- 2 days ago
Democratic Senators decry the Republicans' rescissions package on the Senate floor.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Mr. President.
00:01Senator from Wisconsin.
00:03The rescissions package before us reduces access to educational programming for children
00:11and locally produced public radio and television programming.
00:15It diminishes America's global leadership while eliminating life-saving aid from the world's most vulnerable populations.
00:25I want to spend a minute on the impact that this will have on public radio and television,
00:32including the disproportionate impact it will have on rural communities.
00:38One in four Wisconsinites live in rural communities, and many rely on public broadcasting for local news,
00:46emergency alerts, and free educational programming, especially for children.
00:51Wisconsin public radio is the primary broadcast relay for Wisconsin's emergency alert system,
01:01including amber alerts and life-saving weather alerts like tornado and flash flood warnings.
01:11Look no further than the absolutely devastating news out of Texas.
01:15Access to high-quality information can truly be the difference between life and death.
01:23Access to local news from reporters and sources that community members trust is more important than ever.
01:31And stripping away this funding would also endanger local news that is already disappearing in so many Wisconsin communities.
01:40In 2024, just last year, almost 20% of our local newspapers shut down in Wisconsin, according to a study by Northwestern University.
01:52That same study found that Wisconsin's northernmost county, Bayfield, had no local news sources at all,
02:02while 22 counties across Wisconsin had just one local news source.
02:07That's where public media plays a critical role in keeping Wisconsinites connected with their communities.
02:15Stations like WXPR in Rhinelander, Wisconsin, would be under threat if this package advances.
02:22One of the few news sources producing local reporting in Wisconsin's North Woods and Michigan's Upper Peninsula.
02:31Or Radio Milwaukee, which, because of public funding, can broadcast local school board meetings for parents and families to stay in touch with what's happening in their community.
02:45Without federal support for public media, this critical information could disappear for Wisconsin families.
02:52This is what public broadcasting means for Wisconsinites.
02:57But it applies to all the states that we represent.
03:02That should be reason enough to oppose this bill on the substance of it.
03:08But the other reason is the extraordinary process that's being used to make this change.
03:15And the impact that would have on the ability of this body to perform its most basic functions.
03:23If passed, this bill would represent the first time this rescissions process is used to pass completely partisan rescissions.
03:35And in doing so, we would undo bipartisan agreements.
03:42And that is why I oppose this bill.
03:44And I hope enough of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will choose to do so as well.
03:52The Senate passes bipartisan appropriation bills every year.
03:57And they're hard.
03:59And they take months of negotiating.
04:01And it doesn't always work as well as it should.
04:04And members on both sides of the aisle often discuss wanting to return to something we call regular order.
04:12We decry full-year continuing resolutions, or CRs, and government shutdowns.
04:18We say we want to bring appropriation bills to the floor.
04:22This isn't a pipe dream.
04:24And I reject the idea that the appropriations process can't work anymore.
04:30More often than not, we pass appropriation bills within the first few months of the new fiscal year.
04:37Not ideal, but workable.
04:40We certainly need to work to make it better.
04:43And the full-year continuing resolution we find ourselves in right now is a prime example of it failing.
04:51But throwing in the towel, as this bill does, would make it so much worse.
04:56And I want to highlight one example of when the appropriation process worked, how it should,
05:03that is particularly relevant in this exact moment.
05:06It was just a few years ago, in fiscal year 2019, that the Labor, Health, and Human Services bill,
05:16not the easiest bill, passed the Senate and was signed into law prior to the start of the next fiscal year.
05:26Now, at that time, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Shelby,
05:32along with other Republicans and working with Democrats, vowed to return to regular order and committed to it.
05:40In May of 2018, President Trump submitted a rescissions package, just like the one we're contending with today.
05:50And enough Republicans joined all the Democrats in opposing it.
05:55And it failed.
05:57And that was the end of it.
05:58Then, three months later, a combined defense and labor, health, and human services bill passed.
06:07It passed the Senate.
06:08It passed the House.
06:09And it was signed into law by President Trump on September 28th,
06:14just days short of the expiration of the fiscal year, 2018 year.
06:21And it wasn't the only pair of bills.
06:25Several other appropriation bills were enacted prior to October 1st also.
06:30My Republican colleagues knew then that passing partisan rescissions packages would make passing bipartisan appropriation bills
06:42that much harder, if it would be possible at all.
06:48That's what we're debating today.
06:51The issue here is really simple.
06:54How can any minority party, Democrat or Republican, make concessions as part of these bipartisan appropriation negotiations
07:03if the majority just walks back those deals a few months later?
07:09The answer is, it can't.
07:12And that's why we have never passed partisan rescissions packages like this before.
07:19Passing this rescissions package will also very likely mean that there will be more to come.
07:27In fact, OMB Director Russell Vogt has said as much.
07:32Right now, the Department of Education is withholding $7 billion in funding
07:39that normally goes out at this time of year to the states for the upcoming school year
07:44to support after-school programs, STEM education, school counselors, and smaller class sizes, among many other things.
07:54Will the administration put that funding in the next rescissions package?
07:58So if we pass this bill, we would find ourselves right back here in a couple of months
08:07with the president exerting his influence to pass another partisan rescissions package.
08:14Or we can end this here like we did in 2018
08:19and deal with these issues where they should be dealt with
08:24and where they frequently are dealt with as part of the appropriations process.
08:31We can and should debate the issues raised in this rescission package
08:36as part of the annual appropriations process.
08:40We should mark up bills in committee and bring them to the floor.
08:45But you cannot vote for this rescissions package
08:48and then argue for regular order
08:51or decry brinksmanship over government funding
08:55and government shutdowns or full-year continuing resolutions.
08:59Because walking back on bipartisan agreements
09:04like this rescission package does
09:06will make future bipartisan agreements
09:10that much harder, if not impossible.
09:14As the ranking member on the Labor, Health, and Human Services subcommittee,
09:21I commit to working with my Republican colleagues
09:24on their specific concerns with funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
09:30But the concerns I've heard raised as part of the debate on this package
09:38actually weren't even raised as part of the appropriation process
09:42in the last two years as I've chaired this subcommittee.
09:47My colleagues are saying that this is such a grave problem
09:51that we have to take the extraordinary step to rescind funding
09:56when these issues weren't even raised
09:58when we passed the appropriation bills
10:01with this funding in it originally.
10:05That's not how this process should work.
10:10To my colleagues, if you are for regular order,
10:14if you want this body to work better
10:16and want more bipartisanship and less partisanship,
10:23I sincerely ask you to deeply reflect
10:27on what this vote means for that goal
10:30that a majority of our constituents want from us.
10:35I urge my colleagues to vote no.
10:46Mr. President.
10:50Senator from Michigan.
10:51Mr. President, today we are debating
10:54President Trump's disastrous proposal
10:57to cut more than $9 billion in funding
11:00that Congress has already approved
11:03for local public broadcasting and foreign assistance.
11:07Not only is this bill harmful to communities in Michigan
11:11as well as all across the country,
11:13but it also risks undermining a key part
11:16of our democratic process.
11:18President Trump and his crony,
11:21Budget Director Russ Vogt,
11:23are trying to undercut the voice of everyday Americans
11:26in our government through this process.
11:30Americans sent us here to represent them
11:32and to act in their best interest.
11:36And that's why our Constitution gives Congress,
11:39not the President,
11:40the sole power to make laws,
11:42including the power of the purse.
11:45And that's why lawmakers routinely come together
11:48to decide on a bipartisan basis
11:51how to allocate federal funding
11:53in a way that best serves the people
11:56who live in our states.
11:58I'm proud to take part in that important process
12:01as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
12:05And I'm proud that my Democratic
12:06and Republican colleagues on the committee
12:08are working hard to advance common sense,
12:11bipartisan funding bills that will meet the needs
12:15of all of our communities.
12:17But Donald Trump wants to throw these bills out the window
12:21so he can pick which communities win
12:24and which communities lose
12:26when it comes to federal resources.
12:28Funding laws are still laws.
12:32And Congress passed these laws with bipartisan support
12:36to direct resources to these programs.
12:40No president gets unilateral say
12:42on how any law is implemented.
12:44And no president gets to overrule Congress's bipartisan laws.
12:49But the legislation pending before the Senate today
12:55would open up a slippery slope
12:57that would undercut Congress's authority,
13:00rob our communities of important resources,
13:03and ultimately erode the voice of the American people
13:06who elect their members of Congress
13:09to make these decisions in their best interest.
13:12We have to put our foot down
13:15because we know it will not stop here.
13:19Today, it's funding for local public media.
13:22But tomorrow, it could be funding
13:24for infectious disease research, public education,
13:27or weather forecasting, all on the chopping block.
13:32They've made it pretty clear
13:34that folks just want to cut
13:35rather than leading our government
13:37in a way that makes our constituents' lives better.
13:40We saw it at the beginning of this year
13:43when the administration froze funds
13:45that Congress passed into law
13:47to support local infrastructure upgrades,
13:50cancer research, child care programs,
13:54opioid addiction centers, and so many more.
13:58Just a few weeks ago,
14:00the administration froze a ton of funding
14:01that Congress passed for summer school
14:04and for school programs.
14:07And again, with a big, bad bill
14:09that our Republican colleagues just passed,
14:12President Trump signed into law
14:14a bill that gutted funding
14:16for critical resources like Medicaid and SNAP,
14:19ripping health care and food assistance
14:21from millions of Americans,
14:23all to cover the cost
14:24for their massive tax cut for billionaires.
14:28And now, today,
14:30Republicans are trying to bypass, once again,
14:33bipartisan laws,
14:34laws that many of them voted for themselves.
14:37So they can rubber stamp
14:40another round of President Trump's harmful cuts.
14:45Let's take a look at the harm
14:47that these cuts will do.
14:49Take the proposed elimination of funding
14:51for public broadcasting.
14:53This would eliminate the single most important source
14:56of funding for local radio and TV stations
14:59that focus on providing high-quality,
15:02community-centered content.
15:03When local public media stations from Grand Rapids
15:08to Marquette see a huge chunk of their budget
15:11eliminated by this bill,
15:13they will, at a minimum, be forced to let people go.
15:16And these are Michiganders
15:17who are just trying to keep their friends
15:19and neighbors informed
15:21on what's happening in their local community.
15:24Families will no longer have 24-7 access
15:27to Michigan's Learning Channel,
15:28which provides educational math
15:31and literacy content
15:32for children all across my state.
15:35But the biggest harm
15:36that these funding cuts will have
15:38on our communities
15:39is the impact to emergency response
15:41and public safety.
15:43Many of Michigan's public TV
15:45and radio stations
15:46are responsible
15:48for broadcasting emergency alerts
15:50during national disasters
15:52like tornadoes, wildfires,
15:55or severe flooding.
15:57When catastrophic ice storms
15:59swept through northern Michigan
16:00earlier this year,
16:01it was local radio stations
16:03that literally saved lives
16:04by broadcasting emergency warnings
16:06to folks
16:07after commercial towers went down.
16:11These alerts are critical,
16:13particularly in rural communities,
16:15where these local public stations
16:17are often the only ones available
16:20to reach people
16:21during an emergency.
16:23WNMU out of Marquette
16:25is the only source
16:26of emergency alert services
16:27for over 250,000 residents
16:30in Michigan's Upper Peninsula.
16:33This single-air station
16:34covers an area larger
16:36than Connecticut, Massachusetts,
16:39Rhode Island, and Delaware combined.
16:41And if Republicans pass
16:43this disastrous bill,
16:45those communities
16:45will be left in the dark
16:47when the next emergency strikes.
16:50Local public media
16:51also plays an important role
16:53in supporting national security
16:54and law enforcement efforts.
16:56In the Thumb region,
16:57Delta College public media
16:58hosts transmitters
16:59for the FBI
17:00and the Coast Guard
17:02to ensure that they can
17:03effectively communicate
17:04during emergency situations.
17:08Eliminating funding
17:08for that partnership,
17:09as this bill would do,
17:11is quite literally
17:12putting American lives
17:13and the homeland at risk.
17:15And don't get me wrong,
17:17I'm all for reducing waste
17:19and making sure
17:20that we're spending
17:21taxpayer dollars efficiently,
17:23but gutting funding
17:24for local stations
17:25that communities rely on
17:27to keep their families safe
17:28is to cut corners
17:30that is absolutely detrimental
17:32to public safety.
17:33So when President Trump
17:36and his cronies
17:37like Russ Vogt
17:37say that this bill
17:38targets government fraud,
17:40waste, and abuse,
17:41something that I have spent
17:41my entire life
17:43fighting against,
17:44we know that
17:45it's just not true.
17:47Don't forget,
17:49they just passed a bill
17:51that's going to add
17:52three trillion dollars
17:54to the deficit.
17:56They don't care about
17:57balancing the budget
17:59or limiting waste.
18:00they want to cut services
18:02that American families
18:03depend on
18:03so they can afford
18:05a bigger tax cut
18:06for the wealthiest Americans.
18:09And in addition
18:10to local broadcasting,
18:11this bill also
18:12will upend bipartisan
18:13investments
18:14in foreign assistance
18:15that Congress made
18:16earlier this year
18:17to maintain
18:19our global leadership
18:20and protect
18:21U.S. national
18:22security interest.
18:24While foreign assistance
18:25represents less than
18:27one percent
18:27of the federal government,
18:29it provides critical
18:30benefits to our nation.
18:34These strategic investments
18:35help save American lives,
18:37reinforce our global leadership,
18:39and support economic growth
18:40here in our country.
18:42Foreign assistance
18:43helps promote global stability
18:45and prevent conflict
18:46that is more costly
18:47for us in the long run.
18:49But this bill
18:50undermines those strategic goals
18:52by compromising programs
18:54that have long received
18:56bipartisan support.
18:57funding for programs
18:59like the Feed the Future
19:01and efforts to counter
19:02Russian and Chinese influence
19:03has been cut
19:04in this bill.
19:06These programs
19:07just don't support
19:08communities abroad,
19:09they actually stimulate
19:10local businesses
19:11and economies
19:12right here at home.
19:13Feed the Future,
19:14which is a part
19:15of the U.S. Agency
19:16for International Development,
19:18supports local farmers
19:19by purchasing
19:20their products
19:21and distributing them
19:22to people in need
19:23around the globe.
19:25If Republicans pass
19:27this bill,
19:28those farmers
19:29will lose.
19:31Feed the Future
19:32also partners
19:33with universities
19:33and colleges
19:34across the U.S.
19:35to operate innovation labs
19:37that draw on their expertise
19:39to tackle
19:40the world's biggest challenges
19:42in food security.
19:44Institutions like
19:45Michigan State University
19:47conduct cutting-edge
19:48agricultural research
19:49to help farmers
19:50grow better products
19:51that support Americans.
19:53These partnerships
19:55also provide
19:56training opportunities
19:57for the next generation
19:58of researchers
19:59to help maintain
20:00America's competitiveness.
20:03If this bill passes,
20:05MSU will lose.
20:08But Michigan State University
20:09is not alone.
20:10Institutions across the country
20:12in states like
20:13Kansas,
20:14Alabama,
20:15Mississippi,
20:17Texas,
20:17Louisiana,
20:18Oklahoma,
20:20North Carolina,
20:20and many more
20:21will also have
20:23their vital research projects
20:24canceled.
20:27Foreign assistance
20:27is designed
20:28to prevent
20:29the need
20:30for more costly
20:30interventions
20:31down the line.
20:33This bill will undo
20:34the success
20:35of past generations
20:36of Americans
20:37and damage
20:38our geopolitical standing,
20:40all to save
20:41just a fraction
20:42of our nation's
20:43annual budget
20:44while doing serious damage
20:46to American leadership
20:48across the globe.
20:50But the bigger picture here
20:51is that Republicans
20:52are allowing
20:53Donald Trump
20:54to bypass Congress
20:56and the bipartisan laws
20:58that we pass
20:59right here.
21:01Every year,
21:02Congress tirelessly
21:03negotiates
21:04bipartisan funding bills
21:05and each side
21:06makes compromises.
21:09But if one party
21:09can simply rip up
21:11those bipartisan funding agreements
21:12by enacting
21:14one-sided rescissions
21:15like what my Republican
21:16colleagues
21:17are going to be doing here,
21:19the appropriations project
21:21will simply break down.
21:24How can we be assured
21:25that these bipartisan agreements
21:27are being made
21:28in good faith
21:28if Republicans
21:29are just going to
21:30turn their backs
21:31on them
21:32just a few months later?
21:34How can we be sure
21:35that the funding laws
21:36we pass
21:36will help
21:37all of our communities
21:38succeed
21:39if our Republican
21:40colleagues
21:41will simply let
21:42President Trump
21:42pick who wins
21:43and who loses
21:45when it comes
21:46to federal support?
21:48President Trump's
21:49Budget Director,
21:50Russ Vogt,
21:51has already made it clear
21:52that he won't stop
21:53with this rescission effort.
21:55He just opened the door
21:56to undercutting
21:57the bipartisan funding laws
21:58that Congress passed
22:00and there's no telling
22:01where he and President Trump
22:02will stop
22:03if they succeed here.
22:05Congress is meant
22:07to be an independent branch
22:08of the government
22:09from the presidency
22:10with our own
22:12unique powers.
22:14Making decisions
22:14about how the federal government
22:16should allocate
22:17its resources
22:17is one of those powers
22:19that belongs
22:20solely to Congress
22:21under the United States
22:23Constitution.
22:25What we do today
22:26will either reaffirm
22:28that Congress
22:29makes the laws
22:30or it will show
22:31how quickly
22:32our Republican colleagues
22:34will roll over
22:35and rubber stamp
22:37whatever Donald Trump wants
22:39no matter,
22:40no matter what harm
22:42it may do
22:43to the people
22:44that they represent.
22:46Mr. President,
22:47I urge my colleagues
22:48to oppose
22:49this harmful bill.
22:55Mr. President.
22:57Senator Morgan.
22:58Yes,
22:58you now have his consent
22:59to grant floor privileges
23:00to my interns
23:01for their shadow days
23:02on the following dates.
23:03Malia Perry
23:04on July 23rd, 2025.
23:08Loud objection.
23:10Thank you,
23:10Mr. President.
23:12My colleagues
23:13from Wisconsin
23:13and Michigan
23:14have spoken
23:15to the destructive
23:16nature of this rescission
23:18because of the programs
23:20that will be canceled
23:21midstream.
23:22I have seen so often
23:26the power
23:27of our international
23:28aid programs
23:30in assisting
23:31in nutrition
23:31and fighting tuberculosis
23:33and malaria
23:35and AIDS
23:36across the world.
23:39But what many
23:40may not understand
23:41is that small fraction,
23:44less a third of 1%,
23:46that we've spent
23:47in those programs
23:48has an incredible yield
23:50not just in doing
23:52good works
23:53around the world
23:54but have been doing
23:56good for America
23:57because the relationships
23:59that are forged
24:00through those programs,
24:02the respect
24:02that is forged
24:03through those programs
24:05comes back
24:07to benefit us
24:08in all kinds
24:10of cooperation
24:11on our huge range
24:13of diplomatic goals,
24:15be they economic,
24:16be they trade,
24:18be they issues
24:19of national security.
24:21That's in fact
24:21what's referred to
24:22as soft power
24:24and soft power
24:26is at risk
24:27with this strategy
24:30of canceling
24:31these programs.
24:33And I think
24:34about rural Oregon
24:36where so often
24:38the warnings
24:39on floods
24:40or fires
24:41is broadcast
24:42over the public
24:44radio system
24:44and all kinds
24:46of different channels
24:47have different programs
24:49that people become
24:50quite attached to.
24:52So there are simply
24:53good humor programs
24:55that are fun
24:56to listen to
24:57and others are
24:58good music programs
24:59but a lot of it
25:00is good news programs,
25:02things deeply appreciated
25:04throughout the state
25:05but often harder
25:07to access
25:08in rural Oregon.
25:09and so
25:10I'm concerned
25:12about this
25:12concerted attack
25:14on rural America.
25:16First my colleagues
25:17across the aisle
25:18say
25:18we're going to make
25:19it very, very hard
25:20for people in rural America
25:22to get health care
25:23if they're on Medicaid.
25:25And then
25:26because
25:27without Medicaid
25:28financing
25:29and paying for services
25:31you lose
25:32an entire hospital
25:33or you lose
25:35an entire clinic,
25:36the whole rural community
25:38is profoundly damaged
25:40because everyone's
25:41health care
25:41is affected.
25:42An attack
25:43on rural America
25:45continues
25:45through this bill.
25:49What I really
25:50want to talk about
25:51now
25:52is to give a sense
25:54how this bill
25:57is an attack
25:59on the separations
26:00of power
26:01that we all
26:03here in the Senate
26:05have taken
26:06a constitutional
26:07oath
26:08to defend.
26:11You know
26:12when I first
26:12came to Congress
26:14as an intern
26:15for Senator Hatfield
26:16it was
26:17we were celebrating
26:17our 200th anniversary
26:19like so long ago
26:2149 years ago
26:22and Senator Hatfield
26:26had a saying
26:27about appropriators
26:28and that was
26:30that appropriators
26:31that is
26:32those members
26:33of the Senate
26:33who served
26:34on the spending
26:34committee
26:35they were
26:37first appropriators
26:39and then
26:39they were
26:40Republicans
26:41or Democrats.
26:43That's
26:44how strongly
26:45they felt
26:46about their
26:47shared responsibility
26:48to manage
26:50the power
26:50of the purse.
26:52The power
26:53of the purse
26:53Article 1
26:54Section 9
26:55of the Constitution
26:55says
26:56and I will quote it
26:58no money
26:59shall be drawn
27:00from the treasury
27:00but in consequence
27:03of appropriations
27:04made by law.
27:09And here is the thing
27:11the Congress
27:14is vested
27:15with that power
27:16but when you decide
27:19how to spend money
27:20you're really talking
27:22about your values.
27:23so those
27:25who serve
27:26on the
27:26appropriation
27:27committee
27:27were doing
27:29their best
27:29to enact
27:30the values
27:31of our country
27:32be they
27:33investment
27:34in health care
27:35in housing
27:37in education
27:38investments
27:39that created
27:40good paying
27:41jobs
27:42investments
27:43that helped
27:43small communities
27:45thrive
27:46investments
27:47that helped
27:47build infrastructure
27:49across the country
27:50that was the
27:52responsibility
27:53that was so
27:54cherished
27:55and there was
27:56a term
27:57for those
27:57who chaired
27:58the 12
27:59subcommittees
28:00on appropriations
28:01and that term
28:03the colloquial term
28:04was they were
28:04the Senate's
28:05cardinals
28:05it's taken
28:07from the
28:08Catholic Church
28:09where cardinals
28:10helped steer
28:11the church
28:11on the right
28:13path
28:13and the
28:15cardinals
28:16of the Senate
28:17had the
28:17responsibility
28:18of steering
28:19our nation
28:20through our
28:21spending decisions
28:22on the right
28:23path
28:24for the people
28:24of America
28:25this is
28:27in fact
28:27a key part
28:29of government
28:30by and for
28:31the people
28:32that shared
28:33responsibility
28:33to spend
28:35that money
28:35wisely
28:36but even
28:39in the early
28:40years that I
28:40was here
28:41in the Senate
28:42we're starting
28:43to see signs
28:44of the breakdown
28:46of that
28:47relationship
28:48the last
28:49conversation I
28:50had with
28:51Senator Hatfield
28:51before he
28:53passed away
28:54he said
28:56what happened
28:57to the
28:58appropriations
28:58committee
28:58now
29:00Senator Hatfield
29:00was a
29:01Republican
29:01and he'd
29:02been chair
29:03of the
29:03appropriations
29:04committee
29:04and he
29:05said
29:06I worked
29:07so closely
29:07with Dan
29:08Inouye
29:09of Hawaii
29:10and I
29:11worked
29:11so closely
29:12with Patty
29:13Murray
29:14of Washington
29:15what has
29:17happened
29:17to that
29:17collaboration
29:18that was
29:21several years
29:21ago
29:22but
29:24as we
29:25have
29:26watched
29:26over time
29:28some
29:30significant
29:30things are
29:31happening
29:31that we
29:32should
29:32understand
29:33as
29:33senators
29:34in the
29:35not so
29:37distant
29:37past
29:37you
29:38tried
29:38to have
29:39a fair
29:39allocation
29:40of revenue
29:41laws
29:42that raised
29:42money
29:43and then
29:44as you
29:45filled the
29:45treasury
29:46the question
29:46became
29:47how will we
29:48spend it
29:49so
29:49responsibility
29:50shifted
29:51from the
29:51finance
29:51committee
29:52to the
29:53appropriations
29:54committee
29:55but
29:58over time
29:59it's become
30:00more and
30:00more popular
30:01to spend
30:02money for
30:03programs
30:03through tax
30:04credits
30:05and deductions
30:06so much
30:07of the
30:07spending
30:07that was
30:08in the
30:08appropriations
30:09committee
30:09has shifted
30:10to the
30:11finance
30:11committee
30:12and then
30:14became
30:15more and
30:16more popular
30:16to shift
30:17discretionary
30:19spending
30:19over which
30:20the appropriation
30:21committee
30:21has control
30:22into
30:23mandatory
30:24spending
30:25and if
30:26it's
30:26mandatory
30:27it's
30:27not a
30:28decision
30:28decided
30:29by the
30:30appropriators
30:31and then
30:32on top
30:34of all
30:34that
30:35we started
30:36to build
30:36up more
30:37and more
30:39national
30:40debt
30:41and so
30:42all the
30:43money that
30:43went to
30:43interest
30:44on that
30:44debt
30:45is money
30:46unavailable
30:47to be
30:48spent
30:48on basic
30:50programs
30:50of health
30:51care
30:52housing
30:53education
30:54investments
30:55that
30:56create
30:56good
30:56paying
30:57jobs
30:57across
30:57America
30:58infrastructure
30:59security
31:01that money
31:03isn't so
31:04available
31:05because it's
31:05tied up
31:06paying
31:06for interest
31:07so these
31:08trends
31:09are changing
31:10the role
31:12of those
31:14senate
31:15cardinals
31:16the chairs
31:17and the
31:19ranking
31:19members
31:20of the
31:20subcommittees
31:21who helped
31:22guide us
31:22in the 12
31:23different sections
31:24of spending
31:25and I'll
31:29say
31:29that problem
31:31of the
31:31debt
31:32growing
31:32that's
31:33very
31:33significant
31:33back in
31:361974
31:37democrats
31:39and republicans
31:40came together
31:41and said
31:41let's have
31:42an architecture
31:43to ensure
31:45that we
31:47are very
31:47responsible
31:48and don't
31:49run up
31:49massive debt
31:50we will
31:50have a
31:51filibuster
31:51free pathway
31:52for one
31:52purpose
31:53and that's
31:54to reduce
31:55deficits
31:55only to
31:57reduce
31:58deficits
31:58and then
31:59my colleagues
32:0022 years
32:01later
32:01across the
32:02aisle
32:02my
32:02republican
32:03colleagues
32:03said
32:04well you
32:04know
32:04we want
32:05a filibuster
32:06free
32:06pathway
32:06to do
32:07tax cuts
32:07which will
32:08increase
32:08the deficit
32:09and they
32:10brought in
32:10a new
32:11parliamentarian
32:11in order
32:13to get a
32:14ruling
32:14that they
32:15could do
32:15the exact
32:16opposite
32:17of what
32:17100
32:17senators
32:18had agreed
32:19to
32:19so more
32:20and more
32:21payments
32:22diverted
32:23into
32:23interest
32:24we have
32:27that
32:27big
32:28beautiful
32:29bill
32:29as trump
32:29calls it
32:30or as
32:31many of
32:31us call
32:32it
32:32the big
32:33ugly
32:34betrayal
32:34bill
32:35you know
32:36the one
32:36I'm talking
32:37about
32:37the ones
32:38where
32:38families
32:39lose
32:39and
32:40billionaires
32:41win
32:41that was
32:43passed
32:43two weeks
32:44ago
32:44well this
32:48rescission
32:49bill is
32:50a continuation
32:50of that
32:51vision
32:51of families
32:52lose
32:53particularly
32:54rural
32:55families
32:56particularly
32:57all
32:58Americans
32:59who lose
33:01out on
33:01the advantages
33:02of soft
33:03power that
33:03we exercise
33:04around the
33:06world
33:06and billionaires
33:07win
33:08but it's
33:10a direct
33:11attack
33:12as well
33:13on the
33:14immediate
33:15process
33:16of Democrats
33:17and Republicans
33:18working together
33:19on the
33:20appropriations
33:21committee
33:21in this
33:22really sacred
33:24responsibility
33:25of exercising
33:26the power
33:27of the purse
33:28let's examine
33:31that word
33:32rescission
33:32it's a fancy
33:33term
33:33what does it
33:34really mean
33:34a rescission
33:35is a repeal
33:36of a previous
33:38spending law
33:39a law was
33:40passed to spend
33:41a certain amount
33:42of money
33:42on a certain
33:42program
33:43or on a
33:44certain agency
33:45and a repeal
33:46of it
33:47that's all
33:47that fancy
33:48term means
33:49and so
33:51the spending
33:51process is one
33:52where those
33:54members of the
33:54spending committee
33:55come together
33:56Democrats and
33:57Republicans
33:57together
33:58and they work
33:59out a
34:00bipartisan
34:00bill
34:01and that
34:02bill
34:03last year
34:04for fiscal
34:05year 25
34:0511 out of
34:0612 bills
34:07that came out
34:08of the
34:08spending committee
34:09out of the
34:09appropriations
34:10committee
34:10were unanimous
34:12or nearly
34:12unanimous
34:13where do
34:15you look
34:15for that
34:15type of
34:16bipartisan
34:16cooperation
34:17in Congress
34:18anymore
34:18well
34:19last year
34:20appropriations
34:22committee
34:2211 out of
34:2312 bills
34:24passing
34:24unanimously
34:25or nearly
34:26unanimously
34:27out of
34:28committee
34:28but what
34:30is happening
34:31right now
34:33is consideration
34:34of undoing
34:37that bipartisan
34:38work
34:39with a
34:41partisan
34:42repeal
34:43now
34:45just
34:46just
34:46kind of
34:47stick
34:47with me
34:48here
34:48about
34:48a
34:49normal
34:49deal
34:49you
34:50make
34:50an
34:50agreement
34:51with a
34:51friend
34:52I'll do
34:53this
34:53if you
34:54do
34:54that
34:55well
34:57everyone
34:58kind of
34:58understands
34:59that's a
35:00partnership
35:00you have
35:02you have
35:02agreement
35:02but what
35:03if one
35:04person
35:05bails
35:05on that
35:06agreement
35:06later
35:06it's a
35:09betrayal
35:09but
35:11bailing on
35:12the agreement
35:13is exactly
35:14what this
35:14bill
35:15is
35:15Democrats
35:17and Republicans
35:18together
35:18made those
35:20spending
35:20decisions
35:21and now
35:23they're being
35:24undone
35:25in a
35:26purely
35:27partisan
35:27fashion
35:28they're
35:29breaking
35:29the deal
35:30they're
35:31going back
35:31on the
35:31agreement
35:32they're
35:33breaking
35:33their
35:34word
35:35that is
35:37pretty
35:37shameful
35:38and it's
35:39why my
35:40colleagues
35:40have been
35:41saying
35:41don't do
35:42it
35:43because
35:44it's
35:44wrong
35:45and it
35:46has a
35:47huge
35:47impact
35:48going
35:48forward
35:49once
35:50somebody
35:50you've
35:51made
35:51an
35:51agreement
35:51with
35:52breaks
35:52their
35:52end
35:53of the
35:53bargain
35:53are you
35:55going to
35:55make a
35:56second
35:57bargain
35:57with that
35:57same
35:58individual
35:58knowing
36:00that they
36:00bailed on
36:01the first
36:01deal
36:01the answer
36:03is probably
36:04not
36:04so how
36:07will
36:08we come
36:09together
36:09and continue
36:11what we did
36:11a year ago
36:1211 out of
36:1312 bills
36:14passing out
36:15of the
36:15Senate
36:15committee
36:16in a
36:17hugely
36:17bipartisan
36:18fashion
36:18if one
36:20side
36:20comes back
36:21and breaks
36:22the deal
36:22I would
36:24invite my
36:25Republican
36:25colleagues
36:26come to
36:26the floor
36:27and explain
36:28to me
36:28how breaking
36:29the deal
36:30that you
36:31were participating
36:32in a year
36:33ago
36:33is an
36:34honorable
36:34thing to
36:35do
36:35and explain
36:36to me
36:37how we're
36:37going to
36:38do future
36:38deals
36:39if you're
36:40breaking
36:40the existing
36:41deal
36:41now never
36:42in the
36:43history of
36:43the Senate
36:44has there
36:44been a
36:45partisan
36:46repeal
36:47never
36:49this is
36:50the first
36:50time
36:50why
36:52because we
36:54understood
36:54together
36:55that a
36:55deal
36:56is a
36:56deal
36:56that
36:58doesn't
36:58mean
36:58the
36:58president
36:59doesn't
36:59have
36:59influence
37:00hey
37:01that was
37:01just
37:01about
37:02last
37:02year's
37:03bill
37:03the
37:05president
37:06lays out
37:06a budget
37:07for the
37:07next
37:07year
37:07has a
37:08huge
37:08influence
37:09the
37:09president
37:10can
37:10veto
37:11the
37:11next
37:12set
37:13of spending
37:14bills
37:14or any
37:15one
37:15of them
37:15but
37:18once
37:19it's
37:19locked
37:20into
37:20law
37:20passed
37:21by the
37:21house
37:21passed
37:22by the
37:22senate
37:23signed
37:23by a
37:23president
37:24to come
37:24back and
37:25undo that
37:25in this
37:26partisan
37:26fashion
37:27you are
37:28breaking
37:29the honor
37:30code
37:31that has
37:32made
37:32bipartisan
37:33collaboration
37:35so
37:36successful
37:37that's
37:39why
37:40you shouldn't
37:40do it
37:41that's
37:42why
37:42you should
37:43vote
37:43no
37:44now
37:51this
37:51question
37:52of how
37:53this
37:53affects
37:54our
37:54constitution
37:54is
37:55significant
37:56because
37:58as I
37:59cited
37:59the
37:59constitution
38:00assigns
38:01the
38:02responsibility
38:02of the
38:02power
38:03of the
38:03purse
38:03to
38:04congress
38:04in article
38:06one
38:07section
38:07nine
38:08but there
38:10have been
38:11occasions
38:11before
38:12one
38:13president
38:13said
38:14we
38:14would
38:15like
38:15to
38:15actually
38:15have
38:15that
38:16power
38:16of the
38:16purse
38:16and the
38:18president
38:19who really
38:19pursued that
38:20aggressively
38:21was
38:22president
38:22nixon
38:22in the
38:231970s
38:25president
38:26nixon
38:26signed
38:28a law
38:28about
38:29how money
38:30would be
38:30spent
38:31but then
38:32decided not
38:33to spend
38:34it
38:34and withheld
38:36the money
38:37from being
38:37spent on
38:38housing
38:38on education
38:40on highways
38:41on agriculture
38:43and on
38:43pollution
38:43prevention
38:44programs
38:44well of course
38:47this was
38:48appealed
38:48on a
38:49constitutional
38:50basis
38:50because
38:51constitution
38:52doesn't
38:52give the
38:53president
38:53the power
38:54to impound
38:54funds
38:55congress
38:57by law
38:58and by law
38:58signed by
38:59a president
39:00had said
39:00here is what
39:01must be spent
39:02on these
39:03programs
39:03and the
39:05president
39:05came along
39:06president
39:06nixon
39:06said i
39:06don't want
39:07to do
39:07it
39:07i'm not
39:08going to
39:08do it
39:08take me
39:10to court
39:10so
39:11they went
39:12to court
39:12and
39:13it didn't
39:14actually make
39:15it to the
39:15supreme court
39:15until after
39:16president nixon
39:17was out of
39:18office
39:18after having
39:21resigned
39:21because of
39:22the watergate
39:22scandal
39:23but in a way
39:24this was
39:25really almost
39:26a bigger
39:26scandal
39:26this was
39:27an attack
39:27on the
39:28constitution
39:28and so
39:30what did
39:30the court
39:31say
39:31in train
39:33versus
39:33new york
39:34and the
39:36piece of
39:36spending
39:37that made
39:37it to
39:37the supreme
39:38court
39:38was related
39:40to spending
39:41on water
39:43treatment systems
39:44of all
39:44things
39:44and the
39:46court said
39:46you cannot
39:47do this
39:48you cannot
39:49impound
39:50funds
39:50it is
39:51unconstitutional
39:52because the
39:53constitution assigns
39:54that responsibility
39:55to congress
39:56now if the law
39:59had been written
39:59by congress
40:00to say the
40:00president has
40:01flexibility
40:01between here
40:02and here
40:02maybe a
40:04modest amount
40:04of flexibility
40:05may have
40:06survived the
40:06constitutional
40:07test
40:07but the
40:10eye to the
40:10president could
40:11just simply
40:11ignore the
40:12law
40:12no
40:13the court
40:14said no
40:15and then there
40:15was a second
40:15test
40:16this second
40:17test had
40:18to do
40:18in 1996
40:19with congress
40:22where republicans
40:24controlled the
40:24house and they
40:25controlled the
40:25senate
40:26they decided
40:27you know how
40:28we'll tackle the
40:28deficit now
40:29now that we
40:30have destroyed
40:30the 1974
40:32law that said
40:33the fast track
40:34could only be
40:34used for
40:36reducing the
40:38deficit
40:38and how we
40:39switched that
40:39and said it
40:40could be used
40:40for increasing
40:41the deficit
40:41now that we
40:42have destroyed
40:42that we have
40:42a new plan
40:43and we'll just
40:44simply say to
40:45the president
40:45you can line
40:46out a veto
40:46and again the
40:48court weighed
40:48in and the
40:50court said
40:50hell no
40:51no you can't
40:52because the
40:54constitution does
40:54not say you
40:55can delegate to
40:56the president
40:57powers the
40:58constitution assigned
40:59to you
40:59it assigns it
41:00to us
41:01that is our
41:03responsibility
41:04so again the
41:07core concept
41:08here
41:09is that
41:10bipartisan
41:11work
41:11in forging
41:13a spending
41:14bill
41:14should not
41:16be done
41:16by one
41:17partner
41:18bailing on
41:19the deal
41:19that was agreed
41:20to the previous
41:21year
41:21now there is
41:23a formal
41:23way to go
41:24about doing
41:25this in a
41:25bipartisan
41:26fashion
41:26and that is
41:28each spending
41:29bill in
41:29addition to
41:30saying what
41:30we'll spend
41:31next year
41:31can contain
41:33agreements
41:34on undoing
41:36the spending
41:36from the
41:37previous year
41:37because it's
41:41the same set
41:42of people
41:42saying we
41:43assigned funds
41:44last year
41:45but now we
41:45see they're
41:46not needed
41:46maybe the
41:47president pointed
41:48out they're
41:48not needed
41:49we will undo
41:49it but it
41:50will undo
41:50it in a
41:51bipartisan
41:51fashion in
41:53the appropriation
41:54committee
41:54in that
41:56same sense
41:57of partnership
41:57working together
41:58so rescissions
42:00yes we do
42:01them all the
42:01time
42:02but they're
42:04done on a
42:05bipartisan
42:05basis in
42:06the spending
42:07committee
42:08not in a
42:09bipartisan
42:10special bill
42:11one sided
42:12basically bailing
42:14on the deal
42:15struck last
42:16year
42:17because this
42:21strategy is a
42:23recipe for
42:23disaster
42:24destroying the
42:25bond of
42:26trust on a
42:27deal made
42:28with each
42:28side having
42:29its priorities
42:30in a bill
42:30and then one
42:31side bailing on
42:32it because of
42:33that it's
42:34never happened
42:35before and it
42:37should never
42:37happen now
42:38Mr.
42:39President
42:40let's step
42:44back from the
42:45immediate loyalty
42:46test the
42:47president of the
42:47United States
42:48has put forward
42:48the president
42:49has said
42:49it's a
42:50loyalty test
42:51I want you
42:52to do this
42:53because I
42:53want you
42:53to bend
42:54the knee
42:55to me
42:55that is not
42:57the responsibility
42:58of the senator
42:59of the United
43:00States of
43:00America to bend
43:01the knee
43:02to the
43:02executive branch
43:03the constitution
43:05gives us
43:06the responsibility
43:07to design how
43:08the executive
43:09branch
43:09functions
43:10it gives us
43:11the senate
43:12the responsibility
43:12to fund the
43:13programs
43:14and the
43:15services
43:15the way
43:19you lose
43:20government
43:21of by
43:22and for
43:22the people
43:23is to
43:24have
43:25an
43:27acquiescent
43:27legislature
43:30that stops
43:32doing its
43:32job
43:33and just
43:33said
43:33we'll
43:34respond
43:34we'll
43:35just do
43:35what the
43:35president
43:36asks
43:36and a
43:37deferential
43:38court
43:38and right
43:40now we
43:40have both
43:41but you
43:42took it
43:43off to
43:43the
43:43constitution
43:44each
43:45one of
43:45us
43:46so honor
43:46that
43:47oath
43:47do not
43:50engage
43:51for the
43:51first time
43:52ever
43:52in creating
43:53this recipe
43:54for disaster
43:55of our
43:56bipartisan
43:56responsibilities
43:58thank you
43:59mr. president
44:00mr. president
44:02senator
44:03virginia
44:04mr. president
44:04the good
44:05news is that
44:05i am the
44:06last speaker
44:07of the
44:07day
44:08that is
44:09good news
44:09i wish i
44:11could tell
44:11you my
44:11speech will
44:12be short
44:12i don't
44:14think it
44:14will be
44:15long but
44:15i will
44:15try to
44:16make it
44:16interesting
44:17i want
44:18to tell
44:18you a
44:19story
44:19and it's
44:21not a
44:21story about
44:22anything that's
44:22happened in
44:23this building
44:23it's a
44:25story about
44:26a very
44:26humble
44:27catholic
44:29parish
44:29in north
44:31side
44:31richmond
44:32virginia
44:32called
44:34saint
44:34elizabeth's
44:35of
44:35hungary
44:36it's a
44:37very
44:38humble
44:38parish
44:38it's a
44:40small
44:40parish
44:40it's
44:41slightly
44:41over
44:42100
44:42years
44:42old
44:43it's
44:44the
44:44church
44:45where
44:45my
44:45wife
44:45and
44:46i
44:46were
44:46married
44:46more
44:46than
44:4740
44:47years
44:47ago
44:48where
44:49all
44:49three
44:49of
44:49our
44:50children
44:50were
44:50baptized
44:51where
44:52we
44:52attended
44:53mass
44:53just
44:54this
44:54last
44:54Sunday
44:55to
44:55hear
44:55the
44:56gospel
44:57reading
44:57the
44:58story
44:58of
44:59the
44:59good
44:59Samaritan
45:00the
45:03church
45:04was
45:04founded
45:04more
45:05than
45:05100
45:05years
45:06ago
45:06in
45:06an
45:06unusual
45:07way
45:07there
45:09were
45:09Italian
45:10and
45:10German
45:11immigrants
45:11in
45:12Richmond
45:12who
45:14felt
45:14looked
45:14down
45:15upon
45:15because
45:15of
45:16where
45:16they
45:16had
45:16come
45:17from
45:17and
45:18because
45:18of
45:19the
45:19accents
45:20that
45:20they
45:20spoke
45:21with
45:21and
45:22that
45:22their
45:22English
45:23wasn't
45:23so
45:24good
45:24and
45:25in
45:25the
45:25aftermath
45:26of
45:26World
45:26War
45:27One
45:27people
45:28looked
45:28at
45:28German
45:29Americans
45:30and
45:30Italian
45:30Americans
45:31with
45:31some
45:31suspicion
45:32German
45:32language
45:34was being
45:34criminalized
45:35in some
45:36of our
45:36states
45:37in the
45:37aftermath
45:37and
45:39these
45:39immigrant
45:40refugee
45:41Catholics
45:42decided
45:43that they
45:44wanted a
45:45place
45:45where they
45:46could feel
45:47welcomed
45:47loved
45:49and safe
45:50as they
45:50worshipped
45:51in accord
45:53with the
45:53American
45:53value
45:54of
45:54freedom
45:54of
45:54worship
45:54and so
45:56they
45:56set up
45:56this
45:57little
45:57parish
45:57in the
45:58Highland
45:58Park
45:58neighborhood
45:59of
45:59Northside
46:00Richmond
46:00Virginia
46:00where they
46:02could go
46:02and be
46:03together
46:03and feel
46:04safe
46:05they chose
46:06an interesting
46:07name
46:07Saint
46:07Elizabeth
46:08of
46:08Hungary
46:09Saint
46:10Elizabeth
46:10of
46:11Hungary
46:11lived
46:12a thousand
46:12years
46:13ago
46:13she
46:14was a
46:15teenager
46:15and she
46:16was a
46:16queen
46:17in a
46:18time
46:18of
46:18great
46:18poverty
46:19and
46:20against
46:21the
46:21wishes
46:21of
46:22her
46:22husband
46:23and
46:23other
46:23officials
46:24she
46:24would
46:25take
46:25bread
46:26and
46:26put
46:26the
46:27bread
46:27inside
46:27of
46:28her
46:28garments
46:28and
46:29go out
46:29and
46:29distribute
46:30it
46:30to
46:30the
46:30poor
46:30and
46:32once
46:33she
46:33was
46:33caught
46:34and
46:35she
46:35was
46:36made
46:36to
46:36open
46:36her
46:37garment
46:37and
46:37when
46:37she
46:38did
46:38open
46:38her
46:39garment
46:39the
46:39bread
46:39had
46:40turned
46:40into
46:40roses
46:40and
46:41that's
46:41the
46:41miracle
46:42that
46:43was
46:43attributed
46:43to
46:43her
46:44she
46:44lived
46:44only
46:45a
46:45short
46:45time
46:46and
46:46died
46:46but
46:46she
46:46was
46:47made
46:47a
46:47saint
46:47by
46:47the
46:47Catholic
46:48Church
46:48and
46:48these
46:49immigrants
46:50who
46:50started
46:51my
46:51parish
46:52chose
46:53that
46:53name
46:54because
46:56they
46:56felt
46:57like
46:57that
46:57was
46:57what
46:58was
46:58needed
46:58in
46:59the
46:59world
46:59people
47:01who
47:01would
47:01try
47:02to
47:02serve
47:02others
47:02in
47:03need
47:03100
47:05years
47:06later
47:06we
47:08celebrated
47:09the
47:09centennial
47:10of my
47:10church
47:10Mr.
47:11President
47:11a couple
47:12of
47:12years
47:12ago
47:12and
47:12I
47:12was
47:13sitting
47:13there
47:14I've
47:14now
47:14been
47:14a
47:14member
47:14of the
47:15parish
47:15for
47:1540
47:15years
47:16and
47:16I
47:16was
47:16looking
47:16around
47:17and
47:18I
47:18realized
47:19times
47:20change
47:20and
47:20they
47:20don't
47:22Catholic
47:23Relief
47:24Services
47:24which
47:25is
47:25one
47:25of
47:25the
47:26largest
47:26agencies
47:28in the
47:29United
47:29States
47:29that
47:30helps
47:30settle
47:30refugees
47:31who
47:31are
47:31legal
47:32immigrants
47:33refugees
47:34are
47:34legal
47:35immigrants
47:35about
47:3615
47:37years
47:37ago
47:38settled
47:38a
47:38Congolese
47:39family
47:39into
47:40my
47:40church
47:40who
47:41had
47:41been
47:41in
47:41a
47:42refugee
47:42camp
47:42after
47:43fleeing
47:43violence
47:44in the
47:44Congo
47:44Catholic
47:45French
47:46and
47:47Swahili
47:47speaking
47:48one
47:49Congolese
47:50family
47:50came to
47:51my
47:51church
47:51and
47:53then over
47:53time
47:54Catholic
47:54relief
47:56services
47:56decided
47:57well
47:58this
47:58family
47:58likes
47:59St.
47:59Elizabeth
48:00and they
48:00feel
48:00welcomed
48:01here
48:01and other
48:02families
48:03started to
48:03come to
48:04my
48:04church
48:04and so
48:05by now
48:06as we
48:06were celebrating
48:07our
48:07centennial
48:08and I'm
48:08looking around
48:09the parish
48:10where I go
48:10this small
48:11very humble
48:12parish
48:13it is
48:15sizably
48:15a
48:15Congolese
48:16refugee
48:17population
48:17legal
48:19immigrants
48:20to the
48:20United
48:20States
48:21who have
48:21been
48:22settled
48:22through
48:22the
48:22Catholic
48:23relief
48:24services
48:24and they've
48:26come to
48:26a place
48:27where they
48:28feel
48:29loved
48:29and cared
48:30for
48:30and safe
48:31and welcome
48:33the color
48:34of their
48:35skin
48:35the accent
48:35that they
48:36use
48:36the fact
48:37that they're
48:37unfamiliar
48:38with
48:38American
48:39culture
48:40might make
48:40them feel
48:41not so
48:41welcome
48:41in other
48:42venues
48:42but in
48:43my
48:43church
48:43they feel
48:44welcome
48:45and it
48:45made me
48:46realize
48:46as we
48:47celebrated
48:47that
48:48centennial
48:49that my
48:50church
48:50looks real
48:51different
48:51in some
48:52ways
48:52than when
48:53it was
48:53founded
48:53a hundred
48:54years ago
48:55but in
48:55other ways
48:55it's exactly
48:56the same
48:57it's a
48:57haven for
48:57people
48:58who are
48:59legal
49:00immigrants
49:01to the
49:01United
49:01States
49:02but need
49:02a place
49:03where they
49:03can gather
49:03with others
49:04and feel
49:04welcome
49:04why do I
49:07tell that
49:07story
49:08how is it
49:10connected to
49:10the rescission
49:11bill that
49:11we're going
49:12to be
49:12voting on
49:12tomorrow
49:13President
49:15Trump has
49:15sent a
49:16bill
49:16to
49:18Congress
49:19and one
49:21of the
49:22pillars of
49:22that bill
49:23is to
49:23rescind
49:24the funding
49:25for refugee
49:26resettlement
49:27programs in
49:27the United
49:28States
49:28run by
49:30churches
49:30seven of
49:33the ten
49:34organizations
49:35that resettle
49:36refugees in
49:37the United
49:37States are
49:38faith based
49:39organizations
49:41the largest
49:42two are the
49:43U.S.
49:43Conference of
49:44Catholic
49:44Bishops
49:45operating
49:46through
49:46Catholic
49:47Relief
49:47Services
49:48and the
49:49Evangelical
49:50Organization
49:51World Vision
49:52but it's
49:56not just
49:56them
49:57church world
50:00service
50:00Lutheran
50:02social services
50:03the Episcopal
50:04Church of the
50:05United States
50:05World Relief
50:07Hebrew
50:09Immigrant
50:09Aid Society
50:11founded more
50:12than a hundred
50:12years ago
50:13to try to
50:14bring Jews
50:15at that point
50:16from Europe
50:16to the United
50:18States and
50:18make sure that
50:19as legal
50:19immigrants
50:20yes they would
50:20be allowed
50:21to be here
50:21legally but
50:22they needed
50:22someone to
50:24teach them
50:24about American
50:25culture and
50:25integrate into
50:26American life
50:27the practice
50:30of American
50:31religious
50:31organizations
50:32assisting
50:33in legal
50:34immigration
50:35goes back
50:36more than
50:36a century
50:37and
50:39President
50:39Trump's
50:40rescission
50:40package
50:41that is
50:41before us
50:42wipes out
50:43funding
50:44to a
50:45dramatic
50:46degree
50:46for
50:47virtually
50:48all of
50:49them
50:49Hebrew
50:50Immigrant
50:50Aid
50:51Society
50:51has had
50:53to lay
50:53off
50:53hundreds
50:54of
50:54staff
50:55world
50:56relief
50:57said
50:58this
50:58President
50:59Trump
50:59said he
51:00will
51:00defend
51:00persecuted
51:01Christians
51:01but the
51:02U.S.
51:03refugee
51:03resettlement
51:04program
51:05is one
51:05of the
51:06primary
51:06ways
51:07that the
51:07U.S.
51:08government
51:08protects
51:09Christians
51:10and others
51:11fleeing
51:12persecution
51:13the Episcopal
51:15Church of the
51:15United States
51:16has had to
51:16end its
51:18long-standing
51:19refugee
51:19resettlement
51:20program
51:21because of
51:22President Trump's
51:23budget cuts
51:24Lutheran
51:26social services
51:27has had to
51:28they've struggled
51:29to make payroll
51:30they've had to
51:30lay off
51:31so many
51:32people
51:32they've
51:33reduced
51:33the
51:33services
51:34that they're
51:34able to
51:35provide
51:35especially
51:36to
51:36Afghan
51:37allies
51:38who were
51:38in the
51:38United
51:38States
51:39because
51:39they
51:39worked
51:40with
51:41the
51:41United
51:41States
51:41military
51:42in
51:42Afghanistan
51:43to
51:43protect
51:44our
51:45troops
51:46Catholic
51:48Charities
51:49has laid
51:49off
51:50all kinds
51:51of
51:51staff
51:52the
51:53families
51:53at my
51:53church
51:54they come
51:54up to
51:55me
51:55after
51:55mass
51:55on
51:56Sunday
51:56and
51:56they're
51:56so
51:57frightened
51:57about
51:57what
51:58might
51:58happen
51:59because
51:59many
51:59of
51:59them
51:59have
52:00families
52:00still
52:00in
52:00refugee
52:01camps
52:01who
52:01might
52:01want
52:02to
52:02come
52:02here
52:02as
52:02legal
52:03refugees
52:03as
52:04legal
52:05immigrants
52:05I
52:07don't
52:07know
52:08of
52:08a
52:08president
52:09who
52:12has
52:12attacked
52:13religious
52:14organizations
52:15Catholic
52:15evangelical
52:16Jewish
52:17who
52:19have
52:19been
52:19doing
52:19this
52:19work
52:20in
52:20many
52:20instances
52:21for
52:21more
52:21than
52:21a
52:21century
52:22in
52:22such
52:23an
52:23orchestrated
52:24intentional
52:25and
52:26calculated
52:26way
52:27as
52:27President
52:28Trump
52:28Matthew
52:33I
52:36was
52:36a
52:36stranger
52:37and
52:37you
52:37welcomed
52:37me
52:37in
52:38I
52:39was
52:39sick
52:39and
52:39you
52:39cared
52:40for
52:40me
52:40I
52:40was
52:40hungry
52:41and
52:41you
52:41fed
52:42me
52:42this
52:43is
52:43bedrock
52:44belief
52:45of
52:46our
52:47nation's
52:47religious
52:48organizations
52:49that
52:51they
52:51will
52:51follow
52:51the
52:52law
52:52legal
52:54refugee
52:54program
52:55but
52:55they
52:55will
52:56help
52:56the
52:57person
52:57who
52:58is
52:58accessing
52:59legal
53:00refugee
53:00programs
53:01to be
53:02able to
53:02integrate
53:03into
53:03a
53:03society
53:04so
53:05they
53:05can
53:05live
53:06with
53:06some
53:07sense
53:07of
53:08dignity
53:08and
53:09have
53:09some
53:09chance
53:10of
53:10success
53:10why
53:11cut
53:11these
53:11programs
53:12why
53:14look
53:15in the
53:15face
53:15of
53:15these
53:16religious
53:16organizations
53:17who
53:17out
53:18of
53:18a
53:18motivation
53:18of
53:19conscience
53:19for
53:20decades
53:21even
53:22a
53:22century
53:23have
53:24decided
53:25that
53:25they
53:25will
53:25try
53:26to
53:26smooth
53:26that
53:27path
53:27to
53:28integrate
53:29people
53:29into
53:30American
53:30life
53:31who
53:31are
53:31here
53:31lawfully
53:32why
53:35cut
53:35their
53:35funding
53:36why
53:36force
53:36them
53:37to
53:37be
53:37laid
53:37off
53:38why
53:38debilitate
53:39their
53:39ability
53:40to
53:40provide
53:40services
53:41it's
53:42an
53:42attack
53:42on
53:42the
53:42religious
53:43organizations
53:44so
53:45that
53:45they
53:46cannot
53:46do
53:46the
53:47work
53:47that
53:48their
53:48faith
53:49in
53:49their
53:49creator
53:50compels
53:50them
53:50to
53:51do
53:51I'm
53:54not
53:54surprised
53:55that
53:56President
53:56Trump
53:56would
53:57propose
53:57this
53:58the
53:59language
54:00and the
54:01rhetoric
54:01and the
54:01behavior
54:02that he
54:02has
54:02exhibited
54:03toward
54:03even
54:05legal
54:06refugees
54:07legal
54:07immigrants
54:08to this
54:08country
54:08lead me
54:09to not
54:09be
54:09surprised
54:10that
54:11this
54:11important
54:12funding
54:13is on
54:13the
54:13chopping
54:14block
54:14in the
54:14bill
54:15that
54:15he
54:15sent
54:15to
54:15the
54:15Senate
54:16but
54:17I
54:17have
54:17to
54:17admit
54:18that
54:18I
54:18am
54:18surprised
54:19that
54:20it
54:21seems
54:21to be
54:21just
54:22moving
54:22on a
54:22path
54:23to being
54:25accepted
54:25it was
54:25accepted
54:26in the
54:26house
54:26without
54:27much
54:28drama
54:29including
54:31by a
54:31whole lot
54:32of people
54:32who go
54:32to
54:32churches
54:33just
54:33like
54:34me
54:34and hear
54:35sermons
54:36preached
54:36about
54:37the
54:37good
54:37Samaritan
54:38just
54:38like I
54:39do
54:39every
54:39Sunday
54:39and we'll
54:42have an
54:42opportunity
54:43tomorrow to
54:43grapple with
54:44it here
54:44I intend
54:45to at least
54:46offer an
54:46amendment to
54:47try to
54:48strip this
54:49piece of the
54:50bill out
54:50so that the
54:51bill will not
54:52be an attack
54:53on religious
54:54organizations doing
54:56what they feel
54:56compelled by their
54:57faith to do
54:58and it is my
55:01prayer that the
55:02entire rescission
55:03bill fail
55:04for the reasons
55:05my colleagues
55:05have said
55:06a deal
55:06is a deal
55:07and we
55:07shouldn't
55:08backtrack
55:08on it
55:09but if we
55:10can't defeat
55:10the entire
55:12rescission
55:12bill
55:13it is my
55:14hope that
55:14we will
55:15allow
55:16organizations
55:18like Catholic
55:19Relief Services
55:20and the
55:20Hebrew
55:21Immigrant
55:22Aid Society
55:23and the
55:23Episcopal
55:23Church
55:24and World
55:24Vision
55:25and World
55:25Relief
55:26and Lutheran
55:27Social Services
55:28it is my
55:29hope that we
55:30will at least
55:30allow them
55:31to practice
55:33the faith
55:33they sincerely
55:34believe
55:35and do it
55:36in a way
55:36consistent
55:37with what
55:38their practices
55:38have been
55:39for decades
55:39and in some
55:40cases even
55:40more than a
55:41century
55:42and so that's
55:44what I'm going
55:44to be praying
55:44for tonight
55:45that there's
55:46a bit of
55:46an epiphany
55:48in this body
55:49and we realize
55:51that the work
55:52that these
55:52church-based
55:53organizations
55:53are doing
55:54isn't bad
55:54this work
55:56isn't something
55:56that should
55:57be slashed
55:57and cut
55:58with these
55:59valuable
55:59faith
56:00workers
56:01laid off
56:01my hope
56:03is that
56:03the Senate
56:04will realize
56:04this is
56:05good work
56:05that is
56:06really at
56:06the core
56:07of who
56:07we are
56:07as Americans
56:08and tiny
56:09little parishes
56:10like
56:10St. Elizabeth
56:11of Hungary
56:12or synagogues
56:13or other
56:14churches
56:14all over
56:15this country
56:15who pride
56:17themselves
56:17on offering
56:18a welcoming
56:19environment
56:20for people
56:21who are here
56:21lawfully
56:22and want
56:22to make
56:22a way
56:23in America
56:23we'll be
56:24able to
56:24continue
56:25to do
56:27just that
56:27with that
56:30Mr. President
56:31I yield
56:31the floor
56:32thank you
Recommended
0:50
|
Up next