{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-2025-02-26-pt1-PgS1364-2", "2025-02-26", 119, 1, null, null, "LEGISLATIVE SESSION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SLEGISLATIVE", "S1364", "S1367", "[{\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Ron Wyden\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mike Crapo\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"119\", \"type\": \"SJRES\", \"number\": \"10\"}]", "171 Cong. Rec. S1364", "Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 2025)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 2025)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S1364-S1367]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION\n\n                                 ______\n\n   TERMINATING THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY DECLARED WITH RESPECT TO ENERGY\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Committee on\nEnergy and Natural Resources is discharged from further consideration\nof S.J. Res. 10, and the Senate will proceed to the consideration of\nthe joint resolution, which the clerk will report by title.\n  The assistant bill clerk read as follows:\n\n       A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 10) terminating the national\n     emergency declared with respect to energy.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be six\nhours for debate only, with the time equally divided between the\nleaders or their designees.\n  The Senator from Texas.\n\n                          Trump Administration\n\n  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I know there is a lot going on in\nWashington, DC, these days given the speed and the aggressiveness with\nwhich President Trump and his administration have attacked his agenda,\nand I use that in a very positive way. It gets a little confusing to\nfigure out what is important and what is maybe not quite so important.\n  But I would like to talk about one thing that has been very top of\nmind for a lot of us here in the House and the Senate; and that, of\ncourse, is the process to implement President Trump's ``America First''\nagenda.\n  This is what the election was about, just on November 5. And, of\ncourse, a lot of ink has been spilled on the mechanics of the process,\ntalking about budget resolutions, reconciliation instructions, and\nthings that are gibberish to most Americans, but this is the process by\nwhich we do the job of implementing President Trump's ``America-First''\nagenda.\n  Last week, my Senate colleagues and I were here late into the night\nand into the early morning voting on amendments to the budget passed\nout of the Senate Budget Committee on which I serve.\n  Our colleagues in the House voted to pass their version last night,\nso now we find ourselves at a critical juncture with a different budget\nresolution in the House from that passed by the Senate.\n  And, of course, as I said, we have been spending a lot of time and\nenergy talking about procedural questions up to this point. Questions\nover whether the Republicans will enact President Trump's agenda in one\nbill or two, whether the bill that eventually reaches the President's\ndesk would originate in the House or the Senate. A great deal of\ndiscussion and debate has been ongoing about all of these details and\nmore.\n  But what is most important is to keep our eye on the prize, what we\nare actually trying to accomplish. As I mentioned at the beginning,\nlast November, millions of Americans went to the polls and elected\nPresident Trump and to turn the page on the last 4 years of the Biden\nadministration's disastrous inflationary policies.\n  We finally reached a point where, as Admiral Mullen, the former\nchairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff about 10 years ago, when asked\nwhat our biggest threat to our national security was, he said it was\nthe debt. And at the time, I think many of us, me included, thought,\nwell, that is kind of an interesting take. Well, we have finally come\nto a point where Admiral Mullen's statement and reality have converged,\nwhere we are now paying more interest on the national debt than we are\non defense of our Nation, in a dangerous world which seems to be\ngetting more dangerous all the time.\n  We spend about 2.8 percent of our gross domestic product on national\ndefense, and there is no question in my mind that we are going to have\nto up that figure substantially, but we can't do it by continuing to\nborrow against our Nation's credit card and to crowd out other\ninvestment and to pass that debt on to our children and grandchildren.\nThat is just flat immoral.\n  So now the task at hand is to enact the policies that the American\npeople voted for. And what are those policies? Well, first and\nforemost, we have to secure the southern border. I represent a State of\nabout 31 million people with a 1,200-mile common border between the\nUnited States and Mexico.\n  We know in Texas what the price that we have had to pay--not just at\nthe border, not just in Texas, but throughout the Nation--for the open\nborder policies of the Biden administration. Customs and Border\nProtection encounters with illegal migrants increased more than 40\npercent from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal 2023, totaling more than 10\nbillion encounters nationwide.\n  And when we say this is an encounter, this is people showing up,\nclaiming asylum, only to be released into the interior of the United\nStates and given a\n\n[[Page S1365]]\n\ncourt date that may be 10 years off or simply paroled, which means\nreleased into the United States, given a work permit. In other words,\nin the words of the Border Patrol when I asked them, what do you think\nthe best solution is to deal with this flood of humanity coming across\nthe border, they used one word. They said ``consequences.'' There have\nto be consequences to coming to the United States outside of legal\nimmigration channels.\n  And during the Biden administration, there simply were no\nconsequences. It was like having a big, green traffic light on the\nborder telling people from anywhere around the world: Come on in.\n  And, of course, the people who facilitated that are these criminal\norganizations, the cartels that have now been designated as foreign\nterrorist organizations by the Trump administration. And, oh, by the\nway, not only did they traffic in human beings for all sorts of\npurposes--including human trafficking of children, young girls, young\nboys--these were the same people who facilitated the movement of drugs\nacross the border in massive quantities that took the life of more than\n100,000 Americans last year alone. About 70,000 of those were from\nfentanyl, a word that has become more common lately because it is\nubiquitous; it is everywhere. It is in States like Montana, States like\nTexas. And many of my colleagues have said: Well, as a result of the\ndisastrous border policies of the Biden administration, every State is\nnow a border State.\n\n  Well, on top of all the people who were simply released--basically\nenriching the cartels, who charge by the head, and making it easier for\nthem to smuggle drugs into the United States--more than 1.7 million\n``got-aways'' evaded Border Patrol. What that means, basically, is they\nwere seen on a camera or some sort of sensor, but by the time the\nBorder Patrol showed up, they were gone.\n  And, of course, these are the people who, frankly, are up to no good.\nWhether they have criminal records, whether they were carrying drugs,\nwhether they had some other reason to evade law enforcement, these are\nnot honest, hard-working people who just simply wanted a better way of\nlife--1.7 million ``got-aways.''\n  The human and drug trafficking facilitated by the Biden\nadministration's open border policies have caused immeasurable\nsuffering to the people of Texas and the people of the Nation. The\nfentanyl manufactured with Chinese precursors smuggled through the open\nborders has taken tens of thousands of American lives. It is a shocking\nstatistic to me that, out of the 70,000 or so--young people, mainly--\nwho died as a result of ingesting fentanyl, unbeknownst to them, they\nthought they were actually consuming something else--a Percocet, some\nother relatively innocuous drug--only to find out the hard way that it\nwas contaminated with fentanyl, a deadly drug, which is now the leading\ncause of death for young people between the ages of 18 and 45.\n  We know where it comes from. The chemicals come from China. We know\nwhere it goes to be manufactured and made to look like relatively\ninnocuous pills that are then taken by our young people. It comes\nacross the border from Mexico. And yet the Biden administration's open\nborder policies made it easier, not harder, for that to happen, and the\nresults, as I said, have been disastrous.\n  Well, now it is up to us to right the ship by enacting President\nTrump's border security agenda, but we also have other work to do. We\nhave to extend the expiring tax provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs\nAct, a bill that we passed in 2017. And after 5 years, many provisions\nof that tax bill expire.\n  If Congress fails to extend the tax cuts championed by President\nTrump in his first term and passed by Republican majorities in the\nHouse and Senate, Americans will face the highest tax increase in\nrecent history. A family of four making around $80,000 a year will see\na $1,700 a year tax hike if these provisions expire.\n  Let me say that again: A family of four making $80,000 a year will\nsee a tax increase of $1,700 next year if these provisions expire.\n  Now, the reason why I emphasize that is because to listen to our\nDemocratic colleagues, you would think it is all about billionaires and\nmillionaires. But, no, 62 percent of American taxpayers would pay more\ntaxes if we experience a multitrillion-dollar tax increase as a result\nof the expiration of these provisions in 2025.\n  Well, after 4 years of the highest inflation we have had in the last\n40 years, families have struggled to keep up. In fact, many of them\nhave been stuck with an effective pay cut and a reduction in their\nstandard of living because the same dollars in their pocket have had\nless purchasing power than they used to, as a result of this insidious,\nsecret, or invisible tax known as inflation.\n  So now is not the time to slap these American families with a tax\nincrease. That would be insult to injury. After Washington Democrats\neroded the purchasing power of American families, it would only add\ninsult to injury to go back to those same families in Texas and\nelsewhere and insist that the government needs to take even more of\ntheir hard-earned paycheck come tax day.\n  I was proud to work with President Trump in 2017, along with all of\nmy colleagues. I happened to be the chief vote counter back then, as\nmajority whip, when we passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and made sure\nthat it had the necessary support to get across the finish line. It\nwasn't easy, but it was important. And it had a huge impact on the\nquality of life and the standard of living of millions and millions of\nAmericans.\n  And so I look forward to working with my colleagues here in the\nSenate to extend those expiring provisions, now during President\nTrump's second term.\n  Last but not least, we have to begin the process of getting our\nspending and debt under control in order to get a grip on the historic,\nrunaway inflation caused by President Biden and Washington Democrats'\nreckless spending spree, and I also mentioned the impact it has on our\nability to provide for the common defense and our national security.\nRonald Reagan famously said: Peace--which is something we all aspire\nto--peace comes through strength. Weakness is a provocation and an\ninvitation to the world's tyrants and bullies--people like Vladimir\nPutin, people like President Xi in China. If they sense weakness, they\nwill take advantage of it. And what we would need to do in America and\nwith our allies is to reestablish deterrence. That is what ``peace\nthrough strength'' means, and we can't do it by continuing to spend\nborrowed money and racking up debt on our Nation's credit card.\n\n  We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to address not only\ndiscretionary spending--which is what we do on an annual basis, which\nis about 28 percent of what the Federal Government spends--but\nmandatory spending. The Federal Government spends an enormous amount of\nmoney each year. It is in excess of $6.5 trillion.\n  Now, I don't have the brain capacity to conceive of what $6.5\ntrillion is, and I doubt anybody does. But it is a lot of money, and\nthere is no way we are going to be able to get our spending problem and\nour debt problem under control by addressing 28 percent of what the\nFederal Government spends.\n  So we need to look not only at the discretionary spending; we need to\nlook at the so-called mandatory spending, which is on auto pilot. And,\nyes, Medicare and Social Security are off the table. We are not going\nto be talking about those. We need to address those at some point, but\nwe can only do that with bipartisan support.\n  And then there are things like the Tax Code, which is more than just\ndeductions and credits. Our Democratic colleagues have now turned the\nTax Code into a welfare benefit scheme. The child tax credit and the\nearned income tax credit are refundable tax credits, which means it is\nnot a credit against income. It is not a deduction. It is a check that\nis handed out. And there are $200 billion worth of refundable tax\ncredits paid out on an annual basis by the Federal Government--$200\nbillion. We need to get ahold of that. We need to get that under\ncontrol.\n  We also need to return to commonsense requirements that were\nbipartisan back in the days of Bill Clinton, which is meaningful work\nrequirements for means-tested programs. We need to help people who need\nhelp. But if people are able to help themselves by working and\nproviding for their family\n\n[[Page S1366]]\n\nand they don't need to be a burden on the taxpayers, then they should\nbe contributing like everybody else and not living off of the American\ntaxpayer.\n  Americans across the country voted to end the reckless policies of\nthe Biden administration. So now it is up to us to deliver. We have\nkicked the can down the road so far, we have run out of road, and now\nwe have a once-in-a-generation opportunity, with President Trump and\nRepublican majorities in both Houses, to do something about it.\n  The House and the Senate have the same goal. The American people have\ngiven this administration a mandate, and the clock is ticking. At the\nend of the day, what matters is not whether the talking heads in the\nmedia or people across the country see this as a Senate bill or a House\nbill. That is inconsequential. What matters is that it is President\nTrump's agenda that we are implementing, as mandated by the American\npeople last November 5.\n  We need to get this across the finish line to secure the border, to\nprovide for the common defense, to avoid a massive tax increase on\nmiddle-class families, and to get our national debt under control once\nand for all. That is what Texans voted for on November 5, and I believe\nthat is what Americans voted for on November 5. That is our mandate,\nand we have no option but to get this job done.\n  I yield the floor.\n  I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                      Nomination of Jamieson Greer\n\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the nomination of\nJamieson Greer to serve as U.S. Trade Representative. If confirmed, he\nwould be the top official on one of the President's signature issues:\ntrade and tariffs.\n  Donald Trump was elected President largely on the promise of lowering\nprices for American families and remaking the global economy to\nAmerica's benefit. Six weeks into his Presidency, what he has shown is\na willingness to impose staggering costs on our families, workers, and\nbusinesses in order to settle scores on issues that have nothing to do\nwith trade or the economy. He gets headlines; his wealthy friends get\ntax breaks; and American families get stuck with higher prices and\nbigger bills.\n  I oppose this nomination. I certainly have nothing against Mr. Greer\npersonally. I just believe, in this position, he will be a rubberstamp\nfor the Trump tax, the knee-jerk decision to slap tariffs on nearly\neverything Americans buy, and make high prices even higher. Mr. Greer\nhas embraced the Trump chaos strategy, which is a slap in the face to\nfarmers, manufacturers, and communities across the country. They are\nsounding the alarm about how the Trump program is already costing them\nsales overseas and jobs here at home. Our country needs a U.S. Trade\nRepresentative who will be the point person on trade for this\nadministration, and I just don't have the confidence in Mr. Greer for\nthat job.\n  Let me start with the first key point. The Trump administration's\nacross-the-board tariffs are going to cost Americans big time--up to\n$2,600 a year, according to one estimate. That could devastate American\njobs. One appraisal is that they could destroy 344,000 American jobs.\n  Donald Trump has already ordered tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and\nChina. The China tariffs went into effect last month. Now, he is\npromising that 25 percent tariffs on everything Americans buy from\nMexico and Canada will go into effect next week. Get ready for gas\nprices to go up, power prices to spike, auto supply chains to be thrown\nout of whack, and fresh fruits and vegetables to get more expensive.\n  And there is more. Donald Trump has promised new tariffs on steel and\naluminum, which go into everything from soda cans to cars. Yesterday,\nhe proposed tariffs on copper, which is used in everything from housing\nto medical devices and cars. They largely come from Chile and Canada.\nAnd he is pushing something called reciprocal tariffs on . . . maybe .\n. . everything.\n  The only thing we can be sure about with Trump's tariffs is that they\nare going to hit working Americans the hardest. Donald Trump, Elon\nMusk, and their billionaire friends are barely going to notice the\nprice hikes.\n  If you ask people at a Fred Meyer's store in Gresham, OR, or who are\nbuying groceries in Charlotte or in Kalamazoo, they don't need an\neconomist to know that Donald Trump isn't helping prices. Less than a\nthird of Americans approve of the job Donald Trump is doing on\ninflation, according to a poll released this week. Consumer sentiment--\na particularly important measure--fell by 10 percent this month. More\nand more Americans are rightly worried that tariffs are going to drive\nmore inflation.\n  If this trade war continues, there is no doubt many U.S. workers,\nfarmers, and ranchers are going to lose their jobs when our trading\npartners retaliate and slap tariffs on ``Made in the USA'' products.\nThat is what happened the last time Donald Trump was in office.\nAmerican producers of everything from rice to bourbon to motorcycles\ngot hammered. They sold less overseas, made less money, and workers\nended up paying the price.\n  There is a right way to approach tariffs that punishes bad actors\nlike China and targets the products that will change other countries'\nbehaviors while minimizing the cost to American families. Donald Trump\nis doing the opposite. He is maximizing price spikes for regular\nAmericans, with no plan or strategy.\n  One other point with respect to trade chaos: Mr. Greer has endorsed\nthis, and it is already hurting farmers and small businesses. Now, I\nhad four townhall meetings in my State recently and talked with lots of\nsmall businesses and farmers.\n  I am hearing one message over and over again: They are already losing\nsales and losing markets to Donald Trump's bluster. Last year, our\nState exported $34 billion in blueberries, hazelnuts, and other goods\noverseas--almost an alltime high. Now, instead of building on that\nsuccess, our producers and innovators prepare for the worst.\n  This story comes up again and again. The Washington Post quoted an\nIowa farmer who has seen prices of seed, fertilizers, and equipment\nincrease while prices for soybeans are flat. ``Our goal is to make Iowa\nand U.S. soybean farms profitable,'' said this Iowa farmer, ``and to do\nthat, we need these international markets. We need to keep growing\ndemand.''\n  The State economist in Georgia said this month that the greatest\nthreat to that State's economy--and I will repeat that--the greatest\nthreat to the economy is Trump's trade threats. Tariffs mean higher\nprices for consumers while trade wars mean other countries buy less of\nwhat Georgia makes, including aerospace components, pulp and paper, and\nauto parts.\n  Pittsburgh-based aluminum manufacturer Alcoa said Trump's tariffs\nwill cost 100,000 jobs in the United States and won't lead to more\nproduction here. ``This is bad for the aluminum industry in the [United\nStates]. It's bad for American workers''--not according to some Member\nof the Senate, but that is what the Alcoa CEO said. There are similar\nreports of communities fearing the worst in Wisconsin, North Carolina,\nand all across America.\n  One final reason I oppose the Greer nomination: It is not clear to me\nthat he will be the final voice in the room with Donald Trump on trade.\nThere are an awful lot of trade cooks in that kitchen. Peter Navarro,\nTreasury Secretary Bessent, and Commerce Secretary Lutnick all have\nclaimed responsibility for trade. It reminds me of an old saying that\ngets attributed to John Madden:\n\n       If you've got two quarterbacks, you have none.\n\n  Well, if you have four chief trade officials, you have none.\n  Unfortunately, Mr. Greer did little in his confirmation process to\nbuild confidence that the buck stops with him on trade. He said it is\nnot a trade matter when Donald Trump uses tariffs to settle scores\nabout the border, immigration, and diplomatic issues. So Mr. Greer said\nthese decisions aren't something he would expect to be involved with if\nconfirmed. If the U.S. Trade Representative isn't going to be in the\nroom when tariff decisions are at\n\n[[Page S1367]]\n\nstake, it is not clear to me what influence over critical trade\ndecisions Mr. Greer will have in the Trump administration.\n  Americans need a trade policy that puts workers and families first\nand a chief trade official who has the authority to deliver actual\nresults for our workers and families. Unfortunately, neither of those\nis on offer today. That is why I oppose this nomination.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.\n  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote\nin favor of the confirmation of Mr. Jamieson Greer, who is nominated to\nserve as the U.S. Trade Representative.\n  I think I ought to just probably set a couple of facts straight about\nPresident Trump's utilization of the various policies that he used in\nthe past term when he was President the first time.\n  It was said that wages went down, prices went up, and that people are\ngoing to face terrible, dire consequences if he is able to follow his\ntrade policies again in this term. The reality is that under President\nTrump, wages went up, jobs went up, unemployment went down, benefits\nwent up, the economy grew dramatically, and we had the strongest\neconomy in our lifetimes because of the policies President Trump\npursued. So I don't think people should let the politics of fear--\nsaying that everything President Trump does is going to hurt people--\nconvince them otherwise.\n  The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which was created in\n1962 by Congress, develops and coordinates U.S. international trade\npolicy and oversees trade negotiations with other countries.\n  The U.S. Trade Representative--the role for which Mr. Greer is\nnominated--historically and statutorily serves as the United States'\nprincipal adviser, negotiator, and spokesperson on trade issues. Mr.\nGreer is well suited for these roles, as demonstrated during his\nprevious tenure as USTR Chief of Staff when he worked with both sides\nof the aisle in negotiating and securing congressional approval of the\nUnited States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which passed the Senate 89 to\n10.\n  I would note that the previous U.S. Trade Representative, who is now\nbeing replaced by Mr. Greer, and President Biden himself for the past 4\nyears refused to actually negotiate any bilateral trade agreements with\nother nations--none.\n  Throughout the nomination process, Mr. Greer demonstrated his strong\ncommitment to working with Congress in a bipartisan fashion to advance\nthe interests of our farmers, ranchers, fishers, and workers. In\nparticular, I applaud Mr. Greer's commitment to change that pattern of\nthe last 4 years and to negotiate and work on opening markets for our\nfarmers and manufacturers around the globe, negotiating new bilateral\ntrade agreements and enforcing existing ones--something we have not\nseen for 4 years.\n  I fully welcome a return to the USTR that performs its statutory\nobligation of creating new opportunities for Americans, and I look\nforward to the USTR's forthcoming reviews of foreign trade barriers\nthat stymie U.S. investments and imports.\n  I urge my colleagues to join me now in advancing Mr. Greer's\nnomination. It is critical that the United States have a USTR at the\nhelm of these investigations and to support the administration's return\nto an active and robust trade agenda that prioritizes America's\nfarmers, ranchers, workers, and businesses.\n  I yield the floor.\n  I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ricketts). The clerk will call the roll.\n  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-2025-02-26-pt1-PgS1364-2"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 26.253665098920465, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}