Summary
- Rand Paul advanced reconciliation funding for Border Patrol and ICE after Republicans tabled all Democratic reform amendments by 8-7 votes.
- Margaret Hassan and Richard Blumenthal proposed multiple amendments requiring ICE identification, judicial warrants for home entries, and stricter use-of-force standards.
- Gary Peters pressed Rand Paul to recess for parliamentarian review of amendments, arguing the Byrd rule excuse hid Republicans avoiding reform votes.
- Republicans said Democratic policy amendments violated reconciliation rules, while Democrats argued the Byrd rule did not apply and votes hid accountability.
- The reconciliation recommendations now head to the Budget Committee, determining continued Border Patrol and ICE operations funding without Democratic-backed reforms.
Morning digest
Get hearings like this in your inbox
Transcript
The committee will come to order. Pursuant to the notice issued on May twelfth, twenty twenty six, the committee will consider reconciliation recommendations to the budget committee today. The most basic responsibility of the federal government is to protect our national borders. Even the most ardent advocate for smaller and less intrusive federal government And then in the Senate, there is no one more ardent than me, can agree with that. But it appears we have found limits of the Senate Democrats' love for government. As all but one refused to vote for a single dollar to secure our borders, to enforce our immigration laws, even against the most violent illegal aliens. As long as I am chairman, this committee will not let Senate Democrats block paychecks for our Border Patrol and other law enforcement. We will not let them shut down inspections for fentanyl, And we will not stand idly by, while they defund the interdiction of child sex trafficking across the border. Today we will vote to fund all of those functions of the Border Patrol and ICE. This is as straightforward a vote as you will ever get on securing the border. There is no extraneous spending in this bill. There are no controversial policy writers attached. This is not a mega spending bill dropped in our laps in the middle of the night. This funds the ongoing operations of the Border Patrol and Homeland Security. You cannot say you support securing our border and vote against this bill. The process Democrats have forced us into is an imperfect one. Reconciliation was intended to cut spending and to balance a budget, not to increase spending or even fund the ongoing operations of government. One consequence of using this process is we cannot include policy changes, even the widely supported reforms agreed to by the president to address real problems exposed earlier this year. No Republican is more more open to reform or willing to question abuses than I have. I held a hearing to examine DHS practices in the wake of the shooting of an American of American citizens in Minnesota earlier this year. I held a hearing on the attempts to stifle one civil right, the second amendment, when exercising one's first amendment rights. I support reforms. But the path Senate Democrats have forced us into will leave all of those issues unaddressed. They have no one to blame but themselves. Finally, before we get started voted, I want to make it clear to those watching from home what is about to happen. You're going to see Democrats offer amendments to this bill that sound good. They will say they're just trying to add a reasonable sounding policy to the bill. Many of us on the Republican side will probably even agree with some of these policies. What the Democrats are really trying to do is kill the bill and thus block funding for the Border Patrol. None of their amendments have been approved by the parliamentarian. As I explained earlier, the budget process they're forcing us to use does not allow major policy changes, no matter how desirable. So everything they offer is an attempt to kill the bill. If they really wanted reforms, they would have supported funding in the regular appropriation process, which would have included reforms to ICE at any time earlier this year, but here we are. The only vote you will need to watch, the vote to fund the Border Patrol is the last one. Senator Peters.
Thank you, uh, Chairman Paul. You know, as Congress, uh, our number one job is to come together, make bipartisan decisions, and pass legislation that adequately funds the missions and the services that the American people count on. And as members of this committee, our top responsibility is to conduct oversight of the administration, ensure the government is using taxpayer dollars effectively, and address all of the threats to our homeland security. This Congress, this committee has failed to convene the annual threats to the homeland hearing, or hearings on cyber security threats, or terrorism threats, or disaster response, all areas where this committee is responsible for ensuring our nation is prepared for a worst-case scenario. Mister Chairman, given the legislation we are considering today, I do wanna acknowledge the really productive oversight hearing that we had in February. We were there, we examined uh the tactics and excessive use of force that some, some Department of Homeland Security law enforcement personnel had been using on our streets including the deaths of Renee Goode and Alex Preddy. I was proud of that hearing, and there seemed to be real concern from members on both sides. of the aisle about addressing abuses by those law enforcement officers. This is why I'm so disappointed uh that none of the reforms that we've been discussing for months are included in this bill. In fact, we are doing uh this whole irresponsible and hyper-partisan spending exercise because the Republican majority does not want to pass common sense reforms that would rein in ICE and hold agencies accountable. On top of that, with the president's war of choice in Iran, we're at even a higher risk of cyber attacks or terrorist attacks. These are serious threats to our, that our committee should be pushing the administration to focus on. And all this is happening at a time when Americans are facing rising costs for food and fuel also because of the president's war with Iran. Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House. And they have taken zero, zero action to lower costs for Americans. This committee and this administration seem to be focused on all the wrong things. And I'm disappointed that the first real legislative mark-up this committee is holding this year we're almost half way through it. We aren't considering bipartisan legislation to address these concerns. Instead, our Republican colleagues are once again on a track, a rubber stamp, billions of dollars for the Department of Homeland Security, no strings attached, and this time it is for the rest of the Trump presidency. So I wanna be clear. It's not because a bipartisan deal cannot be reached. It's because our Republican colleagues are refusing to stand up to President Trump and his extreme out of touch agenda. There's no clearer example of the fecklessness than the one billion dollars in taxpayer funding. This legislation includes to build the president's gold-plated ballroom. A ballroom the president promised would only be paid with private
A billion dollars in private money.
donations. Clearly he lied.
For the money. No.
He said it would never be u- be built with taxpayer monies. And that one billion could be put to a lot better use, immediately giving hard-working families relief from sky-rocking energy bills. Grocery costs, housing costs. It's time to stand up to the president's ridiculous demands. It's time for this committee to do its job and conduct oversight of the administration, especially the Department of Homeland Security. My democratic colleagues and I will be offering several amendments today to make much needed changes and right the ship at the department. So we can be prepared for any of the threats facing our nation, and I would urge my Republican colleagues to give these amendments serious consideration. instead of just rubber-stamping the president's self-serving agenda.
I'd like to correct the record for those who will be voting on this bill. There is no money in this for the ballroom, the billion dollars uh for the uh Secret Service is not in the bill we'll be voting on today. The committee will now proceed to consideration of reconciliation recommendations to the budget committee. I ask that the committee consider Paul's substitute one as modified as the
Mister Chair. Um, I have uh, Hassan fourteen uh, to offer um, across the country. The lawlessness of masked federal agents has made our communities less safe. to start reining in ICE's unacceptable behavior. This amendment, halfs and fourteen, would require that ICE agents display their last name, ID number, and home agency on their uniforms. At the same time, we know that we need to protect the on-line privacy of federal law enforcement who are sometimes doxed. This amendment would provide significant funds to DHS to provide digital privacy services to immigration officers. I urge my colleagues to vote yes.
i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same i move to uh table the amendment without objection hearing
ask for the yes and nays please
uh the clerk will record the vote
senator johnson
no
it's this is a motion to table
all ok yes
senator lankford
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino.
Aye.
Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman. Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego. Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are four. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are three. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Mister Chair.
Is there any member of another amendment?
Yes, Mister Chair, I offer um uh Hassan Amendment fifteen. Our Constitution protects people in America from federal agents entering their home without a warrant, from a judge. Under President Trump, however, we've seen masked poorly trained and poorly led federal agents violating due process, out of step both with our values as a democracy and the conduct of most law enforcement officers who display skill and professionalism and who every day, follow the law. We can't let our country become a place where the president's agents violate freedoms and due process at his whim. That's both at odds with our values and ultimately underli undermines public safety in the long run. This amendment ensures that DHS must have a valid judicial warrant when they enter a home in compliance with the fourth amendment. It upholds the Constitution's protection of the privacy of our homes. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. i move to table the amendment without objection
ask for your assent needs please
alright the clerk will call the roll
aye
aye aye
aye
mmm
aye no way
so we have to decide who's gonna be selected center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin Senator Paul.
Aye.
Zero five two.
Mister Chairman, on the vote votes present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy,
No.
the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
No problem.
Miss, Mister Chairman.
Uh, Senator Blumenthal.
Uh, I call up Blumenthal, twenty four, MCC, two six eight three three. Uh, this this amendment addresses an absolutely abhorrent incident that occurred on january eleventh twenty twenty sixth when dhs officers used a battering ram to break into the home of tiana gibson brown and her husband without a judicial warrant they terrorized her family they seized mrs. brown's husband she testified before psi spotlight hearing on the blatant constitutional violation that occurred to her and sadly and tragically have occurred all across the country the tiana gibson brown amendment would prohibit the use of funds to enter an american's home without a judicial warrant absent exigent circumstance for anybody who cares about the fourth amendment this ought to be an easy vote breaking into Americans' homes without a judicial warrant ought to be barred. I ask for a roll call vote.
I've been advised that the budget committee of this amendment does not comply with the rules of reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor I will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do so. I move to table the amendment without objection.
I I've asked for a roll call vote.
The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Langford.
Aye.
center scott center holly center marino center moody center ernst center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin center paul
aye
mr. chairman on the vote that was present the yeas are eight the nays are five on the vote by
does anyone have a further amendment
this is jerry
senator blumenthal
this is jerry and i i think it's
i call up
schlachen
yeah i think we're gonna go to schlachen now and then jerry comes up
schlachen
i have one too if you mind if i skip sorry senator blumenthal um
i i i yield
thanks
senator schlachen
Um, uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm calling up Slotkin amendment nine. This amendment would prohibit the use of funds to acquire or develop databases that aggregate information about individuals in the United States carrying out normal First Amended First Amendment protected activities or create a watch list of such individuals um in January as the protests around ICE were going on. Um, uh, they were ICE agents filmed Um, and uh people were followed by federal agents and they were told that they were being put on lists and database databases of domestic terrorists. Um, when asked in hearings um uh all kinds of officials said no databases exist. Um, but this amendment is to make sure that never happens, and make clear that the First Amendment rights are protected, and we should never be collecting on American citizens and aggregating data about American citizens for First Amendment related activities. so i urge my colleagues to support
i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill
i ask for the favor of the staff i ask for the favor of the students
on the floor i will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same
ask for the favor of the staff
i move to table the amendment without objection the clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator langford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst
center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slokkin
no
center paul
aye three five seven two
mr. chairman on the vote that was present the yeas or eight the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas or zero the nays are two on this vote the yeas or eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
Mister Chairman.
Uh, Senator Peters.
Yeah, Mister Chairman, I'd like to uh bring up Peter's amendment number seventy seven. Mister Chairman, the the administration is increasingly collecting personal information about everyday activities uh of Americans. It's tracking uh Americans' locations using license plates uh readers. It's monitoring their social media connections and on-line activity. And it's obtaining financial records. health data and behavioral profiles from data brokers. It is then using AI to turn all this data into profiles of individuals. The federal government should not be able to spy on Americans without a warrant, plain and simple. This amendment prevents funds in this act, including any technology DHS procures, from being used for mass or indiscriminate surveillance of American citizens. Certainly urge my colleagues to take action to protect these important civil liberties. And I'd also like to say, Mister Chairman, uh, my Chairman, the uh, Chairman Paul claims that uh, the Republicans cannot support these amendments because it violates the Byrd rule. First, there is no requirement, no requirement in the committee rules or the Congressional Budget Act that amendments considered during a reconciliation mark-up must comply with the Byrd rule. Second, this amendment text has not yet been adjudicated by the parliamentarian so we don't know if it complies with the Byrd rule. Any final ruling will happen before floor consideration. So let's be clear, my colleagues are using the Byrd rule as an excuse to not take clear position on important issues that impact the American people.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. i'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do so i move to table the amendment
um uh roll call record roll call record object to record roll call
without objection uh the clerk will call the roll
center johnson
aye
center langford
aye
center scott
aye
center holly
aye
center moreno center ernst
aye
center moody
aye
center peters
no
center hassan
no no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin senator paul
aye
mister chairman on the vote that was present the yeas or eight the nays or five on the vote by proxy the yeas or zero the nays or two and this vote the yeas or eight the nays or seven and the motion is agreed to
are there any further amendments senator blumenthal
mr. chairman uh there's an ideal in this country that places of worship ought to be free from government interference not to mention breaking down doors and intruding on the practice of faith without fear uh ice has made a practice of going into places of worship to seize supposed undocumented immigrants and as of last february over twenty seven religious groups sued over such enforcement actions taking place where people pray including the menonite church usa central atlantic conference united church of christ the episcopal church central conference of american rabbis general assembly of the presbyterian church the general commission on religion and race of the united methodist church the union of reform judaism the list goes on uh this amendment basically prohibits the use of funds under the reconciliation text and the obbliga for immigration enforcement operations that take place in places of worship practices that are abhorrent and in fact involve reversal of the january twenty twenty twenty five rescission of a rule that protected those areas it was done by the trump administration it ought to be reversed by this amendment and i ask for a recorded vote
while i favor much of the discussion while there could have been a discussion over reforms and bipartisan compromise on this, it didn't happen because the democrat base decided they were not going to fund ice no matter what reforms were proffered. There was a discussion. I was all for the discussion. None of these policy things were acceptable to the democrat side because they decided uniformly not to fund ice. i've been advised that this amendment by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of reconciliation process. and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. i will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same.
mr. chairman.
i move to i move to table the amendment.
mr. chairman.
without objection.
i asked for a recorded vote and i just wanna make the point,
clerk will call the roll.
mr. chairman,
the clerk will call the roll we'll have more time for discussion.
that well, this amendment has not been adjudicated by the parliament.
the clerk will call the roll.
sir langford.
alright.
center scott
aye
center holly
aye
center moreno
aye
center ernst
aye
center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin
no
center paul
i'm
mr. chairman on the vote votes present the yeas or eight the nays or five on the vote by
Does anyone have a further amendment?
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kim.
I call up Kim amendment number four. This amendment continues the authority of members of Congress to conduct unannounced visits to detention facilities meet with detainees and requires DHS to provide access for oversight purposes recent DHS policies have attempted to restrict or delay unannounced congressional visits. to detention facilities despite Congress's clear constitutional authority to conduct oversight. These are public facilities paid for by the taxpayer dollar. You have the right to know how those dollars are being spent and if they're being used improperly. And the increasing reports of deaths in custody and staggering reports of unsafe living conditions are proof that consistent and unimpeded congressional oversight is necessary. I know my Republican colleagues will claim that they cannot support this amendment because it violates the Byrd rule. First, there is no requirement in the committee, again, for this to be uh done in and and that reconciliation mark-up must comply with the Byrd rule. And second, the text still has not been adjudicated by the parliamentarian. So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and our duty to conduct oversight visits. You're back.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the
I ask for the a's and the's.
the clerk will call the roll.
senator johnson
aye
senator langford senator scott senator holly senator moreno senator ernst senator moody senator peters
no
senator haskell senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin senator paul
aye
mister chairman on the vote of those present the yeas or eight the nays or five on the vote by proxy the yeas or zero the nays or two on this vote the yeas or eight the nays or seven and the motion is agreed to
mr. chairman
uh senator blumenthal
thank you mr. chairman i wanna make the point that a number of my colleagues have made uh number one on all these amendments there is no requirement in the committee rules or the Congressional Budget Act, that amendments considered during this kind of reconciliation mark-up must comply with the bird rules. These are issues of principle that demand a show of conscience and conviction on the part of my colleagues. And second, this amendment text, uh, that I'm about to offer, or any of the others that have been offered, have not been adjudicated by the parliamentarian. the amendments we've offered have clear budgetary effects they're appropriate for this meeting and i i wanna be very clear that the bird rule is being used again and again and again by rote without thought simply as a pretext not to take a clear position on these important issues and i call up blumenthal forty eight OLL two six five seven seven uh the trump administration claims to be tough on crime but it is utterly failing crime victims and local partners in minnesota my amendment would require the department of justice office of inspector general to investigate the impact of the use of funds there the so-called immigration surge on firearm drug and other prosecutions in minnesota which we believe have been ignored or disregarded by federal law enforcement there anybody who cares about fighting crime and not just talking about fighting crime should support this amendment
i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do so i move to table the amendment without objection
i ask for a recorded vote
the clerk will call a roll
senator johnson
aye
senator langford center scott center holly center views get to center kim center marino he was supposed to do one more amendment before you ended with a two center ernst center moody you get to kim four center peters
no
so it's your turn you do kim three center hassan
no
center blumenthal no say no
no
center federman
no by prox
center kim
no
center gallego
no by prox
center slotkin center paul
i'm
mr. chairman on the vote of those present the a's are eight
Are there further amendments?
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kim.
I call up Kim amendment number three. Last year we watched ICE agents surge in Los Angeles, followed by Chicago, Washington DC, and eventually Minneapolis. In the wake of these surges, communities were left broken, businesses closed, and families were torn apart. In Minneapolis, Operation Metro surge cost the lives of two US citizens, Renee Good and Alex Preti. We cannot forget that. This amendment prohibits the use of federal funds for large scale immigration enforcement operations such as Operation Metro surge in Minnesota for a period of more than seven days. The cost of these operations is substantial, but more concerning is how the president has weaponized them to terrorize these cities and localities. This is America, and the president should not be using ICE and CBP uh in this type of way. They have a job to do and it's not suppressing the voice of American people. And I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to fund these operations.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do so. i move to table the amendment
i ask for the a's and the's
the clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst
aye
senator moody
i'm still not sure
senator peters
no
senator hassin senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin senator paul
i'm
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there any further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Blumenthal.
Thanks, Mister Chairman. Uh, I call up Blumenthal, seventeen, BUR two six, four O one. ICE has repeatedly denied medical care to people who have been detained. american citizens as well as undocumented people one of them is javier ramirez his case was documented in a report that was done by the permanent subcommittee on investigations in december when we released findings show showing that dhs has consistently denied medical care to us citizens it detained additional reporting since that time has detailed delayed cancer screening for detainees failure to provide routine care and ignoring physical complaints from detainees we ought to be addressing all of it but i want to keep this narrow focus on javier ramirez's experience and so i'm offering an amendment that essentially would require critical medical treatment for the kind of diabetes that he suffers from and he was denied treatment for i ask for a recorded vote
i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same i move to table the amendment
ask for the a's and a's
the clerk will call the roll
aye
Senator Langford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino.
Aye.
Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan. Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two.
are there any further amendments
mr. chairman
senator blumenthal
uh there are reports about deficiencies in medical care relating to pregnant women pregnant women who are miscarrying are told simply to drink more water pregnant women experiencing vaginal bleeding who are denied care and instead told again to drink more water and take vitamins nine eleven calls involving a pregnant woman in severe pain there are numerous examples documented about pregnant women denied essential care this amendment would prohibit the allocation of funds to ice and cbp until they comply with the requirement to provide pregnant women in their custody with access to a maternal and prenatal health care provider whenever requested, no less frequently than once monthly until twenty-eight weeks gestation and twice weekly from twenty-eight weeks gestation until delivery. i've heard time and again from my republican colleagues about their great concern for the delivery of healthy babies i call up blumenthal nineteen b u r two six four two six give them a chance to show they really mean it and i ask for a recorded vote
i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same i move to table the amendment
ask for a recorded vote
the clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
center holly center moreno center erntz center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center thuderman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin
no
center paul
i'm
mr. chairman on the vote of those present the yeas are eight the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are zero the nays are two and this vote the yeas are eight
Are there further amendments?
Chairman Paul.
Senator Peters?
Chairman Paul, uh, I'd like to, uh, call out Peter's amendment, uh, number, uh, eighty. This amendment, uh, redirects, uh, one billion of unspent funds, uh, from the one big beautiful bill act to ensure that DHS, uh, provides adequate care to children. The administration is choosing to place an immigration detention. Certainly was very disappointed. My Republican colleagues do not want a vote on an
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the
Mm. Mm.
bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment, urge my colleagues to do the same, I move to table the amendment.
But no, yeas and nikes.
The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye. Aye. Aye.
Senator Hawley. Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan. Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Hassan.
Mister Chair, I offer my amendment, Hassan number eighteen. There are few jobs as tough as working in law enforcement and there's no job more important for the government. than keeping people safe. The shootings in Minnesota earlier this year shocked Americans of all political stripes, were at odds with our values as Americans and ultimately led to chaos that undermined public safety and made law enforcement's job even harder. It's absolutely essential for DHS to improve its use of force standards and end the lawlessness and chaos that we have seen in our streets. This amendment says that DHS may not receive any funds under this act unless the department improves its use of forest standards. Now, I anticipate, Mister Chair, that you will make uh the same statement um about this amendment as you've made about the others. I want to reiterate uh that there is no requirement in the committee rules or the Congressional Budget Act that amendments considered during a reconciliation mark-up must comply with the bird rule. Second, this amendment text has yet has not yet been adjudicated by the parliamentarians so we don't know if it complies with the bird rule. Any final ruling will happen before floor consideration. But let's be really clear here. My colleagues are using the bird rule as a pretext so that they don't have to record a clear position on a truly important issue. And this is the same problem, Mister Chair, we had during the negotiations that we did have, bipartisan negotiations on reforms, because when push comes to shove, President Trump believes he is above the law. As news reports just breaking Telus, his IRS and Justice Department are finalizing plans to settle a bogus lawsuit with an unaccountable fund that will reward people who attacked police in the United States Capitol. So I urge my colleagues to vote yes for this amendment.
Um, I for one support a lot of reforms and wish we had gone down the bipartisan road to reforms. Um, but the rules are the rules. You can't put policy on appropriation bills. you can't put policy on a reconciliation bill. So as much as I'd like to be for the reforms, you all gave up. You just gave up and said we're not gonna fund ICE. When you all made that decision, the negotiations ended and all hope for reform ended. So here we are. I've been advised that this amendment uh, that the budget committee says that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do so. ask for the yes and no's
move to table the amendment
ask for the yes and no's the clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno senator ertz
aye
senator moody senator peters
no
senator hassin
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator flocken
no
senator paul
i'm
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, on the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Uh, is there a further amendment?
Yes, Mister Chair.
Senator Hassan.
Uh, Mister Chair, I offer my amendment, Hassan nineteen. The shootings in Minnesota have made clear to the vast majority of Americans that the chaos in the streets launched by this administration must end. Law abiding Americans who are legally carrying firearms should not have to worry about being gunned down in the street, not in the United States of America. We need to stand up for the freedoms of the American people and the rule of law, and reject the chaos that this administration has inflicted on our communities, a chaos which has undermined public safety. This amendment says that DHS may not receive any funds under this act, unless the department improves its use of force standards, including prohibiting deadly use of force against civilians who are legally carrying firearms and pose no credible threat. Again, the bird rule does not apply to the uh mark-up in the reconciliation process, nor has this amendment been adjudicated by the parliamentarian. This is about whether my colleagues are willing to go on the record and differ with President Trump. I ask for the yeas and nays.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator holly
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ertz senator moody senator peters
no
senator hassan
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Does anyone wish to offer an amendment?
Yes, Mister Chair.
Senator Hassan.
Mister Chair, I offer amendment Hassan number twenty. There are few jobs as tough as serving in law enforcement, and in New Hampshire, law enforcement officers' regular perform their jobs with skill, with courage and professionalism. That's why I, like a majority of Americans, including law enforcement, was horrified by the president's decision to unleash chaos on our communities with untrained DHS and ICE agents including the shootings in Minnesota. The president's recklessness has just made more Americans less safe. This amendment says that DHS must update its use of force standards including by prohibiting the use of deadly force against restrained immobilized civilians. Again, the Byrd Act does not apply here. Uh, and this provision has not been adjudicated by the parliamentarian. Um, and, uh, the tabling process should not be used as a pretext for taking a clear stand on this issue. I urge my colleagues to vote yes for this amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process. and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do so. Uh, I move to table the amendment.
As for the yes and no's.
The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley. Senator Morano.
Aye.
Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters. Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal. Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Uh, the further amendments.
Mister Chairman.
Senator Blumenthal.
Mister Chairman, I'm uh baffled by my Republican colleagues refusing to address the merits of our amendment and rejecting this option to stand up for basic American rights. And the amendment that I call up now, Blumenthal twenty one, the Marimar Martinez amendment, goes to the core of what it means to be safe in America. And I challenge my Republican colleagues to avoid the rote formula, the meaningless and irrelevant language that the chairman is relying on to simply avoid dealing with basic challenges to american rights in this fraught time miss martinez is a us citizen she was shot five times by border patrol agent charles exom in chicago who then boasted about it in a text that this committee has seen because i showed it two witnesses here. DHS claimed Ms. Martinez was blocking a border patrol agent and that she attempted to ram agents with her vehicle before Exum exited his vehicle and open fired on her. The claim that she was interfering with agents was palpably untrue. She was charged with assaulting federal officers, but these charges were dropped after evidence demonstrated that Mister Exum in fact rammed her car and dh agents were the aggressors this amendment basically states no funds ought to be used from the united states government in america for activities that involve the use of deadly force against nonviolent protesters who are exercising their first amendment rights to protest this administration's lawless mass deportation program this amendment states no funds can be used for the deadly use of force against such nonviolent protesters anywhere anytime any issue although its name for aramar martinez it would protect all of us who are at risk of experiencing violence when engaging in protected first amendment activity i challenge my republican colleagues to do the right thing and reaffirm the importance of the first amendment against the deadly use of force.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor I will oppose this amendment urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment without objection.
I ask for a recorded vote.
The clerk will call the roll.
senator johnson
aye
senator langford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno
aye
Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, on the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two, on this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there any further amendments?
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Peters?
Mr. Chairman, you know my colleagues here keep saying that our amendments don't adhere uh to the Byrd rule and we certainly don't agree with that assertion uh but we certainly wouldn't mind clarity if the chairman would agree to to uh postponing this hearing or at least a recess until we have a chance to go to the parliamentarian to have the parliamentarian look, I think then it would clear clear it all and uh we could show that indeed uh that these do comply. Would you be willing to have a temporary recess uh while we consult the parliamentarian?
Are there further amendments?
Uh just a question for you, Mister Chairman, I can answer the question.
If there are no further amendments we will call the roll on the final bill.
Well I have but I we we we have uh Peter's amendment one thirty nine on the uh before us right now. Uh this amendment would absolutely have a budgetary impact. This is not gonna be, if we went to the parliamentary right now, they would say this is OK, because it actually gives fifty thousand dollars uh for implementation. So this is a clear budgetary impact, a clear appropriation, fully consistent with the rules. Everyone here understands the importance of immigration enforcement. However, in the last year we have seen ICE and CBP personnel pepper spray clergy in the face, break windows and pull American citizens out of their cars, and kill two American citizens who were exercising their first amendment rights. DHS, ICE and CBP have all used uh forced policies and manuals, but these documents are simply not available to the public online, or in any really reasonable form. Americans deserve to know exactly how ICE and CBP have been trained and what their use of forced policies and procedures are, just like our local police and all of our communities. My amendment requires that these documents be posted online. This is basic transparency and accountability that I would urge one of my colleagues to support the amendment.
Once again, many of the policies being proposed, I'm supportive of. If we had a debate today on a policy bill or an authorization bill, I may well support and might support many of the the reforms. The problem is, this is a reconciliation bill. This is a spending bill, and it is not proper or allowed by the rules of the senate to have policy changes on appropriation of reconciliation bills i have been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same i move to table the amendment
jerry is it nice
clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator langford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator holly senator moreno center ernst center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin center paul mr. chairman on the vote of those present the yeas are eight the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are zero the nays are two on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
Are there any further amendments?
Mister Chair.
Senator Kim.
I call up Kim amendment number five. The deaths of American citizens at the hand of hands of ICE and CBP raise serious concerns about their de-escalation skills. This amendment requires ICE and CBP agents to receive de-escalation training for interactions with civilians and protesters. ICE and CBP personnel regularly operate in high tension environments involving arrests, family separations and public demonstrations. Reports of escalated encounters during immigration enforcement operations, including fatal incidents, highlight the need for improved training standards. Congress must ensure that de-escalation training reaches every officer so that no more lives are lost and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment.
I ask for the amendment.
The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley. Senator Marino. Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, my question is
Senator Kim.
No, then Senator Gar-
Senator Gallego.
No, my question
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the a's are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the a's are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the a's are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chair.
Senator Kim.
I call up Kim amendment number two. Delaney Hall Detention Facility has been a source of tremendous turmoil, grievance and chaos in New Jersey, and this amendment requires DHS uh and DHS Office of Inspector General to conduct a formal review of the reported conditions at the facility, addressing uh the concerns and to pause payment on geo group's contract and the intake of new detainees until it's been fixed. A recent open letter, penned and signed by nearly three hundred detainees, substantiates what I and many other members of Congress have personally witnessed about the living conditions within. Within the last year, detainees have protested over insufficient food, one detainee's death has occurred with DHS yet not providing full transparency on what happened. When facilities such as Delaney fail to meet requirements and the billion-dollar corporations that run them should not continue to go unscathed, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment. I answer the eight of eight. The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford. Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody.
Aye.
Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chair,
Senator Kim.
I call up Kim amendment number one. The practice by DHS of retrofitting warehouses into detention facilities often done against the wishes of our community's needs to stop. This is why I'm filing this amendment which would prohibit DHS from using a blank check to retrofit warehouses and turn them into large scale detention facilities. Earlier this year, DHS purchased a warehouse in Roxbury, New Jersey. They did so without consulting with local officials and the local community. And when I visited Roxbury, I heard the real concerns about safety, strain on infrastructure such as water use, and concerns about the values of people's homes in the shadow of the warehouse. These concerns were not addressed by DHS, in fact they were ignored. and i know that this is occurring across the country in all of our states and our districts and we uh see undoubtedly the american people uh standing up against this type of practice warehouses are not supposed to house people these are facilities that lack bare minimum space for medical care bathroom facilities and sanitation but also they come at tremendous cost the facility in roxbury was purchased uh with a hundred thirty million dollars of your taxpayer dollars including hundreds of millions of dollars more than it would cost to retrofit this. So let's do the right thing. Let's make sure DHS can turn these warehouses into mass detention facilities. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment. The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley. Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chair?
Senator Hassan.
Mister Chair, I offer my amendment, Hassan number one. In my state, local law enforcement and local leaders raised significant concerns when ICE went behind their backs and tried to buy a warehouse in Merrimack, New Hampshire, in order to turn it into a detention. Local leaders need to have a say in how to keep their communities safe. This amendment says that ICE cannot buy a warehouse to turn it into a detention center without the approval of state and local officials. Again, I will note that this uh he this process is not subject to the Byrd rule. These provisions have not been ruled on by the parliamentarian. And just to be clear about why we are offering so many of these amendments here, as somebody who was part of bipartisan negotiations, um the last time we met uh we thought we had made some progress we then offered another meeting in the white house and the republicans walked away so that's why we're here we're we would be happy as senator peters noted to have a recess and have the parliamentarian rule on these but in the meantime um i ask for a yes vote on haston number one and i ask for the yeas and nays
uh this uh mark-up for this bill has been known for two weeks All the Democrats could have taken your amendments to the parliamentarian to get them approved to make them uh pertinent to this bill. None of them have been approved. The only thing that's been approved by the parliamentarian is the underlying text of the amendment we're voting on today. I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor I'll oppose this amendment, urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment.
And I ask for a recorded vote.
The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Federman. Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego. Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas or the eights, the nays, or the
Are there further amendments?
Uh, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Slotkin.
Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, I'm calling up Slotkin amendment number one, also related to new ice facilities. Um, two weeks ago I had the chance to visit um the North Lake facility. It's a processing center, an ice center up in Baldwin, Michigan. Um And a couple of weeks before that, I went and visited the warehouse that ICE had leased, um, in Romulus, Michigan. Um, they purchased actually this, um, this warehouse for another detention facility. Um, and I think it is safe to say that whether regardless of how people feel about ICE and the cultural conversation we're having as a country we should not be buying and leasing facilities that were never meant for human beings to house and detain human beings. This was built as a warehouse, uh they were in discussions about storing auto parts there, never intended for human habitation, inadequate sewage capab- capacity. Within a quarter mile of a residential neighborhood I saw kids shooting baskets, less than, you know, it looked like seven hundred feet from this facility. It's near an elementary school. The local officials are against it, local and state officials. Um, and uh, all that to say that there are still empty beds at the existing facility in Baldwin, Michigan. Um, w- w- it, it, I understand that the new secretary has actually come in and called a halt to all these warehouses around the country, that have been um, selected, bought, leased with taxpayer dollars. I appreciate if that's actually what's gone on, and certainly the secretary um, himself was in the plumbing business and understands um that things were not meant for human habitation, should not be housing human beings. I hope they continue that, but in the meantime this amendment would prohibit construction of a a new detention center in a facility that meets any of these criteria and I urge my colleagues to support.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment.
ask for yeas and nays
the clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator langford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst senator moody senator peters
no
senator hassin
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin
no
senator paul
i'm
Mister Chairman, on the vote that's present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Slotkin.
Mister Chairman, I'm calling up Slotkin amendment twelve. This amendment would prohibit armed employees and contractors of DHS, um, from being deployed to polls on election day. Um, to be clear, it's already illegal to send armed men, including DHS agents, to polling places. It's been illegal since eighteen sixty five. There's one exception, and that's to repel quote " armed enemies of the United States". This exception has never been used in American history, not during World War Two when we were in war, not two months after nine eleven when we had been attacked. Um, but that hasn't stopped this administration from suggesting, as recently as last week, that President Trump may in may indeed send ICE agents to the polls. Um, he suggested the same, um, in during the twenty twenty four election. He drafted an executive order in December of twenty uh, Yeah, really. twenty that would have, um, sent troops to the polls, um, and seized ballots in Michigan, um, to help overturn the results of the twenty twenty election. Um, I've asked many nominees in this room whether they would send DHS agents to the polls, and all four of the folks that I asked left the door open, including the secretary of homeland security. Um, clearly this administration has made clear, including in the State of the Union, the president has said very clearly that if his party doesn't win in November, then the the the election was rigged. And he is taking steps to do things that I believe are illegal during the election, either this one or in twenty twenty eight. So this administration needs to be reminded, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, no DHS to the polls.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor I will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment.
Ask for yeas and nays.
Clerk will call the roll.
Aye. Aye. Aye.
Yes.
Aye.
center ernst
i'm sorry
center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gaio
no by proxy
center slotkin center paul
i'm
mr. chairman on the vote of those present the yeas are eight the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are zero the nays are two and this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Slotkin.
I'm calling up uh Slotkin Amendment thirteen, again on the issue of election security and preserving our democracy. I just wanna review the bidding on how um uh the President has attempted to undermine our confidence in midterm elections. We had the raid on an elections office in Georgia a few months ago. The President and the Department of Justice have asked for the Michigan voter rolls. Um, as recently as the last three months, Michigan has denied that request, um, but we're now in court over that issue. Trump has uh said that he wants to quote " nationalize elections in at least fifteen jurisdictions, including Detroit", um, because of uh alleged fraud, and he said in the State of the Union again, um, that if Democrats win in November, they cheated. In December twenty twenty, the Trump administration again drafted an executive order um that would have sent the National Guard in to places like Michigan to seize our ballots against the will of our governor and local officials. And just a few weeks ago, um on April fourteenth, uh the Department of Justice wrote to our Wayne County Clerk in Detroit to request all ballots, ballot receipts, and ballot envelopes from the twenty twenty four election. We need to safeguard our midterms. I would hope no matter what side of the aisle we're on, we want to preserve our democracy. um, particularly in the midterm elections that are coming up. This bill would prevent funds, um, from being used to allow ICE or other DHS agents to seize ballots. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process, and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment.
Ask for yeas and nays.
Clerk will call the roll.
Fenner Johnson.
Aye.
center langford
aye
center scott
aye by proxy
center holly
aye
center moreno center ernst center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim center gaego
no by proxy
center slotkin center paul
i'm it's chairman
uh mister chairman on the vote of those present the yeas or seven the nays or five
five
the yeas or eight the nays or five um on the vote by proxy the yeas or zero the nays or two on this vote the yeas or eight the nays or seven and the motion is agreed to
other further amendments
mr. chairman
senator blumenthal
thank you mr. chairman the president united states has proposed creation of a nearly one point eight billion dollar slush fund to pay off his political allies. He is perverting the justice system with this illegal proposal. This amendment provides the same amount of funding legally for the DHS secretary to establish and administer a similar fund to compensate United States citizens illegally harmed by their government that's the reason i'm calling up blumenthal amendment sixty eight this new fund would provide compensation to united states citizens who were injured or killed by any dhs law enforcement officer or other immigration officer including as a result of gunshot anyone whose property was entered without a judicial warrant anyone who has been detained in violation of the fourth amendment these violations of basic rights ought to be compensated. The injuries and death cry out for justice. Instead of devoting one point eight billion dollars to a slush fund illegally, I urge this committee to take action legally to take care of people who suffered at the hands of their own government, through no fault of their own, and who've been attacked by ice or other agents of the government in my role as ranking member of the permanent subcommittee on investigation i held a series of spotlight forums with the house oversight committee that showed firsthand testimony graphic evidence of these kinds of violent tactics harms murders and these united states citizens ought to be compensated for the harm they've suffered.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor I will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same I move to table the amendment without objection.
I ask for a roll call vote on Blumenthal amendment sixty eight as modified.
The clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aided table.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Aye.
Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
I wanna make clear that this is a motion to table the amendment, and I vote aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, on the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two, on this vote the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Yes, Chairman.
Senator Blumenthal.
I call up uh Blumenthal amendment sixty six. This amendment prohibits the use of funds to deport or detain any veteran unless that veteran has committed or been involved in a violent crime convicted of a violent crime there are about hundred and fifteen thousand military veterans living in the united states who don't have citizenship according to the twenty twenty-two estimates by the congressional research service previously military service was a significant mil mitigating factor that's a quote, to be considered when making enforcement decisions, which makes perfect sense. Random women who perform critical service in the defense of this country ought to be given basic rights. But the Trump administration has rescinded that policy. It is anti-veteran, it's anti-American, such treatment rewards, such treatment towards our veterans is a slap in the face after the sacrifices they've made. to serve this country proudly. Recent DHS data revealed that in twenty twenty five, the Trump administration attempted to support deport two hundred and eighty-two veterans and family members, and that ICE arrested a hundred and twenty-five veterans despite two thirds of those arrested, lacking any criminal warrant, no allegation of criminal activity. i urge members to vote yes to protect a group who have so bravely protected us as we approach this memorial day weekend
i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i will oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same i move to table the amendment without objection
i ask for a recorded vote mr. chairman may i inquire
colorful call the roll
may i just inquire
mr. johnson
aye on the motion to the table
center linkford
aye
center scott
aye
center holly
aye
center marino center ernst
aye
center moody center peters center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman center kim
no
center gallego Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Uh, Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Uh, Mister Chairman, I uh call up uh Peter's amendment uh uh one fifty-three. Uh, I'll give the um talk about that briefly uh but first Mister Chairman, uh, Just wanna be clear, as you've objected to these based on the Budget Committee, I think you know and I think all my colleagues know that it really doesn't matter what your Republican friends on the Budget Committee uh say, it is only the parliamentarian that can rule on this. And we just received a final text last night uh that, so we're rushing this uh forward. And we've um also seen uh videos of uh DHS personnel jumping out of unmarked cars, wearing mask and without clear agency identification, weapons drawn, actions that immediately escalate these encounters with the public and quite frankly, as we all know, create very dangerous situations for everyone involved. Often these masked individuals are only wearing a sign on their vest that says police. This is the same type of insignia that can be easily purchased online by anyone, to impersonate an officer. In fact, just last year, Administration's uh FBI released a bulletin entitled quote, criminal actors impersonate ICE agents to commit violent crime. End of quote. This uh report highlighted how unidentified officers can be imposters and pose significant safety threat to American citizens. To ensure the safety of both law enforcement officers and the public, it's essential that DHS law enforcement are clearly identified. And I recognize there are certain situations where concealment would certainly protect officers such as when they're involved in covert operations like targeting cartels. This amendment strikes an appropriate balance, however, by ensuring that officers' protect ensures their protection during these unique circumstances, while also ensuring they're clearly identified when they're interacting with the American people on American streets. And that's why I encourage my colleagues to vote for this amendment. That'll improve and protect both both law enforcement and the American people. I would ask for a a.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment.
The clerk will.
Without objection, the clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Langford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno.
Aye.
Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Cain.
Oh, oh, oh, I'm sorry.
No.
I, by proxy.
Sorry. So what am I doing? No.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. Fetterman's no by proxy.
Okay. Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mr. Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, on the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Blumenthal. Did you
Who's next?
Yeah.
Yeah. I I think I'm. Uh, Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mister Chairman, I'd uh introduce uh Peter's amendment uh one sixty-two. In the last year, ICE uh has spent two million dollars of taxpayer money to buy Spyware from Paragon Solutions. This is a company whose Spyware is used by autocrats uh against political opponents and dissenters all around the world. Spyware silently breaches a person's devices to steal encrypted messages, call logs, photos and location data, and can even activate microphones and cameras without the individual's knowledge. ICE has failed to provide any details to Congress about how it's actually using this incredibly powerful cyber tool and under what legal I'm skipping, I'm skipping. I'm skipping. justification.
Right.
My amendment very simply would prevent ICE from using taxpayer dollars to spy on American citizens and violate their privacy and free speech rights. I would encourage my colleagues to vote yes to protect privacy and constitutional rights.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to table the amendment. Without objection.
Pass it to the ace of aces.
Ace of aces.
Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye by proxy.
Aye by proxy.
Aye.
Senator Marino.
Aye.
Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin
no
center paul
i'm
seven five one two three four five
mr. chairman on the vote that was present the yeas are seven the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are one the nays are two on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
are there further amendments
yes mr. chairman
senator blumenthal
mr. chairman just yesterday two shooters opened fire at the islamic center in san diego killing three people including a security guard just two months ago a man armed with a rifle rammed his vehicle into a major synagogue in michigan clearly hate crimes are on the rise they're directed against places of worship and non-profit community centers around the country groups are strategically targeting places of worship i call up blumenthal thirty two which seeks to respond to the grow growing need to secure our most sacred and other spaces by redirecting redirecting one billion dollars of the unobligated funds from section perfect nine zero zero zero seven of title nine of the OBB B A it's definitely the same statement it's the same same to the non-profit security grant program within FEMA at DHS and the reason i emphasize that it is a transfer of money is very simply such a transfer is clearly within this committee's jurisdiction.
I guess we'll take one.
Reconciliation allows providing money for existing agency activities that fall within this committee's jurisdiction. Redirecting funds toward other important purposes under DHS clearly complies with the budget. There can be no claim, Mr. Chairman, that the Budget Committee has advised
No.
anyone
No, that's fine.
that this amendment is outside of our jurisdiction or improper to suggest at this point, if republicans truly believe it doesn't comply, we can meet with the parliamentarian as the ranking member has suggested and make any necessary changes before floor consideration. They are hiding behind this procedural pretext and tabling every amendment one after another with out regard to the rules simply because they don't wanna face the merits of these amendments. Now, the non-profit security grant program provides support for exactly the kind of protective activity that might have prevented the deaths at the Islamic center. One security guard was killed, and he may have saved lives, or others. More security guards hardening of the islamic center just as happens at other places of worship but also has to be enhanced at those places of worship we establish the non-profit security grant program to achieve that critical goal let's now fund it with the money it needs and worshipers deserve rather than continuing to overfund the administration's draconian immigration agenda. Rather than throwing money at ICE and CBP, let's provide some protection for people going to worship. Wherever it may be, in any part of the country, this amendment, Blumenthal thirty-two, is clearly within the jurisdiction of this committee. And, Mr. Chairman, I ask if you've provi- been provided any guidance from the budget committee i ask that you provide it to this committee before we vote any guidance in writing i ask be provided
both parties were given two weeks to submit amendments these amendments could have been submitted to the parliamentarian we submitted the bill uh as an amendment to the parliamentarian and it was approved the other side was given every opportunity to do so i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation
Mr. Chairman, I ask for a recorded vote and I ask again for the guidance that you've been providing.
Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
I untable him.
Senator Lankford.
All right.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno.
Aye. Aye.
Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody.
Aye.
center peters
no
center hasson
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gaego
no by proxy
center slotkin center paul
time
mr. chairman on the vote that was present the yeas are eight the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are zero the nays are two on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
Other further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mister Chairman, uh, thank you. Um, last year our Rep- my Republican colleagues, uh, gave, uh, the Department of Homeland Security almost two hundred billion dollars. If we're gonna increase DHS spending, I believe we also need to increase funding for the Inspector General. Since our Republican colleagues passed that bill, we have seen ICE hire people using an AI system that fail to properly vet individuals. And we have seen DHS personnel beat, bully, and kill American citizens. IGs have a track record of success in rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse at federal agencies. But the DHS IG's funding has not kept pace with this exponential growth in the department. We are now giving DHS even more money with almost no accountability, no transparency requirements, or very minimal ones, and absolutely no independent oversight. It's uh we need to change that and uh hope my colleagues will support this. And I wanna be clear as I offer this amendment, Mister Chairman, reconciliation allows providing money for existing agency activities that fall within the committee's jurisdiction. So redirecting funds towards another important purpose under DHS It it complies with the Budget Act. It's very clear that it complies with the Budget Act. This includes repurposing funds that were provided in Hisgack's title of the one big beautiful bill last year. That is what this amendment does. It basically provides nine hundred and ninety-five million dollars for the DHS Inspector General. It has clear budgetary effects, is solely within Hisgack's jurisdiction, and does not change existing policy. Therefore, it is compliant and will not threaten the privilege of this bill. If Republicans truly believe it does not comply, we can meet with the parliamentarian and make the necessary changes before for consideration. We just got final text on this last night is when we got final text. Uh, but I think instead, you know, my uh, my my colleagues here, my Republican colleagues are hiding behind procedural excuses, tabling every amendment. I believe they think this insulates them and they can fool the American people by playing some sort of procedural game. But we know even when you vote uh the way the Republicans are voting, they're basically taking a position that is overwhelmingly popular with the American people and oppose the actions that my Republicans are take my Republican colleagues are taking right now. And I would urge adoption on the amendment.
For two months we debated funding ICE and Border Patrol. There was every opportunity to come to a compromise. The Democrat solution was they hate ice so much they hate border control so much they love the unregulated eight million people that came across against the law that they were unwilling to come to a compromise this bill isn't a compromise this bill has very strict rules you haven't adhered to the rules and so i have been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i will oppose this amendment urge my colleagues to do the same i move to table the amendment Without objection.
Without objection.
Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno.
Aye.
Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Haasen.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the Aser, Yaser eight, the Naser five. On the vote by proxy, the Yaser zero, the Naser two. On this vote, the Yaser eight, the Naser seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mister Chairman, I'd like to uh uh introduce uh Peter's amendment one thirty six. Uh, my amendment provides uh eight billion dollars over the next four years to CISA, which is the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security, CISA is the backbone of our nation's cyber security defense. And given the increasing foreign threats our nation faces in cyberspace from adversaries like Iran, Russia and China, and the growing role of AI in exposing and exploiting uh, so cyber security vulnerabilities, it's absolutely essential that we protect and secure our critical infrastructure. Americans depend on secure communications. transportation, energy, financial systems, water, utilities and hospitals every single hour of the day. And I would encourage my colleagues to vote yes on this critical amendment.
I'm just gonna keep doing this one. I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. I'll oppose this amendment, urge my colleagues to do the same. I move to a tailored amendment.
Yay's uh objection, yay's nays.
Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
center lankford
aye
center scott
aye
center holly
aye
center moreno
aye
center ernst
i by proxy
center moody center peters
no
center hasson
no
center blumenthal center federman
no
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin
no
center paul
i
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are seven, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are one, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Uh, Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mister Chairman, I uh would like to introduce Peter's amendment uh one sixty eight as modified. Uh, my amendment as modified seeks to provide the U S Coast Guard with funds to support maritime drug interdictions. The administration is using the military to strike fishing boats, violating the law and undermining the long-standing efforts of the US Coast Guard to interdict drugs at sea and pursue DOJ prosecutions to dismantle criminal networks. We have long worked to ensure that DHS has the resources and the legal authorities necessary to combat drug trafficking. Let's ensure that the Coast Guard has the necessary resources to continue conducting standard law enforcement operations for maritime drug interdictions and i would urge adoption of my amendment
i've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules of the reconciliation process and will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor i'll oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same i move to table the amendment
i object and the s. four day is nice
clerk can call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst.
Aye by proxy.
Aye by proxy.
Senator Moody.
Aye.
Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal. Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim. Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are seven, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are one, the nays are two, on this vote the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Other further amendments?
Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mr. Chairman, uh, I uh move to uh consider uh Peter's amendment number one thirty four. Uh, we are uh more than two months uh into a war with uh Iran and its uh proxies. Uh, and just last week we saw DOJ charge an Iraqi militia leader with involvement in multiple attacks on Jewish sites uh in Europe. And for planning uh to attack three synagogues uh here in the United States, Uh, while our law enforcement and intelligence community continue to do excellent work, uh, in the last year the administration has basically dismantled key elements of our counterterrorism infrastructure. This White House has fired personnel at the Department of Justice and FBI, associated with investigations the president doesn't like. Uh,
Mm-hmm.
he has cut CISA, our cyber security agency, by a third and has delayed and politicized FEMA and DOJ grants to state and local as well as non-profit organizations that would help us address these serious threats. All of us support sensible immigration enforce enforcement, but at a time of heightened terrorist threats to Americans, we cannot take our eye off the ball. We cannot lose focus of the serious terror threats facing our homeland, and this amendment will ensure funding we need to help combat these very real threats and would urge my colleagues to support it.
i've been advised by the budget committee that none of the amendments presented today by the democrats will comply with the rules of the reconciliation process, and all of the amendments they have put forward will threaten the privilege of the bill on the floor. i will oppose this amendment and the rest of the amendments and i will move to table each one of them in succession. i move to table this amendment.
i object to ask for his names.
clerk will call the roll.
senator johnson
aye
senator langford
aye
center scott
aye
center holly
aye
center moreno
aye
center erntz
aye by proxy
center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin
no
center paul
i'm
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are seven, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are one, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Uh, Mister Chairman, I'd like to introduce uh Peter's amendment one twenty-one as modified. Uh, this amendment as modified would move uh one billion dollars from the one big, beautiful bill act to the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response to help defend against future infectious diseases outbreaks, including those uh potentially caused by the hantavirus or Ebola viruses. Six and a half years ago, during the first Trump administration, the COVID-19 pandemic started. As documented in my report, uh quote, uh historically unprepared, uh unquote, the president's response to COVID was deeply flawed, and the consequences were absolutely tragic. Despite loudly complaining about depleted strategic national stockpile, the President has not made the necessary investments to replenish the stockpile since returning to office, a failure that may cost more lives when the next outbreak inevitably occurs. With drastic cuts cuts to our public health resources by Republicans and their proposed cuts to ASPR we are simply not prepared for a future pandemic. We must reverse course. before it is too late it would urge my colleagues to support this amendment
move to table without objection
objection
the clerk will call the roll
yes
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
sorry aye
senator moreno
i wasn't ready
senator ernst
aye by proxy
senator moody senator peters
no
senator hassan
no
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are seven, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy, the yeas are one, the nays are two, on this vote the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Other further amendments?
Mister Chair.
Senator Hassan.
Mister Chair, I offer my amendment, Hassan number thirty two. Again, this is an amendment that simply reallocates funds within the department, so it is compliant with the Byrd rule, even if the Byrd rule were to apply to this process, which as we have noted, uh, it does not. Um, the American people have been clear about their priorities. They want lower costs and they want their families safe. But the president instead spends his attention building monuments to honor himself, including this new extravagant gilded ballroom. In a democracy like ours, leaders should use taxpayer dollars to serve we the people, not to build golden monuments to themselves. This amendment would divert the one billion dollars in ballroom funds to actually be used for an important priority, to counter child sex exploitation. I urge my colleagues to vote yes for this amendment, uh, and really challenge anyone to explain why a transfer within the department to a function of the department is supposed to address would violate the bird roll. It again suggests, if people vote to table this amendment, that they are using the procedural process as a pretext, simply because they don't wanna cross President Trump. So, um, I think that this funding would be better served, um, in an effort to combat child exploitation rather than for a vanity project for the president. And I ask for the yeas and nays.
there's no money in this bill for the ballroom i move to table without objection
aye yeah as for the a's and the's
clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator marino
aye
senator erntz
aye by proxym
senator moody senator peters senator hassan
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin senator paul
aye
mister chairman on the vote that was present the yeas are seven the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are one the nays are two on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
are there further amendments
mister chair
senator hassen
uh i offer um my amendment has in number thirty three again compliant with bird if bird were actually to apply to the reconciliation process as we have discussed it does not. We live in a dangerous world, Mister Chair, and there's no more important job for our government than keeping people safe, including from terrorists. But instead of focusing on the priorities of the people, keeping people safe, and lowering costs, the President instead spends his days building monuments to honor himself, like his new golden ballroom. My amendment would redirect the one billion dollars in ballroom funds to the critical work of the national counterterrorism center i urge my colleagues to vote yes to stand up to the president he should be focused on serving and protecting the people not honoring and flattering his own ego and i ask for the yeas and nays
once again there's no money in the bill before us for a ballroom i move to table the amendment
i object and ask for the roll call
mmm
call call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno Senator Ernst. Senator, I bet, I bet, I bet, I bet.
I, by proxy.
Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim. Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are seven, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy, the yeas are one, the nays are two.
Are there further amendments?
Uh, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to uh introduce uh Peter's uh amendment number eighty seven. This uh amendment would return all unspent funds uh from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to the United States Treasury for the purposes of reducing the national deficit. President Trump's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill significantly reduced federal revenues through massive tax cuts to the wealthy and is projected to add, this is a big number, four point two trillion dollars to the national debt over the coming decade. Our ever-increasing national debt officially surpassed the size of our economy earlier this month. Without further action or progress from Congress to bring in additional revenue or cut other places, the US will continue barreling down this fiscally unsustainable path. Such high and rising debt would have damaging, we know will have damaging, economic, fiscal and geopolitical consequences. And also I know many of my Republican colleagues don't support some of the amendments that we've been putting forward. I would hope my Republican colleagues would agree we need to reduce the national deficit. We've gotta do this on a bipartisan basis. Let's not use procedural gimmicks to get around the fact that we need to reduce the national deficit, and that's what this amendment does. My Republican colleagues are glossing over what they're glossing over in these objections is that uh in almost all of our previous reconciliations we conducted mark-ups before the birdbath. Well, this is a clear clear uh, compliant amendment. Now, though, Republicans are racing to meet the President's arbitrary June first deadline just to rubber stamp the president. But let's make a statement to the American people right now that we wanna reduce the deficit and we are gonna do it in a bipartisan way cuz the American people demand it. Let's not hide behind procedural gimmicks. Let's show the people where we stand. I urge adoption on this amendment.
This amendment is uh disingenuous. No one in the Senate has objected to spending more than I have. In the last two years I've had fifty amendments voted on the floor. to reduce spending and not one democrat has supported any of the amendments that are proposed to reduce spending so i find this amendment presented to be disingenuous doesn't comply with the rules and i move to table the amendment with that objection
objection objection so objection we're all called
clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator langford senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst
aye by broxom
aye by broxom
senator moody senator peters
no
senator hafson
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no
no
senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin senator paul
no oh my god
mister chairman on the vote those present the yeas or seven the nays or five on the vote by proxy the yeas or one the nays or two on this vote the yeas or eight the nays or seven and the motion is agreed to
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chair.
Senator Hassan.
Mister Chair, I call up amendment H uh, Hassan amendment number forty-three. Um, and again, this is compliant wi- with the Byrd rule should it apply to this process, which it does not. Um, people across the country are struggling with high costs, but that's not a priority for the President. Instead, his passion is building himself a massive, gilded ballroom. While people struggle to afford their mortgage or their rent, the President seeks to build himself a palace. The President should listen to the people and work to lower costs instead of raising buildings in his honor. My amendment would prohibit the President from using taxpayer dollars for his gilded vanity project, rather than using that money to actually help Americans. And, Mister Chair, as you have said, uh, that this latest language does not include funding for the ballroom, it should not be difficult for all of us to vote uh to prohibit any funding in this bill to go to the ballroom and i ask for the a's and the's
it's hard to remove something from a bill that isn't in the bill there is no money in the bill before us for a ballroom so the amendment doesn't really make any logical sense i move to table the amendment without objection
just it prohibits it objection and i ask for the a's and the's
flerkel call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott center holly center moreno center ernst
i'm at proxy
center moody center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
center thutterman
no by proxy
no
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin center paul
i'm
seven five mr. chairman on the vote that was present the yeas are seven the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are one the nays are two on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
are there further amendments
Mr. Chair
senator blumenthal
Mr. Chair if uh anybody is wondering why Americans think members of congress or the president of the united states is out of touch with what's on the minds of american people they have only to look at the failure of this committee to deal with the merits of the ballroom. It's an abomination, a gold-plated monstrosity. Americans were repulsed by pictures of the east wing tear-down, done unilaterally and illegally by the president. And then he told us that the ballroom wouldn't interfere with the White House when in fact it's an architectural monstrosity. They said the capacity of the ballroom would be six hundred and fifty people. And then they revised it to over a thousand. They said it would cost two hundred million. The price then rose to two hundred fifty million, three hundred million, and four hundred million. And they said the construction of the ballroom would be d done entirely with financing by private donors and now they're seeking taxpayer money, one billion dollars. and telling us they can't finish the project without the funds and to add insult to injury they have refused to tell us who the private donors are my permanent subcommittee on investigation staff is investigating who those donors are and in fact there are there's abundant evidence that it's a pay to play scheme that they are seeking favors in return for those donations. That's why I'm offering a series of amendments. It's not only about the architectural monstrosity, the waste of money. It is an issue of corruption in the government. I call up Blumenthal amendment thirty four and ask for a roll call vote because the white house has claimed that the ballroom would be entirely financed through these private donations the american people deserve to know who is donating why what they may be getting in return what solicitations there have been what contracts there are and whether any of those individuals or corporations are seeking favored treatment from regulatory agencies or contracts from the government
there's uh no money in the bill before us for a ballroom i move to table the amendment
we'll call vote
clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator holly
aye
senator moreno senator ernst
aye by proxy
aye by proxy
senator moody
ok
senator peters
no
center haston
no by proxy
center blumenthal
no
center federman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin center paul
aye
seven four seven
mr. chairman on the vote that was present the a's are seven the nays are four on the vote by proxy the a's are one the nays are three in this vote the a's are eight the nays are seven the motion is agreed to
other further amendments
miss chairman
center blumenthal
i call up
uh, blumenthal amendment thirty three this administration has made a habit of awarding no bid
this one this is
arbitrary contracts to favored firms the firm has stepped up in the investigations has written to the architects contractors and engineers seeking basic details about the process of awarding contracts to build the ballroom this amendment would require very simply that the white house use the normal competitive process in awarding contracts to build the ballroom
i move to table without objection
i ask for a roll call about both
clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst
i'm at proxy
senator moody senator peters
no
senator haassen
no by proxy
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin
no
senator paul
time
mr. chairman on the vote that was present the yeas are seven the nays are four on the vote by proxy the yeas are one the nays are three on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
other further amendments
Mr. Chairman,
Senator Blumenthal.
I ask for consideration of Blumenthal amendment thirty seven. As we all have seen, President Trump has gutted the commissions who are responsible for approving projects in Washington DC and the National Capital Planning Commission, the Commission on Fine Arts, have been in effect restocked with administration cronies weakened as these commissions are the white house has still refused to provide them with sufficient information on ballroom construction meaningful oversight of the ballroom has to come from congress we need information that the white house is refusing to provide this amendment would create a district of columbia oversight panel modeled after the congressional oversight panel created during the great financial crisis to monitor the bailout it would be bipartisan it would sit outside of the executive branch to assure that it's adequately informed would cover the ballroom and other projects here in washington like the so-called arc to trump and the repainting of the reflecting pool it would focus on the financing of projects and the terms of the contracts. It would be not only bipartisan, but membership appointed by congressional leadership and the mayor of Washington to assure that there is in fact bipartisan oversight. I ask for a roll call vote.
I'm on the planning commission. The vote was eight to one in favor of allowing the president to add on to the white house. i know of no argument that anything has been done inappropriate in the appointments to the commission they are done by law and by statute you can bring up a law and try to change that but to cast dispersions on the committee that i sit on i object to i move to table the amendment there is no money for the ballroom in this bill
i ask for roll call vote
clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino. Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mr. Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight and the nays are
are there any further amendments
yes mr. chairman
to senator blumenthal
thank you mr. chairman i ask for consideration of blumenthal thirty five this amendment is really so basic and simple i don't know how my republic can colleagues can possibly hide from it by invoking this formulaic gimmick that they have done the trump administration is asking for taxpayer money for this ballroom boondoggle but president trump refuses to provide to congress basic information and he denies the american people that information like how big is the ballroom what will it look like, when will it be finished, and most important, what will be really the total cost. This administration would require the GAO, which we all know is a bipartisan professional organization, to make public a report on important details of this project, including the sources of funds and the terms of its construction. Congress and the american people deserve to know what we are getting for the billion dollars or more that american taxpayers are shelling out for this
absolutely
i'm sure we'll get
yeah
gold-plated monstrosity
um the bill we're addressing today uh has no money for the ballroom i moved to table the amendment without objection
i ask for royal call vote
the clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator holly
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst
aye
senator moody
aye
senator peters
no
senator hassin
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin
no
senator paul
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the a yeas or eight, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy of the yeas is zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Other further amendments?
Yes, Mister Chairman.
Senator Blumenthal.
Mister Chairman, I call up Blumenthal Amendment thirty eight. Not long ago, Mister Chairman, I offered a measure called the No Palaces Act, No Palaces Act. which basically puts some guardrails and safeguards on the white house's construction and demolition process including requiring congressional authorization for the use of private funds for improvement of the white house now i'm not sure that the president of the united states realizes it but it's not his house it's the people's house It doesn't belong to Donald Trump. It belongs to the American people. He occupies it for a period of time. The White House has stacked the NCPC and the CFA with cronies and lackeys who have failed to provide scrutiny over what he is doing to the White House, i've offered amendments to require more information this amendment would insert my no palaces act which puts additional guardrails on the white house's construction and demolition process i'm not gonna go into all the details but one very
uh
salient point for this committee's
yeah he says it
appropriate review is that it establishes a right of action for
right
individuals and institutions including any member of congress any member of congress to bring a civil action in united states district court seeking injunctive relief enforcing the law what we have here is an absence of enforcement the law is dead letter if it's not enforced for most of my career i was an enforcer and what we need here is alternative access to the judicial process to enforce safeguards and guardrails on the president's arbitrary and illegal destruction of our house the white house
there's nothing in the bill before us uh to fund a ballroom i move to table the amendment without objection
objection as for recorded vote
the clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator wankford
bye
senator scott Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino.
Aye.
Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody.
Aye.
Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Federman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
It certainly would have spoiled this committee.
center paul
so
aye by proxy
aye
aye
aye in person
mister chairman on the vote of those present the yeas are eight the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are zero the nays are two on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
are there further amendments
yes mr. chairman
senator blumenthal
mr. chairman i call up blumenthal amendment set seventy three there's been a lot of public reporting
it's good yeah
and i'm sure we've all seen it that indicates some dhs contracts under former secretary christy noem were awarded on a no bid expedited basis without full and open competition and may have benefited department officials or businesses connected to them among those no bid contracts two of them collectively worth two hundred and twenty million dollars were awarded to two firms safe america media llc and people who think llc to produce an ad campaign featuring none other than former secretary christy noem safe america media subcontract subcontracted work to this strategy group a company run by the husband of former DHS assistant secretary for public affairs, trisha mclachlan. The strategy group spent twenty thousand dollars uh in taxpayer dollars on horse rentals and almost four thousand dollars on hair and makeup for what amounted to glorified ads for then secretary no, senator welsh and i have written to DHS. and both the contractors requesting detailed information and records concerning these contracts we have received no substantive information or records so this simple amendment ensures that this committee and our colleagues in the house have the opportunity to conduct appropriate oversight of these highly questionable contracts americans are struggling to make ends meet we all know it from
i'm advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules, therefore i move to table the amendment without objection
objection is announced
clerk will call the roll
aye
center langford
aye
center scott
aye
center holly
aye
center moreno
aye
center ernst
aye
center moody
aye
center peters
no
center hassan
no
center blumenthal
no
no
center federman
no by proxy
no
center kim
no
center gallego
mmm no by proxy
center slotkin
no
center paul
i'm aye
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Other further amendments?
Miss Chairman.
Senator Blumenthal.
It's Chairman, I call up um Blumenthal, sixty nine. Everybody here knows what happened on January sixth. we've seen the videos most of us had lived through it many of us in this room we're in the temporary holding room where brave law enforcement officers guarded us many of those same officers put their bodies and lives on the line the riders who stormed the capital that day had no respect for those officers and many were convicted of assaulting officers julian kater and brian sicknick uh julian kater sprayed us capital police officer brian sicknick with pepper spray officer sicknick died the next day kater admitted his violence and pleaded guilty to assaulting officers with a deadly weapon he was sentenced to more than six point five years in prison for his crimes against law enforcement officers before he was pardoned by president trump others also were convicted sentenced to prison and then pardoned this amendment would ensure that these men and nearly two hundred others like them convicted for attacking law enforcement officers could never receive payments for the government from the government for prosecution. This should not be a hard vote for anyone in this room. either you support law enforcement and you specifically support the men and women who gave their lives on the line to protect us or you wanna reward law breaking and violence against law enforcement. So this amendment would ensure that there be no payment to lawbreakers convicted of assaulting and in some cases contributing to the deaths of law enforcement officers.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment doesn't comply with the rules. I move to table the amendment. Without objection Objection. clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Haassen.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin.
No.
Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that is present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, on the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Other further amendments? Thank you.
Hearing none, Mr. Chairman.
Wait, uh, wait, uh, Mr. Chairman. I think Senator Blumenthal.
Uh, Mr. Chairman, I call up uh Blumenthal sixty nine.
Senator Blumenthal.
Seventy one.
Seventy one.
I'm sorry, seventy one. mr. chairman uh yesterday we learned that president trump has formalized a plan to create a slush fund of one point eight billion dollars in taxpayer money to so-called victims of government weaponization this fund would allow among other things january sixth rioters the same people convicted of attacking the capitol and law enforcement officers defending it to get payments from the government i'm aware of at least five who should be barred from receiving that money these five j six pardonees have been convicted of sex crimes against children sex crimes against children sex abuse of minors possession of sesame and the like it's occurred all since they were pardoned by the president let's talk about just one of them andrew paul johnson was sentenced to a year of prison for his crimes on january sixth president trump's pardoned freedom in march of this year he was again sentenced to prison this time to life in prison for sexually abusing two middle school children in florida notably johnson tried to keep the children quiet by saying he'd give them millions of dollars and where would you get this money from the restitution he expected from the january sixth case yesterday the president announced that he wanted to give johnson and others like him the money that johnson thought he was gonna use to silence the victims of his crime this vote ought to be easy for my colleagues
i move to table without objection
objection
i ask for a roll call vote
lark will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno senator erntz senator moody senator peters
no
senator hassan
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
senator gajego
no by proxy
senator slotkin
no
senator paul
i'm
mr. chairman on the vote that was present the yeas are eight the nays are five on the vote by proxy the yeas are zero the nays are two on this vote the yeas are eight the nays are seven and the motion is agreed to
are there further amendments
mr. chair
senator hassan
mr. chair i offer my amendment has the number twenty eight uh, again compliant with the Byrd process, were the Byrd process or rule to apply to this procedure, which it does not. The American people put their trust in their leaders, including at the Department of Homeland Security, to help keep them safe. That's why I, like a majority of Americans from both political parties, am appalled that the former DHS secretary potentially used millions in taxpayer funds to essentially run a political ad to promote herself. The corruption and self-dealing in this administration
I've been advised by the Budget Committee this amendment doesn't comply with the rules i move to table i object and ask for a roll call vote
i object and ask for a roll call vote bert will call for the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator hawley
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst senator moody
say again
senator peters senator hassin
no no no
no
senator blumenthal
you think he could uh insist that they have a block
senator fuderman
no by proxy
we'd be glad to do it
senator kim senator gallego
no by proxy
senator paul i'm headed in chair mcfedule chairman paul
aye
oh dear i'm just mr. chairman on the vote of this present the yeas or eight the nays or five on the vote by proxy the yeas or i'm it's just me zero the nays or two on this vote the yeas or eight the nays or seven and the motion is agreed to
are there any further amendments
mr. chair
go set center assam
I offer my amendment, hassle number twenty seven. Under this administration there's been a rise in corruption, self-dealing, and use of public funds for self-promotion, unlike any in our country's history, including by the way, something this committee has uh attempted to regulate in the past, which is insider trading, stock trading by the President of the United States. We've tried to uh uh put forward legislation that would uh control Congress's uh insider trading, or ban it. Uh, but the President has now, um, decided that it is OK for him to do. But I wanna turn at this moment, uh, to, um, the very idea that Corey Lewandowski, who was working as a consultant apparently, uh, was reporta- for DHS, was reportedly telling companies that they would need to pay him personally, if they wanted government business. That's at odds with the respect for the rule of law that should be at the heart of the Department of Homeland Security and that law enforcement officers embody every day. We need to find out more about the conflicts of interest, special privileges, and self-dealing that may have been done on the taxpayers' dime at the DHS under this president. My amendment would provide funding for DHS to review conflicts of interest involving special government employees such as Mister Lewandowski. This is compliant with Bird. If Bird were to apply, I urge my colleagues to vote yes.
Been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules. I move to table. Objection. Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino.
Aye.
Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that was present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to. Mister Chairman.
For the further amendments, Senator Slotkin.
Mister Chairman, I'm calling up Slotkin amendment fourteen. Um, this amendment would put aside just a small amount of money to implement a ban on insider trading in prediction markets. I wanna actually um as we come to towards the end here thank Senator Moreno um I think everybody knows that we change the rules in the Senate so that Senators can now not bet use on in production markets and make money off of the information we get here in classified or sensitive briefings and I commend Senator Moreno on that. Um and I think we should extend it to the entire executive branch, and I have a bipartisan bill on on this score. Um, just to review the bidding, on the Friday before the Iran war start, a surge of more than a hundred and fifty polymarket accounts placed hundreds of bets predicting a US strike. On January second before Venezuela, we had a trader uh earn about four hundred thousand dollars by by betting on that strike, and just nine polymarket accounts for a total of two point four million dollars have been bet on exclusively on military operations with a ninety-eight percent success rate. Um, so this bill or this amendment would just give a small amount of money for implementing what should be a ban not just for us but for anyone in government service, whether you are a career civilian, uniformed military, or, importantly, a political appointee. And this comes on the heels of just a raft of information on another issue this committee has worked hard on, which is actually passing bipartisan legislation here in this body on banning stock trading based on insider information. I commend my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who have been highlighting this, but it is hard to miss that the president has just been making incredible numbers of trades, and then making deals the next day, not least of wish on things like Nvidia sensitive chips, um, just days before he struck a big deal with the Chinese. So I urge my colleagues, let's do what we can on the polymarket piece, And I urge a yes vote.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment doesn't comply with the rules, therefore I move to mo- uh to table.
So moved.
Um, clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino. Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No, by proxy.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul. I'm.
Five.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present.
Five.
The yeas are eight, the nays are five, Can you give me a minute more? and the vote by proxy the yeas are zero, Just a moment. the nays are two on this vote.
Five.
The yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Okay. I'm just being very honest with you. I don't know if you want me to.
Are there further amendments?
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to call up Gallego, number one.
Senator Gallego.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh for this amendment for one simple reason, taxpayer dollars should never be used to enrich a sitting president, his family or his political allies. This week, President Trump dropped his ten billion dollar lawsuit against the IRS, but only after the creation of a one point seven seven six billion taxpayer funded compensation fund. Let's let's just let that sink in. The president of the United States sued his own government, and then negotiated an arrangement with his own department of justice create nearly two billion dollar fund to compensate himself, his family and his allies. According to reports, that fund could be used to compensate individuals involved in the events of of January sixth. Many of those individuals assaulted Capitol Police and other law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line to defend this institution and everyone in it including many of us in this room. This guy, this guy, and this guy, and this guy are gonna potentially get payouts from the federal government for assaulting these police officers. So much for back in the blue. Taxpayer dollars should not support those uh those people that attack these officers. This is not justice. It is a profound abuse of public funds. Right now, Americans are struggling with high prices and economic uncertainty. Federal dollars should be used to lower costs and serve the American people, and not create a slush fund for the president's political allies or to reward those who assaulted law enforcement. My amendment is straightforward. It prohibits the federal government from using taxpayer dollars to pay out settlements for lawsuits brought by the president or his immediate family or allies. It also prohibits creating a fund to provide payments to the president, his family, or the traders who attack the capital. No president, republican or democrat should be able to use the federal treasury as a personal checkbook and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back.
I've been advised by the budget committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules, therefore I move to table.
Rejection uh,
Clerk will call the roll.
we have a
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino.
Aye.
Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody.
Aye.
Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No, by proxy.
No.
Senator Blumenthal. Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight,
Other further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mister Chairman, I'd like to introduce uh Peter's amendment uh one twenty eight. Uh this amendment would provide the uh Department of Veteran Affairs funding to expand and improve health care and housing uh for our veterans. Veterans bravely serve uh our country and have made a solemn, and we have made a solemn vow to each of them that upon their return their earned benefits, including health care, housing and more will be accessible. No veteran should go without these promised uh benefits, and I would encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.
I'd like to remind folks that the votes today are on a reconciliation bill. You can have every policy you'd like to present. You can provide money for every group that we all support. But it can't be done on this bill. It's against the rules. The rules are very specific for reconciliation. The rules are very specific for spending bulls bills. The Budget Committee uh has told us that this amendment doesn't comply with the rules so therefore I move to table. Objection.
Yes, please.
Court will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno.
Aye.
Senator Ernst. Senator Moody.
Mm-hmm.
Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy of the yeas are zero, the nays are two on this vote. The yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chair.
Senator Hassan.
Mister Chair, I offer my amendment, Hassan number fifty nine, again noting that the Byrd rule does not apply to the reconciliation process. High costs are pushing American families to the brink, including high health care costs. But the President has made this challenge worse by ending the enhanced ACA tax credits. I believe new reporting uh says that about five million Americans have since uh lost their While Americans struggle with high costs, the president is trying to build himself a golden ballroom. So while families lose their health care, the president builds himself a palace. There is simply no justification for why a dollar that could be spent to lower health care costs would be better spent on a golden ballroom in order for the president to honor himself. My amendment would do two things. It would remove the one billion dollars in this package, for the president's golden ballroom and it would restore the enhanced a c a tax credits for two years. And anticipating the chair's uh statement here, this would prohibit the use of one billion, but direct one billion, for the a a c a tax credits for two years, I urge my colleagues to vote yes.
There's no money in the bill before us for a ballroom. I move to table the amendment.
I object.
Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
center scott
aye
center holly
aye
center moreno center ernst center moody center peters
no
center haasen
no
center blumenthal
no
center thurman
no by proxy
center kim
no
center gallego
no by proxy
center slotkin
no
center paul
i'm
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy of the yeas is zero, And you can go next. the nays are two. On this vote the yeas are eight, And then and then the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Peters.
Mister Chairman, I'd like to uh introduce Peter's amendment uh one forty two. Uh, my amendment transfers one billion dollars of unspent funding from the big uh beautiful bill to provide relief for farmers. In Michigan and across our country, farmers are facing high costs from Everything from fuel to fertilizer, uh, in part because of the president's, uh, war of choice, uh, with Iran. Uh, this makes it more expensive to grow the food that feeds our country, and ultimately raises prices at groceries for our hard-working families, as they see every day when they go into the grocery store. I would encourage my colleagues, uh, to vote yes on this amendment.
I move to table the amendment. Objection. Without objection, clerk, clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Langford. Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Marino.
Aye. Senator Moody.
Senator Ernst. Senator Moody.
Aye.
Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote that is present, the yeas are eight, the nays are four.
Are there further amendments?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Senator Hassan.
I offer my amendment, Hassan number forty four. For two hundred and fifty years, America has been defined by the belief that we, the people, rule. Our country is not defined by one man, one party, or even one president. There are few things as un-American. as draping the exterior of our government buildings with massive portraits of a president. That's what they do in authoritarian countries, not in America. My amendment would prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars to hang pictures of the current president on the exterior of federal buildings, and I will note it is compliant with the Byrd rule, even if that rule were to apply to this procedure, which it does not. I urge my colleagues to vote yes to reassert that our democracy is defined by we the people not one leader.
once again there's no money in this bill for a ballroom i move to table the amendment objection uh clerk call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator Lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator holly
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst senator moody
aye
senator peters
no
senator hassin
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Other further amendments?
Mister Chair.
Senator Hassan.
I offer my amendment, Hassan, number forty seven. Right now, Americans are struggling with high costs, but rather than helping families afford their groceries and rent, The president is focused on putting his name on buildings. The president has tried to rename the Kennedy Center after himself, turning what was a legacy for a fallen president into a vanity project, a monument to himself. The president should be focused on helping the American people, not flattering his own ego. My amendment would reaffirm the name of the Kennedy Center. Again, this is compliant with Byrd, and I urge my colleagues to vote yes.
move to table objection clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford
aye
senator scott
aye
senator holly
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst senator moody senator peters
no
senator hassin
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim
no
senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin senator paul
I'm.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, on the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Are there further amendments?
Mister Chairman.
Senator Blumenthal.
Thank you, Mister Chairman. Uh, I call up Blumenthal, fifty eight. Seeking an investigation into the director of the FBI, Kash Patel. who has been reportedly regularly absent or unreachable as a result of drinking too excess following some of these alcohol fueled nights director patel's morning meetings and briefings allegedly have had to be rescheduled for later in the day members of his security detail have reportedly had difficulty reaching or waking him. His behavior allegedly has caused delays in decision making in major investigations. The role of the FBI director is not part time. He has to be on call and ready to perform at all, uh, particularly when we are at war and there are threats of terrorist attacks. around the country. We're fortunate that no mass terror attack has occurred while Director Patel was intoxicated or unreachable, but these allegations should concern all of us. This amendment would fund the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General to investigate the allegations against Dire- Director Patel and their impact on public safety anyone who shares my concerns about the safety and security of this country should want to see this investigation happen i have written to the inspector general asking for this investigation i've received no response and i'm hopeful that the committee will pass this amendment which would require the investigation
move to table without objection I'm sure
I ask for I ask for the eight and eight
objection
look clerk will call the roll
senator johnson
aye
senator lankford senator scott
aye
senator holly
aye
senator moreno
aye
senator ernst
aye
senator moody senator peters
no
senator hassin
no
senator blumenthal
no
senator federman
no by proxy
senator kim senator gallego
no by proxy
senator slotkin Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas or eight. The nays are five. On the vote by proxy, the yeas are zero. The nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
I understand this is the final amendment, Senator Peters.
Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman. Chairman, I'd like to uh offer uh Peter's amendment uh one forty eight. Uh, this amendment is the CBP officer retirement technical corrections act. It was a bill uh, to fix retirement benefit error for a group of around fourteen hundred dedicated CBP officers. In two thousand eight, CBP incorrectly told these newly hired, uh, border security officers that they would be eligible for an enhanced retirement benefit without having to retire at a certain age, or reach twenty years of service to qualify for the benefit. In twenty twenty one, when CBP realized its mistake over a decade ago, these officers abruptly lost, uh, access to retirement package. Each year more officers retire without the enhanced benefit they were promised, due to an agency mistake. This bill has already passed the Senate unanimously, and we should not let a funding package uh for CBP advance uh without this very simple but necessary fix for these dedicated border security officers. It's time for us to step up to the promise that was made to them. This reconciliation reconciliation bill is the best chance to provide this long overdue technical fix and I hope something that we can do on a bipartisan uh basis. Uh we've had bipartisan support, but now we need to fund it, this is when we can do it. I hope uh we get support for the amendment.
I've been advised by the Budget Committee that this amendment does not comply with the rules I move to table.
Objection. Aye.
Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Langford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno. Senator Ernst. Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Haasen.
No.
Senator Blumenthal.
No.
Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim. Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
Aye.
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present. The yeas are eight, the nays are five, and the vote by proxy of the yeas is zero, the nays are two. And this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are seven, and the motion is agreed to.
Before we take the final vote, we recognize the ranking member for brief remarks.
Well, thank thank you, uh, Mister Chairman, uh, against Senate brief remarks. Uh, it's hard to believe, uh, that our, my, our colleagues, uh, voted to, to block, uh, my Republican pile, uh, colleagues voted to block every single one of the amendments, uh, that my Democratic colleagues and I offered, uh, today. Uh, I ju- I just want to be clear, uh, my Democratic colleagues and I believe that all of DHS needs to be funded, but, but we have a responsibility in this committee to conduct oversight and to push for reforms at DHS when they are needed. We offered amendments that would have addressed the abuses and the misconduct we saw from DHS some DHS personnel. We offered amendments that would ensure DHS is focused on addressing serious national security threats from rising terrorism and cyber security threats to potential future pandemics. The chairman claims that we should address these issues uh in an authorization uh mark-up. But, have to say, the chairman has not had a legislative authorization mark-up in over nine months. I know I can speak from my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
Mm-hmm.
that we would like to address these issues in an authorization mark-up, and hope that we can have more markups in the future. We've already waited nine months. Uh, it's time to get to work on some very important issues. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I recall, the ranking member, when he was chairman, we did no markup or authorization of DHS. Today we did process fifty seven amendments, though, and the minority was able to, uh, you know, vent their frustration. I joined many on the minority of saying we should have reform. Some reforms have happened. Uh, Tom Homan went to Minneapolis and I haven't seen any any any news breaks out there. I haven't seen people in the street rioting. I think reforms have happened. I wish we could have come together and announced that these reforms had occurred, and that, uh, DHS is doing better in this. But instead the Democrats decided they weren't going to find ice no matter what. There were discussions, there were discussion of reforms, but they would never come to the table. I don't like doing appropriations this way. I think it's a not a good precedent. But the Democrats left us no choice because they said, we will not fund ICE no matter what you say, because our ra- our base is so rabid. But the thing is, eight million people came across the border. This is a real problem. It's overwhelming our welfare system, overwhelming our hospitals. We can't have an open border. I haven't agreed with everything President Trump has done, but he did control the border. It's the best thing that has happened. It's the best change we've happened had happened since Biden's administration. The border is being controlled, but you have to pay ICE, you have to pay the Border Patrol. So I'm glad we got this done today. I thank everybody for their patience. Seeing no further amendments, the question is to transmit the recommendations as modified to the Budget Committee the Clerk will call the roll.
Senator Johnson.
Aye.
Senator Lankford.
Aye.
Senator Scott.
Aye.
Senator Hawley.
Aye.
Senator Moreno.
Aye.
Senator Ernst.
Aye.
Senator Moody. Senator Peters.
No.
Senator Hassan.
No.
Senator Blumenthal. Senator Fetterman.
No, by proxy.
Senator Kim.
No.
Senator Gallego.
No, by proxy.
Senator Slotkin. Senator Paul.
I'm
Mister Chairman, on the vote of those present, the yeas are eight, the nays are five. On the vote by proxy and for the record only, the yeas are zero, the nays are two. On this vote, the yeas are eight, the nays are five, and the motion is agreed to.
ok
business meeting is adjourned
the recognition hmm what the recognition
Morning digest
Start every morning briefed on yesterday’s hearings
A free weekday email covering yesterday’s hearings and transcripts newly unlocked in the archive.
