Floor Speech2026-03-25

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to Proceed--Resumed

Full Text

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 56 (Wednesday, March 25, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 25, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S1589-S1599] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026--Motion to Proceed--Resumed Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 311, H.R. 7147. 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. Department of Homeland Security Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, we are on day 40 of Democrats' shutdown of Department of Homeland Security--day 40. And that is on top of Democrats' recordbreaking 43-day full-government shutdown in the fall. Altogether, thanks to Senate Democrats, a lot of DHS employees have been working without pay for more than 80 days so far this fiscal year. That is shameful. It is no wonder TSA agents are quitting in droves-- anyone would be if they had been working without pay for almost 50 percent of the fiscal year so far. My Democrat colleagues, of course, are working with pay, having rejected a Republican proposal to stop Senators' pay while DHS continues to be shut down. I am hoping that Democrats can at least envision what it is like for stressed-out Homeland Security workers wondering if they will be able to [[Page S1590]] pay their rent, and I hope they will recognize the situation can't continue. Homeland Security workers are hurting; travelers are beyond fed up with the disastrous situation at U.S. airports; and we cannot continue to keep this critical Department unfunded. Democrats have a proposal before them with legislative text--the latest serious offer from Republicans to get this Department back up and running. Democrats have repeatedly said that they want to pay TSA, Coast Guard, FEMA, and employees who defend America from cyber attacks. This bill would do it. I hope Democrats will work with us to finalize an agreement and reopen the Department of Homeland Security this week. SAVE America ACT Mr. President, since we began debate on the SAVE America Act, my Democrat colleagues have spent a lot of time hedging. And that has been particularly evident on the issue of voter ID--something that Democrats have spent years decrying as a tool of voter suppression but are now suggesting they somehow support. Democrats can read the polls as well as any of us, and I suspect that Democrats are not eager to be seen as on the 20-percent side of an 80- 20 issue, so they are trying to have their cake and eat it too. So the Democrat leader is out there claiming Democrat support for voter ID--as long, of course, as he doesn't have to vote for any ID proposal that we actually put forward. On Thursday, the junior Republican Senator from Ohio offered an eminently reasonable voter ID proposal. All that it would have done is require a photo ID for voters when they go to the polls--a driver's license, military ID, Tribal ID, passport--the types of IDs that are sitting in wallets right now that the American people use on a regular basis. Democrats said: No, we don't like that. And so they blocked it. And more than blocked it. The junior Senator from Oregon offered an alternative bill that would have actually banned voter ID for absentee ballots. And then yesterday--yesterday--Democrats said the quiet part out loud. The Democrat leader came down to the floor and made it clear when Democrats say they support voter ID, they mean that they support voter ID just as long as the ID requirements in question are meaningless. That is right. The Democrat leader brought up a bill Democrats introduced a few years that included a voter ID requirement--well, sort of. Let me read a few of the IDs that the Democrats' bill would have accepted: A debit card, a lease or mortgage document, a utility bill, any document containing the individual's name--name, not photo--issued by a government, or a photocopy of any one of the above. Now, sure, Mr. President, some of these things are accepted or requested as adjunct documents when you are trying to get something like a driver's license or a library card--along with, you know, things like photo ID or a birth certificate. But just showing a utility bill to prove your identity? Give me a break. If someone asked you for an ID in any other circumstance, are you going to pull out your electric bill? Can you get into a bar by showing your lease? Can you prove eligibility to work at your new job by pulling out the water bill? No, you cannot. Now, I would like to see someone try to get on a plane by presenting a photocopy of their debit card. When Republicans say voter ID, we mean an actual ID with a picture issued by a government. The kind of ID that is required for a whole bunch of things in our daily lives--starting a new job, driving a car, doing an early pickup at school, opening a bank account, getting a library card. The Democrat leader suggested that photo IDs are somehow out of reach for voters--that they need ``inclusive'' voter ID options. How does the Democratic leader think Americans are navigating all of the scenarios I just mentioned? Well, I will tell him: With their photo IDs. And yet, it is somehow an intolerable burden to ask Americans to bring those IDs with them to the polls. Give me a break. Requiring a photo ID isn't onerous. It is common sense, and the American people agree. Poll after poll shows that Americans of both parties strongly support requiring a photo ID at the polls. And just to reassure my Democrat friends, a 2019 study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found: [S]trict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation. Democrats are going to have another chance tomorrow to support election integrity by implementing a commonsense photo ID requirement. Will they stand with Americans, or will they continue to oppose any meaningful ID requirement at the polls? 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. Department of Homeland Security Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, this morning, Democrats sent Republicans our counteroffer on legislation to reopen DHS, pay TSA workers, while at the same time rein in ICE with commonsense guardrails. Our offer is a reasonable, good-faith proposal that contains some of the very same asks Democrats have been talking about now for months. Leader Jeffries and I have spoken about this agenda, and he agrees we need these strong reforms. Now, over the last day, Republicans have made the outrageous and bad- faith claim that Democrats are somehow moving the goalposts back in these negotiations. They are saying Democrats changed the ask. They are saying Democrats are backtracking and suddenly introducing new demands at the last minute. This is nonsense--nonsense. Democrats and the American people have been very clear from the beginning about what we need in order to move forward. We have been talking about ICE reforms from day one. These are not new demands. These are not surprise demands. They are not things we came up with yesterday. They are commonsense reforms, reasonable reforms, reforms that police departments across America follow every day. These are reforms the American people overwhelmingly support and things that Republicans know perfectly well we have been seeking since these negotiations began-- since these discussions began as well. So for Republicans to now act as though Democrats have changed our position as though we have moved the goalposts is poppycock, bad faith. And for Republicans to send us a proposal that has no reforms is bad faith as well and will only slow things down. They know it is bad faith. In fact, over the weekend Democrats had constructive conversations in person with our Republican colleagues. They--the Republican colleagues--conceded that some of the reforms, verbally, that we have been looking for, they said: These make sense. We thought there might be a path forward on some of the ways to reform ICE and to get some of the things everybody knows ought to be in Federal legislation. We thought there had been some progress. But then Republicans sent us their offer yesterday, and it contained none of what had been talked about, none of the reforms we had been discussing. So if anyone is slowing down negotiation and hurting TSA workers, it is the Republican leadership who did not include one single reform. Republicans, frankly, are struggling to get on the same page among themselves. That is probably why they have been so erratic here. Moderates in the Republican caucus say one thing; conservatives say another. Donald Trump is all over the place, seemingly without a clue of what is going on. They are still worried about and afraid of what he might say or do. That is what this is all about. So let me say this: We are ready to discuss these issues at a moment's notice with Republicans. We will not walk away. We are not walking away, and we want to get to a solution. We now have given Republicans our response. It is a serious offer, and time [[Page S1591]] is of the essence, I say to my Republican colleagues. The Easter holiday is coming. Families are going on spring break. TSA lines are literally stretching out the door at airports. People are exhausted. And our TSA agents need to be paid. Enough is enough. It is

Referenced legislation: SJRES107, HR7147

View original source →