[Pages S2143-S2147]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

______

PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5,
UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
RELATING TO ``ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM: ENERGY CONSERVATION
STANDARDS FOR WALK-IN COOLERS AND WALK-IN FREEZERS''--Resumed

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
resume consideration of H.J. Res. 24, which the clerk will report.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:

A joint resolution (H.J. Res. 24) providing for
congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United
States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of
Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In
Freezers''.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.

Sexual Assault Awareness And Prevention Month

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today, Senator Shaheen of New Hampshire
and I are introducing a resolution. That resolution recognizes April as
Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month.
Far too many Americans have suffered as a result of this terrible
crime. Sexual violence doesn't discriminate. Statistics show that two
in five women and one in four men will experience sexual assault
sometime throughout their life, and yet those numbers can't capture the
pain, the fear, and the lifelong impact that survivors endure.
We must ensure that these brave survivors know that they are not
alone. That means expanding resources for survivors, holding criminals
accountable, and fostering a culture where no one suffers in silence or
shame.
So Senator Shaheen and I urge our colleagues to recommit to this
cause, not just for this 1 month out of 12 but every day of the year.
To survivors of sexual assault, we see you, we stand with you, and we
will not stop fighting for you.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
(The remarks of Ms. Cantwell pertaining to the introduction of S.
1272 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced
Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
Ms. CANTWELL. I yield the floor.

Recognition of the Majority Leader

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.

Budget Resolution

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, as early as today, we expect to take up a
budget resolution that will lay the groundwork for delivering on the
Republican agenda. This resolution is the first step toward a final
bill to make permanent the tax relief we implemented in 2017

[[Page S2144]]

and deliver a transformational investment in our border, national and
energy security--all accompanied by substantial savings measures and
commonsense reforms to our government.
And at the prospect of this, Democrats are losing their minds. Their
opposition to the 2017 tax relief, of course, is well known. Since the
day the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was passed, and before, Democrats have
attempted to mischaracterize--and some would say flatout lie--about
this legislation.
In fact, the Washington Post Fact Checker has repeatedly issued
three- and four-Pinocchio responses to Democrats' claims, which center
around the falsehood that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was about handouts
to corporations and billionaires.
The truth, of course, is not only did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut
taxes for every income group, but it was working families--working
families--not the wealthy, who received the greatest proportional
benefit.
Let me just repeat that: The truth is that not only did the Tax Cuts
and Jobs Act cut tax rates for every income group, but it was working
families, and not the wealthy, who received the greatest proportional
benefit. Those are the facts.
But, of course, the facts have not gotten in the way of Democrats
continuing to claim that extending this tax relief is about handouts to
billionaires.
The Democrats' latest hysteria is centered around the application of
budget rules we will use for this week's budget resolution. They claim
that using current policy baseline is somehow destroying Senate rules,
even though the 1974 Congressional Budget Act, which governs this
budget resolution, clearly states that it is the chairman of the Senate
Budget Committee who determines the budget baseline used for budget
resolutions.
The senior Senator from Vermont, who caucuses with the Democrats,
confirmed that it is the chairman's role in a 2022 report when he was
chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. And, of course, Democrats
themselves have previously advocated for the use of a current policy
baseline. They basically invented it back in 1977, shortly after the
Budget Act was enacted.
Chairman Muskie, a Democrat from Maine and chairman of the Budget
Committee, used a current policy baseline in his budget resolution
because he thought it represented a more realistic benchmark.
More recently, President Obama's fiscal year 2013 budget assumed $4.5
trillion of expiring tax cuts would be extended in the Democrat's
baseline, matching current policy at the time.
Jump forward to the Biden administration's most recent budget, in
which Democrats explained that:

Adjustments to the . . . baseline are needed to better
represent the deficit outlook under current policy and to
serve as a more appropriate benchmark against which to
measure policy changes.

So using the current policy baseline is not some bizarre new gimmick.
I should also note, of course, that the Senate Parliamentarian has
deemed the Senate budget resolution, which uses the current policy
baseline, in order and ready for floor consideration.
Democrats' sudden concern for saving money and protecting the
character of the Senate is touching. Who would have guessed that the
party that was so eager to tear down a fundamental Senate institution,
mere months ago, by killing the Senate filibuster would suddenly
develop such a passionate interest in defending the character of the
Senate?
But their hysteria is misplaced.
I do understand that Democrats are uncomfortable with the idea of tax
relief. When you think that government knows best and when your
enthusiasm for new government programs is virtually unlimited, it is no
surprise you would prefer to maximize the flow of taxpayer dollars to
the government.
But Republicans believe, fundamentally, that Americans know best what
to do with their money.
And so no matter how many times Democrats attempt to distort or
outright lie about what we are trying to do here, Republicans intend to
deliver a permanent extension of the tax relief that we passed in 2017.
Failing to extend this tax relief would result in a $2.6 trillion tax
increase on those making less than $400,000 a year, as well as a $600
billion tax increase on small businesses.
A typical family of four making $80,000 a year would end up sending
an additional $1,700 to the government next year--$1,700. I am quite
sure they have better uses for that money than sending it to Uncle Sam.
I said ``make this tax relief permanent,'' and I do mean permanent.
Senate Republicans are united with the President in viewing a temporary
extension as unacceptable. Americans should not have to live in fear of
a tax hike every few years. And small businesses, including family
farms and ranches, like those in my home State of South Dakota, need
certainty about the tax outlook so they can plan for the future. Making
the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent will ensure that Americans' take-
home pay does not go down, and it will have significant economic
benefits.
The National Federation of Independent Business reports that making
the small business section 199A deduction permanent would result in the
creation of an additional 1.2 million jobs annually, with that number
climbing as the law goes on.
And the Tax Foundation reports that long-run gross domestic product
would increase by a substantial 1.1 percent. That means more jobs and
more opportunities for American workers and, interestingly enough,
increasing Federal revenues, to the tune of about $3 trillion, which is
the right way--the right way--by growing the economy.
When the economy is growing and expanding, people are working, they
are making money, they are taking realizations, they are paying taxes.
And do you know what? Government revenue goes up, not down, which is
exactly what we experienced when we passed the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs
Act, 8 years ago now.
As I said earlier, it was working families, not the wealthy, who
received the greatest proportional benefit from that Tax Cuts and Jobs
Act, and it is working families, not the wealthy, who will see the
greatest proportional benefit for making this tax relief permanent.
We are here to make sure that hard-working Americans have more
breathing room, to make sure that our economy is providing them with
jobs and opportunities and that they are not facing lower paychecks
next year.
I was proud to help draft the 2017 tax relief and put more money in
American families' pockets, and I look forward to permanently extending
it in the near future.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Recognition of the Minority Leader

The Democratic leader is recognized.

Tariffs

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, yesterday, Donald Trump made one of the
dumbest decisions he has ever made as President, and that is saying
something. The tariffs Donald Trump approved yesterday are far, far
worse than we thought. It is the largest tax hike on families since
World War II.
Yesterday was not ``Liberation Day''; it was tax day. ``Middle class,
pay more taxes,'' Donald Trump is telling you. That is what the day is
all about.
This morning, naturally, the markets are plunging. The Dow is down
800 points, and the S&P is already on track for its worst day in years.
Donald Trump has singlehandedly created a financial forest fire.
Trump called yesterday ``Liberation Day.'' Nobody was feeling even
close to liberated--quite the opposite. American families are learning
the hard way that Donald Trump has them right in the middle of a pincer
and is squeezing them on both sides.
On the one side, Donald Trump is pushing tariffs that will cost
working families an extra $5,000 a year, and by his own admission, he
``could not care less.'' On the other side, Donald Trump is working
with Republicans to gut vital programs working families rely on, like
Medicaid, Social Security, veterans programs.
So there is a pincer: Trump's tariffs raise costs and pick people's
pockets on one side, and Trump's budget and his

[[Page S2145]]

budget cuts are taking away healthcare and benefits and veterans' care
on the other side.
Now, there are smart ways to use tariffs, and there are dumb ways to
use tariffs. Donald Trump is using tariffs in the dumbest way
imaginable. In fact, Donald Trump slapped tariffs on penguins and not
on Putin. Trump sanctioned the Heard and McDonald Islands, only
inhabited by penguins. That is what happens when you don't have a clue
as to what you are doing. You fire air traffic controllers, dismantle
disease-outbreak monitoring, sabotage Social Security and VA
operations, censor climate data, defund public schools, and declare a
trade war on penguins.
What is going on? Prices on groceries, prices on electronics,
appliances, metal, beer, furniture, fertilizer, and so much more will
go up. People's retirements are in peril as markets are in turmoil
across the globe. And Donald Trump says, ``I couldn't care less.'' That
is his quote, America. You are getting squeezed on both sides by his
tariffs and his budget, and he says, ``I couldn't care less.''
The American people are learning quickly that Donald Trump is
breaking all the promises he made in the campaign and he is not on
their side. He couldn't care less. It is truly unbelievable to watch
the sheer destruction Republicans are inflicting on Americans.
We aren't even 100 days into President Trump's second term, and the
Republicans this week will plow ahead to take away people's Medicaid.
They are letting Elon Musk sabotage Social Security. He says it is a
Ponzi scheme. He says he is OK if it is eliminated. What do these rich
people know about how middle-class people struggle? It is a little
coterie of billionaires that is running policy.
As I said, the middle class is getting squeezed by the pincers on
both sides.
What are they doing firing tens of thousands of epidemic responders,
healthcare workers, food inspectors, abandoning veterans? And now, on
top of all of that--it has been bad enough before ``Liberation Day,''
which is tax day--Americans are going to pay $5,000 a year through his
tariffs. For what? Why are they doing all this? Why would they do all
this? Why would they hurt people, so many people in so many ways? Why
would they have that pincer squeeze them? I will tell you why. One
thing. One reason. Tax breaks for the billionaires. As I said, this is
a coterie of billionaires running the government--Trump and Musk and
Lutnick and so many others. You heard the net worth of his Cabinet; it
is incredible. Cutting taxes for billionaires makes them squeeze the
American people. It is utterly disgusting.
President Trump should reverse course on his disastrous tariffs
immediately--immediately--or else he risks plunging America into a
recession. Some of the leading banks, the leading financial analysts
with no ax to grind, have greatly increased the odds that we will have
a recession because of what Trump is doing.
What President walks mindlessly into a recession, which means it is
harder to get a job, harder to keep a job, harder to pay the bills?
What President does that?
So I am calling on the House and Speaker Johnson, given how bad
Trump's tariffs are--they now know it--to come back into session and
vote on the Senate's bipartisan bill undoing the tariffs on Canada, the
bill we passed yesterday with bipartisan support because a few
Republicans had the courage of their convictions and voted against the
President and for Senator Kaine's very, very timely and needed bill. If
the Speaker really cares about the American people and the costs they
would bear by these tariffs, he should call back the House and take up
the Senate bill immediately.
The American people care about one thing above all--and they care
about a lot of things, but at the top of the list is inflation. That is
the No. 1 thing on people's minds. We heard that over and over again on
last November's election day and ever since. And Donald Trump said in
his campaign that he would reduce prices on day one when he got
elected. He is doing just the opposite. He is not reducing prices; he
is dramatically raising them $5,000 a year on the average American
family. And by his own omission, Donald Trump said ``I couldn't care
less.''

Government Funding

Mr. President, on the budget, this week, Donald Trump and the
Republican Party are hitting Americans with a brutal one-two punch.
On one side, Trump has hit Americans with a massive tax hike through
his extremely dumb tariffs. On the other side--they are unfocused, just
unfocused. On the other side, Senate Republicans are getting ready to
take away vital programs, throw people off Medicaid--all so they can
give massive tax breaks to billionaires. It is a brutal Republican
pincer move, with American families trapped in the middle.
Trump's tariffs raise costs and pick people's pockets on one side,
and Trump's budget cuts are taking away healthcare and benefits and
veterans' care on the other side.
If Republicans pass their agenda, 80 million Americans will be at
risk of losing coverage. Rural hospitals, community health centers, and
nursing homes will be at the risk of closure.
If Republicans proceed this week, Senate Democrats will expose their
agenda for the American people to see. We will pick their bill apart.
We will put them on record. We will force Republicans to explain in
multiple ways again and again and again why they want to cut taxes for
the rich at the expense of working people.
Senate Republicans are so hell-bent on cutting taxes for
billionaires, they seem ready to detonate the rules of the Senate and
break their word to get it done. Republicans spent years preaching
about preserving Senate rules and protecting regular order, but now
that their billionaire tax cuts are on the line, the rules don't seem
to matter for them.
We all know what is going on here. We know. Senate Republicans don't
want to admit that their plan to make these tax cuts permanent will add
$37 trillion to the debt--$37 trillion. That more than doubles the
totality of our national debt today--more than doubles it. It is
reckless, and it is dangerous.
So Republicans in essence want to pretend like their trillion-dollar
tax cuts are free, like magic, or, as Chip Roy, one of the most
conservative Republicans around here, said, like ``fairy dust.'' A
middle school math student could tell you this is ridiculous.
House Republicans must tread carefully. I say that to them over
there, particularly the ones on the hard right. If they go along with
this dangerous gimmick hatched by Senate Republicans, they will pave
the way to add $37 trillion to the debt. Republicans will forever
incinerate any credibility they have to complain about debt and
deficits.
When you go home, Senate Republicans, don't tell your constituents
that you want to cut the debt--$37 trillion. And far worse than that,
these billionaire tax breaks and the gargantuan deficit that they will
create will haunt our children and our grandchildren with sky-high
interest rates, a hobbled economy, and rampant inequality. It is not
the world I want my grandchildren to grow up in.
House Republicans must not go along with this dangerous plan by
Senate Republicans.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Medicaid

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, we are in the process of reaching a
conclusion in debating at least the first step--maybe now the second
step--of reconciliation. It is an opportunity for us to make the Tax
Code more permanent, an opportunity for us to reduce spending and to
hopefully get the budget better in balance to bring our debt under
control.
But, today, I just want to highlight a small portion of what this
debate ultimately will consider, and that is the issue of Medicaid.
As does the Presiding Officer, I come from a very rural State.
Medicaid is a component of how we provide healthcare to low-income
individuals and how we care for and provide medical treatment for those
with disabilities. I want to highlight from my own

[[Page S2146]]

personal point of view how valuable that is, the necessity of our
finding ways for low-income individuals and individuals with
disabilities to be able to access healthcare.
As this conversation and debate continue, I want to make certain that
my colleagues know, in my view, the value of making certain we do no
harm to those in desperate need of healthcare in Kansas and across the
country. I am certain--perhaps without a doubt--there are flaws in the
system and that abuse occurs, and our focus should be on eliminating
those flaws and that abuse.
I want to also talk about another aspect of Medicaid funding. A lot
of what I have worked on as a U.S. Senator and before that as a Member
of the House of Representatives is trying to make certain that rural
America--rural Kansas in particular--has a future and that the
community that I grew up in--now with a population of less than 2,000--
has a future and an opportunity for people to come there, live there,
raise their families there, educate their children there, and to retire
there. Rural America is hugely important to me and, in my view, is
hugely important to the country.
One of the challenges we face in rural Kansas and in Kansas generally
is having access to healthcare. Our community hospitals are hugely
important. Our ability to maintain those hospitals and keep their doors
open is a major priority for me. During COVID, we took extraordinary
steps to make sure we didn't lose a healthcare provider and that the
citizens of Kansas and the country could access healthcare.
One of the components that pays for that healthcare is Medicaid. It
is not the hugest component. Medicare, private insurance, other
sources, and private pay are utilized for the hospitals to generate the
revenue to be able to keep their doors open. This keeping of hospital
doors open matters.
As I stated, my goal is making sure that rural communities have a
future, but that future disappears in the absence of having access to
healthcare. So a significant portion of that effort of mine to
preserve, protect, and defend rural Kansas--and our State generally is
rural--is to make sure the hospitals have the capability and the
revenues necessary to provide the services the community needs.
Medicaid is a component of that. Nine percent of hospital revenues come
from Medicaid. It is also true that Medicaid only covers 65 percent of
the costs of the healthcare provided to someone who receives Medicaid
benefits.
The average operating margin for a Kansas hospital is a negative 7
percent, meaning that the revenues don't cover the costs, and there is
$1.1 billion in uncompensated care. In other words, the hospitals of
Kansas, our healthcare providers, have a shortfall. They take in a
certain amount of revenue, but that revenue is $1.1 billion for
uncompensated care. That revenue doesn't exist.
Eight hospitals have closed in our State since 2015. I have visited
every hospital in Kansas--most of them numerous times. I have talked to
hospital administrators and patients and board members and the CFO.
I know one of my standard questions is often: So, are you in the red
or the black?
The most common answer to that question is: Well, it depends on what
day you ask.
My point in making these statements is that as we debate
reconciliation and as we debate the instructions--in the case of the
House, instructions to the Energy and Commerce Committee, and in the
Senate, instructions to the Finance Committee--those instructions in
the bill that we are considering right now are significantly different.
The instructions to the House Energy and Commerce Committee are to cut
$888 billion from Medicaid. The instructions to the Senate Finance
Committee are to cut $1 billion. Now, in both of these circumstances,
these are minimum amounts.
But I wanted my constituents to know that, in my view, before this
product is concluded, before this legislative endeavor is concluded and
we have sent the instructions to the committees and the bills come back
from the committees, I want to make sure that we take into account the
importance--the importance--of people who are low-income and have
disabilities and the importance of Medicaid to them but also the
broader issue of what it means to a community to lose its hospital.
Often, that hospital is the largest employer in communities across
Kansas. That is a component.
The reality is that our citizens move away. If you are a young family
and you are looking for a place to live or you are a young family who
has grown up in a community in the absence of access to healthcare--and
it is broader than just hospitals. It is the hospital; it is the
nursing home; it is the community pharmacist; it is the physician; it
is the nurse practitioner; it is the chiropractor; it is the
optometrist. All of those individuals and their professions matter as
to whether or not communities across my State will be around for time
to come.
I want to highlight this issue today because the process is beginning
that will set the stage for whether or not the future is bright for
individuals and the communities in which they live in Kansas and across
the country.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.
Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I just listened to my colleague from
Kansas. It is just commendable, the example he has set of going and
visiting absolutely every single one of the hospitals in the State of
Kansas. It is an example for all of us to get out and talk to our
constituents and listen to what they have to say. The senior Senator
from Kansas has, I think, set an example for all of us. He visits every
county in his State repeatedly, yearly, and it is a model for all. So I
am happy to hear him address these issues in this body this morning.

Current Policy Baseline

Mr. President, I also heard speak the Senator from New York, Senator
Schumer, and what I heard him do is something different. What he did is
he mischaracterized a budget term called the ``current policy
baseline.''
First and foremost, the Budget Committee has consulted with the
Senate Parliamentarian on the substitute amendment that we are bringing
to the Senate today. The Parliamentarian has deemed it appropriate for
consideration under the Congressional Budget Act. The Budget Act is
also clear. The Budget Committee chairman decides the baseline.
I served in this body when it was the Democrats who were arguing in
favor of the current policy baseline. That was in 2013 when President
Barack Obama was in the White House. The Obama administration and the
Senate Democrat majority at the time argued that a current policy
baseline was the ``appropriate reference point'' when it extended
existing tax policy. Senate Republicans are simply following the law
and the standard that the Obama administration wanted followed in 2013.
The current policy baseline is how we make the tax cuts permanent. It
is how we stop a $4 trillion tax increase--a tax increase supported
unanimously by today's Senate Democrats because, for the Senate
Democrats, their favorite day is coming soon: tax day, April 15.
Millions of Americans today are filling out their tax forms, and
people are going to spend time this weekend trying to get it right. As
they do, I ask myself and wonder if these people who are working so
hard at home--hard-working people, earning money, and having to fill
out their tax forms--if they realize that Democrats right here in the
U.S. Senate want to raise those taxes by a cumulative number of $4
trillion.
Look, a $4 trillion tax increase on American families would be
devastating. Senate Republicans are fighting against it. Republicans
want to make the 2017 tax cuts permanent. We want to reverse the
Democrat failures of the past 4 years. We are focusing on getting
America back on track.
Let's look at the tax cuts that occurred a number of years ago. Tax
reform restored fairness and simplicity to the Tax Code. Americans are
better off because of it. It is one of the things that resulted in the
best economic times of my life.
Within 2 years of passing the tax cuts, the United States added
millions and millions of new jobs. Unemployment fell dramatically to
its lowest point in 50 years. Many businesses grew and invested. Most
importantly--most importantly--hard-working Americans had more money in
their pockets to spend.
In Wyoming, I heard of one local business owner who used the tax cuts

[[Page S2147]]

to give his employees a raise. He also expanded his business--more
jobs, more economic opportunities for people in his part of the State
of Wyoming. This is what happens when Washington taxes less and
taxpayers get to keep more of their hard-earned money. It is good for
families, and it is good for businesses. It is good for our Nation. In
Wyoming and across the country, millions and millions of workers are
benefiting from the higher pay, the bigger bonuses, and the best
opportunities that come from lower taxes. By making these tax cuts
permanent, businesses and families will get the stability and the
certainty they need in order to thrive.
Ninety percent of Americans saw their taxes go down because of tax
reform. It would be disastrous if the tax-and-spend Senate Democrats--
those who brought us the highest inflation in our lifetime--were to
choke off the chance for Americans to keep more of their hard-earned
money. American families would see their taxes go up if the Democrats
get their way. Twenty million businesses would see their taxes go up if
Democrats get their way. Six million jobs and $540 billion in wages
could be erased if Democrats get their way. In all, families, workers,
and job creators are facing a $4 trillion tax increase.
When Republicans passed this Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Speaker Nancy
Pelosi--she was Speaker of the House of Representatives at the time,
from California--famously dismissed the savings and the bonuses and the
benefits. She said that these wins for workers--she described them as
``crumbs.'' Democrats continue to dismiss the burden of higher taxes.
Listen to what Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said. She
said that cutting taxes was nothing more than ``tossing a few crumbs''
at the American people.
Listen to what Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey said. He blamed
workers who received bonuses from tax reform for ``driving up the
debt.'' I don't recall him saying that in his last 25 hours on the
floor of the Senate. He didn't repeat it again.
Democrats are out of touch with America's families. That is what is
happening here. It has been proven by the results of the November
election, and their condescending liberal attitude is a threat to the
American dream. They just think they know better than everybody else.
It is wrong for Democrats to force hard-working taxpayers to pay for
wasteful Washington spending. Fortunately for the hard-working
taxpayers of this country, President Trump is in the White House,
Senate Republicans are in the majority, and common sense is coming to
Washington. Senate Republicans are going to continue to put an end to
this wasteful Washington spending because we stand with the American
workers, with the job creators, and with the small businesses of this
country. Hard-working taxpayers are soon going to see where each and
every Senator stands.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my
remarks prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Nomination of Mehmet Oz

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, today, I rise to urge my colleagues to vote
in favor of the motion to invoke cloture on Dr. Mehmet Oz, who is
nominated to serve as Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services, or CMS.
The CMS Administrator is responsible for overseeing healthcare
programs that cover tens of millions of Americans, including Medicare,
Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP.
At his hearing, Dr. Oz spoke strongly about his desire to modernize
the CMS and encourage a healthy lifestyle for all Americans. His vision
for treating the underlying causes of chronic disease and equipping
providers with innovative technologies to serve patients will also be a
much needed sea change at CMS.
I am confident that his years spent as a leading physician and public
health advocate make him duly qualified to accomplish these goals, and
I look forward to working with him, if confirmed.
Dr. Oz clearly met the standard of the Finance Committee's arduous
nomination process, and I thank him for the diligence and accessibility
he displayed during the extensive meetings he had with committee
members and staff, in addition to responding to hundreds of questions
for the record.
I strongly encourage my colleagues to join me in advancing his
nomination.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sheehy). The clerk will read the title of
the joint resolution for the third time.
The joint resolution was ordered to a third reading and was read the
third time.

Vote on H.J. Res. 24

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution having been read the
third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
Mr. CRAPO. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Maryland (Ms.
Alsobrooks), the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Bennet), the Senator from
Delaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley), and the
Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 42, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 162 Leg.]

YEAS--53

Banks
Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Curtis
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Husted
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Justice
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
McCormick
Moody
Moran
Moreno
Mullin
Murkowski
Paul
Ricketts
Risch
Rounds
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sheehy
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Tuberville
Wicker
Young

NAYS--42

Baldwin
Blumenthal
Blunt Rochester
Booker
Cantwell
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Fetterman
Gallego
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
Kim
King
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Murphy
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schiff
Schumer
Shaheen
Slotkin
Smith
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wyden

NOT VOTING--5

Alsobrooks
Bennet
Coons
Merkley
Murray
The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 24) was passed.

____________________