This is not an official government website.
© 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Congressional Daily Record
This section captures a floor statement or debate entry. It mentions legislation such as Withholding the pay of Senators if a Government shutdown occurs., members such as Marsha Blackburn.
Issued
May 13, 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 contextWITHHOLDING THE PAY OF SENATORS IF A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN OCCURS—Motion
To Proceed
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 296, S. Res. 526, a
resolution withholding the pay of Senators if a Government
shutdown occurs.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
National Police Week
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, here in DC this week is Police Week, and we are reflecting on the brave men and women who serve us in Tennessee and also across this country, where they are serving our communities every day with courage, with integrity, and with honor. We so appreciate their service. Every day, they put their lives on the line to protect their families, their friends, their neighbors. They enforce the law, and they keep the peace; and for that, they deserve every American's enduring gratitude.
National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial that is here in our Nation's Capital. Engraved on that memorial are the names of every fallen officer in our country going back to the year 1850. This memorial contains 24,775 names. This week, 363 heroes are being added, including 3 from Tennessee: Hugh Carlen of Putnam County, whose watch ended February 24, 1912; James Hood of Jonesborough, who fell in the line of duty August 26, 1928; and Deputy Sheriff Justin Bradford Mowery, of Blount County, whom we tragically lost on December 28.
reflect on their sacrifices and their stories and those made by the thousands of other officers on the Roll Call of Heroes.
There is a reason our officers are called the thin blue line: They are the only force separating us from chaos, disorder, and anarchy. They take pride in their responsibility, but to do their jobs, they need the support of their communities, their States, their country. They need the support of this Chamber, and for too long, they have lacked that support from Democrat leadership. Instead of funding the police, the Democrats have worked to defund the police and, indeed, all law enforcement. But, under President Trump, the Federal Government is backing the blue from one side of this country to another.
In Tennessee, we have seen this much needed support in Memphis. For years, Memphis, which is an iconic American city, has struggled with rampant crime. In 2024, it had the highest crime rate per capita of any city in the country. Memphians truly suffered. Indeed, all West Tennesseans suffered. Many could not walk outside of their homes without fear of being robbed, assaulted, or murdered in Memphis.
Under the President's leadership, those days are coming to an end. Since launching the Memphis Safe Task Force last year, crime in Memphis has plummeted. In the first quarter of this year, overall crime was down more than 40 percent compared to 2025. Indeed, since the task force began 7 months ago, the crime rate has been cut 50 percent.
Federal resources. The task force has done a great job in getting criminals off the street and behind bars. In total, authorities have made more than 9,000 arrests, including 996 for narcotics, 838 for firearms offenses, 105 for sex offenses, and 67 for homicide. They have also seized 1,500 illegal firearms, and they have located 150 missing children. Every single American—indeed, every Member of this Chamber— should applaud this success.
administration's effort. My Restoring Law and Order Act would increase funding for law enforcement and help keep violent criminals behind bars.
it illegal to dox Federal law enforcement officials and put them in harm's way.
many of our Democratic colleagues are trying to do everything in their power to undermine law enforcement.
the Secret Service, Coast Guard, TSA, FEMA, and other critical Agencies without funding, and they jeopardized our Nation's security at a time of heightened threats from the world's largest sponsor of terrorism, Iran.
And the reason? Well, they had a petty reason. They used our Federal law enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security as a trading chip. What they were trying to do was to abolish ICE, end the enforcement of our immigration laws, and defund Federal law enforcement.
Thank goodness they were not successful. They got nothing for their little fit. President Trump brought this charade to an end late last month by signing into law legislation that reopened DHS and restored its vital operations.
will fund ICE and Customs and Border Protection for years to come. We are accomplishing this through the reconciliation process, and that is the same process we used to pass the Working Families Tax Cut last year. We are going to make certain we can fund these vital Agencies.
law, and they can side with criminals over law enforcement. They can continue to side
champion the same radical policies that unleashed chaos at the border and across the country during the Biden administration, but that will not stop Republicans from saluting our men and women in uniform, from backing the blue, from standing with the thin blue line, and making certain that law enforcement has what they need to provide safety for American citizens in communities coast to coast.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Nomination of Kevin Warsh
Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote no on Donald Trump's attempt to take over America's central bank.
Donald Trump. Consumer sentiment is at an alltime low. Families are paying more for groceries, more for housing, more for healthcare—all thanks to Trump's chaotic tariffs and his One Big Beautiful Bill, and now his foolish and illegal war with Iran is further driving up the cost of gas and the cost of nearly everything else here at home.
economy before November's midterm elections. Now, he can do that. Instead of taking action to lower prices, which he could do, he has cooked up a ridiculous scheme: Install sock puppets at the Federal Reserve Board who are willing to artificially juice the economy. Of course, it will be American families who pay the price when this scheme backfires and raises prices and the cost of borrowing even more.
Donald Trump has not been subtle about this takeover attempt. First, he opened a bogus criminal investigation into Fed Governor Lisa Cook, and he illegally tried to fire her. Then he opened another bogus criminal investigation into Fed Chair Jay Powell—all in a ploy to push him out.
Trump then proclaimed:
Anybody that disagrees with me will never be the Fed
Chairman.
Consideration of Mr. Warsh's nomination was rightfully delayed by some of my Republican colleagues when they joined Democrats in refusing to move forward amid the Department of Justice's phony inquiry into Chair Powell, but the second that the administration pretended to close the investigation, Republicans folded and advanced Mr. Warsh's nomination. No one here is fooled. The investigation is still open.
But don't take it from me. Take it from President Trump, who said the investigation is “not dropped.”
Take it from the President's spokeswoman, who said “The investigation still continues.”
Take it from U.S. attorney Pirro, who said that she “will not hesitate to restart a criminal investigation.” She went on to promise that her office would “continue to litigate the issue.”
Fed Governor Cook, taking it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Justice Department's reported criminal probe against her is ongoing.
investigations as a way to take over the Fed—to push out the people who have been confirmed so that he can install his own people who will do exactly what he wants.
So let me turn to Mr. Warsh, the nominee. At this unprecedented moment in the Fed's history, he is uniquely unqualified to lead the Agency, and that is why every single Democrat on the Banking Committee voted against his nomination—the first party-line vote ever for a Fed Chair, ever in history.
First, Mr. Warsh has proven to be a sock puppet for President Trump. During his confirmation hearing, Warsh couldn't even say that Trump lost the 2020 election. We need a Fed Chair who evaluates economic data and sets monetary policy in the real world, not in Trump's delusional alternative reality.
Second, Mr. Warsh has refused to disclose the sources of more than $100 million worthwhile of assets. If confirmed, he will be the wealthiest Fed Chair in history, but he refuses to provide transparency to the American people about who he is entangled with. During his hearing, Mr. Warsh refused to say if he is invested in companies affiliated with President Trump or his family, companies that have facilitated money laundering, Chinese-controlled companies, or financing vehicles established by Jeffrey Epstein.
We have no idea if Mr. Warsh owns stock in any banks, which will be in direct violation of the Federal Reserve Act upon his swearing in later this week.
We also have no idea how and to whom Mr. Warsh will divest those secret assets. Based on the information we pieced together, it is possible that Stanley Druckenmiller, who makes a living betting on what the Fed will do next, may cut Mr. Warsh a huge check to cash him out. The American people would be right to question who Mr. Warsh will serve if a billionaire gives him a sweetheart deal just as Mr. Warsh takes office.
Third, Warsh says that he has “no regrets” from his catastrophic tenure as a Fed Governor before, during, and after the 2008 financial crash. The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which Congress set up to investigate the causes of the financial crisis, found that Governor Warsh attended multiple meetings in 2006 in which participants rung the alarm about subprime mortgages and rising mortgages and rising foreclosures and implored the Fed to use its authority to address these risks. Not only did Mr. Warsh ignore these warnings, he pushed back against them. In fact, in 2007, he said:
Subprime mortgages have gotten a bad name in this
environment, and in some cases, that's not just.
He also said later that he doesn't “see any immediate systemic risk issues” among the big banks. Remember, this is shortly before the crash of 2008.
Then, for good measure, Mr. Warsh also praised risky financial instruments like credit default swaps that helped trigger the 2008 crash, and he said: No, these are innovations that make the financial system safer.
So that is what he did before the crisis. During the crisis, Warsh served as Wall Street's personal liaison on the Fed Board as 8 million workers lost their jobs, 10 million people were being thrown out of their homes, and many more saw their life savings vanish. Mr. Warsh's No. 1 priority? Not those families. Not those workers. Mr. Warsh's No. 1 priority was the big banks that crashed our economy. He worked tirelessly to orchestrate multibillion-dollar Wall Street bailouts. But Mr. Warsh says today he has “no regrets.”
Not Mr. Warsh. Nope. He wanted to keep interest rates high—“no regrets”—and he kept pushing for higher interest rates for more than a decade even as our economy struggled.
as President, Donald Trump passed him by. Now, Mr. Warsh chalked this up to his refusal to “put [his] ambitions ahead of [his] principles.” Well, Mr. Warsh decided not to make that mistake the second time around. As soon as Donald Trump became President a second time, Mr. Warsh began shouting from the rooftops that the Fed should cut interest rates. In exchange for abandoning his principles, the President offered Mr. Warsh his dream job.
Look, red lights are flashing all across our economy. American families are struggling. Republicans will come to regret their decision to aid and abet President Trump's Fed takeover by installing Mr. Warsh as Chair.
I urge a “no” vote.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to oppose Kevin Warsh's nomination to serve as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. I am not persuaded, based on his record and his testimony at his hearing before the Senate Banking Committee, that he has demonstrated the independence or the judgment this position requires.
The Federal Reserve has a statutory dual mandate: maximum employment to support jobs and price stability to avoid excessive inflation. To carry out that mandate effectively, markets need confidence that monetary policy decisions are being made on the basis of
President Trump is still demanding a big cut in interest rates. In fact, just yesterday, a Washington Post headline read “Iran war pushed inflation to highest rate in nearly three years.”
around the country—at the gas pump, at the kitchen table, farmers across the country with higher input costs. So there is no doubt that the illegal Iran war is driving prices up, and that comes on top of the continued upward inflationary pressure from the President's failed tariff tax policies, which continue to work their way through the system and put upward pressure on prices.
policies the President is pursuing are making life simply unaffordable for our fellow Americans. Yet, when he was faced with the prospect of carrying out that dual mandate free of political interference from the White House, Mr. Warsh's record and his responses to questions raised very serious concerns.
crisis and its aftermath, he was a consistent inflation hawk, supporting higher interest rates. He did that even as unemployment then approached 10 percent and the country was in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Despite that loss of jobs and high unemployment, Mr. Warsh repeatedly focused instead on inflation risks.
committee that sets interest rates—Mr. Warsh said he was “more concerned about upside risks to inflation than downside risks”—again, at a time of very high unemployment.
Chairman Bernanke put in place to lower long-term borrowing costs and support economic recovery.
percent, as Americans faced the great recession, Mr. Warsh was a hawk, pushing for higher interest rates over more near-term relief for American families. That was his position when the economy was weakest, weaker than it had been in generations, when millions of Americans were out of work.
But these days—these days—Mr. Warsh has had a complete conversion, a 180-degree flip. He is now a super dove on interest rates even as unemployment has recovered from the depths of the great recession, and, in fact, today, prices are too high. That is a situation where textbook economics would say that the big rate cuts demanded by President Trump will make inflation worse; they will make life even more unaffordable for the American people. Prices will keep going up.
Now Mr. Warsh says that rapid productivity gains, particularly from artificial intelligence, could justify easier monetary policy without reigniting inflation. Economists across the spectrum are overwhelmingly skeptical of this theory, especially when you look at the near- and midterms—certainly not something that would happen by the end of this year, and it is the end of this year where President Trump is demanding big interest rates. In fact, President Trump has repeatedly and publicly demanded sharply lower rates. We have seen him harangue the Federal Reserve over and over and over. And Mr. Warsh's views have conveniently moved in exactly that direction.
legitimate question: Is this a genuine change in economic judgment or is it a shift that reflects the preferences of the President who nominated him—specifically, a President who has been abusing his power to influence monetary policy and to strip the Fed of its independence; a President who has launched an unprecedented assault on the Fed, trying to fire Governor Lisa Cook, trying to concoct charges against Chairman Powell to push him out of the Federal Reserve. President Trump is doing all of this to try to get lower interest rates and much lower interest rates now.
would implement his preferences, who would lower interest rates significantly in the short term. And all of a sudden—all of a sudden— on his nomination-day conversion or just preceding that as he was auditioning, Mr. Warsh now seems to think that is appropriate despite his clear prior views.
Housing Committee hearing. I asked Mr. Warsh a straightforward question about monetary policy.
by the end of this year, so I asked Mr. Warsh whether a rate cut of that scale in an economy with steady growth and inflation already above target—whether that would likely put upward pressure on prices. Right? This is a simple, basic economics question, and he would not answer the question directly.
As I said, the basic framework is clear: Lower rates stimulate demand. If demand rises faster than supply, inflationary pressures increase, costs for families go up. That is Economics 101. If a nominee for Fed Chair will not directly acknowledge that basic relationship in a public hearing before this body, it is reasonable to ask whether he is avoiding an answer because it conflicts with the policy direction favored by the White House, favored by President Trump.
Federal Reserve implements monetary policy based on their reading of the data, not on the reading of politics. And I am concerned about whether Mr. Warsh meets that standard because we have seen these questions of independence raised even more dramatically under this administration than any before.
And against that backdrop, members of the committee asked Mr. Warsh direct questions. We asked: Would he step down if pressured by the President over monetary policy?
We asked: Would he resist efforts to manipulate the composition or
decisions of the Federal Open Market Committee?
We asked: Would he clearly reject political pressure on reserve bank
leadership?
And over and over, Mr. Warsh refused to give direct answers.
I believe Americans deserve clarity about whether Mr. Warsh is committed to standing up for the Fed at a time of unprecedented attacks and political pressure from the White House.
Senate Banking Committee, I remain unconvinced. I hope, if confirmed, he proves my concerns wrong. I hope he does act independently, and I hope he makes decisions based on facts and evidence, even when those decisions conflict with the President's preferences.
But on the record before us today, I cannot support this nomination.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Whistleblowers
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today, I am here in the Senate about the Democrat Judiciary Committee minority in the House of Representatives.
than troubling. That letter made disgraceful and wrongful accusations regarding this Senator's helping many FBI whistleblowers.
about my efforts to help whistleblowers. Accordingly, the timing of this letter, so late after settlements occurred in August of 2025, is suspect. If concerns existed, why were they not raised last year?
attack on this Senator and my office and whistleblowers is beyond the pale.
years, that I feel like honest whistleblowers are treated like a skunk at a picnic. Oftentimes, their only crime is telling the truth. And for telling the truth, they often lose their job. They are hurt professionally, and it discourages other people who want to tell the truth about wrongdoing in government from coming forth. That is why whistleblowers deserve the protection that I and other Senators give them.
my office's efforts to obtain a fix for whistleblowers who faced years of retaliation
and financial ruin—that letter called it a “shakedown scheme.”
sliver of integrity, they would retract that letter. This isn't the way to handle disagreements.
But what is there to disagree with? Patriotic whistleblowers had wrongs against them righted, and I helped make their case right.
The letter further notes:
The record definitively shows that the agents weren't
disciplined for making protected disclosures to Congress or
for the imaginary offense of being a Republican.
POLITICO noted in their article:
Judiciary Democrats did not provide supporting
documentation for the sources of some of their claims.
was wrongly accused of being a part of a January siege was cleared by the inspector general. His clearance was restored. He got his job back. The FBI Security Division had ignored photo and video evidence supporting that whistleblower's claim.
No classified leaks. No criminal conduct.
It's common practice for Federal Agencies to settle legal
or administrative complaints against them, which virtually
all the whistleblowers had against the FBI at the time of
settlements.
“documenting the flaws in FBI actions against employees”:
In fact, two of our clients who received settlements were
FBI Security Division employees retaliated against for
exposing the FBI's use of the security clearance process for
reprisal also against other Empower Oversight clients—a
wrong even the Biden-era FBI recognized when it reinstated
Marcus Allen's security clearance.
understand. When whistleblowers step up to the plate, you have to fight for them. So that is exactly what my office did, and I am not going to back down one bit and let brave individuals suffer more years of ruin. And I am certainly not going to apologize for fighting and winning for whistleblowers.
satisfaction and settlement that he or she deserves. But that effort to get them justice must be made, and I make it clear to all of my staff that they must do what they can to get the job done of protecting whistleblowers—in other words, give the effort of protecting whistleblowers the “old college try.” That is what the taxpayers expect, and that is my reputation as a whistleblower defender.
I have made a career out of protecting and defending whistleblowers; and never in my time have I, my staff, or my whistleblowers received more attacks for doing that job than in this Congress.
is happening here, just as I stood up for whistleblowers throughout the decades—no matter who they blow the whistle on, Republican or Democrat administrations—whether that is disagreeing with this administration about Mr. Reuveni being a real whistleblower or defending the Ukraine whistleblower, years ago.
In conclusion, I will note that the Democrat letter said:
The treasury isn't a personal checkbook for ideological
payouts, and the misuse of millions of dollars in taxpayer
resources for personal or political benefit is a felony.
receiving $1.2 million or Lisa Page receiving $800,000 from the Biden Department of Justice after the damage that they did to this country? Or were they covering up again for a disastrous Biden-Harris administration?
I yield the floor.
Nomination of Kevin Warsh
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, for the President of the United States, there are few decisions more important than nominating leaders of integrity and good judgment to hold trusted positions in office. And few of those trusted positions are more important than the Chair of the Federal Reserve. Those words were uttered by President Trump during his first term when he announced Jerome Powell as his nominee to Chair the Fed. How times have changed.
he navigated the economic problems of our time, from the COVID-19 pandemic to rapidly rising inflation. Yet he also faced a challenge unlike any other Chair in history: a sham legal battle waged by the very President who nominated him. To President Trump, it seems that exercising good judgment does not mean reliance on the economic facts and data, but instead obedience to his every demand.
weaponized the Department of Justice to pressure, belittle, and threaten him. I want to commend Chair Powell for standing firm in the face of the President's tirades. It is not easy to face Trump's vengeful wrath, and it is indefensible that DOJ has kept open the possibility of pursuing these baseless, politicized charges in the future.
But Mr. Powell's term as Chair expires on Friday, and President Trump seems determined to nominate a Chair who will do his bidding, instead of one who is independently minded. Earlier this year, President Trump nominated Kevin Warsh to lead the Fed after Powell's departure. Mr. Warsh previously served as member of the Board of Governors from 2006 through 2011 as a Bush appointee.
Warsh's actions during that time raise cause for concern: Mr. Warsh played a central role in arranging numerous multibillion-dollar bank bailouts, while warning against interest rate cuts even as unemployment soared. He has expressed no regrets about these bailouts and continues to support Trump's Wall Street deregulatory agenda. We already have seen the damage across our government, from the Department of Justice to Health and Human Services, that Trump loyalists can wreck. We cannot allow that chaos in our central bank.
our economic policies are determined by facts not politics. Warsh threatens to undermine that.
interest rates, even if it raises inflation, will Warsh have the courage to say no? When one of the President or his allies' many shady business ventures fail, will Warsh stand strong amid pressure to provide a taxpayer funded bailout? When the chips are down, will Warsh make the decisions that best benefit his country or the President who picked him? Warsh's record and his answers at his confirmation hearing indicate the answers are no. Americans are struggling more than ever to afford basic goods, from housing, to gas, to groceries. Yesterday, data showed that Trump's war of choice in Iran has caused inflation to reach 3.8 percent, the highest in 3 years. Working families deserve a central bank that will fight for them, not the President and his billionaire buddies.
I am not convinced that Mr. Warsh has the willingness to do what is best for the American people. For that reason, I will be voting no on his nomination and encourage my colleagues to do the same.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Banks). The Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I ask unanimous consent that the vote scheduled for 2 o'clock be called immediately.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.