This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Congressional Daily Record
This section captures a floor statement or debate entry. It mentions legislation such as Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act, 2026, members such as John Thune.
Issued
March 20, 2026
senate side of the record
People
3
Linked members mentioned in this section
Legislation
1
Bills and resolutions linked from this section
Committees
0
No linked committees in this section
Senate Holds
0
No hold activity linked here
Source Document
Connected Data
People mentioned
Bills and resolutions
Source Control
Reader mode is for comprehension. The linked government PDF is the official published source.
Download official Senate Record PDFReturn to issue contextDEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026—Motion to
Proceed—Resumed
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 311, H.R. 7147, a bill
making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes.
SAVE America Act
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I said at the beginning of this debate that I was going to use the word “commonsense” a lot, and that is because the SAVE America Act unites a bunch of commonsense policies, the kind of things that are just intuitively obvious—or, at least, they should be—and should be getting 80 to 90 votes, or more, here in the Senate.
like showing a photo ID at the polls and demonstrating that you are an American citizen, in other words, eligible to vote when you register.
this bill, in this case, not about protecting our elections but about protecting our youth.
In recent years, we have seen men—biological men who identify as
women—take up spaces in athletics meant for actual women and girls. And this is happening across a range of sports: track, swimming, volleyball, basketball, soccer, softball, and the list goes on.
that. They are pretty obvious. There is the physical danger, of course, that can be posed to women by men competing in their sports.
But more than that, this is an issue of fairness and equality. At the most basic level, every roster spot that goes to a male is a roster spot that doesn't go to a female. That is a high school girl who has lost out on the chance to play high school sports because a male has taken up her space.
the team can, and frequently does, rob them of opportunities to excel. The simple biological, scientific fact is that men possess physical advantages when it comes to sports, things like greater muscle mass and greater aerobic power. And that means that, by and large, men are likely to dominate in women's sport, taking wins and medal opportunities away from women.
the podium. Being knocked out of medal contention can mean the loss of things like college scholarships. As one female runner who was robbed of multiple wins by a biological male described the situation, “it robs girls of the chance to race in front of college scouts who show up for elite meets, and to compete for the scholarships and opportunities that come with college recruitment. I'll never know how my own college recruitment was impacted by losing those four state championship titles to a male. When colleges looked at my record, they didn't see the fastest girl in Connecticut. They saw a second- or third-place runner.”
Let me read that again.
When colleges looked at my record, they didn't see the
fastest girl in Connecticut. They saw a second- or third-
place runner.
rights, you would think they would be the first—the very first—people up to bat for fairness and equality for female athletes, but they are not.
Sports Act, legislation to ensure that women—and women only— participate in women's sports at federally funded educational institutions; and every single one of my Democrat colleagues voted against the bill. Not one Democrat had the courage to say that women's sports are for women.
granddaughter who started playing sports, I feel pretty passionately about the subject.
athletic programs over the past half century, and I cannot believe that one half of the U.S. Senate is apparently content to see those gains undermined by allowing men to take up places in sports meant for women.
vote for legislation that would protect women's sports. It would be nice if this time they had the courage to stand up for female athletes.
transgender ideology—that we had to worry about. But as bad as it is for a female athlete to lose out on a college scholarship because her achievements are overshadowed by those of a biological male, the subjection of children to gender transition procedures is even worse.
gender dysphoria have been prescribed puberty blockers—cross-sex hormones—and, in the most extreme cases, been approved for irreversible surgical procedures that permanently mutilate their bodies. And all of this has been done with little to no scientific evidence to support these dramatic interventions.
issues, and youth conducted in Great Britain—repeatedly highlights the lack of scientific evidence to support gender transition procedures for minors. And thanks in substantial part to that review, Britain's national science service decided to largely discontinue providing puberty blockers to children.
provision of gender procedures for minors—Finland, Sweden, and Denmark have also done so. And a New York Times piece notes that there is reason to believe that there are other European countries that may follow suit.
American Medical Association have come out against surgical gender transition procedures for minors, noting the lack of evidence to support their use.
scientific evidence to suggest that gender transition procedures benefit children. What we do have, however, is scientific knowledge of how dangerous these procedures can be, and the list of side effects is long and serious.
that side effects for gender transition procedures can include infertility, loss of bone density, heart disease and metabolic disorders, surgical complications, negative cognitive impacts, psychiatric disorders, and more.
before they can have any real understanding of what they are consenting to.
Mr. President, 12- and 13-year-olds cannot understand what it will mean to possibly damage their bones for the long term. And 14- and 15- year-olds are not capable of comprehending what giving up their fertility could mean. That is because they are children. They are still changing and growing and developing, and through no fault of their own, they simply don't have the experience and knowledge to grasp the full magnitude of what they are consenting to.
would ban gender transition procedures for minors, since Tuesday; and I have been struck by the near total silence of my Democrat colleagues on this issue during this debate.
ideology—witness the refusal of even one Democrat to stand up for women in sports—I am not sure I have seen a single Democrat come to the floor to defend gender transition procedures for minors.
to wonder if maybe some Democrats are reluctant to publicly advocate for subjecting children to, in many cases, irreversible medical procedures backed up by little scientific evidence with a whole host of serious, long-term side effects.
In many areas of medicine, treatments are first established
as safe and effective in adults before being extended to
pediatric populations. In this case, however, the opposite
occurred: clinician-researchers developed the pediatric
medical transition protocol in response to disappointing
psychosocial outcomes in adults who underwent medical
transition.
I mean, just say that again:
[C]linician-researchers developed the pediatric medical
transition protocol in response to disappointing psychosocial
outcomes in adults who underwent medical transition.
We have essentially been using children as guinea pigs. It is unconscionable, and it should stop now.
take a stand against the abuse of children, and I urge every Member of this body to vote to protect children from further harm.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The Democratic leader is recognized.
H.R. 7147
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, the chaos at TSA is reaching a boiling
point. We need to reopen it as quickly as possible. That is what Senate Democrats are intent on doing. So, tomorrow, the Senate will take a very simple procedural vote on beginning to reopen TSA, which Democrats are leading.
Tomorrow, America will see the matter crystal clear: which Senators want to open up TSA, pay TSA workers, and end the chaos at our airports and which Senators are going to block TSA funding yet again. If you want to open up TSA, vote yes tomorrow.
to also continue funding for ICE, without any reform of ICE. This is different. This doesn't tie the TSA to ICE funding because ICE funding is controversial. This does not make the workers at our airports or the passengers at our airports hostages.
Republicans are saying: Unless you pass ICE as-is, without reform, we are not going to help the TSA workers get paid and reduce the lines at the airport.
We are saying: Just do it, no ands, ifs, or buts.
go. There are some very deep disagreements. Republicans still have not accepted that the American people want legislation—real legislation— to ensure the kind of brutality we saw in Minneapolis can't happen again. But in the meantime, Republicans do not need to hold the rest of these Agencies hostage, including TSA.
To my Republican colleagues: We both see the chaos at TSA. We both know and would admit there is a lot more work to do on ICE. There is no good reason to keep holding TSA hostage. There is no good reason to reject our proposal to fund it.
SAVE America Act
Mr. President, on SAVE, the Senate is in session today, and all we are really doing is wasting time on a voter suppression bill written only to appease the fringe elements of the MAGA base. With so many problems facing our country, the cost of living so high, with people struggling to make ends meet, with the war going on in Iran, Republicans instead are choosing to spend time making it harder for citizens to vote. This is exactly what the SAVE Act is designed to do. It is designed to make it harder for citizens to vote.
Do not listen to the Republican talking points about voter ID. That is a ruse. Underneath the surface, the SAVE Act is a voter purge bill. Most of its core elements don't even talk about voter ID. They want to make it harder to register to vote than it is to register to buy an AR- 15.
submit their voter rolls to the Department of Homeland Security. They want Americans' information to be run through an algorithm that Elon Musk and DOGE could use to kick eligible American citizens off the voter rolls without them even knowing they were kicked off.
And you say: Why?
They say: Well, you will have to go find out.
That is a disgrace. That is undoing what is deeply American: the right to vote. They want to make registering to vote a bureaucratic nightmare.
registering on college campuses and in churches, and even end registering at the DMV, where, of course, you have to show ID.
That is what the SAVE Act is, and Republicans know it. They know that if the American people are given a fair chance to make their voices heard, Republicans are in trouble.
Iran
Mr. President, on Iran, thanks to Donald Trump's war with Iran, gas prices are now nearing $4 a gallon. Experts predict that this weekend gasoline will cross the $4-a-gallon threshold. In just the last month, gas prices have gone up by $1 a gallon. Brent crude is hovering around $108 a barrel, much higher than it has been.
And Donald Trump has the gall to say that prices are “not that bad.” Do you hear that, America? Donald Trump is telling you $4 gas is not that bad. What bubble does he live in? How often does he fill up his car with gasoline? When Donald Trump says that the prices are not that bad, who is he kidding? He is speaking like a billionaire. America is being led into war by Marie Antoinette.
Americans' pain is “the [least] of our concern[s] right now.” Can you believe this? The highest economic adviser in the Trump administration says Americans' pain is “the [least] of our concern[s] right now.” If there is anything that shows how much Donald Trump and his minions are out of touch, that is it right there. Trump and his acolytes are unbelievable. They are so clueless. They are in a bubble.
Meanwhile, the war with Iran is expanding. Iranian strikes on Qatar's energy structure have knocked out 17 percent of the country's LNG export capacity. QatarEnergy says two LNG trains could be sidelined for 3 to 5 years—a staggering blow to global energy markets. In other words, even if this war ended tomorrow—and there are no signs it is anywhere close to ending—the damage Donald Trump has unleashed will take a long, long time to fix.
Meanwhile, the war in the Middle East is expanding, not shrinking. Donald Trump is sending additional warships and thousands of marines to the region. He refuses to fully rule out boots on the ground, a step that would mean more American casualties and even higher costs than he now projects. And this week the administration was floating a funding request of more than $200 billion—$200 billion—to finance this open- ended war. No way; that will never happen. It is a preposterous and dangerous risk. We should never accept giving Donald Trump a blank check to wage war in Iran in perpetuity. Even a fraction of the $200 billion is unacceptable for a war without a plan, without an endgame, without the support of the American people. And, of course, the money could be used for so much better—reducing Americans' costs on healthcare and on housing and on electricity and on daycare.
as he publicly asks for their help. Today, he called NATO a “paper tiger” and called our allies “cowards.” How does he expect to form a coalition, which he says he needs, if he is just going to spend his time calling them names—calling our allies names?
time and is sickening. He has spent years trashing our allies, insulting them, threatening NATO, undermining the very alliances that have kept us strong for generations. Now, suddenly, after Trump has dragged the United States into a war that is not going his way, he turns around and asks those same allies to jump in and help. What world does he live in? And when the allies don't immediately leap into this open-ended conflict in the way Donald Trump wants, what does he do? He calls them “cowards.”
Donald Trump's leadership is pathetic—pathetic.
The war needs to come to an end now. The American people have had enough.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority whip.
H.R. 7147
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, the Senate will soon confirm Markwayne Mullin to be the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
fully funded Department of Homeland Security. The American people need that to keep all of us safe. We are going to do very well having Senator Mullin's trustworthy leadership in place.
because of the Democrats. We just had the Democrat leader on the floor of the Senate saying he wants to vote against funding the Department of Homeland Security, and he says he plans to do it again today.
are
that they are the ones defunding it. For 35 days, they have blocked every effort to reopen the Department of Homeland Security. It is time to vote to get it open again.
Americans need and deserve safety and security. The Democrats are preventing it. Americans all around the country are on high alert because they have seen multiple attacks by radical Islamic terrorists across the streets of this Nation. Americans have died, and blood is on their hands.
synagogue and a preschool in Michigan. There were staff there. There were teachers. There were 100 children inside. Had it not been for the quick-acting security guards, many of those inside would have been killed. We later learned that that terrorist's brother was a commander in the terrorist group Hezbollah.
In New York City, two terrorists threw homemade bombs into a crowd. The terrorist admitted to authorities later that they had hoped to hurt or kill more people than were killed by the bomber in the Boston Marathon.
In Texas, a terrorist shot into a crowded establishment. He was wearing a T-shirt that said “Property of Allah.” Three people were killed, and dozens were wounded.
It is not just the kinetic attacks; it is also cyber attacks. Iran this week launched a major cyber attack on a major medical device company in Michigan. Because of that attack, hospitals around the Nation had to temporarily pause transmitting vital-sign data from patients under treatment.
witnessed against the medical device company shows the reach of Iran's cyber capabilities.
in 2001. They are there to prevent all of these kinds of attacks, and the Democrats have shut it all down. Because of the shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security by the Democrats, our Nation is vulnerable to terrorist attacks on multiple levels—physical, cyber.
Republicans stand ready to end this shutdown today. We want to end it today. We are going to vote today.
The minority leader was on the floor, and he said: Well, tomorrow, we are going to have a vote about trying to change committee assignments and move something over there and move it around, and we will just deal with one part of it.
The country needs to be protected. The American people need to know that they are safe in their communities.
to address the concerns that the Democrats have raised. They include expanding the use of body cameras for officers and making IDs for officers clearly visible. Democrats have rejected all of these good-faith offers. They rejected bipartisan solutions. Instead, they once again are trying to peel apart the Department of Homeland Security.
attacked us in our homeland, and it is to protect the people in this country. Piecemeal Democrat bills cannot hide the fact that Democrats caused this current shutdown. If they think they can avoid blame for this shutdown of American security, they are wrong. The people understand that the Democrats are standing between their own securities in their own homes and the terrorists who are out there.
Secretary of Homeland Security. His name is Jeh Johnson. We have all worked with him. He had a warning just this past weekend for the Democrats. He said this:
If ever there were a time we needed to fund the Department
of Homeland Security, it's right now.
He went on to say:
[We] need all 22 components of Homeland Security
functioning all at once, side-by-side.
This is a statement of a Democrat. He ran the Department for President Barack Obama, and he is telling the Democrats on the floor: Fund all of it.
something called Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The American people are well aware of that.
different to say to NBC News. He said:
ICE does some functions that are very much needed.
Apparently, he doesn't think any of it is needed today. Now he wants to abolish ICE. He has said it. Democrats want to abolish ICE. They have said it. They want to defund law enforcement. You have seen the chants. You have seen the people: “Defund the police.” “Defund ICE.” They don't seem to care about the safety and the security of people in this country. They seem to want to stand more with illegal immigrant criminals than they do with American people. This is a radical position. It is now also the default policy of the Democrat Party.
been talking about a few years ago when he said “ICE does some functions that are very much needed”? Well, one of those is called Homeland Security Investigations. They are part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement—the part he wants defunded. He wants it all gone.
Mr. President, 7,100 special agents work for Homeland Security Investigations. They do vital work that keeps America and Americans safe. This week alone, these hard-working agents helped to seize over 170 pounds of methamphetamine in Utah. Additionally, they arrested a child trafficker in California who was trafficking not one but two children. They helped to investigate and arrest an illegal immigrant in Louisiana who was a member of the terrorist group MS-13. That is this week.
cartels, who stop terrorists, who rescue children from human traffickers.
So we are going to vote again today. We are going to vote to fund the Department of Homeland Security, and we will fund it right away today, fully, immediately. The Democrats are going to have to say whether they are going to stand with us and the American people or they are once again going to stand against safety and security. They are the only ones standing in the way, and blood is on their hands. The American people will hold them accountable.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Democratic whip.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago, a woman named Kristi Noem came and appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee. We had been asking her to come in and explain her management of the Department of Homeland Security for months. She said she was too busy; we knew better.
agents not only in Chicago, which I am honored to represent, but also Minneapolis.
It didn't work out as she planned.
answer questions directly to her about the management of the Department and things she had said and done.
The Achilles' heel turned out to be a $200 million publicity stunt, which she had bilked the taxpayers out of, so that
riding horses, appearing before Mount Rushmore, and she said the President approved it.
By the end of the day, she was finished. Two weeks ago, the head of the Department of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, was fired by President Trump.
with ICE, this paramilitary force that showed up in the city of Chicago and across the United States and has killed at least two, maybe three innocent American citizens.
our border and live in the United States. You heard the President's speech over and over again: We are going to get the “worst of the worst.” Remember he said that?
that is what we are going after. But the record of the ICE Agency is much different. When they take a look at all of those that they have deported and taken into some kind of a holding cell, it turns out that only one out of seven have any kind of criminal record—one out of seven.
off to different detention camps have no criminal record at all. They are not the worst of the worst. They are folks that overstayed a visa into the United States, period.
our side, we want to work with the administration to change the standards for ICE so that they are basically the same standards that apply to your State troopers and your hometown police, basic standards of law enforcement that professionals follow. ICE is a far cry from that today, but what we are looking for are changes that makes them comply with the law and the Constitution.
There is a question of funding the Department of Homeland Security. Two weeks ago, the Democrats said: Here is our position. We will fund everything in the Department of Homeland Security, all of it, including TSA, except for ICE, and we are negotiating with the White House. Let's get it done.
Nine times we have come to the floor. Nine times Democrats have come to the floor and said we will fund the entire department, including TSA, including FEMA, including the Coast Guard. ICE, let's resolve by negotiation. We are in the middle of that right now.
Democrats. So to come to the floor now and blame the Democrats because people in TSA are not being paid doesn't reflect the reality and what happened on the floor.
Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act
Madam President, now there is also a matter pending on the floor. I will see if I still have a copy of it here. This is the matter that is before us on the floor of the U.S. Senate. It is entitled “SAVE America Act.” What this proposes to do is a dramatic change in registering to vote in America.
Let me be specific. With this proposal, the proof that you have to present of your identity when you register to vote changes dramatically.
have to bring in to prove that you are eligible to vote. The first suggestion is a passport. Well, half of the people in America, roughly half, own a passport and half do not. So if you decide you want to get a passport to make sure that you or your son or daughter who has turned 18 get a chance to vote, how do you get a passport?
you come and pay a filing fee of $165. You can get an expedited approval in a matter of days and weeks for an additional $60, but it is basically $165 for a passport. Let me remind you, half of the people in the United States do not have a passport.
imagine what is going to happen at the passport office? How many Americans register to vote each year? About 50 million—50 million.
State without this law passing? Twenty-five million. So you are going to triple the workload at the Department of State for people who want to be registered to vote in time for November. How is that going to work? No explanation.
is to present your birth certificate. Problem: Turns out a substantial number of Americans don't have a birth certificate; they have to obtain one. And, secondly, there is a problem when the birth certificate reflects a maiden name of a woman before she was married or in a hyphenated relationship. And so there has to be a change made there.
In each State there is a cost and a time involved in that process. So this is supposed to make it easier to vote? No, not at all.
dramatically change the laws on registering to vote? Well, voter fraud, according to the other side of the aisle—people who are ineligible; they don't even profess to be Americans; and they are going to try to vote.
who didn't have American citizenship were prepared to violate the law and try to vote? Well, each year we are talking about some 50 million people registering, 24-year period of time, the number must be huge. Seven million? No. Seven hundred thousand? No. Seventy thousand? No. Seven hundred? No.
the United States and weren't legally American citizens. Seventy-seven of the millions that were trying to register during that period of time.
matter where you are from, no matter what your political affiliation may be for a new standard of proof. It is not necessary. In fact, to charge $165 for a passport so I can prove I can vote is in the nature of a poll tax.
What does the Supreme Court have to say about poll taxes? In the case of Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that any poll tax was unconstitutional.
citizens' rights to vote in Federal elections “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.”
The Harper case involved a poll tax in the State of Virginia. The Supreme Court threw it out. Do you know how much the poll tax was in Virginia when this case was decided? One dollar and fifty cents.
In striking this fee down, Justice William Douglas said, “the right to vote is too precious, too fundamental to be . . . conditioned” on whether somebody has $1.50 in their pocket.
Iran
in Iran. We kept asking the administration what their goals were with the invasion of Iran. Do you remember the public hearings, the congressional hearings where they sent in the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, they were interrogated by Senators and Congressmen from both political parties and asked to explain why we invaded Iran?
The reason you don't remember is because it never happened. We invaded this country without any congressional debate.
it is Congress that declares war, and yet we have no explanation formally from this administration and no opportunity to ask basic questions.
I will close with this: 22 years ago there was a vote in this Chamber, a vote to invade Iraq. If you remember,
under President George W. Bush explained they had weapons of mass destruction which threatened our allies and friends and even the United States, and that is why we had to invade.
I was skeptical of that. I was one of 23 Senators who voted against the invasion of Iraq 22 years ago. It was 1 Republican and 22 Democrats, we voted no. It turned out to be the best vote I ever cast. When we sent our forces in there, Saddam Hussein was swept aside quickly, and then they started looking for weapons of mass destruction and found none. None.
And here we go again. A $200 billion first appropriation for this war—$200 billion. If just a portion of that money had been saved for health insurance premiums, helping people pay them in the United States, some 24 million Americans wouldn't be facing a dramatic increase that they can't afford in their health insurance premiums. Madam President, $200 billion is what President Trump is asking for. It is time for us to have that debate we didn't have before the invasion.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Moody). The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, we are negotiating right now over much- needed reforms for ICE and Border Patrol. The reality, which I think we do all understand is that we are still very far apart; but as negotiations continue, Democrats have tried again and again to give paychecks to TSA and CISA and the Coast Guard and FEMA, Agencies that are doing really important work right now.
a full-year CR, which Republicans have blocked multiple times now, and after those were rejected, targeted efforts such as the repeated attempts we have made to try and pay TSA workers.
because Republicans are holding their funding hostage so they can try to give ICE even more money, without including any necessary reforms.
would do. So Republicans are saying: We will not let you give TSA or other important Agencies a single dollar unless you let us shell out billions of dollars to ICE and Border Patrol, which are already sitting on billions of dollars. Think about how absurd that is.
its employees right now, unless they can give more money to ICE and Border Patrol, even when Republicans know ICE officers are still getting paychecks because Republicans know Border Patrol agents are getting paychecks.
in their “Big Ugly Bill.” Secretary Noem went out and blew hundreds of millions of dollars to cut ridiculous ads and plaster her face all over TV. She blew hundreds of millions on new private jets. ICE wasted millions on souped-up SUVs with flashy paint jobs, and they can't even use them.
is accountability. Democrats have been very clear what we are asking for here since late January, and our asks have not changed. We are talking about incredibly basic, necessary reforms. Taking off masks, requiring body cameras and IDs is not some extreme thing. Requiring judicial warrants is not some extreme thing.
these reforms because they directly respond to the abuses that have been happening.
dragged out of their car on their way to a doctor's appointment. With warrants, you don't have so much profiling where ICE and Border Patrol haul the same American citizen away from his worksite twice, not charged with a crime, not part of a targeted action, just hauled away by masked thugs.
where ICE drags a man out of his house in his underwear and even refuses to look at his ID. Now, the DHS Secretary nominee just this week said they would use them. That is a welcome surprise, but we need to see that in legislative text now.
on the way back home from a basketball game wouldn't get tear gassed and parents wouldn't have to bring their baby to the hospital when they stop breathing.
like Marimar Martinez and Carlos Jimenez would never have been shot by Federal agents, and maybe citizens like Ruben Ray Martinez, Renee Good, and Alex Pretti would still be alive.
rein in ICE and Border Patrol. Have Republicans looked around? They gave ICE and Border Patrol unprecedented sums of money, and then Donald Trump and Stephen Miller turned them into rogue Agencies.
Republicans don't want to talk about that. They don't want to even address that. But the American people have had enough of this rogue Agency. We need to rein it in, and we are negotiating right now over how to do that. But it is clear it is going to take more time to get there, and we need the White House and we need Republicans to finally address these key reforms.
But there is no reason to make TSA wait for their paychecks. Absolutely none. Democrats are eager to break the logjam and fund Agencies like the TSA and Coast Guard and FEMA and CISA. The offer to fund these while we keep negotiating stands.
continue working on reforming ICE and Border Patrol if that is what is needed, but so far, Republicans have responded to that offer with the same message they are going to send today. Republicans are saying: No, we will not give you any TSA funding, none, unless you shove billions of dollars at an Agency that we already gave billions of dollars to.
“No,” they are saying. “We will not let you send out TSA paychecks unless we can give a blank check to ICE,” which is already sending out paychecks.
Well, let me be clear: We are not going to give Stephen Miller a blank check, as this bill would do. I am not going to stand by and let Republicans shovel more money at a rogue Agency without having real change in legislative text.
down. So I will be voting no, and I urge my colleagues to join me as well.
House and some of our Republican colleagues, but the basic challenges remain: The White House and Republicans need to work with us to address these key reforms. To that end, my colleagues and I remain focused on the White House's coming forward with a proposal that really addresses the major concerns I have outlined here today.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
Mr. SCHATZ. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
Mrs. MURRAY. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington objected.
The objection is heard.
The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. KENNEDY. I will be back.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. I hear you.
The majority leader.
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Motion to Proceed to the Motion to Reconsider
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I move to proceed to the motion to reconsider the cloture vote from February 24 on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 311, H.R. 7147.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The motion was agreed to.
Motion to Reconsider
Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I move to reconsider the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 311, H.R. 7147.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The motion was agreed to.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Cal. No. 311, H.R. 7147, a bill making further
consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2026, and for other purposes.
John Thune, Mike Crapo, Marsha Blackburn, Bill Hagerty,
Tim Sheehy, Roger F. Wicker, Susan M. Collins, Todd
Young, Jim Banks, Bernie Moreno, Jon Husted, Eric
Schmitt, John Hoeven, John Barrasso, Pete Ricketts,
Roger Marshall, Katie Boyd Britt.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the mandatory quorum call under rule XXII has been waived.
motion to proceed to H.R. 7147, a bill making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close, upon reconsideration?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Daines), the Senator from Nebraska (Mrs. Fischer), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the Senator from Montana (Mr. Sheehy), the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Tuberville), and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker).
Further, if present and voting: the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt) would have voted “yea” and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Tuberville) would have voted “yea.”
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Gallego), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly), the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Klobuchar), the Senator from California (Mr. Schiff), the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen), the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.
The result was announced—yeas 47, nays 37, as follows:
Rollcall Vote No. 59 Leg.
YEAS—47
Banks
Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Curtis
Ernst
Fetterman
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Husted
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Justice
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
McCormick
Moody
Moran
Moreno
Mullin
Murkowski
Ricketts
Risch
Rounds
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Young
NAYS—37
Alsobrooks
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt Rochester
Booker
Cantwell
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kim
King
Lujan
Markey
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Slotkin
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Wyden
NOT VOTING—16
Britt
Coons
Daines
Fischer
Gallego
Kaine
Kelly
Klobuchar
Paul
Schiff
Shaheen
Sheehy
Smith
Tuberville
Whitehouse
Wicker
The motion was rejected.
(Mr. RICKETTS assumed the Chair.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. McCormick). On this vote, the yeas are 47, and the nays are 37.
The motion was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.