S. Senate, and that is that there is a reason these destructive disasters are piling up, one after another, leaving communities exhausted and governments depleted. It is the warming planet. Now, look, when someone is sitting in the dark without power for days or worse, and they have lost a loved one or their home, they don't want to hear about how dryer fields and warmer oceans are the culprit of their pain. And they are right. In the immediate aftermath of a disaster, our collective obligation--but especially the government's obligation--is to set politics aside and to help, not to make a point that you always wanted to make or to say, "I told you so," but to help. And so I have always hesitated to talk about disasters in this context. But the reason for the change, the reason I feel so strongly that it is time that we name the problem, as uncomfortable as it is, is that we can't go on like this. Disasters used to be an unfortunate reality you had to deal with from time to time, and now we're getting back-to-back hurricanes on top of historic floods that dumped more than 2 trillion gallons on the State earlier this year and catastrophic fires that leveled Lahaina 3 years ago. This is not normal. Now, it is true that we are in an El Nino year--and particularly a bad one at that--but this is not isolated to just this year nor is it limited to the great State of Hawaii. For 3 years in a row, now, we have had more than 20 disasters nationwide, each costing over a billion dollars in damages. And the world's eight hottest months ever on record have all been in the last 3 years. You can chalk that all up to being a terrible coincidence or maybe it is the weather fairy acting up; or you can trust your own eyes because we all see it and feel it. You feel it when you go to the park and your kids can't breathe because of the smoke from a wildfire that is burning hundreds of miles away. You feel it when you have to board up your windows and gather up supplies, as yet another storm approaches. You feel it when you move to a new State and find out that you can't get home insurance anymore. You do not need a fancy science degree to understand what is happening nor do you even need to love the outdoors to want to do something about it, because we are all paying the price for our inaction. And so what do we do about it? The most obvious answer is to scale up clean energy and reduce pollution as aggressively as we possibly can. But let's be clear: That will not happen overnight, and that will not stop the warming planet overnight. And so we need a plan to help communities to prepare for and respond to disasters in the here and now. We have to improve evacuation routes. We have to harden powerlines. We have to pre-position equipment and supplies. We have to make sure that people have access to air conditioning and heating. Clearing underbrush to slow or stop the fires, building infrastructure to reduce the risk of flooding--these are the kinds of steps that we need to be taking right now to protect people. Most of my colleagues here know that disasters are not a partisan issue. Hurricanes and floods and tornadoes and fires do not pick and choose their targets based on how the last election went. This week, it is Hawaii. It was Texas and Indiana earlier this summer. It will be somewhere else next. There, but for the grace of God, go I. And so we need to step up here. States and localities are lurching from one disaster to the next, and they need help. And every day Congress pretends like we don't know what is happening, more and more people get hurt. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Indiana.

Todd Young (R-IN)

Mr. President, as you well know, we are debating the Protect College Sports Act--legislation about the future of college sports--but I wouldn't be doing my job as a U.S. Senator from Indiana if I didn't point out that the Hoosier State happens to be the capital of the college football world right now. In one of the greatest seasons in the history of all college sports, the Indiana Hoosiers went undefeated last year and won the national championship. IU is back with a top-five team again this year and has a chance for another deep playoff run. And joining IU in the top five is the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, who also look really good this season. Whether it be in Bloomington or South Bend, we are hoping the championship trophy stays in the great State of Indiana this year. This support for these two teams shows that Hoosiers love college sports, and we want to continue rooting for our favorite schools and athletes for generations to come, but the future of college sports is at a crossroads right now. Congressional action is necessary to ensure that the NIL landscape is built on clear and fair rules and that it provides protections for both student-athletes and universities and ensures the longevity of not only college football and men's basketball but Olympic and women's sports as well. Without a Federal framework, the legal and operational uncertainty around this space will only cause our academic institutions and student-athletes to suffer. However, as with any legislation Congress contemplates, we have to do our due diligence to ensure it will work as intended. In addition to the many Hoosiers that are or will become student-athletes, I have a diverse group of engaged stakeholders on this issue based in Indiana, including the NCAA, USA Track & Field, USA Gymnastics, USA Diving, and, of course, top-tier universities. Throughout this process, I have stayed in close contact with these schools and organizations to make sure the legislation will work for them. I have also pushed reforms to this bill as it has gone through the process to ensure the interests of all Indiana colleges and universities, including our two Big Ten schools, are well represented. I am pleased that this final bill is supported by Indiana, Purdue, Ball State, Indiana State, and numerous other colleges and universities across Indiana. Getting to the finish line on a major piece of legislation like this isn't easy, and it requires a lot of work. I am particularly grateful to Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell for their collaborative approach and willingness to make changes to the bill to address concerns raised by the Big Ten. I know the Presiding Officer and so many other colleagues lent their voice and their labors to this effort, and I am most appreciative for all the breakthroughs for which they are responsible. I am supporting this legislation because I believe it is the right approach to protect the future of college sports. I believe it is the right approach. So I urge my colleagues to support the Protect College Sports Act and strengthen this uniquely American institution. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

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 PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno)

Without objection, it is so ordered.

John W. Hickenlooper (D-CO)

Mr. President, $43.6 billion and counting--that is the Pentagon's estimate for how much it has spent on this illegal war in Iran. Now, that is a lot of money. In fact, it is so much money that if every American family gave $500, you still wouldn't have enough to pay for this war--the missiles, the munitions, the warships. Over $43 billion of taxpayer money with no discernible benefit--wasted. But I don't want to talk about what $43 billion includes. Today, I want to talk about what that number doesn't include. Wars aren't measured just in dollars and cents; they are measured in lives lost, whether Americans feel safer at home, better off. And by all these accounts, the costs are enormous. Take the 19 brave servicemembers whose deaths have been disclosed by the Pentagon. That is 19 families who have lost someone irreplaceable. In just a few weeks, children are going to trick-or-treat without their parent. A few weeks later, parents and families will gather for Thanksgiving with an empty seat at the table. "I will never recover from this," one widow wrote on social media. What is even more heartbreaking is that we don't know exactly how many servicemembers have died in the Middle East amid this war. Reports say that the Pentagon is not being transparent with Congress or the American people. What we know is that every one of those lives lost deserves our gratitude, and every one of those families deserves an accurate accounting of this war's human cost. Since February, more than 800 servicemembers have been wounded in the Middle East. Some went days without receiving adequate hospital care. Many face life-altering injuries. Tens of thousands of their fellow servicemembers are still deployed, fighting a war that this administration still refuses to call a war. Back at home, their loved ones are left worrying and wondering whether their loved ones will get home for the holidays. You are not going to find any of those costs in the $43 billion pricetag. There has also been a staggering cost in America's loss to national security. Since June, the war has consumed between one-half and two-thirds of our key missile defense interceptors. Even with increased production rates, it will take at least 5 years to rebuild those stockpiles. Every interceptor we fire in Iran is one that we don't have protecting this country in the future. Iranian strikes have damaged or destroyed hundreds of buildings and structures on U.S. bases, along with our relationships with the allies and partners who agreed to host them as a bulwark against the aggressions of Iran. That premise has been turned on its head. At the same time, we have shown Iran that it can seize control of one of the world's most critical waterways and literally bring global trade to a stop, bring it to its knees. A quarter of the world's oil and a third of the world's fertilizer trade used to flow through the Strait of Hormuz. No longer. We have given our adversaries a roadmap and even a test drive for holding the global economy hostage, which the Houthis have already exploited in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. America's adversaries are celebrating our distraction, this futility, and the mounting costs. Every dollar we spend on Iran is a dollar we are not spending modernizing our military to protect against the threat of an ascendant China. Every warship that is deployed to the Arabian Sea is one fewer warship that is available to protect the South China Sea. But you are not going to find those costs in the $43 billion pricetag either. And then there is the cost, well, to you, the American people. You are paying for this war every day when you fill up your tank, when you buy groceries, when you pay your rent. Before the war, the national average for diesel was $3.72 per gallon. This week, it is over $6.50 per gallon for diesel. That is nearly a 75-percent increase. That means that a small farmer using 1,000 gallons of diesel during a harvest is paying roughly $2,800 more just to do the same work as before the war. Even Republicans have said it: This is "killing farmers' income"--that that is what this war is doing: "killing farmers' income." The war is also impacting Americans' grocery bills. Between July of 2025 and July of 2026, fresh vegetable prices increased over 6 percent, beef rose over 9 percent, and tomatoes are up over 13 percent. You shouldn't have to be a millionaire to drive to the grocery store and feed your family. Few have felt the financial cost of this war more than prospective home buyers. Before the Iran war, the average 30-year mortgage rate was hovering right around 6 percent--still too high for many families. Today, it is above 7 percent. For the average Colorado home buyer, that difference adds up fast. That is a mortgage that is $280 more every month, almost $4,000 a year, and over $100,000 over the course of a 30-year mortgage. That is real money that could go to childcare, to a child's college savings, or just their lifetime savings. For many, it means buying a home just doesn't make financial sense right now, even if you have been saving up for years. You won't see those tradeoffs reflected in the Pentagon's $43 billion pricetag for this war. Let me ask, finally, what is the cost of this war on our democracy? James Madison once wrote to his friend Thomas Jefferson that "the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it." That is why the Founders gave Congress the power to declare war--not the President, not the Supreme Court; Congress. Yet, so far, not a single Senator has introduced a legislative measure to formally declare war on Iran. The Presiding Officer may have noticed that up until now, I haven't mentioned President Trump. That is not because the President bears no responsibility for this war. He certainly does. President Trump unilaterally made the decision to enter this costly--for most people, unwarranted--war. But the decision about whether it continues does rest with Congress. To my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats, who are wrestling with this issue, just ask yourself, is this war making the lives of your constituents any better? That isn't a partisan question; it is a question every Senator has an obligation to ask and a responsibility to get the response for. Because whether the President is a Republican or a Democrat, Congress cannot surrender its constitutional power simply because the President belongs to our party. We all, each and every Senator--we all took an oath to defend the Constitution, not a President. We all took an oath to serve the American people, not a party. President Trump made the decision to enter this war, but whether this war continues is now a decision for all of us. What is the true cost of this war and the cost of allowing it to continue? Well, this week, the Senate is going to get another chance to decide. I urge, as I have been--I urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting to end this war now and for good. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Virginia.

Mark R. Warner (D-VA)

Mr. President, in a moment, I am going to ask this body on a unanimous consent basis to pass an important piece of legislation that has already passed in an overwhelming fashion out of the Republican-controlled House. And this legislation is to make sure that we protect our Federal workers and realize that our Federal workers do remarkable things. They inspect our food, support our troops, respond to national disasters, frankly, protect our safety. They deserve basic workforce protections that prevents retaliation, discrimination, and wrongful termination. Unfortunately, this current Trump administration has taken to heart the notion that OMB Director Vought said he wanted to traumatize the Federal workforce. Well, he has, and I cut this back because I have got a couple of my colleagues joining me. President Trump signed two Executive orders, one that ripped away collective bargaining rights from more than a million public servants and the other that unilaterally canceled hundreds of thousands of existing union contracts under, frankly, what I think are false national security pretense, to make it easier, frankly, to fire experienced nonpartisan civil servants and, candidly, to replace them with political loyalists. That is why we started the civil service back many, many years ago. I am joined by three of the four of us from the greater Capital area, so with that, I would like to yield my time to the Senator from Maryland Senator Alsobrooks.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Maryland.

Angela D. Alsobrooks (D-MD)

Mr. President, I would like to thank my colleague from Virginia for his leadership on this critical bill. Both Maryland and Virginia have uniquely felt the pain from this administration's effort to attack Federal workers. They are our constituents, patriots who serve this country no matter the party; people who have been disrespected over and over again by efforts to weaken their collective power. This administration has spent all of this time driving up the cost of everything from gas to groceries, starting wars that we are paying for at home, making healthcare unaffordable and making our lives worse. But what is the real threat in their eyes? Our patriot civil servants, patriotic civil servants. It is a cruel lie meant to cause division and distract the American people from the awful things the Republicans are doing. The fact is, President Trump and Russell Vought are afraid of the collective power of these workers. They are afraid that Federal workers' ability to fight back through collective bargaining will keep them from bending the government to their will. President Trump stripped Federal workers of their hard-won collective bargaining rights, one of the most significant acts of union busting in our Nation's history, all in the name of national security. Since then, he started a war in Iran with no exit strategy, bombed eight countries, and awarded billions of dollars in defense contracts to his sons and cronies. The real threat to our national security is not our dedicated civil servants; it is this corrupt President and his reckless administration. Together my colleagues and I are instead laser-focused on protecting these patriotic Federal workers on fighting back against efforts to erode their rights in the workplace. And this is personal for me and for the 460,000 Marylanders who serve the Federal Government. We will not stop fighting until the Protect America's Workforce Act is passed and our rights are restored.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Virginia.

Mark R. Warner (D-VA)

Mr. President, I yield to Virginia Senator Kaine.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Virginia.

Tim Kaine (D-VA)

Mr. President, it is good to be together with my colleagues, and I needn't repeat, but what I will say is I view this effort by President Trump and the administration to go after collective bargaining rights as a larger attack on the idea of public service because we have seen Federal employees laid off in record numbers through the DOGE actions at the beginning of the administration, through buyouts that were somewhat involuntary. One of the things the administration did early was they sort of indiscriminately laid off probationary employees because those employees don't have the ability to easily challenge their layoffs. Those probationary employees included massive numbers of veterans who because they had left Active Duty service and then joined the Federal civil service were probationary for the first 2 years, even though they were midcareer professionals who had patriotically served their country for decades. So you have stripping away collective bargaining rights. You have laying off probationary employees. You have other DOGE cuts. You have forced purchases trying to buy people out, trading civil servant for political so that they can be more easily fired. Announcing that you are going to move Agencies out of the DC area with the hopes that when you do, a lot of Federal employees may not move with it. This is all an effort to just dramatically shrink those who were serving the American public. And so what do you see? My colleagues and I know, tax season is a season where a lot of people are calling Agencies to try to get help. We had done a good job in reducing waiting times on the phone so that people could actually get their questions answered. They ballooned again this year because of all these layoffs. Of all the things that demonstrate the attack on public service that this stripping of collective bargaining is a piece of, the one that I think that just speaks most obviously was the one that came out about a week ago, that the administration put on administrative leave thousands of Federal employees and paid them anyway, but locked them out of their jobs so that they could not serve their fellow Americans. How is this effective to pay billions of dollars--billions of dollars to people--but force them to stay home and not let them serve their fellow Americans answering their tax questions, inspecting for food safety, being part of the national security apparatus? It is just an overall effort to attack Federal employees, even if you are going to waste money to do it. Our Federal employees want to serve their fellow Americans. We should allow them to do it free of intimidation or reprisal, and that is why I am so strong to stand with my colleague from Virginia to support the Protect America's Workforce Act.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Virginia.

Mark R. Warner (D-VA)

Mr. President, the way the President has formed these Executive orders under national security reasons--and I understand narrowly tailored national security exemptions might make sense, but the Trump administration is not doing this in good faith. Matter of fact, the President has inappropriately classified literally two-thirds of the Federal workforce as having national security missions without any explanation whatsoever.

So the Executive orders reclassify the entire Departments and Agencies, for example, the whole Department of Treasury, the whole Food and Drug Administration, the FCC, stripping these employees of their rights. So I urge my colleagues to join us in passing the Protect America's Workforce Act. As I mentioned to my colleague, this has already passed by a large margin bipartisan in the Republican-controlled House. So let's stand up for these vital, dedicated workers, protect longstanding labor protections and the integrity of the civil service. Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2550, which is at the desk; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Is there objection? The Senator from Florida.

Rick Scott (R-FL)

Mr. President, I object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The objection is heard. The Senator from Rhode Island.

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)

Mr. President, I am here with another unanimous consent request, and I appreciate the Senator from Florida, Senator Scott, for being here to participate in this exchange. I keep coming here to try to reinforce the obvious, scientifically clear point that climate change is real, that that is a simple scientific fact. The way this has gone is that I came to the floor earlier this year and asked my colleagues to agree on that simple scientific fact: Climate change is real and, frankly, our fossil fuel emissions are causing it. Well, I guess it is no surprise, but my Republican colleagues would not agree to that fact. So I have returned to the floor, time and again, in hopes that my Republican colleagues could agree to some of the simpler truths contained within that truth. Each time faced with well-documented truths about sea level rise or wide-ranging climate economic fallout, Republicans have objected. Well, climate change isn't stopping or slowing down, and I won't either. So today's simple truth is that climate change is making wildfires more frequent, more intense, and more destructive. My question is, can we not all agree on that? Here is some background. This chart from the National Interagency Fire Center shows that average U.S. acreage burned annually by wildfires has almost tripled in the last three decades, and the upward drift of the chart is pretty obvious. The science proving that climate change makes wildfires worse is both clear and straightforward, and it has been well-known for decades. It is not new. In fact, wildfires are part of a climate upheaval that Big Oil itself predicted. Shell, for instance, in a 1989 confidential planning document, warned that if fossil fuels were not brought under control, "there would be more violent weather--more storms, more droughts, more deluges. Mean sea level would rise at least 30 cm. Agricultural patterns would be most dramatically changed. . . . Boundaries would count for little--overwhelmed by the numbers. Conflicts would abound. Civilization could prove a fragile thing." That is what Big Oil said about climate change effects from their product back in 1989: "Civilization could prove a fragile thing." This is the underlying temperature increase that is driving the droughts that Shell predicted nearly 40 years ago. So, first, we know that fossil fuel emissions--climate change--is increasing global temperatures. You can't read it. This goes back to 1860. This is a pretty longtime chart in this instance. This is now. So how does it work? What does that heat do to drive wildfires? Well, warmer air draws more moisture out of the soil, out of plants, out of bodies of water. There is a scientific name for this. NOAA calls the phenomenon evaporative demand or sometimes atmospheric thirst. But you don't have to use scientific language to understand it. You just watch a puddle dry up on a hot day. That is what you are seeing. NASA, NOAA, and the Forest Service call drought conditions like these fire weather--fire weather. According to NASA's website on wildfires and climate change, "human-caused climate change [is] the main cause for increasing fire weather in the American West." Now, it is about a quarter of 6 this evening when I read that quote from NASA's website. You might want to start the shot clock on how long it takes for the fossil fuel goons to get in there and change the website. Climate change makes droughts last longer. The Forest Service reports that what was once a 4-month fire season now lasts 6 to 8 months. So there are more opportunities for any spark to start a dangerous blaze. And climate changes make drought conditions worse; that is, drier; that is, with more flammable material. So those fires that do start in that longer season are more likely to become severe. In January of 2025, a collection of wildfires in the Los Angeles metro area burned through over 15,000 homes and businesses, killed more than two dozen people, and poisoned the air with toxic pollution. Mr. President, 2026 is already on track for one of the worst wildfire seasons on record. August wildfires in Spokane, WA, caused over $1 billion in damage and destroyed over 800 people's homes. In July, wildfire smoke blanketed much of the country and degraded air quality for tens of millions of people. Researchers have found that the number of people in the United States who experience at least one extreme smoke day per year is up 27 times in the last decade. So if you used to have one extreme smoke day in your life, now you have 27 in the same period of time. Every county in the continental United States experiences degraded air quality from wildfire smoke at least 16 times every year, and the cost of that is real. Air pollution from wildfire smoke makes people sicker and causes deaths. Scientists have known for decades--decades--that climate change is making wildfires worse. More recently, the data has gotten more precise. We can now connect climate change to specific individual events. In the case of the L.A. fires, scientists from the World Weather Attribution and Imperial College London found that climate change made the weather conditions that drove these fires 35 percent more likely. This kind of analysis is called climate attribution. The National Academies recently released a comprehensive report on the current capabilities of climate attribution, including on wildfires. To no one's surprise, the fossil fuel industry and its allies are already out to discredit this work. In the face of tens of thousands of Americans losing their homes to wildfires, millions more facing skyrocketing insurance premiums as wildfire risk becomes either unavailable or unaffordable, and the risk of crashing home values--because when you can't insure your home, guess what. You can't get a mortgage on your home. And if you are the kind of person who bought your home with a mortgage and needs somebody with a mortgage to buy it from you when it is time to sell, that crashes the value of your home. It destroys its worth. Well, in the face of those facts, the traditional response of the fossil fuel industry is to try and hide the truth, but there is truth, and the truth is climate change is making wildfires more frequent, more intense, and more destructive. And I really hope that we are able to agree on that. Mr. President, so notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be discharged and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 559; further, that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Is there objection? The Senator from Florida.

Rick Scott (R-FL)

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, first off, I want to say that I respect my colleague's concern about the environment. Since I have been in the Senate, he has been very consistent about his concern about what we all should be doing for the environment, and I think we ought to take it very seriously--whatever we can do to protect our environment. But, today, I rise to object, to oppose this resolution. I have been to the Palisades. I have walked through the destruction. I saw the homes that were destroyed. I met with the people who lost everything. I talked to victims--including Spencer Pratt--and heard firsthand what they experienced and what they are still going through. We are talking about families who lost their homes, their possessions, their communities--in some cases, their loved ones. Today, those victims are still looking for answers. Mr. President, 12 people lost their lives in the Palisades fire, including vulnerable seniors. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Aging, I felt a duty to make sure those families got some answers. I held a hearing to hear directly from survivors and understand what happened to seniors and other vulnerable Americans who were trying to prepare, evacuate, and recover. I have also been working with Senator Ron Johnson to get to the bottom of what happened through our work on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Senator Johnson and I launched an investigation--a congressional investigation--because the victims deserve answers and accountability. We are looking at what happened before, during, and after the fire. We are looking at wildfire prevention and mitigation. We are looking at water and infrastructure. We are looking at staffing and preparedness. We are looking at evacuation plans and communications. We are looking at the decisions made by State and local officials. One thing is clear to everyone: California had serious leadership failures. Here is what we do know. In the months leading up to the fire, Mayor Karen Bass cut the Los Angeles Fire Department budget by $17.6 million. One month before the fire, the L.A. fire chief wrote in a memo that the budget cuts had "severely limited the department's capacity to prepare for, train for, and respond to large-scale emergencies, including wildfires." Mayor Bass tried to deflect blame by terminating that fire chief. Three days before the fire, Mayor Bass traveled to Ghana, despite warnings of an imminent, life-threatening wind event in Los Angeles. We know that Gavin Newsom has done nothing. He has done everything he can, though, to escape responsibility for the fire. Yet court documents and testimony show that Governor Newsom could and should have closed the Topanga State Park after the Lachman fire in accordance with his own State guidelines. People were still out there hiking while there were underground embers burning. Fire crews were turned away by park officials. None of the State's predeployed fire crews or trucks in southern California were sent to the Pacific Palisades, even despite the fire just days earlier. The bottom line: Karen Bass and Governor Newsom were responsible for leading their governments through this crisis. They were responsible for preparing for it, and they failed. The people in the Palisades deserve to know what went wrong and why their communities were not better protected. Senator Johnson and I are going to keep asking those questions. Our staff has sent request after request for documents and information. We have gotten delay after delay from California and Los Angeles agencies in providing the information we need. Let me be clear, we are not going to give up. We are not going to let bureaucratic delays prevent us from getting the answers for these families. We are going to keep requesting the documents. We are going to keep asking the questions. We are going to keep following the facts, wherever they lead. So here is my problem: I don't think it is appropriate for a resolution that comes to the Senate and basically, essentially, tries to tell those victims that all of those failures--failure after failure--can be covered up with the vague excuse of climate change. And, clearly, we all know that we have got to take our own advice, take care of our environment, and deal with anything that our environment might be doing. The correct response is not to spend more money when we already are $43 trillion in debt. It is an insult to the victims who are still waiting for accountability. It is an insult to the intelligence of every American who can plainly see that Mayor Bass and Governor Newsom failed. They failed these people. Now, in Florida, we know what responsible wildlife management looks like because I led these efforts as Governor of Florida. We know you just can't wait for a wildfire to start and then hope you can put it out. We made prescribed burning an important part of wildfire management strategy. You have to manage forests. You have to use prescribed fire responsibly. You have to make sure firefighters have the resources and infrastructure they need before disaster strikes. And you have to hold leaders accountable when they fail. That is real wilderness prevention. We can't write it off as climate change. That doesn't address any of these issues. It just lets the politicians in California pass the buck and escape responsibility. The victims of the Palisades fire don't need Washington passing another resolution telling them what caused their suffering. They know. They need answers. They need to know what will be done to make sure this never happens again. Senator Johnson and I will continue our investigation because the victims deserve nothing less. We owe it to the 12 people who lost their lives. We owe it to everyone who lost their homes. We owe it to every American who expects their government to be prepared when disaster strikes. So we are going to keep fighting for the truth. We are going to keep demanding records. We are going to keep demanding accountability. We are not going to give up until we get all the answers. We are not going to let the California officials responsible for these wildfires say climate change caused this as an excuse. So, again, I appreciate my colleague's concern about the environment. I agree with him that we have got to be very focused on how we can protect our environment, but, unfortunately, I object to this resolution.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The objection is heard. The Senator from Rhode Island.

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)

Mr. President, I am looking forward to the day when the Senator from Florida and I can be working together on these issues. As he knows very well, the University of Florida teaches the science of climate change. They have courses like Managing for a Changing Climate, Climate Change and Health, Climate Change Science and Solutions, Oceans and Global Climate Change, and many, many others. And it would be great if the science that the University of Florida teaches were also respected and reflected here on the Senate floor. It is more than just the University of Florida getting it right. This also lands in Florida in big ways because while wildfire may not be an issue in the good Senator's State, flooding sure is. And that same cascade of risk that I talked about--starting with climate risk, hitting insurance security, moving into mortgage availability, clobbering property values, and then leading to recession--is well underway in Florida. Some have called it the great climate insurance collapse, and in that very difficult situation, Florida is first and worst into that danger. Climate risk first; insurance collapse, second; mortgage market suffering, third--all of those things are happening. Indeed, the chief economist from Freddie Mac, who is not a green guy--he is a finance and mortgage guy--warned there was a coastal property values crash coming. And as we go through those different stages from climate risk to insurance to mortgages to property values, unfortunately, Florida led the country last year in lost property values, which is at least, in part, I think a function of this risk and how it is hammering Florida homeowners. So you don't really get away from this kind of a general risk. The insurance industry is not lying to everybody. They are not leaving customers who pay their premiums because they don't like the customer. They are leaving customers who pay their premiums because the property is no longer insurable. And what we are seeing here across the United States is massive predictions in insurance rate increase, and Florida is really at the epicenter of that. This dark band is a 200-percent to 300-percent increase, and you see it all along the Florida coast. They are running at about $14,000 already in insurance costs for homes in Florida. Double that--not double it, add 200 percent and add 300 percent. That is actually tripling and quadrupling. You can see how that begins to hammer the home's value. And here, you see a similar problem. This isn't just a cost problem; this is a nonrenewal problem. It is going to end up costing you more money once you are nonrenewed--absolutely. But you also have to go through the immediate hassle and worry and anxiety of finding out how the heck you are going to insure your home once your insurance company has nonrenewed you. And you can see the focus of nonrenewal is along these coastal areas, very heavily in Florida, and then in some of these wildfire areas that we talked about out in California. So this continues to come at us. It is focused on certain geographic areas more than others, but no place more than Florida. So I look forward to working with the good Senator from Florida on finding solutions before the bottom falls out of his insurance, mortgage, and real estate markets. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will call the roll.

The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Dan Sullivan (R-AK)

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Lummis)

Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Alaska.

Dan Sullivan (R-AK)

Madam President, I rise today to pass my legislation, the Bycatch Reduction Act, which is the most comprehensive trawl bycatch reduction legislation ever to come before the U.S. Senate, ever to come before the Congress. And we have made good progress on this bill. We have been working on it for, heck, in some ways many years. I am going to talk about this. We had a great vote in the Commerce Committee last week, and I see my good friend Senator Markey from Massachusetts, whom I have worked on a number of fisheries issues with--being a Massachusetts Senator and an Alaska Senator--is on the floor today. So I am hoping he is going to actually speak in support of this bill and pass it with me. This bill has already passed all the Republicans in the Senate, who have approved it. So this is really important for my constituents. For generations, Alaskans have depended on our oceans, our rivers, and our abundant fish resources that sustain all of us, especially salmon. From subsistence harvesters in our Native villages to commercial fishermen in our coastal communities to recreational fishermen across our State, Alaskans depend on healthy fisheries. For Alaska Native communities, our fish, especially salmon, are deeply connected to culture, tradition, heritage, and a way of life that reaches back thousands of years. Our salmon provide food, food security, jobs, culture. They support families and entire communities, and they are a source of deep spiritual connection. My wife Julie's family had a fish camp on the Yukon River for generations--generations. My daughters have all been raised in the summers on that river--every summer, my wife, my family, my in-laws, my daughters, a deep spiritual connection. Yet Alaska's salmon runs, in particular, are facing enormous challenges. Our fisheries, in general, are facing enormous challenges. We have seen and continue to see huge fluctuations in salmon, crab, halibut, and other species that Alaskans depend on. We know the ocean is changing. It is an issue Senator Markey has raised a lot. We have ocean acidification issues. We know these conditions will continue to change. We also know that fishing activity, particularly bycatch, and contact between fishing gear, trawl gear, and sensitive sea floor habitats affect the health and productivity of marine ecosystem. So what are we going to do about this? For years, Alaskans across our State, everywhere--coastal communities, interior communities, villages--have been asking for action. Fishery managers have asked for more data to make informed decisions. Subsistence harvesters have asked for greater transparency. Communities have asked for greater accountability. And fishermen have asked for the tools and technology they need to reduce trawl bycatch. It is a huge issue in my State. I have talked about this bill on the Senate floor a lot. This was an issue--a bill inspired by my wife Julie, as I have already mentioned her--it was part of my Alaska Salmon Task Force Act. What does this focus on? It is focused on bringing the best minds together--a bill that I got over the goal line, passed into law in 2022--to say: What is going on with our salmon runs? Why do we have really strong salmon runs in places like Bristol Bay, with their sockeye runs, and very weak king salmon runs on the Yukon River and the Kuskokwim River? So what we did in this bill is we brought the best minds in Alaska--State, Federal, Tribal, indigenous, university, fishermen, community members--to come together and say: What is happening? Why is it happening? And what is the pathway to get to what every Alaskan wants: stronger healthy salmon runs on all our rivers, across all species? So we did this. Alaskans coming together--this body coming together--produced this very important report, the Alaska Salmon Task Force Act. NOAA Fisheries helped. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game helped. But, most importantly, we set up task forces with regard to Tribal members on the Yukon, on the Kuskokwim to make sure we had their input. This was Alaskans coming together. It is not easy to get consensus--not easy to get consensus on issues such as fisheries and salmon--but we did that. And this laid out several different recommendations on moving forward to get to the goal we all want--a roadmap back to strong, healthy salmon runs. This is an issue I have been working on for years, and one of the recommendations was to reduce trawl bycatch. There are other recommendations that we are working on--ocean acidification and many others--but this was a big one. So we worked on this bill, again, with dozens and dozens of Alaskans. This legislation honors the call for action that so many Alaskans have made and our Alaska Salmon Task Force Act has as well. The Bycatch Reduction Act is designed to do that, and it has a robust toolkit with several clear objectives. First, it establishes for the North Pacific Fishery Management Council standards and monitoring requirements and action and timelines to take action to reduce trawl gear contact with the sea floor and protect important marine habitats. Essentially, it requires proven tools, such as mandating certain technologies like salmon excluders on trawl vessels, to, again, reduce salmon bycatch. It invests in science and technology to continue to work on better understanding ocean conditions. It creates new gear testing facilities. It reauthorizes NOAA's Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program that I have been focused on during my whole time here in the Senate. It reconstitutes the Alaska Salmon Research Task Force, with Alaskans and our indigenous experts with Tribal and traditional knowledge, as a bycatch task force overseeing NOAA's activities as they relate to trawl bycatch. Alaskans overseeing NOAA is very important for our stakeholders. This legislation also strengthens transparency and accountability for trawling on the North Pacific Fishery Council. It requires NOAA to make observer coverage requirements and bycatch information more accessible to the public and easier to understand. It expands opportunities for Alaskans, fishermen, and other stakeholders to participate in the council process. It raises the issue and starts looking again at the issue of conflicts of interest on the council. These provisions are not ideas that came out of a Washington, DC, office; they came from Alaskans. As I mentioned, this bill--the most comprehensive bycatch-reduction bill ever--builds on the work that hundreds of Alaskans did on our salmon task force to get to the goal we all want: stronger, healthier salmon runs across our State, across rivers, across species, especially given that we are seeing the devastating declines in salmon on the Yukon River and across the western interior of Alaska that have led to fishery closures, subsistence shortages, and families not being able to fish. As I mentioned, my wife's family keeps a fish camp on the Yukon River. We have watched those smokehouses, including ours, sit idle for years. It is heartbreaking. It is really heartbreaking to witness these families, their culture, the people who live along our great rivers not being able to put up fish every year, and they have been doing so for thousands of years. So this is an important first step. It is because of the task force and hundreds of conversations with Alaskans for years now that we need to take action. The Bycatch Reduction Act puts the recommendations here into action. Again, we had a very strong vote last week in the Commerce Committee. I think every Senator but four voted for my bill. I explained it, and we saw how important it was because the bill uses science, technology, innovation, accountability, and action to help support reducing trawl bycatch and strengthen subsistence traditions, sport fishing in Alaska. It is about giving fishermen the tools to reduce bycatch, and it protects fisheries and fish stocks that depend on them. It is about making sure Alaskans have access to the data and transparency they need to participate meaningfully in the management of our fisheries, and it safeguards the long-term sustainability, particularly of our salmon, that so many Alaskans depend on. I want to thank the countless Alaskans who have been working with me and my team for years now on these issues. We have sought and fought to reduce bycatch in many, many other ways, but this bill is a really, really important step. So I am hopeful that my colleagues are going to now pass it with me, and we will move it over to the House and get it passed and signed into law. Madam President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 4938 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the Sullivan substitute, which is at the desk, be 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

Is there an objection? The Senator from Massachusetts.

Edward J. Markey (D-MA)

Madam President, reserving the right to object, though this bill is primarily focused on addressing bycatch in the Northern Pacific fisheries, Alaska, we still have questions in Massachusetts about how this bill will affect fisheries that expand beyond the Northern Pacific. Again, people sometimes don't follow fishing issues that closely. They might be amazed to know that the largest two fishing areas in the United States are Alaska and Massachusetts--New Bedford, Gloucester. You have seen the movies. You saw "The Perfect Storm." You saw all of these incredible stories about Massachusetts and its fishing industry. The same thing is true for Alaska. So we share that designation, and we kind of debate over which one is the No. 1 fishing State in the Union. It is not a debate in Senator Sullivan's mind, I know, but it is important to us. Reducing bycatch is an important issue in Alaska and in Massachusetts as well, and it is very much worth pursuing, so I hope to continue to work on this topic with my colleague. It is a very important subject. When you are trying to catch one fish and now you start catching other fish as well, that is what we call bycatch, and you want to minimize that. You want to just focus on the primary fishing objective. So it is a very important subject, and it is something that all of the people in the Alaska delegation understand better than anyone else. It is a fishery issue that is essential in Alaska, but it affects other States, including Massachusetts, as well. But since this bill includes language that would direct new regulations across fisheries, I owe it to my constituents in Massachusetts to talk directly with the fishermen and fishing organizations in Massachusetts that could be affected by any changes, and they will need the time just to make sure any modifications that are needed would be included in the legislation. Unfortunately, this bill is moving rapidly. We haven't had enough time to tackle these questions and talk to those folks in Massachusetts, many of whom are out on their boats right now or are on the docks as we speak. We just need to give them the time to be able to fully consider the implications of this legislation just to make sure there is not an implication in the law of unintended consequences. We have areas of agreement, though--no question about it--to build upon. I support the establishment of a fund for bycatch mitigation and habitat protection, as well as for the reauthorization of the Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program. All of that, I think, we can agree on. I think increased transparency and accountability in fisheries management is a critical goal, and I fundamentally believe in the aim of protecting our fisheries and habitats from unnecessary damage and harm. I want to continue to work with my colleague on that effort in the weeks ahead. We are still going to be in session for another couple of months. I have to respect, however, the ongoing questions posed by my constituents in Massachusetts regarding what this bill would mean to them. My staff is here with me--Jeremy D'Aloisio, Hannah Vogel, and Colleen Brown. They are here. They are willing to start talking right now, to work on this issue with Senator Sullivan's staff in ensuring that we hear all of the concerns that come from the fishing communities in Massachusetts but then to come to the table to try to resolve any differences and to ultimately produce legislation. So that is the reason I come out here, and I do so having reserved my right to object. But having made my statement, I must at this point object to the motion of the Senator from Alaska.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The objection is heard. The Senator from Alaska.

Dan Sullivan (R-AK)

Madam President, I am disappointed in my good friend Senator Markey of Massachusetts. He and I have worked on, actually, a lot of fisheries issues together. He is right; Massachusetts and the State of Alaska have important fisheries interests. This one, fortunately, doesn't impact Massachusetts at all; it is solely confined to the North Pacific area. So I am a little disappointed that he is not moving forward. I want to thank all of my Republican colleagues who cleared my Bycatch Reduction Act, and we are going to keep working on it. I certainly will continue working on it with Senator Markey. Like I said, we have worked together on a number of fisheries issues over the years, and we are going to continue to work on hitting the bycatch issue with a multifaceted approach, as we have already done. One of the things we have gotten done here in the Senate, in both the Biden and Trump administrations, is to dramatically ban the importation of all Russian trawl-caught fish and now Chinese trawl-caught fish. That really helps with regard to the bycatch issue. We have been very focused on increasing the annual appropriations for the Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program that I have led on a number of times. I have even defended in court our Alaska halibut fishermen against Seattle-based Amendment 80 trawlers in a lawsuit and won that case with them. We are going to continue this work, building on the work from the legislation we passed for the roadmap to get back stronger salmon runs in Alaska and stronger fisheries with regard to salmon runs across species, across rivers, across the States, but this bill is a really important part of that, so I will continue to work this. If the Senator from Massachusetts and his staff have edits and amendments, I don't think it is going to impact Massachusetts at all, to be honest, but we will work with them because we are very focused. My constituents are very focused to finally see action on trawl-bycatch reduction, and this bill is the bill with action and timelines, and we are going to get it over the goal line. We are going to get it over the goal line. I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senator from Colorado.

Michael F. Bennet (D-CO)

Madam President, over the past few weeks, familiar scenes have been playing out in Colorado and all across the country. Families are buying new books and backpacks, picking up school supplies, and taking their children to the pediatrician for their annual checkup. For decades, back-to-school season did not prompt anxiety or confusion--except for maybe the kids like me that didn't do their summer reading. Parents could rely on the recommendations from their pediatricians, and the questions they did have were answered by professionals. But that peace of mind is being undermined by the current administration--including by the President of the United States and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, who have worked tirelessly to undermine decades of settled science around routine vaccinations that have kept kids safe in this country and around the world for years. The consequences of that broken trust are showing up in our emergency rooms and in our classrooms. Parents are increasingly concerned that their kids will go to school and come back with a serious disease. Right now, our Nation is living through the most severe measles outbreak in over 35 years. Measles is not a mild childhood inconvenience; it is one of the most contagious viruses on Earth, capable of causing high fevers, brain swelling, long-term disability, and death. In Colorado, we have already confirmed 25 cases this year, including 7 hospitalizations. Of these cases, 22 people were unvaccinated. Of the 25 who have measles in Colorado today, 22 were unvaccinated. That is the most we have had in over 30 years. You have to go back to 1995 to find an outbreak in my State that is even close to what we are seeing today. We are going backward when it comes to public health in the richest country in the world, and families in Colorado and all across this country are suffering the consequences. But what is taking place in Colorado is especially tragic because Colorado's experience is one of the reasons that the United States has a two-dose vaccine recommendation today. Back in 1988, an outbreak of 84 measles cases swept through Fort Lewis College in Durango. It caught public health officials completely by surprise because nearly every student on that campus had already received a measles shot. Under the guidance at that time, one dose was supposed to be enough, so CDC researchers--not people playing politics--CDC researchers went to Durango to figure out what exactly had gone wrong, to learn from this surprising outcome. There, they discovered something that continues to inform our vaccine policy even today: While the virus infected students who had only received a single shot, not a single student who had had two doses got sick. That campus in Durango became the proving ground for today's recommendation on measles. Based directly on what they saw at Fort Lewis and similar outbreaks at that time, the CDC updated its guidelines in 1989 to establish the two-dose MMR schedule recommended for every schoolchild in America today. This updated recommendation paved the way for measles to be officially eliminated across the United States in the year 2000. That was a quarter of a century ago, when, following the science, this country eliminated measles; and for 30 years after that, routine vaccine recommendations have kept children safe and in the classroom. Back then, faced with a public health emergency, we did what you would expect: We followed the evidence, updated our practices, and successfully prevented another outbreak of that scale or severity going forward. We learned from each other. Today, we are taking the opposite approach. Instead of defending the settled science that saved millions of lives, President Trump and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., have spent months waging a campaign to promote skepticism, stoke fear, and amplify outright lies. Look at what has happened in just the last few weeks. In August, President Trump signed an Executive order on childhood vaccines that overrides decades of settled scientific consensus. It encourages States to abandon school entry requirements. It recommends reducing the number of routine vaccines protecting our kids. And it calls for breaking up longstanding combination shots like the measles, mumps, and rubella--MMR--vaccine into separate single-disease doses spread over multiple doctor visits. That recommendation ignores the basic, undeniable fact, which is that separate single-disease shots for measles, mumps, and rubella do not even exist in the U.S. market today. They are so obsolete, and we were following the science, such that those single shots that the President and the HHS Secretary are calling for don't even exist today. And it ignores the evidence that we have from countries that have already tried to separate the dose and then reverted back because it didn't work. In the 1990s, Japan moved away from the combination MMR shot and attempted to separate the vaccines. The result was predictable. It was immediate and disastrous. They saw vaccination rates plummet and measles outbreaks surged. And, earlier this year, Japan officially abandoned the experiment--as we will, undoubtedly--and returned to the combined MMR vaccine. We don't need to repeat another nation's mistake when the safety and lives of American children are on the line. And telling parents to ask for shots that don't exist today only plunges families into further chaos. It forces parents to schedule endless appointments, take time off work, and pay multiple copays for vaccines that used to be delivered safely in a single visit. As everybody in this place knows, before I came to the Senate, I was the superintendent of schools in Denver. This was such a happy time every year, when people were coming back, bringing their kids back to school. And the last thing that they wanted to worry about was getting a free vaccine for their children or whether they should have that vaccine at all. In those days, not that long ago, there was nobody worrying about a President or an HHS Secretary peddling misinformation that would lead to the biggest outbreak in measles that we have had in 30 years. Things are hard enough as it is for families in Colorado and all across this country right now. We don't need to make matters worse by intentionally misleading them about what is safe and making it harder for them to get a free vaccine at the pharmacy down the street. And, by the way, I know my colleagues here well enough to understand something that I don't think the administration understands. It is not good enough just to get your kid vaccinated. The other kids in the school need to be vaccinated. The other kids in the classroom need to be vaccinated for vaccines to work. And, until this administration, that wasn't controversial because we could see what the science told us. And for families in rural Colorado, where healthcare access is already stretched thin and local hospitals are already in danger of going bankrupt because of the razor-thin margins, this burden that they are creating is almost unbearable. And to make matters worse, the other week, the President told the American people that the MMR vaccine--a safe, lifesaving shot given to hundreds of millions of children over four decades--the President called it "quite lethal"--"quite lethal." They had to send out Dr. Oz to clean up the record after that--the Director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid. They had to send him out on live television to contradict the President of the United States, who said that this routine vaccine that we have relied upon to save millions of lives was "quite lethal." Meanwhile, Secretary Kennedy spent last week serving as the keynote speaker for an anti-vax convention. In the middle of the worst measles surge our country has seen in 35 years, the Nation's top health official stood in front of a crowd of anti-science activists and reassured them that they have "a strong and steadfast friend in the White House." I wish I could tell families trying to get their kids back to school that they have a steadfast friend in the White House, that they have somebody who is trying to make their life easier, not harder; to make it easier to bring up a kid, not harder. When the leadership of HHS spends its time amplifying conspiracy theories, they are not making communities safer; they are driving down immunization rates, leaving our schools vulnerable, and putting the lives of Colorado's children directly in harm's way. Today, Colorado has the sixth lowest measles vaccination rate in the nation for kindergartners. Only 87.7 percent of Colorado kindergartners have received both doses of their MMR vaccine, and that is well below the 95 percent threshold for herd immunity. In fact, 57 out of Colorado's 64 counties now fail to meet that basic safety line. My message to Colorado parents from this floor tonight is simple: Vaccines are safe, they are effective, and they remain our strongest defense against diseases like measles. And when we allow misinformation to drive down vaccination rates, we aren't just failing to meet an important public health indicator; we are failing moms in Aurora and in Pueblo and in Durango. We are failing pediatricians like Dr. Stinar in Grand Junction, who are fighting on the frontlines of this disease; and we are failing vulnerable children across Colorado who have no choice in the matter. Parents, pediatricians, and families across Colorado should be able to expect more from their government. They deserve certainty. They deserve clear communication. They deserve to know that their public health system is designed to keep them safe, rather than to pursue another political agenda that has nothing to do with their education or their health. I think we should be having a debate in this country about the state of healthcare in the United States of America and about the ways in which we failed this generation and the next generation in providing a system that actually delivers better healthcare at a reasonable price and mental health care at a reasonable price, instead of plunging people into further misery or into bankruptcy. I wish we were having that debate on the Senate floor, but we can't begin to have that until the basic facts about science and medicine are taken seriously by this administration. The President should start by rescinding his Executive order today on childhood vaccines. He should fire Secretary Kennedy, as I have long called for. But until that happens--and I don't think it is going to happen in the foreseeable future. Until that happens, we are going to be stuck fighting battles against a disease that we functionally eliminated 30 years ago. Kids and families in Colorado and all across this country deserve so much better than that. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will call the roll.

The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Graham)

Without objection, it is so ordered.

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR (Executive Session)

Page S4912 · Official text

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar No. 918 and Calendar No. 919 and only PN769-2 Wade E. Arnold on the Secretary's desk in the Coast Guard; that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Without objection, it is so ordered. The nominations considered and confirmed are as follows:

Text printed in the Record (504 characters)

The following named officer for appointment in the United States Coast Guard to the grade indicated under title 14, U.S.C., section 2121(e): Capt. Stanley P. Fields The following named officers for appointment in the United States Coast Guard to the grade indicated under title 14, U.S.C., section 2121 (d): Jeffrey W. Novak Gregory C. Rothrock PN769-2 Coast Guard nomination of Wade E. Arnold, which nomination was received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record of January 13, 2026.

Legislative Session

Page S4912 · Official text

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Senate will now resume legislative session.

Morning Business

Page S4912 · Official text

Madam 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.

Cuba

Page S4912 · Official text

Peter Welch (D-VT)

Madam President, in the midst of all the chaos and cruelty inflicted by the White House on the American people and around the world, I suspect not many Americans are aware that we are also carrying out an illegal blockade against Cuba, a country the size of Tennessee that poses no threat to the United States, but whose government we have tried to depose by one means or another for more than 60 years. There is plenty to not like about the Cuban Government, which has defended a failed economic model and repressive political system for decades. The Cuban people deserve freedom and opportunity. But that does not justify the United States imposing a naval and financial blockade against an impoverished country that has neither attacked us nor threatened to attack us. The consequences for the Cuban people have been devastating. Today, they are suffering from daily electrical blackouts that have made everyday life a virtual nightmare. Schools, hospitals, public transportation, food production, trash collection, and many other life necessities have been brought to a practical standstill. Ironically, even our own embassy has been impacted to the point that they are unable, or unwilling, to provide the necessary support for Members of Congress who have a legitimate interest in observing firsthand the consequences of the policy of collective punishment against the Cuban people being carried out by our government. According to an article in the New York Times on September 17, 2026:

Text printed in the Record (639 characters)

"Thousands of containers filled with food, medicine and other goods bound for Cuba have been stranded throughout the Caribbean since two shipping giants stopped deliveries to avoid tough U.S. sanctions, according to diplomats, Cuban officials, merchants and others involved in the imports. "The containers stranded in various ports include humanitarian aid, from solar panels to medication to colostomy bags. Dozens of containers of aid purchased by different United Nations agencies are among them. U.S. sanctions have also hobbled shipments by air, and forced the World Health Organization to scrap planned deliveries of cancer drugs."

Peter Welch (D-VT)

Secretary of State Rubio claims that "if Cuba is a humanitarian disaster, it is because their regime is a disaster, because the economic model they follow doesn't work." That heartless statement ignores the fact that no such humanitarian crisis existed before the Trump administration launched what amounts to a unilateral policy of economic warfare against Cuba. This is unconscionable, it is immoral, and it is a clear violation of international law. If any country were to engage in such aggression against the United States, we would condemn it as an act of war. During the past year, Cuba's authorities have announced wide-ranging and long overdue economic reforms. While they are aspirational goals, they represent the kind of transformational reforms the United States has been calling for as long as I can remember. But has it made any difference to the Trump administration? To the contrary. The administration has only increased sanctions on Cuba, making it even harder to implement structural changes to the economy. It is apparent that nothing will satisfy the White House short of regime change--or regime collapse, with the consequent risk of social upheaval and mass migration. President Trump confirmed as much in his speech at the U.N. General Assembly earlier today, when he said that Cuba "will fall." Earlier this year, I spelled out steps that I and many others believe both governments can and should take to address the legitimate concerns of the other. Among other things, on the U.S. side, those steps include ending the failed economic embargo and removing Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, which has no factual or legal basis. On the Cuban side, it includes economic reforms to increase foreign investment and unshackle the private sector, and releasing prisoners whose only offense is criticizing Cuba's repressive one-party system. Back then, neither government showed interest in taking the initiative, and conditions for the Cuban people, and for Americans whose own government has prevented them from freely traveling to Cuba, have only gotten worse. But the Cuban Government has finally recognized that its antiquated centralized economic system needs to change, and they are trying to move in that direction. They have also released some political prisoners, including celebrated artist Luis Manuel Otero Alcantara, although he was forced into exile in the U.S. Others, including Maykel "Osorbo" Castillo Perez, must be released. The Trump administration, which routinely insists that its policy is to support the Cuban people, should match its rhetoric with action. It should support economic reforms that have the potential to significantly improve life on the island. Ending the illegal blockade would be an obvious and necessary step. No legitimate U.S. interest is served by compounding the misery of the Cuban people by preventing other countries and companies from sending lifesaving fuel and supplies to Cuba.

Orlando Letelier and Ronni Karpen Moffitt

Pages S4912–S4913 · Official text

Peter Welch (D-VT)

Madam President, 50 years ago yesterday, on September 21, 1976, Chile's former ambassador to the United States Orlando Letelier and his colleague Ronni Karpen Moffitt were murdered by a car bomb placed by agents of the Chilean secret police. Every year on the anniversary of that horrendous crime, people gather to pay tribute to Ambassador Letelier and Ronni Moffitt at Sheridan Circle, just 3 miles from the Capitol Building, where a small monument marks the spot where their lives were violently cut short. That monument is inscribed with the words "Justice--Peace--Dignity"--ideals they embraced in their professional and personal lives. For years, justice eluded Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt and much has been written about the decades-long effort to identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice. I want to acknowledge and credit the Institute for Policy Studies where Letelier and Moffitt both worked, along with Peter Kornbluh and the National Security Archive for their unending efforts to obtain the declassification of documents that record that long arc of justice, and to keep the memory of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt and the ideals they stood for in the public consciousness for the past 50 years. Eventually, the FBI identified two DINA operatives, American-born Michael Townley and Maj. Armando Fernandez Larios, as leading suspects. The U.S. then sought the extradition of DINA's top two officers, Manuel Contreras and his deputy Pedro Espinoza, which Chile's dictator General Pinochet blocked. A CIA review of its own intelligence on the car bombing concluded that there was "convincing evidence that President Pinochet personally ordered his intelligence chief to carry out the murder" and that Pinochet "decided to stonewall on the case to hide his involvement and, ultimately, to protect his hold on the presidency." When Chile returned to democracy in 1990, the George H.W. Bush administration agreed to drop sanctions against the Pinochet government for protecting the DINA officers if the new government prosecuted Contreras and Espinoza. They were both found guilty of conspiring to assassinate Letelier and given short prison sentences of 7 and 6 years respectively. But Pinochet, still the head of the Chilean Army, remained immune from prosecution, as did all the other torturers and executioners from his cruel dictatorship. It was not until Pinochet was arrested in London in October 1998 under the European Anti-Terrorism Convention that his immunity was lifted. Although the British released him after more than a year of house arrest, just days after his return to Santiago a courageous judge, Juan Guzman, filed papers in court to strip Pinochet of his immunity from prosecution. At the time he died in 2006 at the age of 91, he faced indictments and investigations for corruption and human rights atrocities. In 2012, a Chilean court finally ordered that Ronni Moffitt's case be officially investigated. Fourteen years later, on June 15, 2026, Chile's magistrate for human rights, Judge Paola Plaza, ruled that three former DINA officials were guilty of killing Moffitt. Brig. Gen. Pedro Espinoza, DINA's former deputy director for operations, was sentenced to 15 years. Gen. Raul Iturriaga, a high-ranking officer in DINA's "Exterior" department, was also sentenced to 15 years, as was retired Brig. Gen. Jose Zara Holger, also a director in DINA's international operations division. Fifty years after the assassination, the Moffitt ruling is part of the final chapter in the effort to hold General Pinochet and his DINA accomplices accountable for an act of international terrorism in Washington, DC. This past July, The New York Times reported on ICE's detention--and then release--of one of those accomplices, Armando Fernandez Larios, who defected to the U.S. in 1987 and served just 5 months in prison for his role in the assassination plot. Last October, in its quest to find immigrants with real criminal backgrounds, ICE detained Fernandez Larios and the Department of Homeland Security rightly labeled him "the worst of the worst" for his past crimes of homicide. But while hundreds of migrants who have no criminal history are summarily arrested and deported from this country every day, Fernandez Larios was quietly freed from the Krome Detention Center in Miami on March 19--a glaring example of the Trump administration's double standard in the administration of justice. Fernandez Larios should be deported for his part in the assassination of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt and the egregious human rights crimes he committed before coming to this country. The United States must not be a haven for foreigners who violate human rights or commit acts of terrorism. The Fernandez Larios case and the recent ruling in the case of Ronni Moffitt have refocused attention on the September 21 bombing a half-century ago. I join those who honor the memory of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt and reaffirm that no matter how long it takes for the wheels of justice to turn, no one is above the law, especially those who abuse their positions of power to commit heinous crimes.

Tribute to Admiral Jennifer S. Couture

Page S4913 · Official text

Tim Kaine (D-VA)

Madam President, I rise today to congratulate Rear Admiral Jennifer S. Courture on her retirement from the U.S. Navy and to honor her for more than 31 years of distinguished service to our Nation. Throughout her extraordinary career, Rear Admiral Couture has exemplified the highest ideals of leadership, professionalism, and public service. A native of Vineland, NJ, who spent much of her naval career in Virginia, she was commissioned through the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps program at George Washington University in 1995 and went on to serve with distinction across multiple sea, shore, and flag assignments. At sea, Rear Admiral Couture served aboard USS Wasp, USS Saipan, USS Elrod, USS Leyte Gulf, and USS Porter. She commanded USS Kauffman and Destroyer Squadron 28, deploying twice as Sea Combat Commander with the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group, one of the few women to command a carrier strike group in Navy history, highlighting her role as a trailblazer for women in the armed forces. Her leadership style has focused on empowering sailors and fostering a culture of excellence within her command. Her operational service included support for Operations Joint Endeavor, Active Endeavor, Iraqi Freedom, Enduring Freedom, and Inherent Resolve. Ashore, she held key leadership and policy roles that strengthened the Navy's people, readiness, and operational effectiveness, including service with Commander, U.S. Atlantic Fleet; Naval Surface Force Atlantic; U.S. Joint Forces Command; the Center for a New American Security; and the Office of the Chief of Naval Personnel. Furthermore, Rear Admiral Couture completed studies at the U.S. Naval War College and the Joint Forces Staff College and earned a master of arts degree from Old Dominion University and a doctor of education in Organizational leadership from Northeastern University. As a flag officer, Rear Admiral Couture continued to lead at the highest levels, serving as Commander, Naval Service Training Command; Commander, Carrier Strike Group Eleven; and Director, Military Personnel Plans and Policy, OPNAV N13. In each role, she advanced the development, readiness, and success of sailors and naval forces entrusted to her leadership. Rear Admiral Couture's career reflects a sustained commitment to mission, mentorship, innovation, and the people who make the U.S. Navy strong. Her accomplishments--including numerous personal, unit, and service awards, among them the Legion of Merit--stand as a testament to her devotion to country and to the sailors she has led and inspired. As she concludes more than three decades of honorable service, I congratulate her on an exceptional naval career and wish her and her family fair winds and following seas in retirement.

Tribute to Ganesan N. Annamalai

Pages S4913–S4914 · Official text

Madam President, I rise today to honor Mr. Ganesan N. Annamalai and recognize his contributions to our country as an exceptional public servant in the Department of the Air Force. As an Air Force Senate Liaison Officer from October 2023 to August 2026, Ganesan performed his duties with distinction, supporting the 118th and 119th U.S. Congresses. With roots in both Nashua, NH, and Austin, TX, Ganesan is a graduate of George Washington University and Johns Hopkins University and has served as a civilian in the Department of the Air Force for more than 8 years. He has demonstrated exceptional and unrivaled leadership in service to the U.S. Government throughout his career. In his role as Air Force liaison officer to the Senate, Ganesan advised Department of the Air Force senior leaders and helped develop strategic engagement opportunities to advance U.S. Air Force and U.S. Space Force priorities. He facilitated seamless collaboration on behalf of the Department of the Air Force across 62 congressional offices, serving as the principal Air Force liaison to 34 Senators and their respective staff. Ganesan supported delegations for Members of Congress and staffers to showcase Air Force equities in the United States and abroad, including to the Reagan National Defense Forum and the Paris Air Show. Through these interactions, he strengthened international collaboration and cultivated relationships crucial for advancing shared defense priorities. Most notably, Ganesan's strategic support was vital to the successful execution of more than 280 engagements for senior Department of the Air Force leadership. This included coordinating 43 posture hearings and managing the critical confirmation activities for the 27th Secretary of the Air Force, the 24th Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and the 3rd Chief of Space Operations. Ganesan's direct involvement and stewardship enabled Members of Congress to make informed decisions about Air Force oversight, funding and resources. Ganesan's leadership and composure were instrumental during his detail to the White House Situation Room as a duty officer from September 2024 through August 2025. He meticulously documented developments during the initial hours of emerging crises, providing real-time analysis directly to the President and other senior government officials. He led his team in convening urgent calls and providing robust intelligence to the Nation's most senior officials, exhibiting remarkable poise under extreme pressure. His efforts were central to supporting the National Security Council across two administrations, directly enabling the execution of 496 high-level phone calls, 23 official trips, and 29 critical policy meetings. I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in recognizing my fellow Granite Stater Ganesan Annamalai for his many contributions to the safety and security of our great country. We wish him all the best in the next chapter of his life.

Tribute to Cindy Rosenwald

Page S4914 · Official text

Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute to Cindy Rosenwald and recognize her decades of public service. Cindy is currently wrapping up her final term in public office, bringing to a close a remarkable 22-year career in the New Hampshire Legislature. After 14 years in the New Hampshire House of Representatives and 8 years in the New Hampshire Senate, she leaves a legacy of resilience, creative problem-solving, and genuine care for her constituents. Cindy spent her early years in Rye, NY, before earning a bachelor's degree from Harvard University and a master's degree from Rivier University. Following her education, she pursued a varied career in communications, healthcare, and teaching. She has held positions in hospital marketing and public relations and was formerly a vice president at Ted Bates Advertising, where she continued to work with healthcare and packaged food clients. Before entering the political arena, Cindy also worked in education, holding positions at multiple local universities. In addition to working as a writing instructor at her alma mater Rivier College, Cindy held positions at New Hampshire College--now Southern New Hampshire University--and the University of Massachusetts Lowell, where she eventually served as an adjunct professor. Fueled by her experience in the realm of social services, Cindy's transition into politics began in 2004 when she was elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives, representing the Hillsborough 30th district. During her tenure in the House, she became known as an active participant in legislative matters and a fierce advocate for affordable housing, childcare, healthcare, and policies to help working families. She was notably a key voice in the fight to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, championing relief for Granite Staters who had gone without health insurance and put off needed care. In 2018, Cindy continued this work after winning election to represent New Hampshire's 13th district in the State senate, which encompasses six wards in Nashua, NH. As one of the legislature's most tireless advocates for mental health care, she was the prime sponsor of legislation to raise reimbursement rates for Medicaid providers for mental health and substance use disorder treatment. With a keen focus on the future, Cindy also turned her attention to growing New Hampshire's economy, leading the successful effort to bring municipal cash reserve investments back to the State. She truly embodies what it means to be a public servant, and her advocacy for the well-being of Granite Staters is both unwavering and unmatched. Over more than two decades of public service, Cindy has fostered genuine relationships built on trust, courage, and partnership. She will soon conclude her fourth term in the New Hampshire Senate, but her persistent advocacy will leave an unforgettable mark on us all. Many of Cindy's colleagues, past and present, regard her as a visionary leader who fought long and hard to make New Hampshire a healthier and more compassionate State. She sought meaningful change through legislation, and she strove to ensure that no Granite Staters fell through the cracks. Cindy's enduring commitment to public service is an inspiration to us all. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in thanking Cindy Rosenwald for her many years of service to New Hampshire and her fellow Granite Staters. We wish her all the best in the next chapter of her life.

Recognizing the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests

Pages S4914–S4915 · Official text

RECOGNIZING THE SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE FORESTS

Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV)

Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute to the Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests and recognize its 125 years of dedicated service to land conservation and sustainable forestry. The Forest Society began with eight Granite Staters back in 1901. Concerned that New Hampshire's White Mountains were being rapidly clear-cut, they formed the Forest Society with a clear mission: to perpetuate the forests of New Hampshire through their wise use and their complete reservation in places of special scenic beauty. Inspired by great conservationists like John Muir and Theodore Roosevelt, they formed the Forest Society at a time when Americans across the country had begun to appreciate mountains for their unparalleled beauty and opportunities for outdoor recreation. As Americans increasingly recognized the need to protect the Nation's natural landscapes, the Forest Society set its sights on the White Mountains and promptly got to work. With former New Hampshire Gov. Frank W. Rollins serving as the Forest Society's first president and Philip W. Ayres serving as its first forester, the group's earliest efforts focused on land conservation projects in the northern reaches of the State. It first lobbied for the State of New Hampshire to buy Crawford Notch, and the purchase was finalized in 1911 after 3 years of hard work. Later that same year, the Forest Society famously advocated for the passage of the Weeks Act alongside the Appalachian Mountain Club, AMC. Known as one of the most important conservation laws in American history, the Weeks Act authorized the Federal Government to purchase private land to restore and protect forests and watersheds. It led directly to the establishment of the White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire, and thanks in large part to the public support the Forest Society generated for its passage, Granite Staters will continue to enjoy the many environmental, economic, and recreational benefits of this land for generations to come. The Weeks Act was a defining public policy achievement for the Forest Society, but its work was just getting started. Also in 1911, the group began to acquire land of its own, purchasing hundreds of acres on Mount Sunapee to protect it from clear-cutting. In the years that followed, the Forest Society acquired or helped protect some of New Hampshire's most treasured natural and recreational spaces, including Lost River Gorge, Mount Monadnock, the Old Man of the Mountain, and the Flume. By 1994, Forest Society reservations encompassed 24,584 acres across the State, a testament to its commitment to protecting New Hampshire's wilderness. Today, the Forest Society owns more than 68,000 acres in over 200 reservations and protects tens of thousands more through conservation easements and other arrangements. Over its 125-year history, the Forest Society has worked alongside landowners, municipalities, government agencies, and other conservation organizations to help protect more than 1 million acres of open space across New Hampshire. In recent years, the Forest Society has continued to advocate tirelessly for the wise use of our forests. It has remained a key supporter of the Land and Community Heritage Investment Program LCHIP, a program that provides competitive grants for land conservation and preservation projects that permanently protect landscapes in the Granite State. After a 2019 fire left two historic buildings at The Rocks Estate destroyed, the organization pivoted and used the loss as an opportunity to reimagine the historic estate. In 2020, the Forest Society launched its Forest Society North at The Rocks campaign, beginning a multi-year effort to renovate the site and expand its conservation, education and forestry work in the North Country. Another recent accomplishment is the Forest Society's work to preserve Mount Major and the surrounding land. As one of New Hampshire's most beloved hiking destinations, Mount Major's immense popularity has heightened the risk of trail erosion and damage to vegetation. The Forest Society has led numerous volunteer efforts to preserve this special place for Granite Staters and visitors to enjoy. With these projects and more, the Forest Society continues to embody its original objective of promoting the wise use of land through conservation and advocacy. The 125th anniversary of the Forest Society is worthy of celebration. It is an opportunity to reflect on more than a century of advocacy and hard work that have supported the longstanding mission of the Forest Society: to promote the protection and wise use of land through education and by example. I ask all Americans to join me in honoring this milestone, recognizing the generations of members, volunteers, landowners, and partners who have contributed to its story and saluting the next generation of Forest Society staff, volunteers, and supporters who will carry this legacy into the future.

Remembering John Tuggle

Page S4915 · Official text

Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute to John Tuggle, executive director of Region 4 Planning and Development Council, who departed this Earth suddenly on the evening of September 18, 2026, much to the sorrow of myself, his family and friends, the community he called home, and the many people across the State that he mentored, encouraged, and supported throughout all of their endeavors. In 1971, the West Virginia Legislature created 11 planning and development councils, which are responsible for administering and facilitating Federal and State funding for local and regional projects including water, wastewater, transportation, broadband deployment, workforce development, housing, healthcare, and tourism, among other priorities. These councils are the unsung heroes of infrastructure in our State. Most West Virginians do not even know they exist. Their work is not publicized; they do not seek attention or expect praise. They do it because they love their communities and want to create a better quality of life for their neighbors. Region 4 is comprised of Fayette, Nicholas, Greenbrier, Pocahontas, and Webster Counties--five rural counties in our State that are among the most beautiful and scenic places we have to offer. Each of these counties have unique challenges that make public infrastructure costly and difficult. But no challenge was too daunting for John and his team of project specialists, financial managers, and GIS coordinators. If you have ever spent time around John and the staff of Region 4, you know they are more than colleagues; they are family. My heart is with them during this difficult time. Throughout my time serving in Congress, I have had many opportunities to work with John and his team, and I can say without hesitation that they are the very best. So often, elected officials get all the credit when Federal or State dollars get handed down to communities for projects. It is our names written in the headlines, but truly nothing can be accomplished without the boots on the ground required to submit applications, manage projects, and make them a reality. John was the epitome of boots on the ground, the one who built trust and made things happen, and we certainly have big shoes to fill with his passing. Most importantly, John was a family man and dedicated Christian. He was a loving husband, father, foster parent, mentor, neighbor, and friend. He was an active member of the United Methodist Temple in Beckley, WV, and a volunteer for the Annual Community Thanksgiving meal in his hometown of Oak Hill, where he was one of the first to arrive and one of the last to the leave while serving free hot meals to thousands of his neighbors. When the June 2016 floods struck much of John's region, he was instrumental in the recovery efforts, restoring vital infrastructure to communities and working with volunteer organizations to help rebuild the homes and lives of those impacted. John and his wife Romona were proud foster parents and remained in their children's lives even after they left his family's care. John Tuggle was the best of us. He was a gentle giant. Yes, he was impossible to miss even in a crowded room, but it was his warmth, kindness, knowledge, and commitment to helping others that made him larger than life. His spirit lives on through the many projects and people he helped shape. Charlie and I join countless others across West Virginia in prayer for his wife Romona, his family, and many friends.

Remembering Karen Clark

Pages S4915–S4916 · Official text

Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)

Madam President, on behalf of myself and Senator Tina Smith of Minnesota, I rise today to honor Minnesota State Representative Karen Clark, who passed away in June after a lifetime of service to our State. Karen was raised on a farm near Edgerton, MN, where she first developed her love for the land and passion for protecting the earth--a commitment that would come to define her legacy as a legislator and the cofounder of an environmental organization. She earned her degree from the College of Saint Teresa and began working as a public health nurse, providing care to underserved communities. Karen was also known as a powerhouse community organizer fighting for civil rights. In 1980, she turned her focus to the State house and was elected as a State representative. Karen won that first race promising to be a fighter for social justice and economic justice. And for 38 years, she never wavered from that promise. Karen strengthened protections for survivors of domestic violence, got rid of BPA in baby bottles, stood up for the environment and workers, as well as for immigrants and refugees, and wrote the bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Minnesota. She did all of this as a trailblazer, as the first openly lesbian legislator to serve in the Minnesota State House. Karen was committed to doing the right thing, no matter how long it took and no matter the obstacles in her way. After an earlier setback in the fight for marriage equality, Karen did not give up. She did not lose hope. She did not lose sight of the fight, and we remember her words from that moment: "The Minnesota I know is a place of inclusion, tolerance, and love." Thanks to Karen, Minnesota is a more inclusive place and warmer place all the more. There are many words that describe Karen: organizer, environmentalist, legislator, advocate, nurse. But above them all, we think of Karen as the best of Minnesota, as the very ideal of a servant leader. She will be dearly missed by her wife Dr. Jacquelyn Zita and all who benefited from her dedication, compassion, and service.

Recognizing Allegheny County Airport

Page S4916 · Official text

Madam President, I rise today to honor Allegheny County Airport, known to Pennsylvanians as AGC, as it celebrates 95 years of service to the National Airspace System, to southwestern Pennsylvania, and to our Nation. Ninety-five years ago, on September 11, 1931, Allegheny County Airport opened as the Nation's third-largest commercial airport and one of the first modern air facilities built with a paved runway system. That bold beginning set the tone for nearly a century of leadership in American aviation. Today, AGC continues to serve as a premier gateway for business and general aviation. As an FAA-designated General Aviation Reliever Airport within the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, it preserves critical airspace efficiency for Pittsburgh International Airport while supporting the economic vitality of the region, including during major national events such as the 2025 U.S. Open and the 2026 NFL Draft. AGC's role extends well beyond commerce. Nearly 20 percent of all flights at the airport are dedicated to lifesaving patient care through STAT MedEvac operations, making it an indispensable partner in emergency air medical logistics and time-sensitive organ transport across the region. The airport has also long served as a center of aerospace education and workforce development. It is home to the accredited Pittsburgh Institute of Aeronautics and an ATP Flight School, both of which prepare the next generation of certified technicians and commercial pilots to serve our Nation's skies. Over the course of its 95-year history, Allegheny County Airport has facilitated countless critical VIP and executive movements, including historic visits by Presidents Harry S. Truman, Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden. On behalf of the people of Pennsylvania, I congratulate Allegheny County Airport on this remarkable milestone and thank its leadership, employees, and partners for 95 years of service, safety, and excellence. I look forward to its continued success for decades to come.

Recognizing Visioncorps

Page S4916 · Official text

Madam President, I rise today to honor VisionCorps of Lancaster, PA, as it celebrates its 100th anniversary of service to individuals who are blind or vision impaired. VisionCorps was founded in 1926 by a group of local businessmen committed to helping veterans blinded during the First World War, and others who were blind, learn a trade. What began as a small workshop teaching skills such as basket weaving and chair caning has grown, over a century, into a comprehensive rehabilitation and support services organization serving thousands of Pennsylvanians. Today, VisionCorps provides low vision occupational therapy, safe travel training, assistive technology instruction, employment services, and independent living support to help individuals who are blind or vision impaired overcome barriers and live fuller, more independent lives. Serving communities across southeastern and south-central Pennsylvania, the organization has also built meaningful employment pathways for people who are blind, including through its long-standing partnership with the National Industries for the Blind. For a century, VisionCorps has stayed true to its founding purpose: empowering individuals who are blind or vision impaired to attain independence. On behalf of the people of Pennsylvania, I congratulate VisionCorps on its 100th anniversary and thank its staff, volunteers, and supporters for a century of changing lives.

Remembering James Brueggemann

Page S4916 · Official text

Madam President, I rise today to honor the life and memory of James Edward Joseph Brueggemann, a devoted husband, father, grandfather, businessman, and man of deep faith who passed away on August 15, 2026. James, known affectionately as "Jim" to those who knew him, was born on February 22, 1960, to Bernard and Rita Brueggemann. He was the third of their six children. Jim was raised in a family that instilled in him a strong Catholic faith, a profound sense of responsibility, and an enduring commitment to family and hard work. Those values became hallmarks of Jim's life. He devoted himself to his family and to the family business Bavarian Trucking, where he carried forward the work ethic and sense of duty that had been passed down to him by his parents. Jim's life was defined not simply by his work, but by the people he loved. He was a devoted husband to his wife Maria, a loving father, and a proud grandfather. He is survived by Maria, their 16 children, 46 grandchildren and counting, and his siblings. His faith was central to the way Jim lived his life. Even as his health declined, he remained devoted to the Catholic faith. His family recounts that shortly before his passing, Jim went to Confession, received Holy Communion, the Apostolic Blessing, and Extreme Unction. Later, he told his wife, "I am ready to go." Jim passed away the following morning, surrounded by his wife, children, siblings, and loved ones. The story of Jim Brueggemann is ultimately a story of faith, family, perseverance, and service. He leaves behind a large and loving family whose lives were shaped by his example and whose memories of him will endure for generations. Northern Kentucky has lost a respected member of its community, but Jim's greatest legacy will not be measured by a business or an accomplishment. It will be measured by the family he loved, the values he lived, the faith he cherished, and the example he provided to those who had the privilege of knowing him. I extend my deepest condolences to Maria Brueggemann, Jim's children and grandchildren, his brothers and sister, and all of his extended family and friends.

Remembering Mathias Toebben

Pages S4916–S4917 · Official text

Madam President, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Mathias "Matth" Toebben, a respected northern Kentucky developer, businessman, community leader, and friend to countless people throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky who passed away on August 3, 2026. His passing marks the end of a long and distinguished life dedicated to his family, his work, and the continued growth and prosperity of the community he called home. Throughout his 95 years, Matth demonstrated the values that have long defined northern Kentucky: hard work, perseverance, entrepreneurship, and a commitment to building something better for the generations that would follow. As a developer, he understood that building a community meant far more than constructing buildings or developing property. It meant creating places where families could live, businesses could grow, and future generations could prosper. His vision and investment helped contribute to the growth and transformation of northern Kentucky over the course of many decades. For those fortunate enough to know Matth, he will be remembered as a man of character and determination--a man who understood the value of a handshake, the importance of keeping one's word, and the responsibility that comes with success. His life serves as an example of what can be accomplished through vision, hard work, and an unwavering commitment to one's community. Northern Kentucky today is a thriving region with a growing economy and a strong sense of community. Matth played an important role in making that possible. His contributions are woven into the story of northern Kentucky's development, and his influence will continue to be felt long after his passing. At the age of 95, Matth leaves behind a legacy measured not only in what he built, but in the people and communities that were strengthened by his life's work. His passing is a profound loss to his family, his friends, his colleagues, and the many people throughout northern Kentucky who had the privilege of knowing him. I extend my deepest condolences to the Toebben family. May they find comfort in the memories of a life well lived and in knowing that Mathias' contributions to northern Kentucky will endure for generations to come.

Recognizing Copperhead Gun & Range

Page S4917 · Official text

Madam President, as a member of the Senate Small Business Committee, I seek to recognize outstanding Kentucky small businesses that exemplify the American entrepreneurial spirit. It is my privilege to recognize Copperhead Gun & Range of Prestonsburg, KY, as a Senate Small Business of the Week. Founded in 2014 by Bill Conley, Copperhead Gun & Range began in Martin, KY, with a mission to provide eastern Kentucky with a locally owned source for firearms, ammunition, and shooting accessories while promoting responsible firearm ownership. What began as a small firearms retailer has since grown into one of the region's premier destinations for shooting sports, firearms education, and training. The business later transitioned to Brian Nelson, who saw an opportunity to expand Copperhead. In 2016, Copperhead opened a larger facility in Prestonsburg featuring an indoor shooting range and expanded retail operations. Aaron Scott took responsibility for managing the new location and overseeing its day-to-day operations, beginning nearly a decade of leadership and growth. Under Aaron's management, Copperhead expanded its customer base, products, and services while developing a reputation for knowledgeable service and expertise. In 2025, after years of helping build the business, Aaron purchased Copperhead from Brian and became its owner and CEO. Today, Copperhead's business has grown to approximately three times its earlier size while remaining locally and family owned. Copperhead is now a full-service firearms retailer and indoor shooting range serving customers throughout eastern Kentucky. In addition to firearms, ammunition, optics, accessories, and related products, Copperhead emphasizes education and responsible firearm ownership. The business provides concealed carry certification classes, firearms safety instruction, hunter education, and specialized training opportunities. Following the devastating floods that struck eastern Kentucky in July 2022, Copperhead became an official Floyd County donation collection site, helping gather essential supplies for families who had lost homes and belongings. When flooding again struck Floyd County in February 2025, Copperhead did more than collect donations. The business provided specialized military-style vehicles and personnel to assist the Floyd County Sheriff's Office with emergency response efforts. Working alongside local first responders, Copperhead's team helped evacuate more than 100 residents from flooded areas and transported critical emergency equipment where conventional vehicles could not safely travel. Copperhead's commitment to its customers and community has not gone unnoticed. The business has been recognized as "Best in the Mountains" by the Floyd County Chronicle, reflecting the reputation Aaron and his team have built among the people they serve. Small businesses like Copperhead Gun & Range demonstrate the important role locally owned businesses play in their communities. They create jobs, develop expertise, invest locally, and, when their neighbors are in need, answer the call. Congratulations to Aaron Scott and the entire team at Copperhead Gun & Range. I wish them continued success.

Recognizing Dueling Barrels Brewery & Distillery

Page S4917 · Official text

Madam President, as a member of the Senate Small Business Committee, I seek to recognize outstanding Kentucky small businesses that exemplify the American entrepreneurial spirit. Therefore, it is my privilege to recognize Dueling Barrels Brewery & Distillery of Pikeville, KY, as a Senate Small Business of the Week. Located in the heart of downtown Pikeville, Dueling Barrels Brewery & Distillery was founded through the vision of the late Dr. Pearse Lyons and his wife Deirdre Lyons. Natives of Ireland, the Lyonses saw similarities between the mountains and people of their homeland and those of eastern Kentucky. Their appreciation for the region inspired an investment in downtown Pikeville intended to create jobs, attract visitors, and celebrate Appalachian culture through Kentucky's longstanding traditions of brewing and distilling. Although Dr. Lyons passed away before Dueling Barrels opened its doors in 2018, the business became an important part of downtown Pikeville and the region's growing tourism economy. In 2025, Kendall and Shannon Wright, owners of Brothers Wright Distilling Company, acquired Dueling Barrels. Already established in Kentucky's bourbon industry, the Wrights saw an opportunity to preserve what had been created in Pikeville while building upon it. Since acquiring the business, they have expanded its offerings, added a stage showcasing local musicians, enhanced the kitchen and food menu, and renovated the upstairs into a private event venue. Today, Dueling Barrels combines handcrafted spirits and locally brewed beer with a full-service restaurant, live entertainment, events, and Kentucky hospitality. It draws visitors to Pikeville while providing residents with a gathering place in the heart of their community. The Wrights' commitment to eastern Kentucky extends beyond Dueling Barrels. Brothers Wright Distilling is bringing together two industries deeply connected to Kentucky's identity: coal and bourbon. The company ages bourbon underground in a former eastern Kentucky coal mine, where the naturally stable environment provides distinctive conditions for barrel aging. The Wrights are working to transform the abandoned mine into a tourist destination where visitors can experience Appalachia's coal history while learning about Kentucky bourbon. Their work has earned recognition within the craft spirits industry. Brothers Wright Distilling's Mary's Coal Mine Moonshine received a silver medal at the 2024 American Craft Spirits Association Judging of American Craft Spirits. They are also a craft member of the Kentucky Distillers' Association. Small businesses like Dueling Barrels Brewery & Distillery embody the determination, creativity, and community spirit that make Kentucky special. Kendall and Shannon Wright are investing in the future of eastern Kentucky, supporting their neighbors, and finding innovative ways to celebrate Appalachia's heritage while creating new economic opportunities. Congratulations to the entire team at Dueling Barrels Brewery & Distillery. I wish them continued success, and I am proud to recognize this great Kentucky business.

Tribute to Montana Educators

Pages S4917–S4918 · Official text

Tim Sheehy (R-MT)

Madam President, as the school year gets underway, it is my honor to pay tribute to all our Montana educators. As we gather in the Senate today, Montana teachers are standing in front of classrooms of all sizes, from high school auditoriums in Billings to one-room schools serving our most rural communities. They show up every day with a profound commitment to their students acting as mentors, advisors, and friends who build character and confidence from a young age. From Sidney to Hamilton, our educators ensure every Montana child receives a quality education. A teacher's true success is not measured by headlines; it is found in everyday breakthroughs. It happens when a struggling student is convinced to stay in school, or when an adult believes in a child for the very first time. These victories may often go unseen, but they quietly shape the trajectory of a student's life. With so much asked of our schools today, it is worth taking a moment to honor the educators leading Montana's classrooms. Through every instruction, kind word, and life lesson, they shape the future leaders of our state and country, and they truly deserve our recognition and thanks.

Measures Read the First Time

Page S4918 · Official text

The following bill was read the first time:

Text printed in the Record (234 characters)

H.R. 9340. An act 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.

Executive and Other Communications

Pages S4918–S4919 · Official text

The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as indicated:

Text printed in the Record (11,819 characters)

EC-4757. 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 Approvals; Indiana Prong 4 (Visibility) for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard" (FRL No. 13249-02-R5) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 10, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4758. 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; New York; Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS" (FRL No. 13227-02-R2) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 10, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4759. A communication from the Wildlife Biologist, Migratory Bird Program, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Process for Authorizing Migratory Game Bird Hunting" (RIN1018-BI04) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 4, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4760. A communication from the Manager, Branch of Classification and Program Support, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee" (RIN1018-BH72) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 4, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4761. A communication from the Manager, Branch of Classification and Program Support, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reclassification of the Razorback Sucker from Endangered to Threatened with a Section 4(d) Rule" (RIN1018-BE07) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 4, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4762. A communication from the Manager, Branch of Classification and Program Support, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reclassification of the Hawaiian Stilt (Kukuluaeo or Aeo) from Endangered to Threatened with a Section 4(d) Rule" (RIN1018-BE02) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 4, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4763. A communication from the Chief, Branch of Domestic Listing, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Contiguous U.S. Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx" (RIN1018-BH59) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 4, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4764. 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 "Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program: Extension of 2025 Compliance Reporting Deadline" (RIN2060-AX06)(FRL No. 11947.1-01-OAR) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 4, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4765. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "National Environmental Policy Act Regulations" (RIN2125-AF80) received during adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 4, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4766. 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 "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; San Joaquin Valley, Revisions to Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Ozone" (FRL No. 13355-02-R9) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 14, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4767. A communication from the Director, Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report entitled "Mid-Session Review of the Budget of the U.S. Government for Fiscal Year 2027"; to the Committees on Appropriations; and the Budget. EC-4768. 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 Ukraine for defense articles and services estimated to cost $2.68 billion (RSAT Case 26-90); to the Committee on Foreign Relations. EC-4769. A communication from the Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Modification of U.S. Munitions List Category XX(a)" (RIN1400-AG35) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. EC-4770. A communication from the Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Clarifying Policies of Denial, Updating the Major Non-NATO Ally List, and Minor Corrections" (RIN1400-AG31) received during the adjournment of the Senate in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. EC-4771. A communication from the Senior Bureau Official, Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting, pursuant to section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act, the certification of a proposed license for the export of defense articles, including technical data, and defense services to the United Arab Emirates in the amount of $50,000,000 or more (Transmittal No. DDTC 26-064); to the Committee on Foreign Relations. EC-4772. A communication from the Assistant Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Department of State, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Public Access to Information" (RIN1400-AG32) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. EC-4773. A communication from the Secretary of Energy, transmitting, proposed legislation to create an exception that would eliminate withdrawal liability when, pursuant to a Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/NNSA) contract competition, a new contractor is selected to continue operations at a government-owned, contractor-operated facility or site of DOE/NNSA pursuant to a cost reimbursement contract, and to make the changes provided in Section 1; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. EC-4774. A communication from the Regulations Coordinator, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Nonclinical Testing Terminology" (RIN0910-AJ27) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. EC-4775. A communication from the Senior Counsel, Office of Legal Policy, Department of Justice, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Application for Relief From Disabilities Imposed by Federal Laws with Respect to the Acquisition, Receipt, Transfer, Shipment, Transportation, or Possession of Firearms" (RIN1105-AB78) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on the Judiciary. EC-4776. A communication from the Assistant Secretary for Legislation, Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report entitled "Report on Unobligated Balances for Appropriations Relating to Quality Measurement"; to the Committee on Finance. EC-4777. A communication from the Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation, Department of Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Organic Certification Cost Share Program (OCCSP)" (RIN0560-AI85) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. EC-4778. A communication from the Deputy Secretary, Department of Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Highly Erodible Land and Wetland Conservation" (RIN0560-AA73) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. EC-4779. A communication from the Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service, Department of Agriculture, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Milk in the Northeast and Other Marketing Areas; Uniform Pricing Formula Provisions" (AMS-DA-23-0031) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. EC-4780. A communication from the Sanctions Regulations Advisor, Office of Foreign Assets Control, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations" (31 CFR Part 560) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-4781. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Whistleblower Award Determination" (RIN3038-AF74) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. EC-4782. A communication from the Director, Office of Legislative Affairs, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Reciprocal Deposits: Implementing the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act" (RIN3064-AG32) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-4783. A communication from the Director, Office of Legislative Affairs, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Clarification of Deposit Insurance Coverage for Branches of U.S. Banks in the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau" (RIN3064-AG06) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-4784. A communication from the Director, Office of Legislative Affairs, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Prohibition on the Use of Reputation Risk by Regulators" (RIN3064-AG12) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-4785.

Text printed in the Record (3,904 characters)

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 Saudi Arabia for defense articles and services estimated to cost $24.3 billion ((RSAT Case 26-69)(OSS-2026-0682)); to the Committee on Foreign Relations. EC-4786. A communication from the Assistant General Counsel for Legislation, Regulation, and Energy Efficiency, Department of Energy, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Rescission of Production Incentives for Cellulosic Biofuels" (RIN1904-AG07) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 22, 2026; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. EC-4787. A communication from the Program Analyst, Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Route Designations-Vehicle Length, Width, and Weight Limitations" (RIN2125-AG31) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 14, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4788. 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 "Partial Repeal of the Carbon Pollution Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units" (FRL No. 12674-02-OAR) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 17, 2026; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-4789. A communication from the Associate General Counsel for General Law, Office of the General Counsel. Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, five (5) reports relative to nominations, vacancies, designations of service in acting roles, discontinuations of service in acting roles and actions on nominations for positions covered by the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 14, 2026; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-4790. A communication from the Associate General Counsel for General Law, Office of the General Counsel. Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, three (3) reports relative to nominations, vacancies, designations of service in acting roles, discontinuations of service in acting roles and actions on nominations for positions covered by the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 14, 2026; to the Committee on the Judiciary. EC-4791. A communication from the Branch Chief, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries; Closure of the Angling Category Southern Area Trophy Fishery for 2024" (RTID0648-XD679) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 16, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-4792. A communication from the Senior Attorney Advisor, Federal Railroad Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "National Environmental Policy Act Regulations" (RIN2130-AD05) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 16, 2026; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-4793. A communication from the Acting Assistant Secretary, Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled "Federal-State Unemployment Compensation (UC) Program; Data Availability" (RIN1205-AC10) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on September 16, 2026; to the Committee on Finance.

Petitions and Memorials

Pages S4919–S4926 · Official text

The 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 (9,792 characters)

POM-66. A memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Florida urging the United States Congress to impel the National Guard Bureau to examine the present allocations of the Florida National Guard and allow an increase in its force structure; to the Committee on Armed Services. Whereas, the number of soldiers and airmen allocated to each state's National Guard, known as its "force structure," is determined by the National Guard Bureau in Washington, D.C., and Whereas, with approximately 21 million residents, Florida is the third most populous state in the nation but has a force structure of just over 12,000 Guardsmen, and its ratio of one Guardsman for every 1,833 residents ranks 53rd among the 54 states and territories of the United States which have a National Guard component, and Whereas, due to the unprecedented events of 2020 and 2021, including COVID-19 response, natural disasters, and overseas deployments, the Florida National Guard expended the same number of workdays in 18 months as it had expended during the previous 20 years, and Whereas, the Florida National Guard continues to meet its mission goals; however, the shortage of these invaluable "citizen soldiers," combined with the state's growing population and increased need for National Guard activation and response, has resulted in the repeated redeployment of the same soldiers, which ultimately leads to excessive stress and fatigue and negatively impacts recruitment, retention, and readiness, and Whereas, the National Guard Bureau's report titled "Impact of U.S. Population Trends on National Guard Force Structure," released to Congress in April 2021, acknowledges the aforementioned concerns within Florida and other regions, stating that "the National Guard may need to evaluate reallocating mission sets to other geographic areas to keep pace with changing demographics across the country," now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Legislature of the State of Florida: That the Florida Legislature respectfully urges the United States Congress to impel the National Guard Bureau to examine the present allocations of the Florida National Guard and allow an increase in its force structure; and be it further Resolved that the Secretary of State dispatch copies 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, and each member of the Florida delegation to the United States Congress. ____ POM-67. A memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Florida urging the United States Congress to establish a framework for a sovereign wealth fund for the United States; to the Committee on Finance. Whereas, on February 3, 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order that directs the Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury and the Secretary of the United States Department of Commerce to develop a plan within 90 days for the creation of a sovereign wealth fund, and Whereas, while the secretaries are developing the plan, Congress should be proactive and establish the framework for the sovereign wealth fund, and Whereas, if Congress establishes the framework, the sovereign wealth fund can be more efficiently implemented, and Whereas, the sovereign wealth fund can be used to promote fiscal sustainability, lessen the burden of taxes on families and small business, establish long-term economic security, fund critical projects, and promote the United States' economic and strategic leadership internationally, Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Legislature of the State of Florida, that the Congress of the United States is urged to establish a framework for a sovereign wealth fund; and be it further Resolved, That the Legislature urges Congress to enact any legislation necessary to establish the framework for the sovereign wealth fund, and be it further Resolved, That the Secretary of State is directed to dispatch copies of this memorial to the President of the United States, to the President of the United States Senate, to the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and to each member of the Florida delegation to the Congress of the United States. POM-68. A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Washington requesting that the federal government create a universal health care program to ensure that every resident in Washington state and the United States has timely access to health care services without incurring crippling familial debt; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Whereas, Universal access to affordable health care is one of the most important issues in the United States; and Whereas, Our current health care system is in a downward spiral with costs continuing to skyrocket, medical debt driving many into bankruptcy or life-altering indebtedness, increasing child mortality rates especially in communities with lower incomes, and creating unnecessary suffering in entire families who struggle to maintain health care insurance coverage or recover from the impacts of health care costs up to and including bankruptcy and homelessness; and Whereas, Article 25 of the universal declaration of human rights ratified by the United Nations declares health care is a human right; and Whereas, Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and inhumane"; and Whereas, A national universal health care program is the most efficient and cost-effective means of providing access to health care for everyone and eliminating the economic, physical and mental health pain and suffering so many Americans are experiencing due to lack of timely access to health care and/or debt incurred; and Whereas, A state-run universal health care program, in the state of Washington, absent current barriers in federal law, could replace the state's current multipayer system in which individuals, private businesses, and government entities pay public and private insurers for health care coverage; and Whereas, This health plan would establish a state agency to finance all primary and medically necessary health care with substantial savings compared with the existing multipayer system of public and private insurers; and Whereas, This health plan would reduce financial barriers to access care and the growing number of residents with inadequate coverage. By reducing administrative and other waste, including health insurance company profits and excessive prices for drugs, hospitals, and medical devices, it would save money on health care; and Whereas, Washington businesses and workers will benefit by lowering the cost of health care, removing the burden of unfunded and inadequate coverage, and allowing businesses to compete more effectively on national and international markets. Businesses will also benefit directly by removing the administrative costs of selecting and implementing health insurance programs for their workers, a billion-dollar expenditure for businesses in Washington state; and Whereas, The current system of fragmented private health insurance is the main obstacle to expanding access to health care because it promotes administrative waste, both in the processing of bills by providers and in the administration of a health insurance system with its many separate health insurance companies, each offering a large variety of separate plans, each plan involving separate pricing schemes; and Whereas, The large number of independent companies and health plans forces each provider to operate an entire back office with billing clerks and other personnel to deal with billing and negotiating prices for services and vastly inflating the cost for providing health care; and Whereas, Because the failures of our health care system most dramatically harm marginalized communities, creating a system of universal access, free point-of-service care and standardized reimbursements will not only make health care less expensive, it will also make it fairer and more equitable. Instead of being a system that destroys future opportunity for many, it will be a system which empowers communities through their newfound health and independence; now, therefore, Your Memorialists respectfully pray that the federal government: (1) Create a universal health care program to ensure that every resident of Washington state and our country has timely access to health care services without incurring crippling familial debt; (2) Absent federal government action on the request in subsection (1) of this memorial, partner with the state of Washington to reduce barriers and allow the state to successfully implement a universal health system for the people of Washington such as passing legislation similar to HR 6270 (by Rep. Ro Khanna, CA-17 ) that was introduced in the 118th Congress which will allow states to create their own universal health care programs; or (3) Absent federal government action on the requests in subsections (1) and (2) of this memorial with the appropriate federal agencies, work to grant Washington state the appropriate waivers to remove the restrictions on the state's ability to create a universal health care system, and be it Resolved, That copies of this Memorial be immediately transmitted to the Honorable Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of the United States Department of Labor, the federal agencies involved with granting the requested necessary waivers, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and each member of Congress from the State of Washington. ____ POM-69.

Text printed in the Record (10,571 characters)

A joint memorial adopted by the Legislature of the State of Washington opposing Medicare privatization and urging the federal government to level the playing field between Original Medicare and Medicare Advantage; to the Committee on Finance. Whereas, Original Medicare was created in 1965 as a public good to provide a national health care system for seniors and the disabled in the United States and has proven to be our most efficient and effective public health care program with administrative costs accounting for only two to three percent of Medicare spending; and Whereas, Since the federal government has created various for-profit privatized health care programs within Medicare including Part D which covers prescription drugs, Medigap which are supplemental plans to cover Medicare Part B's 20 percent copays, and Medicare Advantage which is permitted to take up to 15 percent of every Medicare dollar for administration and profits for managing Medicare claims; and Whereas, Recent reports by the department of health and human services inspector general, academic researchers, and investigative journalists have uncovered wide-ranging fraudulent practices, confirming that upcoding, overpayments, delaying medically necessary care, and the denial of claims by insurers and other private businesses managing Medicare claims, together, account for overcharging the Medicare trust fund and Medicare beneficiaries by as much as $75 billion to $140 billion annually; and Whereas, Insurers and wall street are fiercely lobbying to gain a larger share of the soon-to-be $1.6 trillion of annual Medicare spending by further privatizing Medicare and turning it into a profit center, thus hastening the depletion of the Medicare trust fund at a time when Medicare beneficiaries are among the most vulnerable populations served in health care, and need more, not fewer benefits; now, therefore, Your Memorialists respectfully pray in opposition to Medicare privatization and urge the federal government to level the playing field between Original Medicare and Medicare Advantage so that Medicare beneficiaries will not suffer additional costs by choosing Original Medicare and will have a genuine choice between the public and private program as a step towards increasing health care equity by: (1) Eliminating the Original Medicare 20 percent copays and setting an out-of-pocket cap on medical expenses; (2) Adding benefits to Original Medicare such as dental, vision, and hearing coverage as is permitted in private Medicare Advantage plans; (3) Eliminating the allowed excessive administrative costs and profits in the Medicare Advantage programs; and (4) Recouping funds for the Medicare trust fund from the Medicare Advantage overpayments, fraud, and abuse that have been documented in academic studies, congressional reports and investigations by the department of health and human services in order to support a robust Original Medicare system that will lower costs and improve benefits, access, and equity for all seniors and disabled beneficiaries. Be it Resolved, That copies of this Memorial be immediately transmitted to the Honorable Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and each member from the State of Washington. ____ POM-70. A concurrent resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Texas urging the United States Congress to amend the Internal Revenue Code to made spaceports eligible for tax-exempt private activity bonds; to the Committee on Finance. Whereas, Since the "space race" of the 1960s, Texas has been at the forefront of space exploration, discovery, and innovation, and the state is sure to play an instrumental role in defining the next phase of American involvement in space; and Whereas, Texas is home to NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center as well as more than 2,000 aerospace establishments; during the 88th Session of the Texas Legislature, the Texas Space Commission was established to strengthen the state's leadership in aerospace activity, and the Texas Aerospace Research and Space Economy Consortium was launched to serve as a forum for higher education and industry experts seeking to advance the state's role in space operations; and Whereas, In 2023, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Texas Economic Development Corporation recognized Texas as a powerhouse in the rapidly expanding private space sector; commercial investment in space transportation has driven the need for spaceport sites, operating environments, and infrastructure, and Texas ranks second in the nation in the number of spaceport locations; and Whereas, Tax-exempt private activity bonds currently finance a wide range of facilities, including airports, docks, and wharves, which, like spaceports, serve as hubs for the transportation of people and freight; the qualification of spaceports for tax-exempt private activity bonds would encourage more investment in aerospace infrastructure, benefiting both Texas and the nation as a whole; and Whereas, The United States cannot afford to fall behind in the highly competitive field of space operations, and making spaceports eligible for tax-exempt private activity bands would help to ensure that the nation maintains its leadership in space commerce; Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the 89th Legislature of the State of Texas hereby respectfully urge the United States Congress to amend the Internal Revenue Code to make spaceports eligible for tax-exempt private activity bonds; and, be it further Resolved, That the Texas secretary of state forward official copies of this resolution to the president of the United States, to the president of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States Congress, and to all the members of the Texas delegation to Congress with the request that this resolution be entered in the Congressional Record as a memorial to the Congress of the United States of America. ____ POM-71. A concurrent resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Iowa urging the members of Congress to amend federal law to increase the maximum gross weight allowed for motor vehicles operated on the interstate road system in Iowa and bordering states; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Whereas, federal law imposes a uniform combined gross weight limit of 80,000 pounds for vehicles operated on the interstate road system, unless expressly exempted; and Whereas, a number of exemptions to the weight limit are provided on certain segments of the interstate road system, including in Iowa and in states that border Iowa; and Whereas, vehicles with six or more axles can safely and efficiently handle loads exceeding 80,000 pounds while complying with reasonable axle weight limits, as evidenced by the 96,000 pound weight limit for commercial motor vehicles with seven axles driven on primary highways that are not part of the interstate road system in Iowa; and Whereas, commercial motor vehicle drivers are inconvenienced while navigating the interstate road system by encountering different weight limits on different segments of the same interstate road system within and across state borders; and Whereas, it is in the best Interest of Iowa and the states that border Iowa to have the same vehicle weight limits on the interstate road system across all states that border Iowa; and Whereas, it is also in the best interest of Iowa to increase the payload capacity of commercial motor vehicles, which may result in fewer vehicles on the interstate road system and improve traffic flow; Now therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring, That the General Assembly of the State of Iowa urges Congress to amend federal law to authorize the federal highway administration to raise the weight limit on the interstate road system in Iowa and in the states that border Iowa to 96,000 pounds for commercial motor vehicles with seven axles; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be distributed to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and each member of Iowa's congressional delegation. ____ POM-72. A concurrent resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Iowa urging the United States Congress to support efforts to recognize all United States troops who served in Honduras from 1981 to 1992; to the Committee on Armed Services. Whereas, the House of Representatives believes military members and veterans who serve or have served in hostile environments should be recognized; and Whereas, the United States military maintained a presence in Honduras throughout and beyond the 1980s, providing training to and conducting military exercises with the host nation's mIlitary; and Whereas, the buildup and presence of United States troops served as a deterrent to Nicaraguan aggression in the region and also a means of building up support for democratic values via civil action in Honduran communities; and Whereas, United States troops were equipped with live ammunition and assisted the Honduran military in training and combat support capacities; and Whereas, United States troops reported experiencing hostile fire and imminent danger; and Whereas, at least one United States service member received a Purple Heart for injuries sustained as a result of terrorist activity while serving in Honduras in 1990; and Whereas, United States troops lost their lives while conducting various military duties while in Honduras due to terrorist activity and other hazardous circumstances; Now therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, That the House of Representatives calls upon the United States Congress to support efforts to issue an Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, or similar recognition of having served in an area of hostility, to all United States troops who served in Honduras from 1981 to 1992; and be it further Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives shall forward copies of this resolution to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Majority and Minority Leaders of the United States Senate, the Majority and Minority Leaders of the United States House of Representatives, and to each member of the Iowa congressional delegation. ____ POM-73.

Text printed in the Record (7,665 characters)

A resolution adopted by the House of Representatives of the State of Hawaii endorsing Taiwan's international participation, supporting the signing of a United States-Taiwan bilateral trade agreement, and commemorating the relationships and exchanges between the state of Hawaii and Taiwan; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. Whereas, the United States and Taiwan are bonded by a shared commitment to democracy, freedom, human rights, the rule of law, and a free market economy; and Whereas, to further support and reinforce trading partnerships, the United States-Taiwan Initiative on 21st Century Trade has reached an agreement to develop concrete methods to deepen the economic and trade relationship of the countries, advance mutual trade priorities based on shared values, and promote innovative and inclusive economic growth for workers and businesses, including through new trade agreements; and Whereas, in order to strengthen bilateral trade, the government of Taiwan has expressed its desire to sign a bilateral trade agreement, bilateral investment agreement, and avoidance of double taxation agreement with the United States; and Whereas, Hawaii and Taiwan have had an established sister-state relationship since 1993 that has developed an enduring and mutually beneficiary friendship, exemplified by the Taiwan government's generous $500,000 contribution to Hawaii in the aftermath of the 2023 Maui wildfires; and Whereas, in addition to the strong reciprocal trading partnership, the State of Hawaii Office in Taipei and Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Honolulu have been working together to promote substantial cooperation and exchanges in areas of tourism, agriculture, culture, and education; and Whereas, the United States-Taiwan Education Initiative was launched in 2020 to strengthen cooperation on international education and enhance Taiwan's role in providing Mandarin Chinese language instruction; and Whereas, given the designation of Mandarin Chinese as a critical language and Taiwan plans to be bilingual by 2030, schools and institutions of higher education in both Hawaii and Taiwan have enhanced their exchanges, as exemplified by the partnership between University of Hawaii and the National Tsing Hua University; and Whereas, for years, Taiwan has actively engaged in climate change research, supported anti-terrorism cooperation, and worked with its partners to tackle transnational crime; and Whereas, Taiwan's meaningful participation in bodies such as the World Health Organization, International Criminal Police Organization, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and International Civil Aviation Organization would make international mechanisms truly global; and Whereas, the United States has assisted Taiwan in participating in the World Health Organization, International Civil Aviation Organization, and International Criminal Police Organization and will continue to support Taiwan's meaningful participation in these and other international organizations; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives of the Thirty-third Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2025, That this body joins the United States to endorse the participation of Taiwan as an observer in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, International Civil Aviation Organization, World Health Organization, and International Criminal Police Organization; and be it further Resolved, That this body supports the first agreement under the United States-Taiwan Initiative on 21st Century Trade and encourages the United States Trade Representative to commence negotiations to enter into a bilateral trade agreement: with Taiwan; and be it further Resolved, That this body commemorates the State of Hawaii's thirty-second anniversary of sister-state relations with Taiwan and supports mutual beneficiary exchanges and cooperation with Taiwan; and be it further Resolved, That certified copies of this Resolution be transmitted to the President of the Republic of China; President of the United States; President of the United States Senate; Speaker of the United States House of Representatives; United States Secretary of State; members of Hawaii's Congressional delegation; Governor; and Director of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism. ____ POM-74. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Nevada urging the United States Congress to enact legislation to prohibit officers and agents of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the United States Department of Homeland Security from entering schools and places of worship for the purposes of enforcing federal immigration laws; to the Committee on the Judiciary. Whereas, All children in the United States are entitled to equal access to a public elementary and secondary education, regardless of their or their parents' actual or perceived national origin, citizenship or immigration status; and Whereas, Places of worship have historically been viewed as sacred and protected spaces for persons who attend religious services to exercise their religious beliefs and attend religious services and offer various resources to support and protect anyone in need; and Whereas, Educational personnel and members of religious organizations are often primary sources of support, resources and information to assist and support students and persons who attend religious services; and Whereas, The activities of federal immigration law enforcement agencies, on or around schools and places of worship, including, without limitation, surveillance, interviews, demands for information, arrests, detention or any other federal immigration enforcement activities, harmfully disrupt the learning and religious environments of schools and places of worship and significantly interfere with the ability of students and persons who attend religious services, regardless of their immigration status, to access free public education and places of worship; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Assembly and Senate of the State of Nevada, Jointly, That the members of the 83rd Session of the Nevada Legislature hereby urge Congress to enact legislation to prohibit officers and agents of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the United States Department of Homeland Security from entering schools and places of worship for the purposes of upholding federal immigration laws; and be it further Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly prepare and transmit a copy of this resolution to the Vice President of the United States as the presiding officer of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and each member of the Nevada Congressional Delegation; and be it further Resolved, That this resolution becomes effective upon passage. ____ POM-75. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Nevada urging the federal government to maintain the moratorium on the testing of explosive nuclear weapons; to the Committee on Armed Services. Whereas, The State of Nevada and its citizens have long contributed to the national security of the United States by hosting the Nevada National Security Site, formerly the Nevada Test Site, where a total of 100 atmospheric tests and 828 underground tests were conducted; and Whereas, After sustained advocacy by Nevadans, the era of explosive nuclear testing in the United States ended in 1992 when a moratorium on underground nuclear testing was passed by bipartisan majorities in the United States Congress and signed into law by President George H. W.

Text printed in the Record (11,475 characters)

Bush, and the moratorium has been voluntarily upheld by every president for over 30 years; and Whereas, Former national security officials and other Washington-based research organizations have recently called for renewed explosive nuclear testing which, if adopted, would occur underground at the Nevada National Security Site in Nye County, just 65 miles from Las Vegas, Nevada, and would introduce environmental, health and economic risks to all Nevadans; and Whereas, When the Federal Government first selected the Nevada Test Site for nuclear testing, an estimated 57,000 people lived in Clark County and the five nearby rural counties, whereas today these counties are home to more than 2.3 million people; and Whereas, Underground testing of explosive nuclear weapons could inadvertently release radioactive material into the air, as has happened in the past with at least 32 venting accidents from underground tests at the Nevada Test Site, including the 1970 Baneberry incident, which released a significant amount of radioactive material across a widespread area of the western United States and exposed 86 Nevada Test Site workers to high levels of radiation; and Whereas, More than 32,000 "Downwinder" claims have been filed as a result of atmospheric testing, and more than 27,000 claims have been filed under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act by former Nevada Test Site employees and contractors, demonstrating the impact of nuclear testing on the health of Nevadans; and Whereas, Exposure to radiation from resumed testing of explosive nuclear weapons could result in negative chronic health effects to the local population over time, including cancer, heart disease, neurological disorders, autoimmune disorders and thyroid disease; and Whereas, Previous underground testing of explosive nuclear weapons caused tremors in Las Vegas registering as high as 5.7 on the Richter scale, which rattled residents and visitors, underscoring that resumed testing could pose significant risks to the infrastructure, buildings and, ultimately, economy of Nevada, including its tourism and real estate industries; and Whereas, Resumed explosive nuclear testing would further contaminate local groundwater sources, as evidenced by the environmental reports of the National Nuclear Security Administration indicating radioactive materials in groundwater from previous testing and the known effectiveness of groundwater in dispersing radioactive contamination into the surrounding environment; and Whereas, There is no technical or military requirement to resume nuclear testing, as the Directors of the Los Alamos, Sandia and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories and the Commander of United States Strategic Command, along with the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, have annually affirmed the safety, security, reliability and performance of nuclear weapons for over 25 years and have consistently determined there is no technical or military requirement to resume testing; and Whereas, No country other than North Korea has conducted an explosive nuclear test this century, and 187 countries, including the United States, every NATO and United States Pacific ally, Russia and China, are signatories to the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty; and Whereas, Resumption of the testing of explosive nuclear weapons would undermine the national security of the United States by encouraging Russia, China and other countries to resume the testing of nuclear weapons and improve their nuclear arsenals; and Whereas, The United States has extensive data from having conducted more nuclear tests than any other country, which fuels today's powerful science-based stockpile stewardship program with cutting edge diagnostic, modeling and computing capabilities that are second to none; and Whereas, Polling conducted by the University of Maryland in 2024 found that more than two-thirds of Nevada Republicans and Democrats favor continuing to abide by the moratorium on nuclear testing; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Assembly and Senate of the State of Nevada, Jointly, That the members of the 83rd Session of the Nevada Legislature hereby urge the Federal Government to maintain the moratorium on the testing of explosive nuclear weapons; and be it further Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly prepare and transmit a copy of this resolution to the President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States as the presiding officer of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the United States Secretary of State, the United States Secretary of Defense, the United States Secretary of Energy, the Under Secretary for the National Nuclear Security Administration and each member of the Nevada Congressional Delegation; and be it further Resolved, That this resolution becomes effective upon passage. ____ POM-76. A resolution adopted by the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan urging the United States Congress to enact legislation that would reinstate the Department of the Interior's prior removal of the gray wolf from the endangered species list, thus allowing gray wolf population management to be handled at the state level; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Whereas, Gray wolves were first classified as an endangered species by the federal government in a first of its kind list issued in 1967. Since this initial listing, gray wolves in Michigan and elsewhere have been federally protected under a variety of laws, including the Endangered Species Act of 1973; and Whereas, Since its first listing, gray wolf populations across the United States--and especially in Michigan--have made a tremendous recovery and stand as a true success story of the Endangered Species Act. As of 2020, gray wolf populations across the United States have swelled to exceed six thousand animals. Accordingly, gray wolves were delisted by the United States Department of Interior that year, giving authority over population management back to the states. However, in 2022, a federal court overturned this delisting, reclassifying gray wolves as an endangered species in 44 states, including Michigan, effectively revoking states' management authority over these animals; and Whereas, Michigan's thriving gray wolf population is evidence that federal protection for these animals through the Endangered Species Act listing is no longer necessary. In its 2024 winter wolf survey, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) estimated that there were, at a minimum, over seven-hundred and fifty gray wolves populating the Upper Peninsula, an increase of over a hundred from the DNR's 2022 survey. The growing wolf population in the Upper Peninsula is estimated to be comprised of over one-hundred and fifty wolf packs and, per the DNR's research, remains in equilibrium with available habitat. By continuing to benefit from federal protection under the Endangered Species Act, which prohibits the killing of these predators unless they pose a direct and immediate threat, the gray wolf population may continue to swell and consequently wreak havoc on an already severely declining white-tail deer population in Michigan. Having exceeded expectations, the gray wolf's recovery in Michigan should now be managed at the state level by the expertise of our DNR; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives, That we urge the United States Congress to enact legislation that would reinstate the Department of Interior's prior removal of the gray wolf from the endangered species list, thus allowing gray wolf population management to be handled at the state level; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation. ____ POM-77. A resolution adopted by the Senate of the State of Michigan urging the President of the United States and the United States Congress to renew the African Growth and Opportunity Act and expand the program to include other sub-Saharan African countries; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. Whereas, The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) was enacted in May 2000 to provide eligible sub-Saharan African countries with duty-free access to the United States market for certain products. The program covers over 1,800 products beyond those eligible for duty-free access under the Generalized System of Preferences, a broader U.S. trade preference program. To become and remain eligible for duty-free access, countries must establish or make continual progress toward establishing a market-based economy, the rule of law, political pluralism, and the right to due process. Eligible countries must also eliminate barriers to trade and investment with the United States and enact policies to reduce poverty, combat corruption, and protect human rights; and Whereas, A total of 49 countries are potentially eligible for the AGOA trade preferences, but the number of beneficiaries varies over time, as the President of the United States reviews each country's eligibility on an annual basis. The first designation of eligible countries was made on October 2, 2000, by President Bill Clinton, and between 2001 and 2024, the number of eligible countries has ranged from 31 to 41. In 2024, there were 32 AGOA-eligible countries; and Whereas, The AGOA has been amended multiple times to clarify preferential treatment terms, to modify technical standards, and, critically, to extend sunset provisions. The program had an initial expiration date of September 2008, but President George W. Bush signed the AGOA Acceleration Act of 2004 to extend the program's operation through September 2015. In June 2015, President Barack Obama signed the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, thereby extending the AGOA's validity to its current sunset date of September 2025; and Whereas, The United States continues to import significant quantities of goods from AGOA-eligible countries. Total AGOA imports were valued at 9.3 billion dollars in 2023 and 8.0 billion dollars in 2024. Crude oil accounted for a quarter of these imports in 2024, with Nigeria alone supplying 1.6 billion dollars in crude oil to the United States. Major categories of non-energy imports included passenger vehicles, apparel, agricultural and food products, base metals, and chemicals. South Africa remains our largest source of AGOA imports, excluding crude oil; and Whereas, The state of Michigan engaged in over a billion dollars? worth of two-way trade with AGOA-eligible countries in 2024. Our state imported nearly 440 million dollars in goods from the 32 AGOA-eligible nations in 2024, and we exported over 566 million dollars? worth of goods to those countries. Michigan can and should continue to take advantage of the economic growth promoted by the AGOA and create a two-way pipeline of investment between our state and sub-Saharan Africa; and Whereas, The United States should renew the AGOA program and expand it to include other sub-Saharan countries. The AGOA has been a central pillar of our nation's trade and relations with sub-Saharan Africa for decades, and we should continue to use this program to foster development in the region while simultaneously promoting U.S. interests.

Text printed in the Record (9,394 characters)

Expanding economic and commercial regimes, leading to stronger markets and more effective trading partners for the state of Michigan; now, therefore be it Resolved by the Senate, That we urge the President of the United States and the United States Congress to renew the African Growth and Opportunity Act and expand the program to include other sub-Saharan African counuies; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation. ____ POM-78. A resolution adopted by the Senate of the State of Michigan condemning the attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, including the assault on the courageous members of the Capitol Police, and denouncing the use of presidential pardon power to absolve those who participated in the dangerous and anti-democratic riots; to the Committee on the Judiciary. Whereas, On January 6, 2021, a violent mob overwhelmed Capitol Police and breached the United States Capitol Building, disrupting the peaceful transfer of power; and Whereas, This attack on the United States Capitol resulted in traumatic injuries to approximately 140 law enforcement officers; and Whereas, This violent insurrection was not only an attack on the United States Capitol Building, but on the rule of law, the values of American democracy, and the Constitution, which are the bedrocks of the American Republic; and Whereas, The United States Capitol Police, alongside other law enforcement agencies, displayed extraordinary courage, professionalism, and commitment to their duties in the face of overwhelming danger while defending our nation's capital, protecting members of Congress, and ensuring the safety of those within the Capitol Building; and Whereas, The Capitol Police, many of whom faced physical harm, acted with valor to prevent further escalation of violence, and suffered life-altering injuries in the course of their duties; and Whereas, On January 20th, 2025, President Trump's pardoning of, or commutation of sentences for, 1,500 criminals involved in the violent insurrection is an act of betrayal to the brave law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line on January 6, 2021, as well as to the citizens of the United States; and Whereas, Among the 1,500 criminals pardoned by President Trump, 169 of them were found guilty of assaulting police officers, including one who assaulted Metropolitan Police Department Officer Noah Rathbun with a flagpole, another who jammed a stun gun into the neck of Washington Police Officer Michael Fanone multiple times, and another who sprayed multiple officers with bear spray; and Whereas, The International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Fraternal Order of Police jointly condemned these presidential pardons and commutations, stating that "crimes against law enforcement are not just attacks on individuals or public safety--they are attacked on society and undermine the rule of law" and that when perpetrators of violent crime against law enforcement are not held accountable, it emboldens others to commit similar acts of violence; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate, That we condemn the attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, including the assault on the courageous members of the Capitol Police, and denounce the use of presidential pardon power to absolve those who participated in the dangerous and anti-democratic riots; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation. ____ POM-79. A resolution adopted by the Senate of the State of Michigan condemning the administration and congressional Republican's support of the divisive "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" that raises costs for Michiganders, slashes Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and the Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC), adds burdensome hurdles to important tax relief measures for low-income households, drives more families into poverty by giving tax cuts to the most wealthy households, and sets back progress on a clean energy future while increasing energy costs on Americans; to the Committee on Finance. Whereas, The Trump Administration's budget reconciliation bill, House Resolution 1, named the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," is a raw deal for the citizens of the United States (U.S.) and Michigan by cutting programs that millions of citizens rely on and gives tax breaks to multi-millionaires and billionaires; and Whereas, President Trump and congressional Republicans have campaigned for the past 10 years on concerns regarding the national debt but are preparing to add $2.8 trillion additional debt to the U.S. over the next 10 years, which represents an economic and national security threat to our citizens and will burden our children and grandchildren with this debt; and Whereas, President Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" will significantly increase the financial burden on working-and middle-class Americans by eliminating or reducing basic needs programs; and Whereas, The bill proposes deep systematic cuts to Medicaid, jeopardizing healthcare access for millions of low-income families, seniors, children, and individuals with disabilities; and Whereas, Medicaid covers one in four Michiganders, with 2.6 million Michiganders receiving access to healthcare each month through Medicaid, including one million children (Medicaid covers 45 percent of all Michigan births), 300,000 people living with disabilities, 168,000 seniors, and 750,000 adults in the Healthy Michigan Plan; and Whereas, Medicaid is the largest health insurance program in the U.S. and restricting access to this vital lifeline will negatively impact the access of millions of citizens to healthcare as hospitals will be forced to reduce staffing, eliminate services, and close their doors, with rural hospitals, often the largest employers, taking the hardest hit; and Whereas, President Trump's legislation slashes funding for SNAP, taking away food from over 1.4 million Michiganders (15 percent of our state's population), and forcing food insecurity on vulnerable households, including children, veterans, and the elderly, and Whereas, Cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, and WIC, as proposed by the Trump Administration and congressional Republicans, will create an estimated $2 billion hole in Michigan's budget; and Whereas, This bill takes the money cut from Medicaid, SNAP, and WIC and gives it to wealthy individuals and large corporations through tax cuts, by extending the 2017 tax cuts that resulted in benefits to the wealthiest 10 percent and rising costs for the bottom 90 percent from President Trump's tariffs and slashing of basic needs programs; and Whereas, The bill increases the Child Tax Credit only for the wealthiest of families and leaves 20 million children in working families with no additional benefit and receiving less (or no) health care or food support, pushing more families (especially those with children) into poverty; Whereas, Millions of families that rely on the Earned Income Tax Credit will now have additional burdensome hurdles to receiving their benefits, hindering and stifling families from rising out of poverty; and Whereas, The legislation seeks to eliminate or scale back resources for clean energy projects, undermining climate goals, exacerbating the effects of climate change, stifling innovation, and threatening progress toward a sustainable and environmentally secure future; and Whereas, An independent analysis estimates that the congressional Republicans' bill will raise the cost of energy prices for households and businesses by nearly seven percent by 2026, equating to approximately $110 for the average American household, nearly canceling out any benefit for working class families; now, therefore be it Resolved by the Senate, That the members of this legislative body condemn the Trump Administration and congressional Republican's support of the divisive "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" that raises costs for Michiganders, slashes Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and the Women Infants and Children program (WIC), adds burdensome hurdles to important tax relief measures for low-income households, drives more families into poverty by giving tax cuts to the most wealthy households, and sets back progress on a clean energy future while increasing energy costs on Americans; and be it further Resolved, That we urge members of Congress to reject this legislation in its entirety, and to instead pursue policies that fully fund Medicaid, SNAP and WIC, protect vulnerable communities, and expand access to healthcare, promote clean energy, and ensure a fair equitable tax system for all Americans; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, and the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and the members of the Michigan congressional delegation. ____ POM-80.

Text printed in the Record (11,339 characters)

A resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Nebraska urging the President of the United States and members of the United States Congress to make permanent changes to the Child and Adult Food Programs to reimburse all participating family day care homes at Tier 1 rates and provide additional reimbursements for each meal and supplement provided; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Whereas, the Legislature recognizes that adequate nutrition for Nebraska's youngest children is vital for their healthy development and eating habits which provides a foundation for better academic performance and success later in life; and Whereas, the Legislature recognizes that young children in low-income households are especially at risk of inadequate nutrition, harm to their development, and adverse outcomes; and Whereas, high quality early care and education programs in Nebraska play an essential role in contributing to the healthy development of the young children served by the federal Child and Adult Care Food Program through proper nutrition; and Whereas, early care and education programs in Nebraska operate on thin margins, facing persistent financial strain while trying to serve Nebraska's low-income children without the ability to charge for the true cost of care or receive adequate reimbursement from the child care subsidy program; and Whereas, the federal Child and Adult Care Food Program funds that Nebraska receives plays an essential role in giving the one thousand two hundred eighty-three participating early care and education programs the ability to provide high quality nutrition to a daily average of twenty-three thousand six hundred ninety-five Nebraska children; and Whereas, the President of the United States and the United States Congress passed the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 on June 25, 2022, whereby Tier II family day care homes participating in the Child and Adult Care Food Program received reimbursement at the higher Tier I rates and additional reimbursements in the amount of ten cents for each meal and supplement provided pursuant to the Act; and Whereas, the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 expired on June 30, 2023; and Whereas, young children in low-income households are at risk of losing access to healthy, well-balanced nutrition provided by the Child and Adult Care Food Program unless the United States Congress and President of the United States act to permanently implement the aforementioned changes made by the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 for the next federal fiscal year beginning on October 1, 2026; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the members of the One Hundred Ninth Legislature of Nebraska, Second Session: 1. That the Legislature urges the President of the United States and members of the United States Congress to make permanent changes to the Child and Adult Food Programs to reimburse all participating family day care homes at Tier 1 rates and provide additional reimbursements for each meal and supplement provided. 2. That copies of this resolution be delivered to the President of the United States, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President of the United States Senate, and each member of the Nebraska Congressional delegation. ____ POM-81. A resolution adopted by the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands respectfully urging the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to ensure meaningful and equitable involvement of the Northern Marianas Descent (NMD) persons, and recognition of the Northern Mariana Islands' traditional knowledge, stewardship, and proprietary rights in all current and future activities related to ocean exploration, marine research, data ownership, and commercialization of marine resources in the Mariana Trench and surrounding waters; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Whereas, the Uraali Refaluwasch Association (URA), a registered nonprofit organization (CNMI Business License No. 27006), has submitted a position paper to NOAA articulating critical concerns regarding ocean exploration within the Mariana Trench and adjacent marine environments; and Whereas, the people of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), particularly those of Northern Marianas Descent (NMD), possess a deep cultural, historical, and spiritual connection to the surrounding ocean, which forms an integral part of their identity and way of life; and Whereas, the CNMI, as a U.S. territory with a unique political status under Public Law 94-241, maintains a right to exercise self-government and to protect its natural and cultural resources from exploitation or exclusion from national scientific and economic benefits; and Whereas, the URA's position paper emphasizes the need for NOAA and related federal agencies to integrate Indigenous knowledge systems, promote local leadership and capacity building, and ensure equitable benefit-sharing of data and any commercial applications that emerge from exploration activities; and Whereas, the CNMI has a growing body of local experts, researchers, and traditional practitioners whose contributions can enrich and guide NOAA's efforts in the region; and Whereas, failure to involve NMD communities in the research, data access, and decision-making processes constitutes not only a scientific oversight, but also a violation of ethical standards for community engagement and self-determination; and now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives of the Twenty-Fourth Northern Marianas Commonwealth Legislature, That it hereby expresses its strong support for the recommendations made by the Uraali Refaluwasch Association to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and urges NOAA to adopt and implement those recommendations in full, including: (a) formal recognition of Northern Marianas Descent (NMD) proprietary rights in marine data collected within CNMI waters; (b) co-management of Mariana Trench exploration efforts with the CNMI Government and Indigenous organizations; and (c) Indigenous knowledge integration in all stages of marine research, planning, and resource utilization; and be it further Resolved, That the House of Representatives specifically calls upon NOAA to enter into a formal memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the CNMI Government and recognized Indigenous organizations, including the Uraali Refaluwasch Association, for the purpose of: (a) jointly developing all future ocean exploration and marine research protocols to be conducted in CNMI waters; (b) mandating the inclusion of qualified NMD subject-matter experts in all NOAA-supported field activities and scientific teams; and (c) establishing a binding framework for data-sharing, intellectual property protection, and equitable benefit-sharing for any commercial or scientific outcomes resulting from activities in CNMI water's; and be it further Resolved, That the House of Representatives requests NOAA to issue a formal public commitment to: (a) recognize and incorporate traditional Chamorro and Carolinian stewardship practices in its operational planning and research efforts; (b) prioritize the hiring and training of CNMI residents for all NOAA affiliated initiatives conducted in the region; and (c) guarantee that all marine data collected from CNMI waters is locally archived, fully accessible to the CNMI Government, and not transferred or shared with third parties without prior consultation and consent from the CNMI Government and affected Indigenous stakeholders; and be it further Resolved, That the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall certify, and the House Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this resolution and thereafter the House Clerk shall transmit a certified copy to the Honorable Arnold I. Palacios, Governor of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; the Honorable Kimberlyn King-Hinds, Delegate to the United States House of Representatives; the Honorable J.D. Vance, Vice President of the United States and President of the U.S. Senate; the Honorable Mike Johnson, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives; the Honorable Laura Grimm, Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; the CNMI Indigenous Affairs Office; the Carolinian Affairs Office; and Carmelita "Millie" Rabauliman-Faisao, President of the Uraali Refaluwasch Association. ____ POM-82. A joint resolution adopted by the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee expressing its support for the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act pending in the 119th U.S. Congress and urging passage of this landmark legislation that will protect the Second Amendment rights of Tennessee's law-abiding citizens; to the Committee on the Judiciary. Whereas, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 38) has been introduced in the 119th U.S. Congress with more than 120 co-sponsors; and Whereas, this bipartisan legislation would provide nationwide reciprocity for concealed carry license holders and for residents of Constitutional Carry states; and Whereas, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act allows an individual with a state-issued concealed carry license or permit to conceal a handgun in any other state and also allows a resident of a Constitutional Carry state to carry in other states; and Whereas, as the sponsors of the legislation have noted, the fundamental right to bear arms and defend oneself should not be determined by the state in which one lives, nor do an American citizen's Second Amendment rights disappear when he or she crosses a state line; and Whereas, to protect these fundamental rights, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act will protect law-abiding citizens' rights to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil lawsuits; and Whereas, currently, all fifty states issue concealed carry permits, forty-nine states allow nonresident carry, and twenty-nine states have Constitutional Carry; thus, it makes common sense for Congress to ensure that each state's concealed carry permit or license is valid in every other and state; and Whereas, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act is supported by many major pro-Second Amendment organizations; and Whereas, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives in 2017 with bipartisan support; and Whereas, President Donald Trump has committed to signing national concealed carry reciprocity legislation into law; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate of the One Hundred Fourteenth General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, the House of Representatives concurring, That this General Assembly expresses its support for the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act pending in the 119th U.S. Congress and urge passage of this landmark legislation that will protect the Second Amendment rights of Tennessee's law-abiding citizens. Be it further Resolved, That a certified copy of this resolution be transmitted to the President and the Secretary of the U.S. Senate, the Speaker and the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, and each member of Tennessee's delegation to the U.S. Congress. ____ POM-83.

Text printed in the Record (9,073 characters)

A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming requesting the United States Congress to introduce a bill and enact law to amend Wyoming's act of admission to authorize the expenditure of earnings for the support of the common schools in Wyoming; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Whereas, on July 10, 1890, the United States Congress enacted the Act of Admission that admitted Wyoming as a state in the United States of America; and Whereas, the Act of Admission granted the state of Wyoming two (2) sections of land in every township for the support of common schools; and Whereas, the Act of Admission specified that any proceeds from the disposition of granted school lands were to constitute a permanent school fund, "the interest of which only shall be expended in the support of said schools"; and Whereas, the Act of Admission specified that a percentage of the proceeds of the sales of federal public lands in Wyoming were to constitute a permanent fund, "the interest of which only shall be expended for the support of the common schools" in Wyoming; and Whereas, the Act of Admission specified that certain previously granted lands constituted a permanent fund, with the interest and income to be used for university purposes; and Whereas, the state created the common school account within the permanent land fund in accordance with the requirements of the Act of Admission and Article 7, Section 2 of the Wyoming Constitution; and Whereas, the common school account within the permanent land fund has grown over the years and has been invested to where the current value of the fund exceeds five billion six hundred million dollars ($5,600,000,000.00); and Whereas, the investment of the funds in the common school account generates earnings and capital gains that are in addition to interest and income generated from the funds; and Whereas, an amendment to Wyoming's Act of Admission that would replace references to "interest" and "income" with references to "earnings" will better reflect; the reality of how the common school account is invested and will allow the earnings that are generated from the investment of the permanent funds of the common school account to be better and more efficiently applied for the benefit of Wyoming's public schools. Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Members of the Legislature of the State of Wyoming: Section 1. That the Wyoming Legislature requests that members of Wyoming's congressional delegation introduce, and that Congress enact, legislation that will amend Wyoming's Act of Admission to strike references to "interest" in sections 5 and 7 of the Act of Admission and to insert references to "earnings" and to strike the reference to "income" in section 8 and insert a reference to "earnings." Section 2. That members of Wyoming's congressional delegation and Congress consider introducing legislation that makes the following changes to sections 5, 7 and 8 of the Act of Admission as follows: Section 5. All lands herein granted for educational purposes shall be disposed of only at public sale, the proceeds to constitute a permanent school fund, the earnings of which only shall be expended in the support of said schools. But said lands may, under such regulations as the legislature shall prescribe, be leased for mineral, grazing, agricultural, or other purposes, provided that the term of agricultural and grazing leases shall not exceed 10 years; and such land shall not be subject to preemption, homestead entry, or any other entry under the land laws of the United States, whether surveyed or unsurveyed, but shall be reserved for school purposes only. Section 7. Five percent of the proceeds of the sales of public lands lying within said state which shall be sold by the United States subsequent to the admission of said state into the union, after deducting all the expenses incident to the same, shall be paid to the said state, to be used as a permanent fund, the earnings of which only shall be expended for the support of the common schools within said state. Section 8. The lands granted to the Territory of Wyoming by the act of February 18, 1881, entitled "An act to grant lands to Dakota, Montana, Arizona, Idaho and Wyoming, for university purposes," are hereby vested in the State of Wyoming, to the extent of the full quantity of 72 sections to said state, and any portion of said lands that may not have been selected by said Territory of Wyoming may be selected by the said state; but said act of February 18, 1881, shall be so amended as to provide that none of said lands shall be sold for less than $10 per acre, and the proceeds shall constitute a permanent fund to be safely invested and held by said state, and the income earnings thereof be used exclusively for university purposes. The schools, colleges, and universities provided for in this act shall forever remain under exclusive control of said state, and no part of the proceeds arising from the sale or disposal of any lands herein granted for educational purposes shall be used for the support of any sectarian or denominational school, college, or university. The section of land granted by the act of May 28, 1888, to the Territory of Wyoming for a fish hatchery and other public purposes shall, upon the admission of said State of Wyoming into the union, become the property of said state. Section 3. That the Secretary of State of Wyoming transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States Congress, the governor, the state treasurer and to each member of the Wyoming Congressional Delegation. ____ POM-84. A joint resolution adopted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming commemorating the 100th anniversary of Nellie Tayloe Ross becoming the first woman to hold the office of governor in the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary. Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross was born on November 25, 1876, in St. Joseph, Missouri; and Whereas, after being raised in the great plains and midwest, Nellie Tayloe Ross came to Cheyenne, Wyoming, and married William B. Ross, a lawyer and aspiring politician; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross was described as gracious, funny, smart and strongly loyal to her friends and family; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross became the first lady of Wyoming in 1922 after her husband, Williams B. Ross, was elected governor; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross was relied upon by her husband, who consulted her daily on political life; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross was asked to run for governor by the state party chairman after Governor William B. Ross died on October 2, 1924; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross, who had political ambitions, was advised not to run for the office of governor by friends and family but nonetheless accepted her party's nomination on October 14, 1924; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross won the special election for governor on November 4, 1924, with fifty-five and twelve-hundredths percent (55.12%) of the votes; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross assumed office as the first woman governor in the United States on January 5, 1925, tackling hardships throughout the state, including drought, farm and ranch failures and bank failures; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross served as governor for one (1) term, but her remarkable political career did not end once she left the governor's office; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross once again made history in May 1933 when she became the first woman to hold the position of director of the United States mint; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross served as director of the United States mint through the Great Depression, World War II and the Korean War and is the longest-serving United States mint director in history; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross retired from the United States mint in April 1953 and lived a prosperous life until her death at age one hundred one (101) on December 20, 1977; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross remains the only woman to have served as governor of Wyoming and one (1) of seven (7) women to serve as director of the United States mint; and Whereas, Wyoming is the Equality State and has been home to many historical achievements by women; and Whereas, Nellie Tayloe Ross continues to be an inspiration to many people across Wyoming and the United States; and Whereas, January 5, 2025, marked the one-hundredth (100th) anniversary of Nellie Tayloe Ross' historic inauguration; now, therefore, be it Resolved by the members of the Legislature of the State of Wyoming: Section 1. That the State of Wyoming recognizes and commemorates the life and achievements of Nellie Tayloe Ross on this momentous anniversary. Section 2 . That the Secretary of State of Wyoming transmit copies of this resolution to the president of the United States, to the president of the senate and speaker of the house of representatives of the United States congress and to the Wyoming congressional delegation.

Reports of Committees

Page S4926 · Official text

Under the authority of the order of the Senate of September 23, 2026, the following reports of committees were submitted on September 23, 2026:

Text printed in the Record (1,039 characters)

By Mr. JOHNSON, from the Committee on the Budget: Special Report entitled "Legislative Activities of the Committee on the Budget During the 118th Congress" (Rept. No. 119-151). By Ms. MURKOWSKI, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, without amendment: S. 1055. A bill to amend the Indian Health Care Improvement Act to modify the notification requirement for emergency contract health services for certain beneficiaries, and for other purposes (Rept. No. 119-152). By Ms. MURKOWSKI, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute: S. 3219. A bill to transfer certain Federal land into trust for certain Indian Pueblos in the State of New Mexico, and for other purposes (Rept. No. 119-153). By Mr. LEE, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute: S. 3313. A bill to require the Secretary of the Interior to issue a right-of-way for an emergency exit on certain National Park Service land in the State of Virginia, and for other purposes.

Executive Reports of Committee

Pages S4926–S4929 · Official text

The following executive reports of nominations were submitted:

Text printed in the Record (1,741 characters)

By Mr. WICKER for the Committee on Armed Services. *Army nomination of Brig. Gen. David C. Phillips, to be Lieutenant General. *Army nomination of Lt. Gen. Kevin D. Admiral, to be Lieutenant General. *Air Force nomination of Maj. Gen. Charles S. Corcoran (Retired), to be Lieutenant General. Army nomination of Col. Michael L. Seek, to be Brigadier General. *Army nomination of Lt. Gen. Edmond M. Brown, to be Lieutenant General. *Army nomination of Lt. Gen. Francisco J. Lozano, to be Lieutenant General. *Army nomination of Maj. Gen. Christopher R. Norrie, to be Lieutenant General. Navy nomination of Rear Adm. (lh) John D. Saccomando, to be Rear Admiral. *Space Force nomination of Maj. Gen. Robert J. Hutt, to be Lieutenant General. *Space Force nomination of Maj. Gen. Christopher S. Povak, to be Lieutenant General. *Navy nomination of Rear Adm. Oliver T. Lewis, to be Vice Admiral. Air Force nomination of Col. Nathan T. Colunga, to be Brigadier General. Air Force nomination of Brig. Gen. Andrew J. Camacho, to be Major General. Navy nomination of Capt. Douglas Graber, to be Rear Admiral (lower half). Navy nomination of Rear Adm. (lh) Kevin J. Brown, to be Surgeon General. Army nomination of Col. Kevin H. Miller, to be Brigadier General. Army nomination of Brig. Gen. Paul T. Sellars, to be Major General. Army nomination of Col. Shawn D. Wray, to be Brigadier General. Army nomination of Col. Ryan T. Smith, to be Brigadier General. Army nomination of Col. Michael F. Belenky, to be Brigadier General. Army nominations beginning with Col. Matthew T. Adamczyk and ending with Col. Graham R. White, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 16, 2026.

Roger F. Wicker (R-MS)

Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the RECORDS on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Without objection, it is so ordered.

Text printed in the Record (11,869 characters)

Air Force nominations beginning with Adewale O. Ajulo and ending with Jessica L. Yett, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 13, 2026. Air Force nomination of Lindsay K. Vezina, to be Major. Air Force nomination of Justin M. Tubiolo, to be Colonel. Air Force nomination of Park Ilmoon, to be Major. Air Force nomination of John-Michael M. McGaugh, to be Major. Air Force nomination of James H. Hayes III, to be Colonel. Air Force nomination of Aaron J. Lippy, to be Colonel. Air Force nomination of Mengyuan Qiu, to be Major. Air Force nominations beginning with Jeffrey L. Downing and ending with Darrin B. Letsinger, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 30, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Timothy R. Adams and ending with Andre Wolf, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 4, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Joseph A. Boudreau and ending with Adrian A. Zollinger, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 4, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Colin V. Barcus and ending with Norman K. Wilson, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 4, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Ryan G. Allen and ending with Ryan E. Young, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 4, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Chikaodi H. Akalaonu and ending with Tabatha R. Zellhart, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 4, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Christopher R. Alba and ending with Farakh B. Zaman, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 4, 2026. Air Force nomination of Kyle E. Carpenter, to be Colonel. Air Force nominations beginning with David P. Abbott and ending with Justin L. Wolthuizen, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Tracy A. Brannock Bennett and ending with Kendra S. Zbir, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Sabrina M. Akhtar and ending with Jacqueline L. Yurgil, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Aaron J. Agirre and ending with Gregory S. Zilinski, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Craig M. Forsythe and ending with Travis N. Sears, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Madison L. Basile, Jr. and ending with Brian K. Wienhoff, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Nicholas J. Accardi and ending with Attila N. Zsigmond, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Juan S. Alb and ending with Keegan T. Zehr, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Randolph T. Abaya and ending with James Zhen, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Tamara R. Acfalle and ending with Zackery T. Zounes, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. (minus 1 nominee: Mohit N. Sharma) Air Force nominations beginning with David Saul B. Adriatico and ending with Jessica E. Zetina, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Richard F. Bacon III and ending with Matthew W. Yelverton, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Meade J. Adams and ending with Jacob A. Wilde, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nominations beginning with Brian H. Adams and ending with Emily M. Wilson, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Air Force nomination of Richard L. Browell, to be Lieutenant Colonel. Air Force nomination of Kevin M. Heath, to be Colonel. Air Force nomination of Cashius D. Flink, to be Major. Air Force nomination of Justin A. Longmire, to be Colonel. Air Force nomination of Thomas C. Erlinger, to be Lieutenant Colonel. Air Force nomination of Matthew P. DeMars, to be Lieutenant Colonel. Air Force nomination of Christopher R. Marslender, to be Colonel. Army nominations beginning with Kyle R. Abruzzese and ending with 1253917012, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on May 12, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Stephen R. Abrams and ending with 1258347311, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on May 12, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Frank L. Adams and ending with Mathis F. Wright, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on May 12, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Scott A. Beal and ending with Timothy J. Williams, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on May 12, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Pedro J. Acosta Zapata and ending with 1522199520, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. (minus 1 nominee: Michael F. Harari) Army nominations beginning with Donnial K. Hinds and ending with Benjamin L. Ruffner, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Army nomination of Matthew B. Firing, to be Colonel. Army nominations beginning with Thomas C. Agnew and ending with Frances R. Young, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 21, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Nadine M. Alonzo and ending with 1157853003, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 21, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Paul J. Auchincloss and ending with 1257257572, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 21, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Scott J. Anderson and ending with Carl Soffler, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 21, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Peter Baek and ending with Shay L. Worthy, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 21, 2026. Army nomination of Joshua M. McFadden, to be Major. Army nomination of Jeremy T. McGarry, to be Colonel. Army nominations beginning with Travis A. Moore and ending with Brenton L. Weece, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Andrew N. Ayres and ending with Steven J. Ross, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Timur A. Abdurashidov and ending with Justin L. Zeien, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Anna D. Abele and ending with Alyssa C. Younger, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Richard M. Anez and ending with Lee R. Mohy, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Roseann P. Apuron and ending with David T. Young, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Paige E. Covington Riddle and ending with Wesley D. Thomas, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Mistee M. Allen and ending with Sean T. Williams, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with George J. Abboud and ending with Marion O. Yarborough, Jr., which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Matthew S. Bay and ending with Stephen E. Young, Jr., which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nomination of Shamim S. Nafea, to be Major. Army nomination of Bradley C. Hamrick, to be Colonel. Army nominations beginning with Brian R. Barhorst and ending with Robert N. Walker, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Jay C. Alcisto and ending with James E. Zavala, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Darren W. Hearn and ending with Robert Schmand III, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Shara J. Carlton and ending with Kellie J. Stewart, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Tondra Fobish and ending with Selena M. Stewart, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Thammasathith Boriboon and ending with Asovale L. Sikuka, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Jamie D. Bouchard and ending with Derrick L. Williams, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Robert C. Berry and ending with Callief S. Shand, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nomination of Joshua I. Jones, to be Lieutenant Colonel. Army nominations beginning with Robert R. Burgin and ending with David J. Pratico, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nominations beginning with Thomas J. Boehm and ending with 1269574433, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nomination of Benjamin C. Wisnioski, to be Colonel. Army nomination of Christopher E. Berge, to be Colonel. Army nomination of Robert C. Massey, to be Lieutenant Colonel. Army nomination of Michael D. Bales, to be Colonel. Army nominations beginning with Benjamin Ahn and ending with Vivian K.

Text printed in the Record (10,179 characters)

Yanquoiwest, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Army nomination of Morgan J. Hill, to be Major. Army nominations beginning with Jose M. Gamboa and ending with Andrew W. Voll, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Marine Corps nomination of Curtis A. Williamson, to be Colonel. Marine Corps nomination of Jason A. Wahl, to be Lieutenant Colonel. Marine Corps nomination of Gabrielle M. Debbins, to be Major. Navy nominations beginning with Daniel T. Ashland and ending with Thomas M. Riley, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Steven Fuentes and ending with Stephen E. Slaby, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Luke M. Hafner and ending with Lisvette Orellana, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Laura J. Anderson and ending with Timothy R. Strickland, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Michael J. Jacques and ending with Youngseok Seo, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Kenneth M. Alea and ending with Inyene E. Umoren, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Philip E. Angeli and ending with Robert C. Whitaker, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Victor Canchola and ending with Jason W. Williams, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Kalina N. Bitter and ending with Rebecca A. Scott, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 20, 2026. Navy nomination of Timothy R. Seggel, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Anthony P. Desomma, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Keyaira C. S. Seales, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nominations beginning with Renan Amador and ending with Sophia T. A. Tran, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 30, 2026. Navy nomination of Erika L. Ludolph, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Aaron B. Middleton, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Dennis M. Datuin, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of David M. Ferguson, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Jonathan C. Alty II, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Lawrence W. Stoulig III, to be Commander. Navy nomination of Cameron A. Ingram, to be Captain. Navy nomination of Joshua C. King, to be Captain. Navy nomination of Gregory B. Bartlett, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Jacob G. Compton, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Bryan P. Jennings, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Daniel R. Schuerman, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Tyler J. Gale, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nominations beginning with Bhani K. Chawla Kondal and ending with Lindsey L. Voncannon, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on July 30, 2026. Navy nomination of Mohammad A. Awad, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nominations beginning with Pooja Pundhir and ending with Ramin A. Vejdani, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on August 7, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Darin A. Basso and ending with Timothy M. Zoellick, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Yousef M. Ahmed and ending with Jessica L. Zimmerman, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Joshua D. Barclay and ending with True Xiong, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Edward W. Agbeveytamakloe and ending with Jaime C. Zhunepluas, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Kaitlyn E. Amundsen and ending with Jordi I. Torres, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Tyson J. Baca and ending with Jonathan P. Zisko, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nomination of Nicholas J. Gegg, to be Commander. Navy nominations beginning with Imani C. Abrahamsen and ending with Sarah K. Zimmer, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Hannah M. Abdo and ending with Stephanie L. Wilke, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Okoroafor M. Agbai and ending with Marlon J. C. Yulo, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Lillian L. Bean and ending with Danielle Zucker, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Jubbie M. Acutim and ending with Julianna S. Wooley, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Jerell I. Agard and ending with Seth G. Xie, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with William A. Appel and ending with Kadin J. G. Williams, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Ciaran T. Bradley and ending with Jason M. Yax, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Andrew J. Brandmeier and ending with Christian A. Spear, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 14, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Sarra Benkhalifa and ending with Nhu Q. Pham, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Victor G. Aramayo and ending with Megan C. Lasaponara, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Harpreet Kaur and ending with Matthew A. Wilks, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nomination of Brett A. Senters, to be Captain. Navy nomination of Jeffrey A. Stroud, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Abraham J. Trindle, to be Commander. Navy nomination of Nathan W. Winter, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nominations beginning with Ashley A. Aclese and ending with Kyle E. Zunk, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Samuel O. Adjei and ending with Daniel S. Wright, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Mark E. Beaudet and ending with Cole C. Yoos, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Danielle M. Bernal and ending with Rachel A. Wolinsky, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nominations beginning with Kortine M. Broschinsky and ending with Kevin M. Omary, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Navy nomination of Nathan W. Lewis, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Garrett M. Saulters, to be Lieutenant Commander. Navy nomination of Joshua R. Spaulding, to be Lieutenant Commander. Space Force nominations beginning with Nicole M. Abeling and ending with Lei Zhu, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Space Force nominations beginning with Jonathan R. Arehart and ending with Robert O. Wray, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Space Force nominations beginning with Adekunbi H. Adewunmi and ending with Samuel H. Wood, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Space Force nominations beginning with Dan E. Alcantara and ending with Steven D. Zamora, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Space Force nomination of Erin N. Cox, to be Lieutenant Colonel. Space Force nominations beginning with Joshua A. Herrington and ending with Riley Lynch, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026. Space Force nominations beginning with Andrew B. Adams and ending with Alan R. Zollar, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional Record on September 15, 2026.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

*Nomination was reported with recommendation that it be confirmed subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate.

(Nominations without an asterisk were reported with the recommendation that they be confirmed.)

Introduction of Bills and Joint Resolutions

Pages S4929–S4930 · Official text

The 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 (9,624 characters)

By Mr. RICKETTS: S. 5459. A bill to protect the economic value of agricultural data and the autonomy of agricultural producers by protecting the sale of agricultural data and maintaining the security of agricultural data through reasonable safeguards; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. By Mr. HEINRICH (for himself, Mr. Kim, Mr. Padilla, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Fetterman, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Reed, Mr. Booker, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Bennet, and Ms. Rosen): S. 5460. A bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to increase reimbursement rates of school meals, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Ms. Klobuchar): S. 5461. A bill to require a study to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a Strategic Fertilizer Reserve for the storage and management of fertilizer products and fertilizer product inputs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. By Mr. HOEVEN (for himself, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Daines, and Mr. Sheehy): S. 5462. A bill to extend the Frontier Community Health Integration Project Demonstration; to the Committee on Finance. By Mr. WICKER (for himself, Mr. Kaine, and Mr. McCormick): S. 5463. A bill to amend title 36, United States Code, to request the President to designate a month each year as National American History and Founders Month; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. BOOZMAN (for himself and Ms. Duckworth): S. 5464. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to modify the report on the health of women veterans, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. By Ms. CORTEZ MASTO (for herself and Mr. Rounds): S. 5465. A bill to amend the Federal Reserve Act to require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to carry out a review of discount window operations and to implement improvements to such operations, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. By Mr. KING: S. 5466. A bill to authorize grants to fire departments to conduct activities with the goals of reducing falls among older adults and reducing response time when responding to in-home emergencies, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. By Mr. MURPHY (for himself, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Booker, Mr. Kaine, and Mr. Van Hollen): S. 5467. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to expand the Magnet Schools Assistance Program; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mr. MURPHY (for himself, Mr. Booker, Mr. Markey, Mr. Van Hollen, and Mr. Merkley): S. 5468. A bill to divert Federal funding away from supporting the presence of police in schools and toward evidence-based and trauma informed services that address the needs of marginalized students and improve academic outcomes, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mr. TILLIS (for himself and Mr. Padilla): S. 5469. A bill to establish the Heart Security Foundation, a federally chartered charitable and nonprofit corporation; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. MURPHY (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kaine, Mr. Padilla, and Mr. Van Hollen): S. 5470. A bill to prohibit the use of corporal punishment in schools, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mr. COONS (for himself, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Schatz, and Mr. Lankford): S. 5471. A bill to require disclosure of certain information relating to artificial intelligence systems, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. By Mr. WELCH: S. 5472. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income grants and the proceeds of transferrable tax credits supporting the development of affordable housing, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance. By Mr. MERKLEY (for himself and Mr. Wyden): S. 5473. A bill to establish Homeownership Promise Accounts to provide matching downpayment grants, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. By Ms. BALDWIN (for herself and Mr. Kim): S. 5474. A bill to prohibit the expenditure of Federal funds to deploy Department of Homeland Security or National Guard employees at or near any location at which an election is taking place; to the Committee on Rules and Administration. By Mr. LUJAN (for himself and Mr. Cotton): S. 5475. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ensure timely review of local coverage determination requests under the Medicare program; to the Committee on Finance. By Mr. COONS (for himself, Ms. Warren, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Gallego, Mr. Bennet, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Heinrich, Mr. Kaine, Mr. Kelly, Mr. Kim, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Murphy, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Reed, Mr. Schatz, Mr. Schiff, Ms. Slotkin, Mr. Van Hollen, and Mr. Welch): S. 5476. A bill to impose sanctions with respect to foreign persons that have facilitated Israeli settlement construction in the E1 area of the West Bank; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. By Mr. YOUNG (for himself and Mr. Warner): S. 5477. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for certain rules regarding determination of tax in the case of a receivership; to the Committee on Finance. By Mr. LEE: S. 5478. A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the enforcement of foreign censorship judgments, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. SULLIVAN: S. 5479. A bill to prohibit Chinese seafood products in congressional dining facilities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration. By Mr. KAINE (for himself and Mr. Warner): S. 5480. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow rehabilitation expenditures for public school buildings to qualify for rehabilitation credit; to the Committee on Finance. By Ms. WARREN (for herself, Mr. Booker, Mrs. Gillibrand, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Markey, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden): S. 5481. A bill to expand youth access to voting, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration. By Mr. SCHATZ (for himself, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Booker, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Fetterman, Mr. King, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Merkley, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Schiff, Ms. Smith, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Wyden): S. 5482. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to establish an Office of Prison Education, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mrs. GILLIBRAND: S. 5483. A bill to nullify the applicability of the Act of July 2, 1948, with respect to the territory of the Seneca Nation of Indians in New York, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. RISCH (for himself, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Daines, Mr. Hagerty, Mr. Boozman, and Mr. Barrasso): S. 5484. A bill to amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to prohibit the Secretary of Energy from enforcing energy efficiency standards applicable to manufactured housing, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. By Mr. TUBERVILLE: S. 5485. A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to protect American workers and values; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. WHITEHOUSE: S. 5486. A bill to amend the African Growth and Opportunity Act to exclude from eligibility each sub-Saharan African country that does not effectively enforce its environmental laws and fulfill its international environmental obligations; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KENNEDY: S. 5487. A bill to require the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration to develop certain guidelines to improve access to the Transportation Worker Identification Credential program; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. By Mr. VAN HOLLEN (for himself, Mr. Booker, and Ms. Klobuchar): S. 5488. A bill to establish a program to address sickle cell disease and other heritable hemoglobinopathies; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mr. VAN HOLLEN (for himself, Mr. Booker, and Ms. Klobuchar): S. 5489. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize a scholarship and loan repayment program to incentivize physicians to enter into the field of sickle cell disease research, treatment, and patient care, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Coons, and Mr. Cassidy): S. 5490. A bill to designate Ukraine under section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide certain nationals of Ukraine with continued eligibility for temporary protected status, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. PADILLA (for himself, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Schiff, and Ms. Cantwell): S. 5491. A bill to prohibit the intimidation of election officials and election workers; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. HAGERTY: S. 5492. A bill to reduce crime on public transportation, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. By Mr. SANDERS: S. 5493. A bill to establish the Department of Artificial Intelligence and to provide for the regulation of advanced artificial intelligence systems, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Submission of Concurrent and Senate Resolutions

Page S4930 · Official text

The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were read, and referred (or acted upon), as indicated:

Text printed in the Record (7,500 characters)

By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 873. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Moldova's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 874. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Paraguay's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 875. A resolution requesting information on the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 876. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Sierra Leone's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 877. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Uganda's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 878. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of El Salvador's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 879. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Ecuador's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 880. A resolution requesting information on the Commonwealth of Dominica's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 881. A resolution requesting information on the Democratic Republic of the Congo's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 882. A resolution requesting information on the Central African Republic's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 883. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Burundi's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 884. A resolution requesting information on Belize's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 885. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Guinea-Bissau's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 886. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Liberia's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Mr. KAINE: S. Res. 887. A resolution requesting information on the Republic of Palau's human rights practices pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Ms. CORTEZ MASTO (for herself and Ms. Rosen): S. Res. 888. A resolution congratulating the Paseo Verde Little League baseball team on winning the 2026 Little League World Series United States Championship; considered and agreed to. By Mr. LUJAN (for himself and Mr. Moreno): S. Res. 889. A resolution recognizing the contributions of Hispanic and Latino Americans to the musical heritage of the United States and designating September 2026 as "Latin Music Appreciation Month"; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. LANKFORD (for himself and Mr. King): S. Res. 890. A resolution remembering, on the 105th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party, the countless lives the Chinese Communist Party has destroyed and the people currently living in fear of its tyrannical ambitions; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. By Ms. GRAHAM (for herself, Mr. Banks, Mr. Barrasso, Mrs. Blackburn, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Budd, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Daines, Mr. Hagerty, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Justice, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Lee, Ms. Lummis, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. Risch, Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. Young, Mr. Wicker, and Mrs. Hyde- Smith): S. Res. 891. A resolution designating the week of September 27, 2026, through October 3, 2026, as "Religious Education Week" to celebrate religious education in the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Ms. HASSAN (for herself and Mrs. Capito): S. Res. 892. A resolution supporting the designation of September 18, 2026, as "National Concussion Awareness Day"; considered and agreed to. By Mrs. BLACKBURN (for herself and Mr. Kaine): S. Res. 893. A resolution designating October 2026 as "National Country Music Month"; considered and agreed to. By Mrs. HYDE-SMITH (for herself, Mr. Murphy, and Mrs. Capito): S. Res. 894. A resolution designating September 25, 2026, as "National Ataxia Awareness Day", and raising awareness of ataxia, ataxia research, and the search for a cure; considered and agreed to. By Mrs. SHAHEEN (for herself, Mr. Crapo, Ms. Hassan, Ms. Rosen, Mr. Peters, and Ms. Murkowski): S. Res. 895. A resolution designating the week of October 4, 2026, through October 10, 2026, as "National Community Policing Week"; considered and agreed to. By Mr. LANKFORD (for himself and Mr. Coons): S. Res. 896. A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the importance of religious freedom, authoritative texts, and transparency in artificial intelligence systems; considered and agreed to. By Mr. KELLY (for himself, Mr. Gallego, Mr. Grassley, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Thune, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr. Armstrong, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Banks, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Bennet, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Blumenthal, Ms. Blunt Rochester, Mr. Booker, Mr. Boozman, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Budd, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Cassidy, Ms. Collins, Mr. Coons, Mr. Cornyn, Ms. Cortez Masto, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Daines, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Ernst, Mr. Fetterman, Mrs. Fischer, Mrs. Gillibrand, Ms. Graham, Mr. Hagerty, Ms. Hassan, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Heinrich, Mr. Hickenlooper, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Hoeven, Mr. Husted, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Justice, Mr. Kaine, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kim, Mr. King, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Lee, Mr. Lujan, Ms. Lummis, Mr. Markey, Mr. Marshall, Mr. McCormick, Mr. Merkley, Mrs. Moody, Mr. Moran, Mr. Moreno, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Murphy, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Ossoff, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Paul, Mr. Peters, Mr. Reed, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. Risch, Ms. Rosen, Mr. Rounds, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schatz, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Sheehy, Ms. Slotkin, Ms. Smith, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Warner, Mr. Warnock, Ms. Warren, Mr. Welch, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Wyden, and Mr. Young): S. Res. 897. A resolution honoring the life, service, and legacy of the Honorable Jon Llewellyn Kyl, former Senator for the State of Arizona; considered and agreed to.

Additional Cosponsors

Pages S4930–S4932 · Official text

At the request of Mr. Moran, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan) was added as a cosponsor of S. 410, a bill to amend titles 10 and 38, United States Code, to improve benefits and services for surviving spouses, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Hyde-Smith, the name of the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) was added as a cosponsor of S. 470, a bill to amend the CARES Act to remove a requirement on lessors to provide notice to vacate, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Kaine, the name of the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Gallego) was added as a cosponsor of S. 986, a bill to address and take action to prevent bullying and harassment of students. At the request of Mrs. Gillibrand, the name of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1289, a bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States and to support programs at the National September 11 Memorial and Museum at the World Trade Center. At the request of Mr. Booker, the names of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) and the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) were added as cosponsors of S. 1529, a bill to prohibit Federal agencies from authorizing or facilitating commercial finfish aquaculture operations in the Executive Economic Zone except in accordance with a Federal statute authorizing such action. At the request of Mrs. Hyde-Smith, the name of the Senator from South Carolina (Ms. Graham) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1919, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a domestic cotton consumption credit. At the request of Ms. Warren, the names of the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Slotkin) and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin) were added as cosponsors 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 Mr. Lujan, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2076, a bill to provide for an emergency increase in Federal funding to State Medicaid programs for expenditures on home and community-based services. At the request of Mr. Padilla, the name of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2265, a bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Los Angeles, California, and the 2034 Olympics and Paralympic Winter Games in Salt Lake City, Utah. At the request of Mr. Marshall, the name of the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2355, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for hospital and insurer price transparency. At the request of Mr. Thune, the name of the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) 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. Risch, the name of the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Crapo) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2753, a bill to amend the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 to authorize certain extraordinary operation and maintenance work for urban canals of concern. At the request of Mr. Hagerty, the name of the Senator from Montana (Mr. Sheehy) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2840, a bill to amend the Investment Company Act of 1940 to postpone the date of payment or satisfaction upon redemption of certain securities in the case of the financial exploitation of specified adults, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Collins, the names of the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Hickenlooper) and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn) were added as cosponsors 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 Ms. Graham, the names of the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Budd) and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) were added as cosponsors of S. 3605, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a portion of general business credit carryforwards to be transferred by certain taxpayers affected by federally declared disasters and other incidents. At the request of Ms. Smith, the names of the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Slotkin) and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fetterman) were added as cosponsors of S. 3990, a bill to increase access to pre-exposure prophylaxis to reduce the transmission of HIV. At the request of Mr. Young, the name of the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Grassley) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4070, a bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to cover physician services delivered by podiatric physicians to ensure access by Medicaid beneficiaries to appropriate quality foot and ankle care, to amend title XVIII of such Act to modify the requirements for diabetic shoes to be included under Medicare, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Moody, the name of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Banks) 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. Moreno, the names of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Hoeven) and the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young) were added as cosponsors of S. 4429, a bill to prohibit the importation, manufacture, sale, resale, or introduction into interstate commerce in the United States of connected vehicles and related software and hardware associated with foreign adversaries. At the request of Mr. Marshall, the names of the Senator from Montana (Mr. Daines) and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Sheehy) were added as cosponsors of S. 4479, a bill to provide assisted living assistance through Medicaid and the low-income housing tax credit. At the request of Mrs. Murray, the name of the Senator from California (Mr. Padilla) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4503, a bill to improve menopause care and mid-life women's health, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Markey, the names of the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fetterman) and the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) 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 Ms. Hirono, the name of the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Alsobrooks) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4859, a bill to improve the structure of the Federal Pell Grant program, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Welch, the name of the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) was added as a cosponsor of S. 4906, a bill to amend the Dairy Production Stabilization Act of 1983 to establish a dairy market stabilization program, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Husted, the names of the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt), the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn), the Senator from Iowa (Ms. Ernst) and the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Armstrong) were added as cosponsors of S. 5028, a bill 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. At the request of Mr. Schiff, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Kim) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5032, a bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to require justices, judges, magistrate judges, or bankruptcy judges and their spouses and dependent children to place certain assets into qualified blind trusts, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Merkley, the name of the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5087, a bill to amend the Clean Air Act to modify the definition of renewable biomass for purposes of the renewable fuel standard, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Lujan, the names of the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Welch) were added as cosponsors of S. 5278, a bill to prohibit the speculative sale of event tickets, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Cortez Masto, the names of the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) were added as cosponsors of S. 5326, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to strengthen program integrity oversight for the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Britt, the name of the Senator from Florida (Mrs. Moody) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5337, a bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for extensions of detention of certain aliens ordered removed, and for other purposes. At the request of Ms. Murkowski, the names of the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Cortez Masto) and the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith) were added as cosponsors of S. 5354, a bill to reauthorize the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996. At the request of Mr. Budd, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford) and the Senator from Florida (Mrs. Moody) were added as cosponsors of S. 5370, a bill to state the policy of the United States with respect to international religious freedom in the People's Republic of China, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Husted, the name of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Banks) was added as a cosponsor of S. 5392, a bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require institutions of higher education, as a condition of participating in programs under title IV of such Act, to ensure that not more than 20 percent of the student athletes on a varsity sports team of the institution are international students, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono) 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 Ms. Duckworth, the name of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Welch) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 790, a resolution recognizing and honoring the 27th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Olmstead v L.C. At the request of Mr. Crapo, his name was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 862, a resolution honoring the life and legacy of Dolly Parton, a daughter of Tennessee whose extraordinary contributions to music, philanthropy, literacy, education, health, conservation, and culture enriched the lives of countless Americans. At the request of Ms. Cortez Masto, the name of the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 870, a resolution recognizing Hispanic Heritage Month and celebrating the heritage and culture of Latinos in the United States and the immense contributions of Latinos to the United States. At the request of Ms. Baldwin, the name of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 6785 intended to be proposed to S. 4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Merkley, the name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 6790 intended to be proposed to S.

4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Murphy, the names of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 6794 intended to be proposed to S. 4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Murphy, the name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 6795 intended to be proposed to S. 4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Booker, the name of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 6801 intended to be proposed to S. 4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Booker, the name of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 6802 intended to be proposed to S. 4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Booker, the name of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 6804 intended to be proposed to S. 4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Booker, the name of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 6805 intended to be proposed to S. 4668, a bill to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes.

Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions

Pages S4932–S4936 · Official text

Our farmers are getting crushed from all sides by this administration. Trump's blunder in Iran has jacked up the price of fertilizer and diesel to record highs, making it harder for farmers to do their jobs, from planting to harvest. Meanwhile, Trump's costly trade wars and tariffs have raised the cost of farm equipment and, worst of all, closed off markets for our farmers to sell their products. Farm bankruptcies are increasing because of the tariffs and the markets that Trump closed off. Many farmers were already struggling to get by, and now 70 percent of them say they haven't been able to afford the fertilizer they need, all because of Trump's Iran war. Our bill directs the USDA to explore creating a strategic fertilizer reserve to help American farmers weather supply chain shocks by Trump's Iran war. Farmers already have to deal with enough uncertainty as it is: unpredictable weather, inconsistent crop yields, unforeseen blights. They shouldn't have to factor in the chaos coming out of Trump's White House, on top of it all. Soaring fertilizer costs squeeze farmers first, but it doesn't take long for that pain to hit American families at the grocery store. Every Senator who cares about lowering costs, every Senator who cares about helping farmers in rural communities, every Senator, period, ought to get behind this legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Text printed in the Record (7,052 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 "Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Act of 2026". SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Agricultural cooperative.--The term "agricultural cooperative" means an organization or association formed by agricultural producers, operating for the mutual benefit of its members, to collectively market agricultural products, purchase inputs, or provide services. (2) Board.--The term "Board" means the Board of Directors of the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency established under section 5(b). (3) Fertilizer product.--The term "fertilizer product" means-- (A) nitrogen, phosphate, or potash fertilizer; and (B) such other plant nutrient products as the Board may by regulation determine are essential to United States agricultural production, taking into consideration factors including-- (i) widespread use of the plant nutrient product; (ii) lack of substitute products available on the market; (iii) relative importance of the plant nutrient product for the production of crops grown in the United States; (iv) vulnerability of the plant nutrient product to supply chain disruptions; and (v) potential economic harm to agricultural producers if the plant nutrient product becomes unavailable or severely restricted in supply. (4) Fertilizer product input.--The term "fertilizer product input" means-- (A) critical inputs necessary to make nitrogen, phosphate, or potash fertilizer; and (B) such other plant nutrient product inputs as the Board may by regulation determine are essential to United States agricultural production, taking into consideration factors including the factors described in clauses (i) through (v) of paragraph (3)(B). (5) Reserve.--The term "Reserve" means the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve established by section 6(a). (6) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Agriculture. SEC. 3. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following: (1) Fertilizer, including nitrogen, phosphate, and potash products, is an essential agricultural input and vital to the stability of domestic and global food supplies. (2) Unstable fertilizer prices and supply disruptions in recent years have significantly increased production costs for farmers and ranchers and threatened food security and rural economies. (3) Rising fertilizer prices squeeze already thin farm margins, forcing producers to cut back on inputs or acreage, which can lower yields and ultimately drive up food prices for United States consumers. (4) Concentration in global fertilizer markets and reliance on imports that transit chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz heighten the vulnerability of the United States to supply shocks and geopolitical risks. (5) A federally managed strategic reserve of fertilizer product inputs, similar to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, could help mitigate the impacts of severe supply disruptions, price spikes, and other market emergencies, including those caused or exacerbated by avoidable policy-driven conflicts. (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are-- (1) to require a study to evaluate-- (A) the feasibility of establishing a Strategic Fertilizer Reserve for the storage and management of fertilizer products and fertilizer product inputs; (B) best practices for the locations, development, operation, and maintenance of, and withdrawals from, the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve; (C) best practices relating to emerging fertilizer technologies and nutrient management practices; (D) the establishment of an independent agency of the United States Government, to be known as the "Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency", to reduce the impact of disruptions in supplies of fertilizer products on United States agricultural producers and consumers, including those arising from avoidable policy-driven conflicts and mismanagement of foreign policy; and (E) means to ensure that the management and operation of the Reserve are conducted with strict conflict of interest safeguards and transparency; and (2) to authorize the establishment of the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve and the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency. SEC. 4. FEASIBILITY STUDY. (a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a study-- (1) to investigate current domestic fertilizer product production capacity and vulnerabilities, such as import dependency for fertilizer products, critical chokepoints in fertilizer product distribution, and market concentration risks; (2) to investigate the feasibility of storing fertilizer products in the Reserve, including shelf life and degradation rates of stored fertilizer products and associated rotation and drawdown protocols; (3) to investigate the feasibility of storing fertilizer product inputs in the Reserve, including shelf life and degradation rates of stored fertilizer product inputs, associated rotation and drawdown protocols, and necessary blending and processing capacity; (4) to investigate the optimal Reserve size; (5) to investigate the effectiveness of the Reserve's price stabilization; (6) to investigate the type of organization or combination of organizations that are best suited to operate the Reserve; (7) to investigate the 1 or more locations best suited to host the facilities of the Reserve, which shall consider proximity to blending facilities, proximity to agricultural producers, and the climate resilience of facility sites; (8) to suggest the optimal organizational structure for the Reserve; (9) to investigate the situations in which withdrawals or releases from the Reserve would help stabilize prices for United States farmers; (10) to suggest risk management measures for spills, leaks, fires, and explosions; (11) to estimate the cybersecurity and physical security requirements for facilities of the Reserve; (12) to estimate the costs necessary to set up the Reserve; (13) to estimate the annual cost to maintain and operate the Reserve; (14) to investigate domestic fertilizer supply chains, including regional disparities in access for United States farmers; and (15) to consider other factors that the Secretary considers to be important in setting up, maintaining, and operating the Reserve. (b) Determination.--Based on the results of the study under subsection (a), the Secretary shall determine whether to approve the establishment of the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency under section 5, the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve under section 6, and the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Fund under section 8. (c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date on which funds are made available to the Secretary to conduct the study under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives a report describing the findings of the study and the determination of the Secretary under subsection (b). SEC. 5.

Text printed in the Record (10,434 characters)

ESTABLISHMENT OF STRATEGIC FERTILIZER RESERVE AGENCY. (a) Establishment.--On approval by the Secretary under section 4(b), there is established as an independent agency of the United States Government a body corporate, to be known as the "Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency", to develop and oversee the Reserve in accordance with this Act and informed by the findings of the study under section 4(a). (b) Board of Directors.-- (1) In general.--There is established a Board of Directors, which shall be the head of the Agency. (2) Composition.--The Board shall be composed the following 9 voting members: (A) The Secretary. (B) 8 members, each of whom shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. (3) Recommendations.--Before the initial appointment of the members of the Board and before the appointment of any individual to fill a vacancy on the Board, the Majority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the Senate shall each submit to the President 2 candidate recommendations. (4) Qualifications.-- (A) In general.--Members of the Board-- (i) shall be individuals who, by reason of their education, experience, and attainments, are exceptionally qualified to serve; and (ii) shall collectively bring substantial expertise in agriculture, fertilizer markets and supply chains, agricultural finance, cooperative governance, labor, and rural economic development. (B) Sector representation.--In making appointments under this section, the President shall, to the maximum extent practicable, ensure representation from the following sectors: (i) Row crop farmers. (ii) Specialty crop producers. (iii) Livestock and dairy producers. (iv) Beginning and young farmers. (v) Small and mid-sized farmers. (vi) Agricultural creditors. (vii) Agricultural cooperatives. (viii) Agricultural economists and supply chain experts. (C) Geographic representation.--In making appointments under this section, the President shall, to the maximum extent practicable, ensure diverse geographic representation and make reasonable efforts to encourage racial, ethnic, and gender diversity on the Board. (5) Terms.-- (A) In general.--Each voting member of the Board shall be appointed for a term of 4 years, and may be reappointed for not more than one additional consecutive term. (B) Staggered terms.--The terms of the members of the Board shall be staggered so that the terms of not more than 3 members expire in any single year. (C) Holdover.--A member may continue to serve after the expiration of the member's term until a successor has been appointed and qualified. (6) Chair and vice chair.-- (A) In general.--The Board shall elect a Chair and a Vice Chair from among the members of the Board for 2-year terms. (B) Acting chair.--The Vice Chair shall act in place of the Chair in the absence of the Chair. (7) Quorum; voting.-- (A) Quorum.--A majority of the voting members of the Board shall constitute a quorum. (B) Voting.--Any action of the Board shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present and voting. (8) Removal.-- (A) In general.--Not later than 5 days after removing a member of the Board from such position, the President shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate a written statement of the reasons for removal of the member. (B) Hearings.-- (i) In general.--If the President fails to timely submit a statement under subparagraph (A), or if the statement does not set forth specific, detailed reasons for removal of the member of the Board, the committees described in that subparagraph shall conduct joint oversight hearings on the removal of the member of the Board for which a statement was required not later than 60 days after the missed submission deadline. (ii) Witnesses.--Any member of the Board for which a statement was required under subparagraph (A) but was not submitted, or satisfactorily submitted, shall appear as a witness during a joint hearing. (iii) Rulemaking.--This subparagraph is enacted as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of Representatives and the Senate. (9) Personnel.-- (A) In general.--The Board may appoint and fix the pay of such staff as the Board considers necessary to carry out the duties of the Board. (B) Limitation.--No staff appointed under subparagraph (A) may be compensated at an annual rate exceeding the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay in effect for grade GS-15 of the General Schedule. (10) Compensation.-- (A) In general.--Members of the Board shall receive compensation equivalent to the compensation paid for positions in level IV of the Executive Schedule described in section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, prorated on a daily basis for time spent engaged in the work of the Board. (B) Travel expenses.--While engaged in the work of the Board, a member of the Board shall be paid actual travel expenses and per diem in lieu of subsistence expenses when away from the member's usual place of residence in accordance with subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code. (C) Persons otherwise in government service.--Each member of the Board who is otherwise in the service of the Federal Government shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for such other service, but while engaged in the work of the Board shall be paid expenses pursuant to subparagraph (B). (D) Prior approval for outside compensation.-- (i) In general.--A member of the Board who wishes to engage in outside employment shall first obtain the approval, in writing, of the Designated Agency Ethics Official of the Board. (ii) Volunteer professional services.--The Designated Agency Ethics Official of the Board may generally approve in advance volunteer professional services. (iii) Standard for approval.--Approval shall be granted by the Designated Agency Ethics Official of the Board under this subparagraph only on a determination that the prospective outside employment is not expected to involve conduct prohibited by statute or Federal regulation, including part 2635 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (or successor regulations). (iv) Changes in nature or scope.--On a significant change in the nature or scope of the outside employment approved under this subparagraph or the official position of the member of the Board, the member shall submit a revised request for approval under this subparagraph. (v) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date on which the members of the Board have been appointed, the Board shall promulgate regulations to carry out this subparagraph. SEC. 6. ESTABLISHMENT OF STRATEGIC FERTILIZER RESERVE. (a) Establishment.--On approval by the Secretary under section 4(b), there is established in the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency a Strategic Fertilizer Reserve for the storage and management of fertilizer product inputs in accordance with this Act and informed by the findings of the study under section 4(a). (b) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States to provide for the creation and maintenance of, and timely withdrawals from, the Reserve-- (1) to reduce the impact of disruptions in supplies of fertilizer products; (2) to promote the stability of fertilizer product prices paid by United States agricultural producers; (3) to reduce the impact rising input costs have on the cost of food for United States consumers; and (4) to support the food security and national security of the United States. (c) Locations.-- (1) In general.--The Reserve may consist of storage and related facilities located at 1 or more sites within the United States, as determined by the Board, including facilities owned by the United States and facilities owned by third parties under contract with the Board. (2) Requirement.--The location of the facilities described in paragraph (1) shall ensure that the fertilizer product inputs stored in the facilities may be accessed to manufacture fertilizer product blends not later than 14 days after the date on which the Board authorizes a withdrawal from the Reserve. SEC. 7. AUTHORITIES OF THE BOARD. To develop and oversee the Reserve, the Board shall-- (1) issue such rules, regulations, and orders as the Board considers necessary, with consideration of the recommendations of the study under section 4(a); (2) acquire, by purchase, lease, condemnation, or otherwise, land or interests in land for the location of storage and related facilities; (3) construct, purchase, lease, or otherwise acquire storage and related facilities for fertilizer product inputs; (4) use, lease, maintain, sell, or otherwise dispose of land or interests in land, or of storage and related facilities, under such terms and conditions as the Board considers necessary and appropriate; (5) execute any contracts necessary to develop, operate, or maintain the Reserve, including contracts for storage, transportation, blending, packaging, and related services; (6) ensure that all storage, handling, and transportation activities associated with the Reserve comply with applicable Federal, State, and local laws governing safety, health, labor, and the environment; and (7) take such other actions as are necessary and proper to carry out this Act. SEC. 8. STRATEGIC FERTILIZER RESERVE FUND. (a) Establishment.--On approval by the Secretary under section 4(b), there is established in the Treasury of the United States a separate account, to be known as the "Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Fund" (referred to in this section as the "Fund"), which shall be administered by the Board in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury. (b) Deposits.--There shall be deposited into the Fund-- (1) such amounts as may be appropriated to carry out this Act; (2) amounts received from the sale or exchange of fertilizer product inputs from the Reserve; and (3) such other amounts as may be authorized by law. (c) Availability.--Amounts in the Fund shall be available to the Board, without further appropriation or fiscal year limitation, for-- (1) the acquisition, storage, rotation, and maintenance of fertilizer product inputs in the Reserve; (2) the construction, lease, operation, and maintenance of storage and related facilities; and (3) administrative and oversight expenses related to the Reserve. SEC. 9.

Text printed in the Record (9,064 characters)

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND ETHICS REQUIREMENTS. (a) Definitions.--In this section: (1) Covered contract.--The term "covered contract" means a contract with the Board for-- (A) the construction, ownership, operation, or management of any storage or related facility used for the Reserve; or (B) the supply, transportation, or handling of fertilizer product inputs for the Reserve. (2) Covered entity.--The term "covered entity" means any entity that enters into a covered contract. (3) Covered official.--The term "covered official" means-- (A) the President; (B) the Vice President; (C) any individual serving in a position in the Executive Office of the President; (D) any member of the Board; (E) any officer or employee of the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency; and (F) any other employee of the Strategic Fertilizer Reserve Agency designated by the Board by regulation as having significant decision making authority with respect to the Reserve. (4) Financial interest.--The term "financial interest" includes equity, stock, partnership shares, limited liability company interests, options, warrants, beneficial interests held through a trust or investment vehicle (other than a widely held mutual fund or index fund), or any other arrangement under which the applicable covered official or immediate family member may derive pecuniary benefit from the performance of a covered entity. (5) Immediate family member.--The term "immediate family member" means a spouse, domestic partner, parent, child, or sibling, including any such relation by marriage. (b) Prohibition on Financial Interests.--No covered official, and no immediate family member of a covered official, may hold, directly or indirectly, any financial interest in any covered entity. (c) Certification; Disclosures.-- (1) In general.--Before entering into a covered contract, the Board shall require the covered entity-- (A) to certify that, to the best of its knowledge and belief, no covered official or immediate family member of any covered official holds a financial interest in the covered entity prohibited by subsection (b); and (B) to fully disclose all lobbying activities and lobbyist engagements related to the program under this Act or any other matter involving the Board or other Federal agencies that have a direct and predictable effect on the covered contract. (2) Disclosure reports.--The Board shall require each covered official, on an annual basis and on assuming a position as a covered official, to file a confidential report disclosing any financial interests that may be relevant under subsection (b). (d) Recusal and Divestiture.-- (1) In general.--Any covered official who becomes aware that the covered official or an immediate family member of the covered official holds a financial interest prohibited by subsection (b) shall promptly-- (A) notify the designated agency ethics official of the Board; and (B) either-- (i) divest of the financial interest; or (ii) recuse himself or herself from any official action affecting the covered entity in which the financial interest is held, in accordance with applicable ethics laws (including regulations). (2) Regulations.--The Board shall issue regulations establishing procedures and timelines for divestiture and recusal under clauses (i) and (ii) of paragraph (1)(B). (e) Enforcement.-- (1) Covered officials.--A knowing and willful violation of subsection (b), (c)(2), or (d) by a covered official-- (A) shall be grounds for disciplinary action, up to and including removal from office; and (B) may be referred to the Office of Government Ethics and appropriate law enforcement authorities for investigation and potential prosecution under applicable criminal or civil conflict of interest statutes, including sections 201 through 209 of title 18, United States Code, and related provisions. (2) Covered entities.--A knowing and willful false certification or disclosure by a covered entity under subsection (c)(1)-- (A) shall constitute a material breach of the covered contract; and (B) may result in suspension, debarment, civil penalties, or other remedies as provided by law. (f) Public Transparency.--To the extent consistent with law and the protection of confidential business information, the Board shall make publicly available-- (1) a list of covered entities; and (2) a general description of the ethics and conflict of interest policies applicable to the Reserve. SEC. 10. REPORTS TO CONGRESS. (a) Annual Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of establishment of the Reserve, and annually thereafter, the Board shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives a report that-- (1) describes the inventory of fertilizer product inputs in the Reserve, by product type and location; (2) summarizes any acquisitions, sales, exchanges, or other releases of fertilizer product inputs during the preceding year; (3) evaluates the condition and capacity of storage and related facilities; (4) describes any withdrawal events and their effects on fertilizer availability and prices; and (5) provides information on compliance with the requirements under section 9. (b) GAO Review.--Not later than 5 years after the date of establishment of the Reserve, the Comptroller General of the United States shall-- (1) conduct a review of the effectiveness of the Reserve in meeting the purposes of this Act; and (2) submit to the committees described in subsection (a) a report describing the findings of the review under paragraph (1) and any recommendations. SEC. 11. REGULATIONS. (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of establishment of the Reserve, the Board shall promulgate such regulations as are necessary to carry out this Act, including regulations establishing-- (1) protocols for acquisition, maintenance, and rotation of fertilizer products or fertilizer product inputs to be stored in the Reserve; (2) criteria and procedures for determining when a withdrawal and release of the Reserve is warranted; (3) technical and safety standards for storage and handling of fertilizer product inputs; and (4) detailed ethics and conflict of interest procedures consistent with section 9. (b) Consideration.--In promulgating the regulations under subsection (a), the Board shall consider the recommendations of the study conducted under section 4(a). SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out this Act. ______ By Mr. KAINE (for himself and Mr. Warner): S. 5480. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow rehabilitation expenditures for public school buildings to qualify for rehabilitation credit; to the Committee on Finance. Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, today I want to discuss legislation I am introducing, the School Infrastructure Modernization Act, with my colleague Senator Warner. The Federal tax credit for historic preservation is a critical source of funding for renovating historic and aging buildings across the country. While the credit can often be used for turning an aging school building into a commercial building, such as an office or retail location, it is difficult to use the credit to rehabilitate a school while continuing to use it as a school postrenovations. The intent of this bill is to make it easier for schools to benefit from this funding while continuing to serve as a school. As a Richmond city council member and later mayor, I faced challenges familiar to many municipalities--overcrowded schools, aging buildings, and limited dollars in the budget. But in one particular case, I and a group of local stakeholders identified a creative solution. On one hand, we had an overcrowded Thomas Jefferson High School with in-zone and magnet students. On the other hand, we had a closed Maggie Walker High School that needed renovations. We put together a financing package that made use of Federal and State historic tax credits to renovate Maggie Walker High School and satisfied the prior use rule by consolidating the magnet program from Thomas Jefferson into a new Maggie Walker Governor's School for Government and International Studies. Today, over 20 years later, this is one of America's highest performing public high schools. Without the Federal historic tax credit, this would have been too expensive to make happen. This bill will make it easier to do similar projects around the country. More modern school buildings will bolster the quality of public education, and carrying out these projects will generate private sector infrastructure investment and jobs. In Virginia alone, according to a 2021 study, more than 1,000 K through 12 schools are at least 50 years old, representing more than half of all the K through 12 schools in the Commonwealth. I encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense incentive that is good for education, good for infrastructure, and good for jobs.

Introductory Statement on S. 5461

Pages S4932–S4935 · Official text

Text printed in the Record (7,052 characters)

Text printed in the Record (10,434 characters)

Text printed in the Record (6,614 characters)

Submitted Resolutions

Page S4936 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 873--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,820 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON MOLDOVA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Moldova's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Moldova, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Moldova to people in Moldova who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Moldova's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Moldova from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Moldova would treat people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Moldova may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Moldova would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Moldova would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Moldova, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Moldova could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Moldova by people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Moldova; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Moldova that may hold people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Moldova returns people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Moldova but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Moldova; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Moldova related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Moldova by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been wrongfully removed to Moldova by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Moldova but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Moldova; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Moldova, but have been removed to Moldova by the United States Government to countries that are not Moldova, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Moldova officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 874--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF PARAGUAY'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4936–S4937 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 874--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF PARAGUAY'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,874 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON PARAGUAY'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Paraguay's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Paraguay, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Paraguay to people in Paraguay who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Paraguay's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Paraguay from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Paraguay would treat people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Paraguay may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Paraguay would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Paraguay would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Paraguay, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Paraguay could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Paraguay by people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Paraguay; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Paraguay that may hold people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Paraguay returns people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Paraguay but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Paraguay; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Paraguay related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Paraguay by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been wrongfully removed to Paraguay by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Paraguay but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Paraguay; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Paraguay, but have been removed to Paraguay by the United States Government to countries that are not Paraguay, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Paraguay officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 875--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE FEDERATION OF SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4937–S4938 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 875--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE FEDERATION OF SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (7,576 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Saint Kitts and Nevis's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis to people in Saint Kitts and Nevis who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis would treat people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Saint Kitts and Nevis, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Saint Kitts and Nevis could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Saint Kitts and Nevis by people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Saint Kitts and Nevis; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Saint Kitts and Nevis that may hold people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis returns people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Saint Kitts and Nevis; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been wrongfully removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Saint Kitts and Nevis; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Saint Kitts and Nevis, but have been removed to Saint Kitts and Nevis by the United States Government to countries that are not Saint Kitts and Nevis, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Saint Kitts and Nevis officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 876--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4938–S4939 · Official text

LEONE'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (7,090 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON SIERRA LEONE'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Sierra Leone's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Sierra Leone, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Sierra Leone to people in Sierra Leone who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Sierra Leone's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Sierra Leone from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Sierra Leone would treat people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Sierra Leone may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Sierra Leone would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Sierra Leone would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Sierra Leone, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Sierra Leone could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Sierra Leone by people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Sierra Leone; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Sierra Leone that may hold people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Sierra Leone returns people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Sierra Leone; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Sierra Leone related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Sierra Leone by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been wrongfully removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Sierra Leone; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Sierra Leone, but have been removed to Sierra Leone by the United States Government to countries that are not Sierra Leone, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Sierra Leone officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 877--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Page S4939 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 877--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,766 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON UGANDA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Uganda's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Uganda, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Uganda to people in Uganda who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Uganda's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Uganda from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Uganda would treat people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Uganda may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Uganda would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Uganda would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Uganda, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Uganda could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Uganda by people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Uganda; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Uganda that may hold people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Uganda returns people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Uganda but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Uganda; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Uganda related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Uganda by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been wrongfully removed to Uganda by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Uganda but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Uganda; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Uganda, but have been removed to Uganda by the United States Government to countries that are not Uganda, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Uganda officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 878--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF EL SALVADOR'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4939–S4940 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 878--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF EL SALVADOR'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (7,036 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON EL SALVADOR'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding El Salvador's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of El Salvador, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of El Salvador to people in El Salvador who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of El Salvador's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of El Salvador from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of El Salvador would treat people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of El Salvador may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of El Salvador would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of El Salvador would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in El Salvador, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to El Salvador could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in El Salvador by people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to El Salvador; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in El Salvador that may hold people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of El Salvador returns people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of El Salvador but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to El Salvador; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of El Salvador related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to El Salvador by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been wrongfully removed to El Salvador by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of El Salvador but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to El Salvador; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of El Salvador, but have been removed to El Salvador by the United States Government to countries that are not El Salvador, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of El Salvador officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 879--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4940–S4941 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 879--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,821 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON ECUADOR'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Ecuador's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Ecuador, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Ecuador to people in Ecuador who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Ecuador's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Ecuador from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Ecuador would treat people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Ecuador may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Ecuador would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Ecuador would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Ecuador, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Ecuador could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Ecuador by people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Ecuador; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Ecuador that may hold people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Ecuador returns people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Ecuador but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Ecuador; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Ecuador related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Ecuador by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been wrongfully removed to Ecuador by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Ecuador but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Ecuador; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Ecuador, but have been removed to Ecuador by the United States Government to countries that are not Ecuador, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Ecuador officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 880--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE COMMONWEALTH OF DOMINICA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Page S4941 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 880--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE COMMONWEALTH OF DOMINICA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,874 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON DOMINICA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Dominica's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Dominica, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Dominica to people in Dominica who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Dominica's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Dominica from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Dominica would treat people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Dominica may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Dominica would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Dominica would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Dominica, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Dominica could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Dominica by people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Dominica; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Dominica that may hold people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Dominica returns people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Dominica but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Dominica; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Dominica related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Dominica by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been wrongfully removed to Dominica by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Dominica but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Dominica; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Dominica, but have been removed to Dominica by the United States Government to countries that are not Dominica, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Dominica officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 881--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4941–S4942 · Official text

Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (8,386 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding the Democratic Republic of the Congo's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo would treat people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to the Democratic Republic of the Congo could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in the Democratic Republic of the Congo by people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to the Democratic Republic of the Congo; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in the Democratic Republic of the Congo that may hold people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo returns people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to the Democratic Republic of the Congo; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been wrongfully removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to the Democratic Republic of the Congo; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but have been removed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo by the United States Government to countries that are not the Democratic Republic of the Congo, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 882--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4942–S4943 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 882--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (7,955 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding the Central African Republic's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of the Central African Republic, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of the Central African Republic to people in the Central African Republic who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of the Central African Republic's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of the Central African Republic from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of the Central African Republic would treat people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of the Central African Republic may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of the Central African Republic would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of the Central African Republic would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in the Central African Republic, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to the Central African Republic could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in the Central African Republic by people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to the Central African Republic; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in the Central African Republic that may hold people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of the Central African Republic returns people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to the Central African Republic; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of the Central African Republic related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to the Central African Republic by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been wrongfully removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to the Central African Republic; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of the Central African Republic, but have been removed to the Central African Republic by the United States Government to countries that are not the Central African Republic, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of the Central African Republic officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 883--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF BURUNDI'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4943–S4944 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 883--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF BURUNDI'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,820 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON BURUNDI'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Burundi's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Burundi, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Burundi to people in Burundi who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Burundi's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Burundi from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Burundi would treat people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Burundi may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Burundi would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Burundi would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Burundi, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Burundi could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Burundi by people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Burundi; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Burundi that may hold people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Burundi returns people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Burundi but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Burundi; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Burundi related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Burundi by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been wrongfully removed to Burundi by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Burundi but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Burundi; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Burundi, but have been removed to Burundi by the United States Government to countries that are not Burundi, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Burundi officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 884--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON BELIZE'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4944–S4945 · Official text

Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,766 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON BELIZE'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Belize's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Belize, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Belize to people in Belize who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Belize's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Belize from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Belize would treat people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Belize may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Belize would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Belize would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Belize, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Belize could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Belize by people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Belize; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Belize that may hold people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Belize returns people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Belize but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Belize; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Belize related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Belize by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Belize but have been wrongfully removed to Belize by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Belize but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Belize; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Belize, but have been removed to Belize by the United States Government to countries that are not Belize, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Belize officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 885--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA-BISSAU'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Page S4945 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 885--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA-BISSAU'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (7,144 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON GUINEA-BISSAU'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Guinea-Bissau's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Guinea-Bissau, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Guinea-Bissau to people in Guinea-Bissau who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Guinea-Bissau's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Guinea-Bissau from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Guinea-Bissau would treat people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Guinea-Bissau may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Guinea-Bissau would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Guinea-Bissau would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Guinea-Bissau, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Guinea-Bissau could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Guinea-Bissau by people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Guinea-Bissau; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Guinea-Bissau that may hold people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Guinea-Bissau returns people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Guinea-Bissau; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Guinea-Bissau related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been wrongfully removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Guinea-Bissau; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Guinea-Bissau, but have been removed to Guinea-Bissau by the United States Government to countries that are not Guinea-Bissau, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Guinea-Bissau officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 886--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4945–S4946 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 886--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,820 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON LIBERIA'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Liberia's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Liberia, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Liberia to people in Liberia who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Liberia's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Liberia from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Liberia would treat people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Liberia may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Liberia would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Liberia would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Liberia, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Liberia could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Liberia by people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Liberia; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Liberia that may hold people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Liberia returns people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Liberia but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Liberia; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Liberia related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Liberia by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been wrongfully removed to Liberia by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Liberia but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Liberia; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Liberia, but have been removed to Liberia by the United States Government to countries that are not Liberia, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Liberia officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

SENATE RESOLUTION 887--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF PALAU'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

Pages S4946–S4947 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 887--REQUESTING INFORMATION ON THE REPUBLIC OF PALAU'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO SECTION 502B(c) OF THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 Mr. KAINE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (6,713 characters)

Resolved, SECTION 1. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON PALAU'S HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES. (a) Statement Requested.--The Senate requests that the Secretary of State, not later than 30 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, submit to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(c)), a statement regarding Palau's human rights practices that has been prepared in collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the Office of the Legal Adviser at the Department of State. (b) Elements.--The statement submitted pursuant to subsection (a) should include-- (1) all available credible information concerning alleged violations of internationally recognized human rights by the Government of Palau, including-- (A) arbitrary and unlawful arrest, detention, imprisonment, torture and cruel or inhumane treatment, including of people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government; (B) violations of due process rights, including a description of any opportunity provided to people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government to demonstrate that they have been wrongfully arrested, detained, or imprisoned; (C) enforced disappearances and arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, including of people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government; (D) trafficking in persons, including forced or slave labor, including of people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government; and (E) treatment of and legal rights and status provided by the Government of Palau to people in Palau who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government; (2) a description of the steps the United States Government has taken-- (A) to promote respect for and observance of human rights as part of the Government of Palau's activities; (B) to discourage any practices that are inimical to internationally recognized human rights; (C) to publicly or privately call attention to, and disassociate the United States and any security assistance provided for the Government of Palau from, any practices described in subparagraph (B); and (D) to assess, prior to removal, how the Government of Palau would treat people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government, including-- (i) conducting individualized assessments of such individuals to determine whether the Government of Palau may send that person to their country of origin or last residence, and if so, whether the Government of Palau would provide them with meaningful opportunity before their removal to show that they may be persecuted, tortured, or otherwise harmed; and (ii) ensuring that the Government of Palau would provide such individuals with legal immigration status, should they wish to remain in Palau, and would be treated humanely; and (3) other information, including-- (A) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the likelihood that United States security assistance (as defined in section 502B(d) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2304(d))) provided to Palau could be used in support of activities by government officials related to the rendition, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government; (B) any analysis conducted by the United States Government of the conditions to be faced in Palau by people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of such individuals to Palau; (C) an assessment from the Secretary of State of the conditions in any detention centers or prisons in Palau that may hold people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government, including an assessment of allegations of torture and other gross violations of human rights; (D) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to ensure that the Government of Palau returns people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government, in compliance with United States court orders regarding their return to the United States; (E) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to address the risk of detention, torture, or forced disappearances of people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government, or efforts to facilitate the detention, torture, or forced disappearances of such people; (F) a description of any actions the United States Government is taking to protect people who are not citizens of Palau but are within the United States' jurisdiction or effective control from unlawful rendering, trafficking, or other means of removal to Palau; (G) all information regarding any agreement or financial transaction between the United States Government and the Government of Palau related to the rendition, removal, trafficking, detention, or imprisonment of individuals who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government; (H) all information regarding any individuals sent to Palau by the United States Government in 2025 and 2026; (I) a description of any actions that the United States Government is taking to facilitate the release or return of people who are not citizens of Palau but have been wrongfully removed to Palau by the United States Government; (J) all information regarding any assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the treatment of people who are not citizens of Palau but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government, prior to the rendition, removal, or trafficking of such individuals to Palau; (K) all information regarding assurances the United States Government sought or received regarding the further rendition, trafficking, removal, or transfer of people who are not citizens of Palau, but have been removed to Palau by the United States Government to countries that are not Palau, including the human rights conditions for such individuals in those countries; and (L) a summary of all meetings in 2025 and 2026 between Government of Palau officials and Washington-based officials of the United States Government.

Senate Resolution 888--Congratulating the Paseo Verde Little League Baseball Team on Winning the 2026 Little League World Series United States Championship

Page S4947 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 888--CONGRATULATING THE PASEO VERDE LITTLE LEAGUE BASEBALL TEAM ON WINNING THE 2026 LITTLE LEAGUE WORLD SERIES UNITED STATES CHAMPIONSHIP Ms. CORTEZ MASTO (for herself and Ms. Rosen) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

Text printed in the Record (2,702 characters)

Whereas, on August 29, 2026, the Paseo Verde Little League of Henderson, Nevada, representing the Mountain Region, defeated the Hamilton West Side Little League of Ohio in the United States Championship Game of the 2026 Little League World Series; Whereas the Paseo Verde Little League earned its place in the 2026 Little League World Series after winning the Nevada State Championship and advancing through the Mountain Region Tournament undefeated; Whereas the Paseo Verde Little League defeated Billings Big Sky Little League of Montana, 9-2, in the Mountain Region Championship Game to earn its second appearance in the Little League World Series in 3 years; Whereas, in Williamsport, the Paseo Verde Little League opened its World Series tournament with a dramatic 6-5 victory over the Hamilton West Side Little League of Ohio, overcoming a 3-run deficit and winning on a walk-off single by Hudson Cowley; Whereas the Paseo Verde Little League continued its remarkable run by defeating the Soundview Little League of Washington, 5-0, advancing further in the tournament; Whereas the Paseo Verde Little League then defeated the Davenport Northwest Little League of Iowa, 14-6, in the United States semifinal, exploding for 9 runs in the sixth inning and progressing to the United States Championship Game undefeated; Whereas the Paseo Verde Little League again beat the Hamilton West Side Little League of Ohio, 12-2, clinching the United States title for a second straight year for Nevada; Whereas the Paseo Verde Little League players each contributed to the team's United States championship and demonstrated exceptional skill, determination, teamwork, and resilience throughout their championship run; Whereas manager Cory Edwards, the coaches, volunteers, parents, families, and supporters have all played an essential role in developing young athletes and building a culture of character, confidence, and teamwork within Paseo Verde Little League; Whereas the Paseo Verde Little League has become a source of tremendous pride for Henderson, Southern Nevada, and the entire State of Nevada through its outstanding performance on the national stage; and Whereas the 2026 Paseo Verde Little League team has inspired young athletes throughout Nevada and demonstrated that hard work, perseverance, and collaboration can carry a community to the highest levels of youth baseball: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate congratulates and honors the Paseo Verde Little League of Henderson, Nevada, on winning the 2026 Little League World Series United States Championship and commends the players, coaches, families, volunteers, and supporters for their extraordinary achievement.

Senate Resolution 889--Recognizing the Contributions of Hispanic and Latino Americans to the Musical Heritage of the United States and Designating September 2026 as "Latin Music Appreciation Month"

Pages S4947–S4949 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 889--RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF HISPANIC AND LATINO AMERICANS TO THE MUSICAL HERITAGE OF THE UNITED STATES AND DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 2026 AS "LATIN MUSIC APPRECIATION MONTH" Mr. LUJAN (for himself and Mr. Moreno) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

Text printed in the Record (11,998 characters)

Whereas Latin music styles such as rancheras, corridos, mariachi, salsa, merengue, bachata, reggaeton, urban, cumbia, tango, and a multitude of others, and their fusion with other genres, such as jazz, rock, hip hop, and pop, have played a pivotal role in enriching the cultural fabric of the United States, influencing everything from music and dance to fashion and entertainment; Whereas Latin music, characterized by its vibrant rhythms, rich melodies, and diverse instrumentation, encompasses a wide array of musical styles and genres originating from Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as their respective diasporas around the world; Whereas the rich musical traditions of Latin America and the Caribbean were deeply influenced by indigenous cultures, European (particularly Spanish and Portuguese) colonization, the legacy of African slavery, and the vibrant cultural heritage of each region and country, all of which contributed to the development of diverse genres in the United States; Whereas the roots of Mexican music in the United States can be traced back to rich musical traditions that existed in Mexico before the annexation of Mexican territories, including present-day New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado and Wyoming, by the United States following the Mexican-American War; Whereas, throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries, various waves of Mexican immigrants came to the United States for work, particularly in agriculture, mining, and railroad construction, settling in regions such as Texas, California, Arizona, and New Mexico, and bringing their music with them; Whereas Mexican music in the United States encompasses various regional styles, including ranchera, norteno, Tejano, conjunto, mariachi, and corridos, originating from different parts of Mexico but popularized and adapted within Mexican-American communities in the United States; Whereas the lifestyle and the social issues that Mexicans faced are reflected in corridos, a music genre that originated during the Mexican War of Independence and the Mexican Revolution, spreading to the southwestern frontier of the United States and contributing to the development of tejano and New Mexican music; Whereas mariachi music stems from the traditional "son jaliscience", which was initially played by field hands working at haciendas and humble street performers and subsequently promoted by the Government of Mexico in the early 1920s; Whereas mariachi ensembles, which can include violins, accordions, trumpets, guitars, and singers, have since been prominently featured in a myriad of cultural celebrations, including birthday festivities, quinceaneras, and weddings, and in prestigious concert halls; Whereas banda, a style of Mexican music characterized by wind instruments, including primarily brass and percussion instruments, has its roots dating back to the mid-19th century, with the introduction of piston brass instruments, as community musicians sought to emulate military bands and encompasses a fusion of traditional dance rhythms such as polka, cumbia, son, and waltz, and notable performers in the genre include Jenny Rivera, Chalino, Banda MS, and Banda El Recodo; Whereas Caribbean Latin music has had influences in the United States since the mid to late 1800s, with notable contributions from composers like Ignacio Pineiro, Louis Moreau Gottschalk, and Ignacio Cervantes, whose works helped introduce Latin rhythms and melodies to audiences in the United States; Whereas the Cuban version of the habanera, exposed to New Orleans in the 19th century, laid the foundation for the appreciation of Cuban, Puerto Rican, and Dominican musical styles in the United States; Whereas Cuban immigration to the United States, spurred by communism as a result of the Cuban Revolution and the Castro dictatorship, has fostered cultural exchanges that contributed to the development of new musical genres, most prominently in Florida; Whereas, in the aftermath of the Spanish-American War, Puerto Rico became a United States territory, granting its people citizenship and fostering a unique cultural exchange between Puerto Ricans and individuals in the mainland United States, which culminated in a significant migration wave of Puerto Ricans to cities like New York in the mid-20th century; Whereas the establishment of Spanish-language newspapers, such as La Prensa in New York City in 1913, contributed to the dissemination of Latin music and culture among tens of thousands of Puerto Ricans and immigrants from Latin America and the Caribbean who migrated to New York City; Whereas a convergence of Puerto Rican, Cuban, and other Caribbean immigrants, particularly in New York City, infused music in the United States with Afro-Cuban rhythms and jazz improvisation and gave rise to the vibrant musical genre of salsa in the United States, which left a lasting mark on the cultural landscape of the United States; Whereas the introduction of Afro-Cuban music, including the rumba by Don Azpiazu's Havana Casino Orchestra in the 1930s, sparked a Latin music craze in the United States with hits like "Peanut Vendor" by Moises Simons becoming national sensations; Whereas, by the close of the 1940s, Latin music had firmly established its presence in the United States, influencing various genres and becoming an integral part of the musical heritage of the United States; Whereas Tito Puente, a Puerto Rican musical luminary known as both the "King of Mambo" and the "King of Latin Music" left an indelible mark on the world of Latin music through his groundbreaking compositions, including the iconic "Oye Como Va", famously popularized by Carlos Santana; Whereas Tito Puente's innovative blend of Cuban and Caribbean sounds such as mambo, son, and cha-cha-cha resonated with mainstream audiences, solidifying his status as a cultural icon both in the United States and internationally; Whereas, in 1959, Ritchie Valens became a trailblazer in the music industry with his iconic rendition of the song "La Bamba", which became the first Latin song to enter the Billboard Hot 100 chart, marking a significant milestone for Chicano Rock; Whereas Celia Cruz, the incomparable "Queen of Salsa" and a pioneer of Afro-Cuban music, infused traditional guarachas with modern flair, elevated the genre to global acclaim with timeless classics like "La Vida Es un Carnaval", and left an enduring legacy in the realm of Latin music; Whereas Celia Cruz served as a musical ambassador with her dynamic performances and impassioned vocals that transcended cultural boundaries, solidifying her status as a global icon; Whereas Johnny Pacheco, revered as the "Grandfather of Salsa", emerged as a leading figure in the vibrant New York salsa scene during the 1960s and 1970s, contributing significantly to the genre's development, and served as the musical director of Fania Records; Whereas producer, trombonist, composer, and bandleader Willie Colon was a pioneering force in Latin music and a key architect of the "New York Sound" that revitalized Salsa in the 1970s, beginning with his groundbreaking album "El Malo"; Whereas Willie Colon, throughout a decades long career marked by Grammy recognition and groundbreaking collaborations with Hector Lavoe, Ruben Blades, and Celia Cruz, was one of the most visionary figures in Latin American Music; Whereas Willie Colon passed away on February 21, 2026, leaving behind a legacy that continues to shape generations of artists and musicians around the world; Whereas Leonardo "Flacco" Jimenez, a San Antonio-born musician and multiple Grammy award-winning artist, was widely regarded as one of the most influential figures in conjunto and Tex-Mex music, and his masterful accordion playing and distinctive style helped elevate and popularize the genres to national and international audiences and his collaborations with artists such as the Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, and Ry Cooder demonstrated the broad cultural reach and appeal of traditional Mexican-American music; Whereas Los Tigres del Norte, a Mexican band renowned for their poignant portrayal of social issues and immigrant experiences in the United States through songs like "La jaula de oro" and "America", have been honored with multiple Grammy awards, contributing significantly to the popularization of the corridos genre within the United States starting in 1968 and continuing to the present day; Whereas Vicente Fernandez, a singer, actor, film producer, and the "King of Ranchera Music", made significant contributions to ranchera music, earned Grammy and Latin Grammy awards, sold over 50,000,000 records, and received the title of the greatest Mexican singer of all time by Rolling Stone; Whereas Alejandro Fernandez, "El Potrillo", continues the legacy of ranchera music, having sold over 20,000,000 albums across the world; Whereas Gloria Estefan, a Cuban-American singer, songwriter, actress, Grammy award winner, and Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient, emerged as a pioneering figure in Latin pop music during the 1980s and 1990s, achieving international acclaim with hits such as "Conga", which fused Latin rhythms with contemporary pop sensibilities, and her contributions to the genre helped propel Latin music into the mainstream; Whereas Emilio Estefan, a prominent and visionary figure in the Latin music industry, has made significant contributions to the genre as an award-winning songwriter, producer, musician, mentor, and entrepreneur, and was the first artist to receive the grand distinction of Person of the Year during the Latin Grammy Awards in 2000; Whereas, from establishing the Miami Sound Machine to working with renowned artists such as Gloria Estefan, Marc Anthony, Alejandro Fernandez, Jon Secada, Ricky Martin, Jennifer Lopez, and Shakira, Emilio Estefan's influence has been instrumental in defining Latin crossover and introducing Latin rhythms and culture to mainstream audiences worldwide; Whereas Selena Quintanilla, known as the "Queen of Tejano Music", left a profound and enduring impact on the United States through her distinctive fusion of tejano music with contemporary pop and R&B, captivating audiences across the United States and beyond as a Mexican-American artist, and her legacy continues beyond the 1980s and 1990s, resonating with fans to this day; Whereas bachata, with its blend of European, indigenous Taino, and African elements, reflects the rich cultural heritage of the Dominican Republic; Whereas the pioneering work of the band Aventura, originating in New York, played a significant role in popularizing the genre of bachata in the United States, garnering widespread popularity and acclaim; Whereas Cuban reggaeton and tropical duo Gente de Zona, which emerged from the streets of the island and is now a world-renowned group, transcended barriers to ignite hope for the people of Cuba with their historic Spanish hip-hop song "Patria y Vida", authored by Yotuel and Beatriz Luengo; Whereas Mana is considered the most influential Latino rock band and is one of the best-selling Latin music artists in the world, with over 25,000,000 records sold worldwide, and was the first band ever to be recognized as Person of the Year during the Latin Grammy Awards; Whereas Juan Luis Guerra was the first artist ever to receive a Latin Grammy Award during the first televised Latin Grammy Award ceremony for "Ni Es Lo Mismo Ni Es Igual"; Whereas Latin music has continued to evolve and incorporate diverse styles and influences from various countries and regions, and has been popularized by artists like Shakira, Mana, Vicente Fernandez, Alejandro Fernandez, Juan Gabriel, Marco Antonio Solis, Julio Iglesias, Enrique Iglesias, Carlos Vives, Jennifer Lopez, Pitbull, Pepe Aguilar, Karol G, Peso Pluma, Bad Bunny, J Balvin, Maluma, Rauw Alejandro, Prince Royce, and Ozuna, among many others; Whereas Benito Antonio Martinez Ocasio, professionally known

Text printed in the Record (4,730 characters)

as Bad Bunny, was the first artist to win a Grammy Award for Album of the Year for an all-Spanish album, "Debi Tirar Mas Fotos", in the 68-year history of the Recording Academy; Whereas Daddy Yankee, a Puerto Rican artist, emerged as a pioneer of reggaeton, a genre that blends Caribbean rhythms with hip-hop and reggae influences, and played a pivotal role in elevating reggaeton to a global phenomenon in the early 2000s, with his groundbreaking hits, including "Gasolina" and "Despacito", the largest globally streamed Spanish song to date; Whereas the Latin Grammy Award ceremony was the first bilingual primetime program to be aired on an English-language television network in the United States, and celebrated its 25th anniversary in 2024; Whereas the Latin Grammy Foundation is a global champion for music education and empowers communities through Latin music and culture, successfully cultivating the next generation of Latin music creators through various scholarships, educational programs and grants, and educational opportunities that advance Latin music and its heritage; Whereas, for more than 30 years, People en Espanol has been one of the most trusted voices in Hispanic culture, celebrating Latin music and culture and covering in its pages and digital space the evolution of Latin music, singers, and musicians who have captivated audiences around the world; Whereas Leila Cobo is considered one of the world's leading authorities in Latin music, as the first journalist based in the United States to prominently cover Latin music daily, and has been instrumental in transforming its coverage and perception in the United States; Whereas, according to the Recording Industry Association of America, Latin music revenues in the United States reached a record-breaking $1,400,000,000 in 2024, marking the third consecutive year above $1,000,000,000 and accounting for over 8 percent of the United States market; Whereas, in the first half of 2025, Latin music generated $490,300,000 in revenue, fueled by streaming growth and expanding audience engagement; Whereas Latin music artists have significantly contributed to cross-cultural exchanges, civic participation, political movements, and philanthropy, utilizing their influential platforms to advocate for social causes and engage with diverse communities; Whereas Latino artists continue to shape the global music landscape, with performers such as Bad Bunny headlining the 2026 Super Bowl halftime stage and artists such as Karol G and Los Hermanos Flores performing at the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival, underscoring the prominence and cultural influence of Latino artists on the world stage; Whereas the Hispanic population in the United States has grown significantly, accounting for approximately 19 percent of the total population as of the 2020 Census, and continues to contribute to the rich cultural tapestry of the United States; Whereas continued influence and cultural exchange between the United States and the Spanish-speaking world, including Mexico, El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, Guatemala, Venezuela, Honduras, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, and Spain, continue to elevate the cultural importance of Latin music in the United States; and Whereas Latino culture, including its vibrant music traditions, is celebrated and honored at events such as Hispanic Heritage Month celebrations, Latin music festivals, and other cultural gatherings throughout the United States, showcasing the enduring influence and significance of Latin music and heritage in the society of the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) designates September 2026 as "Latin Music Appreciation Month"; and (2) recognizes-- (A) the importance of music produced, written, and performed by Hispanic and Latino Americans to the musical heritage of the United States; (B) the Hispanic and Latino musical artists, composers, songwriters, and musicians whose contributions to music have for too long been underrecognized; (C) the achievements, talent, and hard work of Hispanic and Latino pioneer artists, and the obstacles that those artists overcame to gain recognition; (D) the importance of celebrating and uplifting music made by Hispanic and Latino artists to understand the contributions that Hispanic and Latino artists have made to the fabric of the history and art of the United States; and (E) Latin Music Appreciation Month as an important time to-- (i) celebrate the impact of Latin music on the musical heritage of the United States; and (ii) encourage greater awareness of the cultural importance and history of Latin music so that Latino and Hispanic history and culture can be preserved.

Senate Resolution 890--Remembering, on the 105th Anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party, the Countless Lives the Chinese Communist Party Has Destroyed and the People Currently Living in Fear Of...

Page S4949 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 890--REMEMBERING, ON THE 105TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY, THE COUNTLESS LIVES THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY HAS DESTROYED AND THE PEOPLE CURRENTLY LIVING IN FEAR OF ITS TYRANNICAL AMBITIONS Mr. LANKFORD (for himself and Mr. King) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

Text printed in the Record (4,386 characters)

Whereas, in 2026, the Chinese Communist Party observes its 105th anniversary of coming to power; Whereas untold millions of Chinese citizens became casualties of the Chinese Communist Party's quest for power, enduring severe loss and suffering in what amounts to humanity's worst atrocities since World War II; Whereas, during the Yan'an Rectification Movement from 1942 to 1945, more than 10,000 people were killed as the Chinese Community Party attempted to attack and replace intellectuals with people who supported the Communist ideology; Whereas, during the Chinese Land Reform of 1949 to 1953, an estimated 4,700,000 landowners were murdered in order to redistribute land to peasantry; Whereas, during the Campaign to Suppress Counterrevolutionaries from 1950 to 1952, an estimated 712,000 people were executed for their political views and 1,300,000 more were sentenced to "labor reform"; Whereas, during the Three-anti Campaign in 1951 and the Five-anti Campaign in 1952, Mao Zedong humiliated, terrorized, exiled, imprisoned, and killed thousands of political opponents and capitalists, weakening the economies of the major urban centers of China; Whereas, during the Sufan Movement from 1955 to 1957, the Chinese Communist Party carried out a purge of hidden counterrevolutionaries, arresting an estimated 214,000 people and executing approximately 53,000 people; Whereas, during the Anti-Rightist Campaign from 1957 to 1959, approximately 550,000 people suffered exile, imprisonment, and execution as Mao Zedong conducted a purge of "rightists," credited for creating the modern one-party state of China; Whereas, during the Great Chinese Famine from 1959 to 1961, an estimated 30,000,000 people died as a result of the policy of the Chinese Communist Party, which prioritized industrialization over agriculture, remembered today as one of the greatest man-made disasters in human history; Whereas, during the Socialist Education Movement from 1963 to 1965, an estimated 5,000,000 people were persecuted and 77,560 were executed for their political beliefs; Whereas, during the Tiananmen Square Massacre on June 4, 1989, an estimated 10,000 protestors were arrested or killed by the People's Liberation Army after the Chinese Communist Party declared martial law; Whereas, in 1991, the Chinese Communist Party launched a nationwide crackdown on Fulan Gong practitioners, with millions subjected to persecution, arbitrary detention, torture, forced organ harvesting, or death; Whereas, since the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong in 1997, the Chinese Communist Party has increasingly undermined the autonomy and judicial independence of Hong Kong, resulting in a series of deadly protests and demonstrations; Whereas the Chinese Communist Party continues its longstanding campaign to destroy all independent religious expression in the China by broadly targeting religious leaders with insidious tools of repression and launching a massive crackdown against Protestant Christian house churches; Whereas an estimated 1,000,000 Uighur Muslims are subject to mass detention and torture, including electric shock, waterboarding, beatings, rape, forced sterilization, forced prostitution, stress positions, forced administration of unknown medication, cold cells, and organ harvesting in re-education camps in the Xinjiang province of China; Whereas an estimated 150,000 Tibetan Buddhists live in exile in India and Nepal, 62 years after their leader, the Dalai Lama, sought refuge from a Chinese uprising in Tibet; Whereas the Chinese Communist Party spends billions of dollars annually to either control or exterminate people of all faiths; Whereas the Chinese Communist Party continues to harass, surveil, threaten family members of, and pursue the deportation of religious minorities and dissidents living outside China as part of its transnational repression efforts, including through high-tech and emerging technologies; and Whereas the Chinese Communist Party exerts increasing political, military, economic, and social pressure on Taiwan in order to undermine Taiwan's freedom and independence: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That, on the 105th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party, the Senate solemnly remembers the countless lives the Chinese Communist Party has destroyed and the people currently living in fear of its tyrannical ambitions.

Senate Resolution 891--Designating the Week of September 27, 2026, Through October 3, 2026, as "Religious Education Week" to Celebrate Religious Education in the United States

Pages S4949–S4950 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 891--DESIGNATING THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2026, THROUGH OCTOBER 3, 2026, AS "RELIGIOUS EDUCATION WEEK" TO CELEBRATE RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES Ms. GRAHAM (for herself, Mr. Banks, Mr. Barrasso, Mrs. Blackburn, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Budd, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Daines, Mr. Hagerty, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Justice, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Lee, Ms. Lummis, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. Risch, Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. Young, Mr. Wicker, and Mrs. Hyde-Smith) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

Text printed in the Record (3,367 characters)

Whereas the free exercise of religion is an inherent, fundamental, and inalienable right protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; Whereas the United States has long recognized that the free exercise of religion is important to the intellectual, ethical, moral, and civic development of individuals in the United States, as evidenced by the Founders of the United States, such as-- (1) Benjamin Franklin, who believed religion to be "uniquely capable of educating a citizenry for democracy"; and (2) George Washington, who said in his farewell address, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."; Whereas religious education is useful for self-development because it asks students to consider and respond to questions concerning the meaning and purpose of life, engages students in questions about morality and justice, and enables students to identify their values; Whereas studies like the one published by the International Journal of Mental Health Systems in 2019 have shown that religious education can be "instrumental to improving adolescent mental health" by helping children learn how to make decisions based on morals, promoting less risky choices, and encouraging connectedness within a community, which can enhance self-esteem and well-being; Whereas religious education fosters respect for other religious groups and individuals generally by acknowledging a source for human dignity and worth; Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States found in Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925), that the State does not have power "to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations."; Whereas religious instruction can come from a variety of sources, including sectarian schools and released time programs; Whereas, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, in 2015, 4,350,000 children in the United States attended sectarian elementary and secondary schools where those children received religious education; and Whereas the Supreme Court of the United States held in Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), that State statutes providing for the release of public school students from school to attend religious classes are constitutional, and, as a result, an estimated 540,000 public school students in the United States take advantage of released time programs each year: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) affirms the importance of religious education in the civic and moral development of the people of the United States; (2) celebrates the schools and organizations that are engaged in religious instruction of the children of the United States to aid those children in intellectual, ethical, moral, and civic development; (3) calls on each of the 50 States, each territory of the United States, and the District of Columbia to accommodate individuals who wish to be released from public school attendance to attend religious classes; and (4) designates the week of September 27, 2026 through October 3, 2026, as "Religious Education Week".

Senate Resolution 892--Supporting the Designation of September 18, 2026, as "National Concussion Awareness Day"

Page S4950 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 892--SUPPORTING THE DESIGNATION OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2026, AS "NATIONAL CONCUSSION AWARENESS DAY" Ms. HASSAN (for herself and Mrs. Capito) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

Text printed in the Record (2,690 characters)

Whereas mild traumatic brain injury, otherwise known as a concussion, is an important health concern for children, teens, and adults; Whereas, according to information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-- (1) there are as many as 1,600,000 to 3,800,000 sports-related concussions annually; (2) as many as 5,300,000 individuals live with the long-term effects of a traumatic brain injury; (3) between 2001 and 2018, an estimated 3,800,000 children under age 17 visited an emergency department because of a traumatic brain injury sustained during sports- or recreation-related activities; (4) in 2024, there were an estimated 68,000 fatalities related to traumatic brain injuries; (5) each year an estimated 283,000 children seek care in emergency departments in the United States for a sports- or recreation-related traumatic brain injury, with traumatic brain injuries sustained in contact sports accounting for approximately 45 percent of those visits; (6) 7 in 10 emergency department visits for sports- or recreation-related traumatic brain injury are for children ages 17 and younger; (7) research suggests that many children with a traumatic brain injury do not seek care in emergency departments or do not seek care at all, resulting in a significant underestimate of prevalence; and (8) approximately 15 percent of all high school students in the United States self-reported 1 or more sports- or recreation-related concussions within the preceding 12 months; Whereas the seriousness of concussions should not be minimized in athletics, and return-to-play and return-to-learn protocols can help ensure recovery; Whereas concussions can affect physical, mental, and social health, and a greater awareness and understanding of proper diagnosis and management of concussions is critical to improved outcomes; and Whereas the Senate can raise awareness about concussions among the medical community and the public: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) supports the designation of September 18, 2026, as "National Concussion Awareness Day"; (2) recognizes that mild traumatic brain injury, otherwise known as a concussion, is an important health concern; (3) commends the organizations and individuals that raise awareness about mild traumatic brain injury; (4) encourages Federal, State, and local policymakers to work together-- (A) to raise awareness about the effects of concussions; and (B) to improve the understanding of proper diagnosis and management of concussions; and (5) encourages further research and prevention efforts to ensure that fewer individuals experience the most adverse effects of mild traumatic brain injury.

Senate Resolution 893--Designating October 2026 as "National Country Music Month"

Page S4950 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 893--DESIGNATING OCTOBER 2026 AS "NATIONAL COUNTRY MUSIC MONTH" Mrs. BLACKBURN (for herself and Mr. Kaine) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

Text printed in the Record (1,710 characters)

Whereas country music, a uniquely American sound, echoes from the backroads of the United States to the streets of Nashville, Tennessee; Whereas Bristol, straddling the Tennessee and Virginia State line, is recognized as the "birthplace of country music"; Whereas the Grand Ole Opry, the most famous stage in country music, has been called the "home of American music"; Whereas the Ryman Auditorium, the original home of the Grand Ole Opry, has been described as "the Mother Church of country music"; Whereas country music reminds every American of the importance of faith, family, freedom, hope, opportunity, and patriotism; Whereas country music has influenced numerous other genres of music; Whereas country music is an incredibly diverse genre, appealing to Americans from all walks of life; Whereas country music has millions of fans all across the United States; Whereas the country music industry contributes billions of dollars in revenue each year to the economy of the United States; Whereas Dolly Parton, the "Queen of Country" and one of the world's biggest stars, passed away on August 25, 2026, at the age of 80; Whereas the Country Music Association first celebrated "National Country Music Month" in 1964; and Whereas President Nixon issued a presidential proclamation in 1970 to acknowledge October as "National Country Music Month": Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) designates October 2026 as "National Country Music Month"; (2) honors the contributions of country music and its stars to the story and history of the United States; and (3) encourages the American people to observe "National Country Music Month" with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Senate Resolution 894--Designating September 25, 2026, as "National Ataxia Awareness Day", and Raising Awareness of Ataxia, Ataxia Research, and the Search for a Cure

Pages S4950–S4951 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 894--DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 25, 2026, AS "NATIONAL ATAXIA AWARENESS DAY", AND RAISING AWARENESS OF ATAXIA, ATAXIA RESEARCH, AND THE SEARCH FOR A CURE Mrs. HYDE-SMITH (for herself, Mr. Murphy, and Mrs. Capito) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

Text printed in the Record (2,849 characters)

Whereas ataxia is a clinical manifestation indicating degeneration or dysfunction of the brain that negatively affects the coordination, precision, and accurate timing of physical movements; Whereas ataxia can strike individuals of all ages, including children; Whereas the term "ataxia" is used to classify a group of rare, inherited neurodegenerative diseases including-- (1) ataxia telangiectasia; (2) episodic ataxia; (3) Friedreich's ataxia; and (4) spinocerebellar ataxia; Whereas there are many known types of genetic ataxia, but the genetic basis for ataxia in some patients is still unknown; Whereas all inherited ataxias affect fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, and therefore, are recognized as rare diseases under the Orphan Drug Act (Public Law 97-414; 96 Stat. 2049); Whereas some genetic ataxias are inherited in an autosomal dominant manner, while others are inherited in an autosomal recessive manner; Whereas ataxia symptoms can also be caused by noninherited health conditions and other factors, including stroke, tumor, cerebral palsy, head trauma, multiple sclerosis, alcohol addiction or misuse, and certain medications; Whereas ataxia can present physical, psychological, and financial challenges for patients and their families; Whereas symptoms and outcomes of ataxia progress at different rates and can include-- (1) lack of coordination; (2) slurred speech; (3) cardiomyopathy; (4) scoliosis; (5) eye movement abnormalities; (6) difficulty walking; (7) tremors; (8) trouble eating and swallowing; (9) difficulties with other activities that require fine motor skills; and (10) death; Whereas many patients with ataxia require the use of assistive devices, such as wheelchairs and walkers, to aid in their mobility, and many individuals with ataxia may need physical and occupational therapy; Whereas few treatments and no cures have been approved for ataxia; and Whereas clinical research to develop safe and effective treatments for ataxia is ongoing: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) recognizes the need for greater public awareness of ataxia; (2) designates September 25, 2026, as "National Ataxia Awareness Day"; (3) supports the goals of National Ataxia Awareness Day, which are to-- (A) raise awareness of the causes and symptoms of ataxia among the general public and health care professionals; (B) improve diagnosis of ataxia and access to care for patients affected by ataxia; and (C) accelerate ataxia research, including research on safe and effective treatment options and, ultimately, a cure; (4) recognizes the individuals in the United States who face challenges due to having ataxia, and the families of those individuals; and (5) encourages States, territories, and localities to support the goals of National Ataxia Awareness Day.

Senate Resolution 895--Designating the Week of October 4, 2026, Through October 10, 2026, as "National Community Policing Week"

Page S4951 · Official text

Mrs. SHAHEEN (for herself, Mr. Crapo, Ms. Hassan, Ms. Rosen, Mr. Peters, and Ms. Murkowski) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

Text printed in the Record (2,042 characters)

Whereas police officers are indispensable members of the community who put their lives on the line to protect others; Whereas promoting strong relationships, founded in trust and mutual respect, between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve helps ensure the safe and effective execution of the law; Whereas relationships developed through community policing help protect both law enforcement officers and civilians; Whereas law enforcement officers and communities that work together to address public safety concerns can create lasting solutions to difficult challenges; Whereas community policing has helped produce reductions in both violent and property crime; Whereas events in recent years have sparked a nationwide call to improve the interactions between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve; Whereas community policing facilitates peaceful dialogue, capable of fostering understanding and trust, between law enforcement officers and civilians; Whereas community policing informs the public about the challenges that law enforcement officers face in executing their duties and provides law enforcement officers insight into the concerns of community members; Whereas a long-term commitment to community policing is necessary to eliminate the underlying causes of crime; Whereas the advancement of community policing should be supported to ensure that State and local law enforcement agencies have necessary resources; and Whereas community policing has been recognized as an important tool for improving the relationship between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) designates the week of October 4, 2026, through October 10, 2026, as "National Community Policing Week"; and (2) supports community policing and encourages the people of the United States, law enforcement agencies, and elected officials to identify ways in which communities can improve public safety, strengthen relationships, and build trust.

Senate Resolution 896--Expressing the Sense of the Senate Regarding the Importance of Religious Freedom, Authoritative Texts, and Transparency in Artificial Intelligence Systems

Page S4951 · Official text

Mr. LANKFORD (for himself and Mr. Coons) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

Text printed in the Record (2,065 characters)

Whereas freedom of religion is a fundamental right; Whereas the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States stipulates that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."; Whereas religious freedom, including the freedom of every person to have a faith, live their faith, change their faith, or have no faith at all, is a bedrock liberty and a central protection secured by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; Whereas freedom of religion is a foundational element of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in the United States and abroad; Whereas bias or discrimination against any religious group undermines equal treatment, weakens public trust, and harms a free and just society; and Whereas artificial intelligence systems increasingly influence public understanding and democratic discourse, making transparency and the fair treatment of religious viewpoints essential to informed civic engagement: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) affirms the importance of religious freedom as a bedrock and central constitutional liberty for every person; (2) recognizes that bias or discrimination against any religious group, person of faith, person who changes their faith, or person who has no faith at all is harmful to a free and just society; (3) encourages all organizations that design, develop, or operate artificial intelligence systems to adopt clear and consistently applied standards that uphold universal principles of religious freedom and transparency; (4) supports the development and deployment of artificial intelligence systems that provide responses to religious questions that are thorough and fairly representative of relevant beliefs, texts, traditions, and perspectives; and (5) commends the people of the United States to consult primary sources and religious leaders when seeking to understand religious beliefs and traditions, including sacred texts and other authoritative writings of those traditions.

Senate Resolution 897--Honoring the Life, Service, and Legacy of the Honorable Jon Llewellyn Kyl, Former Senator for the State of Arizona

Pages S4951–S4952 · Official text

SENATE RESOLUTION 897--HONORING THE LIFE, SERVICE, AND LEGACY OF THE HONORABLE JON LLEWELLYN KYL, FORMER SENATOR FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA Mr. KELLY (for himself, Mr. Gallego, Mr. Grassley, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Thune, Mr. Schumer, Ms. Alsobrooks, Mr. Armstrong, Ms. Baldwin, Mr. Banks, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Bennet, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Blumenthal, Ms. Blunt Rochester, Mr. Booker, Mr. Boozman, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Budd, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Cassidy, Ms. Collins, Mr. Coons, Mr. Cornyn, Ms. Cortez Masto, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Daines, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Ernst, Mr. Fetterman, Mrs. Fischer, Mrs. Gillibrand, Ms. Graham, Mr. Hagerty, Ms. Hassan, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Heinrich, Mr. Hickenlooper, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Hoeven, Mr. Husted, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Justice, Mr. Kaine, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kim, Mr. King, Ms. Klobuchar, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Lee, Mr. Lujan, Ms. Lummis, Mr. Markey, Mr. Marshall, Mr. McCormick, Mr. Merkley, Mrs. Moody, Mr. Moran, Mr. Moreno, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Murphy, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Ossoff, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Paul, Mr. Peters, Mr. Reed, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. Risch, Ms. Rosen, Mr. Rounds, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schatz, Mr. Schiff, Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Sheehy, Ms. Slotkin, Ms. Smith, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Warner, Mr. Warnock, Ms. Warren, Mr. Welch, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Wyden, and Mr. Young) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to:

Text printed in the Record (2,623 characters)

Whereas Jon Llewellyn Kyl (referred to in this preamble as "Senator Kyl") was born on April 25, 1942, in Oakland, Nebraska; Whereas Senator Kyl earned a bachelor's degree in 1964 and a law degree in 1966 from the University of Arizona, where he met his wife, Caryll; Whereas Senator Kyl was admitted to the Arizona State Bar in 1966, practiced law in Phoenix for 20 years, and served as chairman of the Phoenix Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce from 1984 to 1985; Whereas Senator Kyl was elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1986 and represented the people of Arizona's Fourth Congressional District for 4 terms, from January 3, 1987, to January 3, 1995; Whereas Senator Kyl was elected to the United States Senate in 1994, reelected in 2000 and 2006, and represented the people of Arizona in the Senate from January 3, 1995, to January 3, 2013; Whereas Senator Kyl was selected by his colleagues to serve as chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, and Republican Whip; Whereas Senator Kyl made lasting contributions to Arizona and the United States through his work on water policy, crime victims' rights, national security, defense, and intelligence; Whereas, following the death of Senator John McCain, Senator Kyl once again answered the call to public service when he was appointed to the Senate on September 4, 2018, took the oath of office on September 5, 2018, and served through December 31, 2018; Whereas, after leaving elected office, Senator Kyl continued to serve the United States, including as vice chair of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States; Whereas the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University's Morrison Institute for Public Policy and the Kyl Institute for National Security at the University of Arizona were named in his honor, reflecting his enduring contributions to Arizona and the United States; and Whereas Senator Kyl passed away at the age of 84, leaving behind a legacy of distinguished service to the people of Arizona and the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) has heard with profound sorrow and deep regret the announcement of the death of Jon Llewellyn Kyl, former member of the Senate; (2) respectfully requests that the Secretary of the Senate communicate this resolution to the House of Representatives and transmit an enrolled copy thereof to the family of Jon Llewellyn Kyl; and (3) stands adjourned as a further mark of respect to the memory of the late Jon Llewellyn Kyl when the Senate adjourns today.

Text of Amendments

Pages S4952–S4955 · Official text

SA 6825. Mr. WARNOCK submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 6776 proposed by Mr. Thune (for Mr. Cruz (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Schmitt, and Mr. Coons)) to the bill S. 4668, to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Text printed in the Record (6,971 characters)

At the end, add the following: SEC. __1. SHORT TITLE. This title may be cited as the "Institutional Grants for New Infrastructure, Technology, and Education for HBCU Excellence Act" or the "IGNITE HBCU Excellence Act". SEC. __2. GRANTS FOR THE LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENT OF HBCUS. (a) In General.-- (1) Grants authorized.--The Secretary shall award grants to eligible entities, on a competitive basis, to support long-term improvements to the facilities of such entities in accordance with this title. (2) Grant period.--With respect to each eligible entity that is awarded a grant under this section, such grant shall be for a period determined appropriate by the Secretary based on the information submitted by such entity under subsection (b). (3) Multiple grants permitted.--An eligible entity may apply for, and be awarded, more than 1 grant under this section. (b) Application.--To be considered for a grant under this section, an eligible entity shall submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require, including-- (1) to the extent possible, the information necessary for the Secretary to make the determinations under subsection (c); (2) a description of the projects that such eligible entity plans to carry out with the grant and how such projects will advance the long-term goals of the entity; (3) an explanation of-- (A) how such projects will reduce risks to the health, welfare, and safety of students, staff, administrators, faculty, researchers, and guests at such eligible entity; and (B) the anticipated number of years that any facilities constructed, improved, or replaced under such projects may be used before presenting a risk described in subparagraph (A); (4) the median age of the facilities that such entity plans to improve or replace under such projects; and (5) in the case of an eligible entity seeking to carry out facility repairs described in section __3(a)(3), a preventative maintenance plan for such repairs. (c) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary-- (1) shall give priority to an eligible entity that-- (A) demonstrates the greatest need to improve campus facilities, as determined by a comparison of factors identified by the Secretary, which may include-- (i) consideration of threats posed by the proximity of such facilities to toxic sites; (ii) the vulnerability of such facilities to natural disasters and environmental risks; (iii) the median age of the facilities that such entity will use grant funds to improve; (iv) the extent to which student enrollment exceeds physical and instructional capacity; (v) the condition of major systems in such facilities such as heating, ventilation, air conditioning, electrical, water, and sewer systems; (vi) the condition of roofs, windows, and doors of such facilities; (vii) other critical health and safety conditions; (viii) the number and condition of facilities in significant disrepair; and (ix) the total amount of deferred maintenance of such facilities; (B) demonstrates the most limited capacity to raise funds for the long-term improvement of campus facilities, as determined by an assessment of-- (i) the current and historic ability of the eligible entity to raise funds for construction, renovation, modernization, and major repair projects for campus; (ii) whether the eligible entity has been able to issue bonds or receive other funds to support school construction projects; (iii) the bond rating of the eligible entity; (iv) the number of students enrolled as of the date on which the application is submitted; (v) the total value of the endowment of the eligible entity as of the date on which the application is submitted; (vi) the total amount of deferred maintenance of such facilities; and (vii) the amount and sources of institutional revenue; (C) enrolls the highest percentages of students who are eligible to receive a Federal Pell Grant under subpart 1 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a et seq.), and whose families qualify for other Federal need-based aid; (D) is a public institution that-- (i) faces declining State support or investment; and (ii) demonstrates limited ability to generate revenue, as determined by assessing-- (I) the total value of the endowment of the institution as of the date on which the application is submitted; and (II) the costs of the deferred maintenance of the institution relative to the total revenue of the institution; and (E) demonstrates an effort to seek support from public and private entities for projects carried out with a grant awarded under this Act; and (2) may give priority to an eligible entity-- (A) that lacks access to high-speed broadband and will use the grant funds to improve access to high-speed broadband sufficient to support digital and technology-based learning in accordance with section __3(a)(6); (B) at which the highest degree that is predominantly awarded to students is an associate's degree; (C) that did not receive a grant under this title in the preceding fiscal year; or (D) that proposes projects aligned with long-term infrastructure priorities that-- (i) serve as regional models, as determined by the Secretary; (ii) address multiple needs on the campus of the entity; (iii) address the needs of at least 1 eligible entity in addition to the entity receiving the grant; or (iv) encourage efforts described in section __3(d). (d) Geographic Distribution.--The Secretary shall ensure that grants under this section are awarded to eligible entities in a manner that reflects the geographic distribution of such entities in the United States. (e) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary, directly or by grant or contract, may provide technical assistance to eligible entities to prepare the entities to qualify, apply for, and maintain a grant, under this Act. (f) Relationship to HBCU Capital Financing Program.-- (1) In general.--The Secretary may take into consideration whether an eligible entity has received a loan under a loan agreement made under part D of title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1066 et seq.) when-- (A) reviewing grant applications under this section; (B) determining priority under subsection (c); and (C) determining the amount awarded for a grant under this Act. (2) Priority.--With respect to paragraph (1)(B), the Secretary may-- (A) determine that an eligible entity should not receive priority under subsection (c) if such entity has received a loan under a loan agreement made under part D of title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1066 et seq.); and (B) determine that an eligible entity should receive higher priority under subsection (c) if such entity has not received a loan under a loan agreement made under part D of title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1066 et seq.). SEC. __3.

Text printed in the Record (11,476 characters)

GRANT USES. (a) Permitted Uses.--Except as provided in subsection (b), an eligible entity that receives a grant under this title shall use such grant funds to carry out at least one of the following activities: (1) Construct, modernize, renovate, or retrofit the campus facilities of such entity, which may include-- (A) improving existing, or establishing new, instructional laboratories or workforce-aligned (as determined by the Secretary) research facilities relating to fields of health, science, technology, engineering, the arts, agriculture, education, and other disciplines as determined by the Secretary; (B) constructing or improving roads or other transportation infrastructure on campus, for which the eligible entity is responsible; (C) preserving facilities with historic significance and facilities that house historic or cultural artifacts; (D) constructing, modernizing, renovating, and retrofitting any campus facility or dormitory (including dining facilities) or other facility customarily used for housing students; (E) improving security and safety for students, faculty, and staff; (F) installing or upgrading water, wastewater, power, and underground infrastructure; and (G) developing facilities or infrastructure that support job creation, entrepreneurship, and community-based opportunities, including establishing workforce development hubs that-- (i) are aligned with regional labor market needs; (ii) focus on fields such as artificial intelligence; and (iii) support education, training, and career placement for students. (2) Purchase, manufacture, or modernize vehicle fleets owned and operated by such entity that are used primarily for the purpose of facilitating campus accessibility and student academic activities. (3) Carry out repairs, including with respect to deferred maintenance, to the facilities of such eligible entity in accordance with the preventative maintenance plan submitted under section __2(b)(5). (4) Acquire and install research-related equipment and technology in the campus facilities of such entity, including specialty equipment with respect to emerging fields (as determined by the Secretary, in consultation with the head of the eligible entity), such as artificial intelligence, data science, machine learning, cybersecurity, biotechnology, chemistry, pharmaceutical sciences, robotics, and advanced manufacturing. (5) For the purpose of facilitating the construction of new campus facilities that are not primarily used for classroom instruction or academic activities-- (A) purchase or otherwise acquire title to land to serve as a permanent site for such facilities; and (B) to the extent that other public or private funds are insufficient-- (i) prepare land for the construction of such facilities; and (ii) pay other preconstruction costs relating to the development of such facilities. (6) Install or extend the life of basic systems and components of campus facilities, which may include-- (A) high-speed broadband internet infrastructure sufficient to support digital and technology-based learning; (B) high-capacity, middle-mile broadband networks, and campus-wide broadband networks, including 5G and future network generations; (C) fiber, cyber, and telecommunications infrastructure, including small cells; (D) heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) or other indoor air quality systems; (E) support for last-mile service for rural campuses when other means of providing this support is unavailable; and (F) other infrastructure to support the success of operations and other digital and technology needs. (7) Strengthen the safety and security of the campus of such entity by improving or utilizing design elements, principles, and technology that-- (A) guarantee layers of security throughout such campus; and (B) uphold the function of such campus as a learning and teaching environment. (8) Strengthen institutional planning and governance to support long-term infrastructure goals by-- (A) developing or updating campus infrastructure master plans, facility condition assessments, deferred maintenance strategies, or long-term capital project timeliness; (B) aligning campus infrastructure master plans with academic and workforce priorities, including with respect to the facilities used by programs in high-demand fields (as determined by the Secretary) in order to address the needs of such facilities and support the growth of such programs; (C) modernizing auxiliary services to improve financial sustainability, service quality, or institutional competitiveness; (D) supporting high-quality research and development efforts, including planning and expanding partnerships with manufacturers, employers, or innovation stakeholders that strengthen infrastructure and innovation; and (E) establishing or expanding offices or initiatives for the recruitment and retention of faculty in fields of research. (b) Prohibited Uses.--An eligible entity that receives a grant under this title may not use such grant funds for-- (1) payment of routine and predictable maintenance costs, minor repairs, or utility bills; (2) any facility that is primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public; (3) the purchase or support of any communications equipment or service (as defined in section 9 of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 (47 U.S.C. 1608)) that poses a risk to national security; or (4) activities that are funded, in whole or in part, under part B of title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1060 et seq.), unless the Secretary approves such use. (c) Supplement Not Supplant.--An eligible entity shall use a grant received under this title only to supplement the level of Federal, State, and local public funds that would, in the absence of such grant, be made available for the activities supported by the grant, and not to supplant such funds. (d) Encouraging Partnerships.--The Secretary shall encourage partnerships between eligible entities and public and private entities to-- (1) provide additional funding; and (2) assist in carrying out the activities under this Act. SEC. __4. USE OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS. In carrying out projects funded with a grant under this Act, an eligible entity shall seek to procure contracts from-- (1) small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans (including service-disabled veterans); and (2) qualified HUBZone small business concerns. SEC. __5. RESERVATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND OTHER ACTIVITIES. (a) Reservation.--An eligible entity that receives a grant under this title may reserve a total of not more than 5 percent of the amount of such grant to-- (1) develop the facilities master plan required under subsection (b); (2) carry out activities to-- (A) protect the health of students, staff, administrators, faculty, researchers, and guests during the construction or modernization of the campus facilities of such entity; and (B) mitigate excessive noise caused by activities carried out under this Act; (3) pay personnel to carry out administrative work relating to the grant program; and (4) pay other reasonable administrative costs associated with the grant program. (b) Facilities Master Plan.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after receiving a grant under this Act, an eligible entity shall submit to the Secretary a comprehensive facilities master plan that-- (A) describes how the entity will carry out the activities identified in the application submitted under section __2(b) with the grant funds received under this Act; and (B) identifies the anticipated benefits and outcomes of such activities. (2) Elements.--The facilities master plan required under paragraph (1) shall include, with respect to the eligible entity submitting such plan, a description of, as of the date on which such plan is submitted-- (A) the extent to which the campus facilities-- (i) meet the educational needs of students; and (ii) support the educational mission and vision of such entity; (B) the physical condition of the campus facilities; (C) the current health, safety, and environmental conditions of the campus facilities, including-- (i) indoor air quality; (ii) the presence of hazardous and toxic substances and chemicals on or near such facilities; (iii) the safety of drinking water at the tap and water used for meal preparation, including the level of lead and other contaminants in such water; (iv) energy and water efficiency; (v) excessive noise in academic spaces; and (vi) other health, safety, and environmental conditions that would impact the health, safety, and learning ability of students; (D) the actual and anticipated impact of current and future student enrollment levels (as of the date of application) on the design of current and future campus facilities, as well as the financial implications of such enrollment levels; (E) the dollar amount and percentage of funds such entity will dedicate to capital construction projects, including-- (i) any funds in the budget of such entity that will be dedicated to such projects; and (ii) any funds not in such budget that will be dedicated to such projects, including any funds available to the eligible entity as the result of a bond issue or the Historically Black College and University Capital Financing Program under part D of title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1066 et seq.); and (F) the dollar amount and percentage of funds such entity will dedicate to the maintenance and operation of campus facilities, including-- (i) any funds in the budget of such entity that will be dedicated to the maintenance and operation of such facilities; and (ii) any funds not in the budget of such entity that will be dedicated to the maintenance and operation of such facilities. (3) Consultation.--In developing the facilities master plan, the eligible entity shall demonstrate that it conducted meaningful consultation with diverse stakeholders, which may include-- (A) staff and other institutional leaders; (B) custodial and maintenance staff; (C) emergency first responders; (D) campus facilities directors; (E) students and families; (F) community residents, including those directly affected by actions undertaken as a result of utilizing grant funds; (G) government entities; (H) local charitable foundations; (I) local employers; (J) Indian Tribes, as applicable; and (K) other such individuals and entities. SEC. __6. HBCU CAPITAL FINANCING LOAN DISBURSEMENT AND FORGIVENESS. (a) In General.--Each time an institution of higher education receives a disbursement of a loan amount under a covered closed loan agreement, the Secretary shall repay-- (1) the outstanding balance of principal, interest, fees, and costs on such loan amount (as of the date of such disbursement) under the covered closed loan agreement; and (2) any reimbursement (including reimbursements of escrow and return of fees and deposits) relating to the covered closed loan agreement that are usual and customary when the loan is paid off by the institution. (b) Covered Closed Loan Agreement.--In this section, the term "covered closed loan agreement" means a closed loan agreement-- (1) executed before September 22, 2026; and (2) made under part D of title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1066 et seq.). SEC. __7.

Text printed in the Record (4,332 characters)

REPORTS. (a) Department of Education Report.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the projects carried out with grant funds awarded under this Act. (2) Elements.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include-- (A) with respect to projects carried out by eligible entities with grant funds awarded under this Act, an assessment of-- (i) the types of such projects; (ii) the square footage of the improvements made by such projects, disaggregated by-- (I) total square footage; and (II) square footage per each eligible entity; (iii) the total cost of each such project; (iv) the cost described in clause (iii), disaggregated by the cost of-- (I) planning; (II) design; (III) construction; (IV) site purchase; and (V) improvements; (v) the geographic distribution of such projects; and (vi) the demographic composition of the student population served by such projects, disaggregated by-- (I) race and ethnicity; and (II) the number and percentage of students enrolled at such entities who are eligible to receive a Federal Pell Grant under subpart 1 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a et seq.); (B) an evaluation of a sample of grant recipients, selected by the Secretary taking into account size and geographic location of each grantee, to determine how such recipients are using the grant and the effectiveness of the activities carried out with the grant; and (C) an analysis of compliance with the requirement in section __3(c). (b) Comptroller General Appropriations Report.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the amount of appropriations necessary to continue implementing the grant program under this Act. (2) Elements.--The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include-- (A) an evaluation of the approximate total cost of deferred maintenance across eligible entities; and (B) an overview of sources of funding for addressing such needs other than the grant program under this Act. (3) Report.--After the completion of the study under paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall submit to the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report on the results of the study. (4) Results.--The results of the study shall be used to inform the appropriation of funds to carry out this title for the fiscal years following the submission of the report under paragraph (3). (c) Comptroller General Implementation Report.-- (1) Study required.--Not later than 4 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the implementation of the grant program under this Act. (2) Elements.--The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include-- (A) an examination of program implementation challenges; and (B) an assessment of whether any changes are needed to make grants under this title more accessible to eligible entities with fiscal challenges to help them raise capital for infrastructure projects. (3) Report.--After the completion of the study under paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the results of the study, including any recommendations to the Secretary for improvements to the implementation of the grant program under this Act. SEC. __8. DEFINITIONS. In this title: (1) Eligible entity.--The term "eligible entity" means-- (A) a part B institution, as such term is defined in section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061(2)); or (B) an institution or program listed under section 326(e)(1) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 1063b(e)(1)). (2) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Education. (3) State.--The term "State" has the meaning given such term in section 103 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1003). SEC. __9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this title for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2032. ______

SA 6826. Ms. BALDWIN (for herself and Mr. Kaine) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 6776 proposed by Mr. Thune (for Mr. Cruz (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Schmitt, and Mr. Coons)) to the bill S. 4668, to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: Strike section 121 and insert the following:

Text printed in the Record (2,699 characters)

SEC. 121. RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING LAW. (a) In General.--No State or political subdivision of a State may adopt, maintain, enforce, or continue in effect any law, regulation, rule, requirement, or standard that-- (1) conflicts with any provision of this title that would prevent compliance with this title; or (2) governs, regulates, or invalidates policies or rules of an institution, a conference, or an intercollegiate athletic association that regulates-- (A) the compensation to a student athlete or prospective student athlete for the use of their name, image, or likeness, except as necessary to comply with this title; (B) transfers of student athletes between institutions; or (C) any provision described in subsection (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), or (b) of section 113 relating to the eligibility of a student athlete to participate in intercollegiate athletics. (b) Preservation of State Laws.--The following State laws, rules, regulations, or requirements, or common law rights or remedies shall not be preempted, displaced, or supplanted: (1) Except to the extent that such law, rule, regulation, requirement, or common law right or remedy conflicts with subsection (a), the following: (A) Uniform Athlete Agent Acts. (B) Civil rights laws. (C) Tort law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (D) Criminal law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (E) Laws that relate to privacy or data breach. (F) Contract law. (G) Trademark law. (H) Copyright law. (I) Consumer protection law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (2) Except to the extent that such law, rule, regulation, or requirement, or common law right or remedy conflicts with subsection (a)(2), any law, rule, regulation, or requirement, or common law right or remedy, whether statutory or common law, that gives rise to a cause of action for the following: (A) Personal injury, including psychological injury. (B) Wrongful death. (C) Property damage. (D) Sexual assault. (E) Harassment. (F) Fraud. (G) Injury resulting from abuse or hazing of a student athlete, including physical or sexual abuse. (H) Injury resulting from deficient student or campus safety measures. (I) Injury resulting from a failure to provide greater protections to student athletes than those provided by the health, wellness, and safety standards under subsections (a) and (b) of section 107. (J) Any related cause of action that is derivative of any of subparagraphs (A) through (I). (c) Rule of Construction.--To the extent liability for violations of the antitrust laws is not limited by this title, subsection (a) shall not be construed to preempt, displace, or supplant the antitrust laws. ______

SA 6827. Mr. MERKLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 6776 proposed by Mr. Thune (for Mr. Cruz (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Schmitt, and Mr. Coons)) to the bill S. 4668, to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 100, strike lines 14 and 15 and insert the following: (1) section 114, only to the extent such section continues to have force or effect; (2) section 115, only to the extent such section continues to have force or effect; ______ SA 6828. Ms. BALDWIN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 6776 proposed by Mr. Thune (for Mr. Cruz (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Schmitt, and Mr. Coons)) to the bill S. 4668, to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: Strike section 121 and insert the following:

Text printed in the Record (2,699 characters)

SEC. 121. RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING LAW. (a) In General.--No State or political subdivision of a State may adopt, maintain, enforce, or continue in effect any law, regulation, rule, requirement, or standard that-- (1) conflicts with any provision of this title that would prevent compliance with this title; or (2) governs, regulates, or invalidates policies or rules of an institution, a conference, or an intercollegiate athletic association that regulates-- (A) the compensation to a student athlete or prospective student athlete for the use of their name, image, or likeness, except as necessary to comply with this title; (B) transfers of student athletes between institutions; or (C) any provision described in subsection (a)(1)-(3) or (b) of section 113 relating to the eligibility of a student athlete to participate in intercollegiate athletics. (b) Preservation of State Laws.--The following State laws, rules, regulations, or requirements, or common law rights or remedies shall not be preempted, displaced, or supplanted: (1) Except to the extent that such law, rule, regulation, requirement, or common law right or remedy conflicts with subsection (a), the following: (A) Uniform Athlete Agent Acts. (B) Civil rights laws. (C) Tort law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (D) Criminal law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (E) Laws that relate to privacy or data breach. (F) Contract law. (G) Trademark law. (H) Copyright law. (I) Consumer protection law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (2) Except to the extent that such law, rule, regulation, or requirement, or common law right or remedy conflicts with subsection (a)(2), any law, rule, regulation, or requirement, or common law right or remedy, whether statutory or common law, that gives rise to a cause of action for the following: (A) Personal injury, including psychological injury. (B) Wrongful death. (C) Property damage. (D) Sexual assault. (E) Harassment. (F) Fraud. (G) Injury resulting from abuse or hazing of a student athlete, including physical or sexual abuse. (H) Injury resulting from deficient student or campus safety measures. (I) Injury resulting from a failure to provide greater protections to student athletes than those provided by the health, wellness, and safety standards under subsections (a)(1)-(4) or (b)(1)-(2) of section 107. (J) Any related cause of action that is derivative of any of subparagraphs (A) through (I). (c) Rule of Construction.--To the extent liability for violations of the antitrust laws is not limited by this title, subsection (a) shall not be construed to preempt, displace, or supplant the antitrust laws. ______

SA 6829. Mr. SCOTT submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 6776 proposed by Mr. Thune (for Mr. Cruz (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Schmitt, and Mr. Coons)) to the bill S. 4668, to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of title I, add the following:

Text printed in the Record (2,781 characters)

SEC. 129. DISCLOSURE OF FOREIGN FINANCING OF INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS. (a) Disclosure to Intercollegiate Athletic Association.-- (1) In general.--A covered person shall disclose to the relevant intercollegiate athletic association (except in the case of a covered person that is an intercollegiate athletic association) all amounts received by the covered person relating to intercollegiate athletics from a foreign government, a foreign adversary, a state-owned enterprise, a sovereign wealth fund, or any other foreign source. (2) Disclosure deadlines.--Disclosures under paragraph (1) shall be made not later than 30 days after-- (A) entering into a relevant transaction or receiving funds, whichever occurs first; or (B) any material change that would impact a previous disclosure. (b) Report and Public Availability.-- (1) In general.--Not later than August 1 of each year, each intercollegiate athletic association shall submit to the Secretary of Education, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report on-- (A) all disclosures received under subsection (a) during the one-year period preceding the date of the report; and (B) any amounts received by the intercollegiate athletic association relating to intercollegiate athletics from a foreign government, a foreign adversary, a state-owned enterprise, a sovereign wealth fund, or any other foreign source during the one-year period preceding the date of the report. (2) Public availability.--Each intercollegiate athletic association shall publish on a publicly available website an updated disclosure containing the matter required under paragraph (1) not later than January 31 and July 31 of each year. (c) Definitions.--In this section: (1) Covered person.--The term "covered person" means-- (A) an institution; (B) a conference; (C) an intercollegiate athletic association; (D) an associated entity; (E) a collective; (F) an athlete agent receiving or arranging funds on behalf of an athlete; or (G) an entity selling or licensing media, sponsorship, apparel, or commercial rights relating to college sports. (2) Foreign adversary.--The term "foreign adversary" has the meaning given the term "covered nation" in section 4872 of title 10, United States Code. (3) Foreign source.--The term "foreign source" has the meaning given that term in section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1011f). (4) Sovereign wealth fund.--The term "sovereign wealth fund" means an investment fund, investment vehicle, or investment entity established, owned, controlled, or directed by a foreign government, including any subsidiary or affiliate controlled by such fund, vehicle, or entity.

Text of Senate Amendment 6825

Pages S4952–S4954 · Official text

Text printed in the Record (6,971 characters)

Text printed in the Record (11,476 characters)

Text printed in the Record (4,324 characters)

Text of Senate Amendment 6826

Page S4954 · Official text

Text printed in the Record (2,691 characters)

Text of Senate Amendment 6827

Pages S4954–S4955 · Official text

Text of Senate Amendment 6828

Page S4955 · Official text

SA 6828. Ms. BALDWIN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 6776 proposed by Mr. Thune (for Mr. Cruz (for himself, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Schmitt, and Mr. Coons)) to the bill S. 4668, to protect the name, image, and likeness rights of, and provide protections for, student athletes and to promote fair competition among intercollegiate athletics, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: Strike section 121 and insert the following:

Text printed in the Record (2,691 characters)

SEC. 121. RELATIONSHIP TO EXISTING LAW. (a) In General.--No State or political subdivision of a State may adopt, maintain, enforce, or continue in effect any law, regulation, rule, requirement, or standard that-- (1) conflicts with any provision of this title that would prevent compliance with this title; or (2) governs, regulates, or invalidates policies or rules of an institution, a conference, or an intercollegiate athletic association that regulates-- (A) the compensation to a student athlete or prospective student athlete for the use of their name, image, or likeness, except as necessary to comply with this title; (B) transfers of student athletes between institutions; or (C) any provision described in subsection (a)(1)-(3) or (b) of section 113 relating to the eligibility of a student athlete to participate in intercollegiate athletics. (b) Preservation of State Laws.--The following State laws, rules, regulations, or requirements, or common law rights or remedies shall not be preempted, displaced, or supplanted: (1) Except to the extent that such law, rule, regulation, requirement, or common law right or remedy conflicts with subsection (a), the following: (A) Uniform Athlete Agent Acts. (B) Civil rights laws. (C) Tort law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (D) Criminal law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (E) Laws that relate to privacy or data breach. (F) Contract law. (G) Trademark law. (H) Copyright law. (I) Consumer protection law, unless otherwise specified in paragraph (2). (2) Except to the extent that such law, rule, regulation, or requirement, or common law right or remedy conflicts with subsection (a)(2), any law, rule, regulation, or requirement, or common law right or remedy, whether statutory or common law, that gives rise to a cause of action for the following: (A) Personal injury, including psychological injury. (B) Wrongful death. (C) Property damage. (D) Sexual assault. (E) Harassment. (F) Fraud. (G) Injury resulting from abuse or hazing of a student athlete, including physical or sexual abuse. (H) Injury resulting from deficient student or campus safety measures. (I) Injury resulting from a failure to provide greater protections to student athletes than those provided by the health, wellness, and safety standards under subsections (a)(1)-(4) or (b)(1)-(2) of section 107. (J) Any related cause of action that is derivative of any of subparagraphs (A) through (I). (c) Rule of Construction.--To the extent liability for violations of the antitrust laws is not limited by this title, subsection (a) shall not be construed to preempt, displace, or supplant the antitrust laws.

Text of Senate Amendment 6829

Page S4955 · Official text

Text printed in the Record (2,781 characters)

Authority for Committees to Meet

Pages S4955–S4956 · Official text

Todd Young (R-IN)

Mr. President, I have 11 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 Armed Services is authorized to meet in closed session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a briefing.

Text printed in the Record (55 characters)

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

Todd Young (R-IN)

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a business meeting. The Committee on Indian Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a business meeting. The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 10:15 a.m., to conduct a hearing. The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. The Committee on Veterans' Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 4 p.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. The Special Committee on Aging is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 3:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 3 p.m., to conduct a closed briefing. The Subcommittee on Cybersecurity of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet in closed session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, at 2:30 p.m.

Privileges of the Floor

Page S4956 · Official text

Edward J. Markey (D-MA)

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Colleen Brown, a fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the year.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Without objection, it is so ordered.

Measure Read the First Time--H.r. 9340

Page S4956 · Official text

Madam President, I understand there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will read the bill by title for the first time.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

Text printed in the Record (235 characters)

A 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.

I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The objection is heard. The bill will receive its second reading on the next legislative day.

Appointment

Page S4956 · Official text

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The Chair, on behalf of the President of the Senate, pursuant to Public Law 106-286, appoints the following Member to serve on the Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China during the 119th Congress: The Honorable John Curtis of Utah.

Secure Space Act of 2026

Page S4956 · Official text

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 557, S. 1962.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the bill by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

Text printed in the Record (612 characters)

A bill (S. 1962) to amend the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from granting a license or United States market access for a geostationary orbit satellite system or a nongeostationary orbit satellite system, or an authorization to use an individually licensed earth station or a blanket-licensed earth station, if the license, grant of market access, or authorization would be held or controlled by an entity that produces or provides any covered communications equipment or service or an affiliate of such an entity, and for other purposes.

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which was reported from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation with an amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic, as follows:

Text printed in the Record (5,133 characters)

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the "Secure Space Act of 2026". SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON GRANT OF CERTAIN SATELLITE LICENSES, UNITED STATES MARKET ACCESS, OR EARTH STATION AUTHORIZATIONS. (a) In General.--The Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 (47 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) is amended-- (1) by redesignating sections 10 and 11 as sections 11 and 12, respectively; and (2) by inserting after section 9 the following: "SEC. 10. PROHIBITION ON GRANT OF CERTAIN SATELLITE LICENSES, UNITED STATES MARKET ACCESS, OR EARTH STATION AUTHORIZATIONS. "(a) Definitions.--In this section: "(1) Affiliate.-- "(A) In general.--The term `affiliate' means an entity that (directly or indirectly) owns or controls, is owned or controlled by, or is under common ownership or control with, another entity. "(B) Own.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term `own' means to have, possess, or otherwise control an equity interest (or the equivalent thereof) of not less than 10 percent. "(2) Blanket-licensed earth station.--The term `blanket- licensed earth station' means an earth station that is licensed with a geostationary orbit satellite system or a nongeostationary orbit satellite system. "(3) Gateway station.--The term `gateway station' means an earth station or a group of earth stations that-- "(A) supports the routing and switching functions of a geostationary orbit satellite system or a nongeostationary orbit satellite system; "(B) may also be used for telemetry, tracking, and command transmissions; "(C) does not originate or terminate communication traffic; and "(D) is not for the exclusive use of any customer. "(4) Individually licensed earth station.--The term `individually licensed earth station' means-- "(A) an earth station (other than a blanket-licensed earth station) that sends a signal to, and receives a signal from, a geostationary orbit satellite system or a nongeostationary orbit satellite system; or "(B) a gateway station. "(b) Prohibition.--The Commission may not grant a license for, or a petition for a declaratory ruling to access the United States market using, a geostationary orbit satellite system or a nongeostationary orbit satellite system, or an authorization to use an individually licensed earth station or a blanket-licensed earth station, if the license, grant of market access, or authorization would be held or controlled by-- "(1) an entity identified on the list published by the Commission under section 2(a); or "(2) an affiliate of an entity described in paragraph (1). "(c) Further Consideration for Secured Networks.-- "(1) In general.--The Commission may issue a report assessing supply chain security risks associated with any earth station licensee, geostationary orbit satellite system licensee, nongeostationary orbit satellite system licensee, or entity granted a declaratory ruling to access the United States market using a geostationary orbit satellite system or nongeostationary orbit satellite system, or an affiliate of such a licensee or entity, that provides communications equipment designed, developed, manufactured, or assembled by an entity identified on the list published by the Commission under section 2(a). "(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in paragraph (1) shall be construed to expand or contract the authority of the Commission.". (b) Applicability.--Section 10 of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to the grant of a license, petition, or authorization on or after the date of enactment of this Act. (c) Rules.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall issue rules to implement section 10 of the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, as added by subsection (a). Ms. LUMMIS. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; that the committee-reported title amendment 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 committee-reported amendment, in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to. The bill (S. 1962), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. The committee-reported title amendment was agreed to as follows: Amend the title so as to read: "A bill to amend the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from granting a license or United States market access for a geostationary orbit satellite system or a nongeostationary orbit satellite system, or an authorization to use an individually licensed earth station or a blanket-licensed earth station, if the license, grant of market access, or authorization would be held or controlled by an entity identified on the Covered List or an affiliate of such an entity, and for other purposes.".

Satellite Cybersecurity Act of 2025

Pages S4956–S4958 · Official text

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 560, S. 3404.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the bill by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 3404) to require a report on Federal support to the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems, and for other purposes. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation with an amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic, as follows:

Text printed in the Record (11,469 characters)

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the "Satellite Cybersecurity Act of 2025". SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term "appropriate congressional committees" means-- (A) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and (B) the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on Space, Science, and Technology, and the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives. (2) Clearinghouse.--The term "clearinghouse" means the commercial satellite system cybersecurity clearinghouse required to be developed and maintained under section 4(b)(1). (3) Commercial satellite system.--The term "commercial satellite system"-- (A) means a system that-- (i) is owned or operated by a non-Federal entity that holds a license issued by the United States for business operations; and (ii) is composed of not less than 1 earth satellite; and (B) includes-- (i) any ground support infrastructure for each satellite in the system; and (ii) any transmission link among and between any satellite in the system and any ground support infrastructure in the system. (4) Critical infrastructure.--The term "critical infrastructure" has the meaning given the term in subsection (e) of the Critical Infrastructures Protection Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C. 5195c(e)). (5) Cybersecurity risk.--The term "cybersecurity risk" has the meaning given the term in section 2200 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 650). (6) Cybersecurity threat.--The term "cybersecurity threat" has the meaning given the term in section 2200 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 650). (7) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Commerce. SEC. 3. REPORT ON COMMERCIAL SATELLITE CYBERSECURITY. (a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the actions the Federal Government has taken to support the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems, including as part of any action to address the cybersecurity of critical infrastructure sectors. (b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall report to the appropriate congressional committees on the study conducted under subsection (a), which-- (1) shall include-- (A) information on efforts of the Federal Government, and the effectiveness of those efforts, to-- (i) address or improve the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems; and (ii) support related efforts with international entities or the private sector; (B) information on the resources made available to the public by Federal agencies to address cybersecurity risks and threats to commercial satellite systems, including resources made available through the clearinghouse; (C) information on the extent to which commercial satellite systems are reliant on, or relied on by, critical infrastructure; (D) an analysis of how commercial satellite systems and the threats to those systems are integrated into critical infrastructure risk analyses and protection plans; (E) information on the extent to which Federal agencies are reliant on commercial satellite systems and how Federal agencies mitigate cybersecurity risks associated with those systems; (F) information on the extent to which Federal agencies are reliant on commercial satellite systems that are owned wholly or in part or controlled by foreign entities, or that have infrastructure in foreign countries, and how Federal agencies mitigate associated cybersecurity risks; (G) information on the extent to which Federal agencies coordinate or duplicate authorities and take other actions focused on the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems; and (H) as determined appropriate by the Comptroller General of the United States, recommendations to support the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems, including recommendations on information that should be shared through the clearinghouse; and (2) shall not include recommendations described in paragraph (1)(H) for new or changing authorities or regulations for Federal agencies. (c) Consultation.--In carrying out subsections (a) and (b), the Comptroller General of the United States shall coordinate with appropriate Federal agencies and organizations, including-- (1) the Department of Commerce; (2) the Office of the National Cyber Director; (3) the Department of Homeland Security; (4) the Department of Defense; (5) the Department of Transportation; (6) the Federal Communications Commission; (7) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; (8) the National Executive Committee for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing; (9) the National Space Council; (10) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; (11) the Department of Justice ; and (12) the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United States Telecommunications Services Sector. (d) Briefing.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall provide a briefing to the appropriate congressional committees on the study conducted under subsection (a). (e) Classification.--The report made under subsection (b) shall be unclassified but may include a classified annex. SEC. 4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. (a) Small Business Concern Defined.--In this section, the term "small business concern" has the meaning given the term in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632). (b) Establishment of Commercial Satellite System Cybersecurity Clearinghouse.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall develop and maintain a commercial satellite system cybersecurity clearinghouse for the purpose of serving as a repository for publicly available resources, guidance, frameworks, voluntary recommendations, and tools. (2) Requirements.--The clearinghouse-- (A) shall be publicly available online; (B) shall contain publicly available commercial satellite system cybersecurity resources, including the voluntary recommendations consolidated under subsection (c)(1); (C) shall contain appropriate materials for reference by entities that develop, operate, or maintain commercial satellite systems; (D) shall contain materials specifically aimed at assisting small business concerns with the secure development, operation, and maintenance of commercial satellite systems; (E) may contain controlled unclassified information distributed to commercial entities through a process determined appropriate by the Secretary; and (F) may not contain sensitive security or proprietary information in the absence of the establishment and use of a gateway to limit access to approved users, as determined by the Secretary. (3) Content maintenance.--The Secretary shall maintain current and relevant cybersecurity information on the clearinghouse. (4) Existing platform or website.--To the extent practicable, the Secretary shall establish and maintain the clearinghouse using an online platform, a website, or a capability in existence as of the date of enactment of this Act. (c) Consolidation of Commercial Satellite System Cybersecurity Recommendations.-- (1) In general.--The Secretary, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall consolidate voluntary cybersecurity recommendations designed to assist in the development, maintenance, and operation of commercial satellite systems. (2) Requirements.--The recommendations consolidated under paragraph (1) shall include materials appropriate for a public resource addressing, to the greatest extent practicable, the following: (A) Risk-based, cybersecurity-informed engineering, including continuous monitoring and resiliency. (B) Planning for retention or recovery of positive control of commercial satellite systems in the event of a cybersecurity incident. (C) Protection against unauthorized access to vital commercial satellite system functions. (D) Physical protection measures designed to reduce the vulnerabilities of a commercial satellite system's command, control, and telemetry receiver systems. (E) Protection against jamming, eavesdropping, hijacking, computer network exploitation, spoofing, threats to optical satellite communications, and electromagnetic pulse. (F) Security against threats throughout a commercial satellite system's mission lifetime. (G) Management of supply chain risks that affect the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems. (H) Protection against vulnerabilities posed by ownership of commercial satellite systems or commercial satellite system companies by foreign entities. (I) Protection against vulnerabilities posed by locating physical infrastructure, such as satellite ground control systems, in foreign countries. (J) As appropriate, and as applicable pursuant to the maintenance requirement under subsection (b)(3), relevant findings and recommendations from the study conducted by the Comptroller General of the United States under section 3(a). (K) Any other recommendations to ensure the confidentiality, availability, and integrity of data residing on or in transit through commercial satellite systems only for the purpose described in subsection (b)(1). (d) Implementation.--In implementing this section, the Secretary shall-- (1) to the extent practicable, carry out the implementation in partnership with the private sector; (2) coordinate with-- (A) the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Office of the National Cyber Director, the National Space Council, the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the head of any other agency with expertise relating to cybersecurity or satellite communications determined appropriate by the Secretary; and (B) the heads of appropriate Federal agencies with expertise and experience in satellite operations, including the entities described in section 3(c) to enable the alignment of Federal efforts on commercial satellite system cybersecurity and, to the extent practicable, consistency in Federal recommendations relating to commercial satellite system cybersecurity; and (3) consult with non-Federal entities developing commercial satellite systems or otherwise supporting the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems, including private, consensus organizations that develop relevant standards. (e) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter until the date that is 9 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report summarizing-- (1) the general status of any partnership with the private sector described in subsection (d)(1); (2) the results of consultations with a non-Federal entity described in subsection (d)(3); (3) the coordination carried out pursuant to subsection (d)(2); (4) the establishment and maintenance of the clearinghouse pursuant to subsection (b); (5) the recommendations consolidated pursuant to subsection (c)(1); and (6) general feedback received by the Secretary on the clearinghouse from non-Federal entities, including overall trends and any proposed changes to the clearinghouse as a result of the feedback. SEC. 5.

Text printed in the Record (2,207 characters)

STRATEGY. Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, jointly with the National Space Council and the Office of the National Cyber Director, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of the Office of Space Commerce, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the heads of other relevant agencies, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a strategy to support coordination, information sharing, and voluntary best practices among Federal agencies and private sector stakeholders relating to the cybersecurity of commercial satellite systems, which shall include an identification of-- (1) proposed coordination roles among relevant agencies; and (2) as applicable, the extent to which cybersecurity threats to commercial satellite systems are addressed in-- (A) critical infrastructure risk analyses and protection plans; and (B) activities relating to commercial satellite systems. SEC. 6. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to-- (1) designate commercial satellite systems or other space assets as a critical infrastructure sector; (2) infringe upon or alter the authorities of the agencies described in section 3(c); (3) authorize the development or implementation of any rulemaking or regulatory requirement, including by way of enforcement action or condition on any license or permit for a commercial satellite system; or (4) modify or expand existing authorities of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States or the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United States Telecommunications Service Sector. Ms. LUMMIS. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be 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 committee-reported amendment, in the nature of a substitute, was agreed to. The bill (S. 3404), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.

Expressing Support for Designation of the Week of September 13 Through 19, 2026, as "National Adult Education and Family Literacy Week"

Page S4958 · Official text

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 863.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the resolution by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows: A resolution (S. Res. 863) expressing support for designation of the week of September 13 through 19, 2026, as "National Adult Education and Family Literacy Week". There being no objection, the committee was discharged and 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.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Without objection, it is so ordered. The resolution (S. Res. 863) was agreed to.

The preamble was agreed to. (The resolution, with its preamble, is printed in the Record of September 17, 2026, under "Submitted Resolutions.")

Resolutions Submitted Today

Page S4958 · Official text

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions which are at the desk: S. Res. 888, S. Res. 892, S. Res. 893, S. Res. 894, S. Res. 895, S. Res. 896.

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolutions en bloc.

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, Service, and Legacy of the Honorable Jon Llewellyn Kyl, Former Senator for the State of Arizona

Page S4958 · Official text

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 897, submitted earlier today.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

The clerk will report the resolution by title.

The legislative clerk read as follows: A resolution (S. Res. 897) honoring the life, service, and legacy of the Honorable Jon Llewellyn Kyl, former Senator for the State of Arizona. 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. 897) was agreed to.

The preamble was agreed to. (The resolution, with its preamble, is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")

Orders for Thursday, September 24, 2026

Page S4958 · Official text

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, September 24; 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, morning business be closed, and the Senate resume consideration of the substitute amendment No. 6776 to S. 4668 postcloture; further, that postcloture time be expired at 10:45 a.m. and the Senate vote on adoption of amendment No. 6776.

The PRESIDING OFFICER

Without objection, it is so ordered.

Adjournment Until 10 A.m. Tomorrow

Page S4958 · Official text