John Thune
Senator for South Dakota · Republican · United States
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4166-S4167] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] Working Families Tax Cut Act Mr. THUNE. Mr.”
“And Workforce Pell will also be a game changer for midcareer professionals. As Colette Atkins, who works at Kirkwood Community College in Iowa, said, ``we have students that are working already, and they can't step away for 2 years, but can they step away to do that 8 to 15 weeks to get that training? They sure can.”
“Trade Representative Office, were among the speakers. ``This isn't the 1980 Farm Crisis, but the pressure is mounting . . . and the effect will be felt across the broader Iowa economy,'' said Christopher Pudenz, the farm bureau's economist, who presented the report along with [Iowa State University] economists Chad Hart and John Crespi.”
“Steady farmland values have bolstered the ag economy, including supporting farmers' ability to borrow money for their operations, though last year, Iowa farmland values inched up less than 1% to an average of $11,549 per acre, [the Iowa State University] reported in its annual farmland survey.”
“``Iowa farm income fell 53 percent over 3 years, new ISU report says.'' Iowa farm income tumbled 53% from 2022 to 2024, squeezed by record-high import costs, depressed corn and soybean prices and continued trade uncertainty, a new report shows.”
“Trump Accounts are a significant tool for parents and their kids. But it is far from the only thing that we did in this bill to help the next generation get a headstart on their American dream.”
The complete record
Every one of 703 lines we hold for John Thune, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 15.
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S3925] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] Cloture Motion Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion. The bill clerk read as follows:”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S3924-S3925] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] EXECUTIVE CALENDAR Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 738. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion. The motion was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination. [[Page S3925]] The bill clerk read the nomination of Kara Marie Westercamp, of Virginia, to be a Judge of the United States Court of International Trade.”
“Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 436, S. 4784. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title. The bill clerk read as follows: Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 436, S. 4784, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota. Remembering Lindsey Graham”
“It is my hope that we will be able to pass this bill out of the Senate soon and begin the process of working with our counterparts in the House and with the White House on a final bill. Republicans are ready to go. The question is: How will Democrats vote today? Are there enough Democrat Senators who support moving forward with a bipartisan--bipartisan--defense bill? I see no reason that there shouldn't be. But then again, Democrats have allowed the politics of obstruction to determine so many of their actions for the last year and a half. I certainly hope that Democrats won't now put politics ahead of support for our men and women in uniform, but that is up to them. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.”
“That includes allowing multiyear procurement contracts that allow the Pentagon to do business more efficiently with greater predictability and savings for taxpayers. I need to mention what this bill does for the men and women serving our country and their families who serve alongside them. This year's NDAA supports a 3.6 percent pay raise for our troops, and it invests in a number of quality-of-life improvements for them and their families: investments in education, housing, healthcare, and childcare. Our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee have put forward a strong bill--a strong bill for our national security and for the men and women who defend our Nation.”
“This year's NDAA will not only help ensure that America can keep pace with those challenges but also that we can outpace our adversaries. It puts a heavy emphasis on unmanned systems, especially drones and counterdrone measures. It also continues shipbuilding efforts to strengthen our naval fleet. As for our airpower, this year's bill will help ensure we maintain a force of at least 1,800 fighters and supports the new B-21 long-range strategic bomber. There is a lot I could talk about in this bill--from investing in our nuclear deterrent to supporting munitions production--but I will mention just two more important aspects of this year's bill. First, it builds on efforts in last year's NDAA to reform defense acquisition.”
“It is the bill that helps ensure our military is ready today and prepared for tomorrow, and I am proud that our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee--with the leadership of Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Reed--have reported out a strong National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2027. For the 66th year in a row, the Armed Services Committee has produced a bipartisan NDAA. And later today, we are going to have a vote to proceed to this important bill. We have had regular reminders over the last few years that we live in a dangerous world, that America still has enemies--enemies that want to attack us, our allies, and our interests. We have seen too how quickly warfare evolves in this day and age.”
“Whether responding to a natural disaster at home or fighting our enemies abroad, the men and women in America's Armed Forces stand ready to answer the call. They are our most important national security asset, and we have an obligation here in Congress to ensure that they have everything they need for whatever the mission may be. I know Senators on both sides of the aisle take that obligation seriously, and we must. As I have said so often before, if you don't get national security right, the rest is just conversation. If we don't make national security a priority here, we run the risk that Americans serving in uniform won't have what they need when they need it. That is why the National Defense Authorization Act is one of the most important bills that we do each year.”
“Mr. President, like many of us, I represent a State with a rich heritage of military service, and South Dakota continues to punch above its weight in our Armed Forces. Our National Guard is frequently called up for critical deployments at home and around the world, and Ellsworth Air Force Base is a key asset to our national defense. In fact, today Ellsworth is the largest construction site in the Air Force as it prepares to host the first B- 21 bombers next year. During the recent State work period, I was glad to welcome Air Force Secretary Troy Meink--a South Dakota native--to Ellsworth. We met with the base leadership and some of the airmen stationed there, and we saw the progress the base is making as it prepares for its important new mission.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S3914] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SWEARING IN OF DARLINE GRAHAM Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, before I begin my remarks this morning, I want to offer a word of welcome to the new Senator from South Carolina. Later today, we will swear in Darline Graham to fill the seat of her brother and our friend Lindsey Graham. I know Darline will carry on Lindsey's tireless service for South Carolina, and I look forward to serving with her. ____________________”
“2347) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income any damages, other than punitive [[Page S3914]] damages, received on account of any sexual acts or sexual contact. A bill (H.R. 5334) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow early childhood educators to take the educator expense deduction, and for other purposes. A bill (H.R. 8469) making appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes. Mr. THUNE. In order to place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceedings en bloc. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection having been heard, the bills will be placed on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV. ____________________”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S3913-S3914] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] MEASURES PLACED ON THE CALENDAR EN BLOC Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I understand that there are four bills at the desk due for a second reading en bloc. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. The clerk will read the bills by title for the second time en bloc. The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 4952) to combat fraud in Federal programs, and for other purposes. A bill (H.R.”
“Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________”
“(3) Offset 3.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by this Act for Atomic Energy Defense Activities, National Nuclear Security Administration, Naval Reactors, 14-D-901 Spent Fuel Handling Recapitalization Project, NRF is hereby reduced by $40,000,000. ______”
“AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR COUNTER UNMANNED SYSTEMS RELATING TO THE DEFENSE OF STRATEGIC ASSETS. (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the Department of the Air Force $50,000,000 for counter unmanned systems relating to the defense of strategic assets. (b) Offsets.-- (1) Offset 1.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by this Act for BMD enabling programs (RDDW 0603890C, line 88) is hereby reduced by $5,000,000. (2) Offset 2.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by this Act for special programs--MDA (RDDW 0603891C, line 89) is hereby reduced by $5,000,000.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S3947] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 6670. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4784, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the appropriate place in subtitle D of title I, insert the following: SEC. __.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S3925] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] Cloture Motion Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion. The bill clerk read as follows:”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 14, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S3924-S3925] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] EXECUTIVE CALENDAR Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 738. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion. The motion was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination. [[Page S3925]] The bill clerk read the nomination of Kara Marie Westercamp, of Virginia, to be a Judge of the United States Court of International Trade.”
“So my challenge to the Senate, to the House, and to the President: Let us come together. Let us get things done. Let us work for the American people. Ask any Uber driver, ask our constituents: What is the biggest issue right now? And they will say: Affording life. Affording life means to be able to afford healthcare. And, Mr. President, with the MVP health agenda, we help our constituents afford healthcare. With that, I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Curtis). The majority leader. ____________________”
“We can't get that done--no way. But, folks, we have actually achieved a lot on healthcare in the last few years. The No Surprises Act blocks about a million surprise medical bills per month for the American people. A PBM reform bill, which was signed into law by President Trump a few months ago but that was negotiated by Congress--and it was tough, but we actually got it so that the value to the patient in terms of lower drug prices, if you will, cutting out or restricting activities of the insurance company in the middle--we got that through. The administration is working on TrumpRx, which allows patients to buy drugs without hidden costs. So if we are going to make healthcare affordable to the American people, we have to build on that record, and we have to work together.”
“Now, we are making steps on this. Right now in the HELP Committee-- the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee--of which I am the chair, we are working on price transparency legislation. We hope to get that passed in the next 2 weeks out of Committee, and we hope this passes on the floor of the Senate. This is how we bring value to the patient, by bringing the power of price transparency, as she chooses what healthcare and where to get her healthcare. Now, we can get this done. Whenever there is a big idea like this, how do we actually help the American people with affordability? How do we actually put money in their pocket and couple it with tools that would give them the power of price transparency, in order to bring money in their pocket and value for the patient? People say: Oh, that is too big.”
“So if you know, if you have price transparency, if you say, ``Wait a second; I am going to have at least a thousand dollars out of pocket because of my deductible, but if I paid cash right now and don't go through my insurance, it only cost me $600,'' you are going to bring value to the patient. In this transaction, under the MVP plan, there would have been money placed into her health savings account. She could have used--in this case, she did it on her own--price transparency to find out the price. So there is money and value for the patient. We take the power away from the middleman, the power away from the insurance company to approve or disapprove of the care that the patient knows that she needs; and, instead, we would give the money directly to her, with the tools of price transparency to bring value to the patient.”
“I was up here in DC once. Actually, I remember we were having a crawfish boil. Every year, Louisiana people have a crawfish boil. And there was a woman who saw me on the street. She stopped me. She said: Hey, Dr. Cassidy. And I said: Yes. She said: I am from Texas, but I saw that you gave a speech about price transparency, and that if I paid cash, it would be cheaper than if I went through my insurance. So the doctor ordered an MRI on my son's shoulder, and they told me it was going to cost $2,000. Well, my deductible was whatever it was--say a thousand dollars. So I said: How much, if I pay you cash? They said: Well, if you pay us cash, it is only $600. In this case, paying cash was cheaper than paying her deductible.”
“Under our plan, we would give an advance, an income tax credit, to the family--on average, for a family of four, about $2,000-- that would go into an account that they use to pay for their benefits. By the way, this is paid for. This is paid for. But they would prefund a health savings account. Now, we don't give it to the insurance company because, if you give the money to the insurance company to subsidize the premiums, the insurance company takes 20 percent of it for overhead and for profit. You give it to the individual or family, and they are going to use 100 percent of it for the healthcare that they need. Now, we have coupled that. So it is money in your pocket. We couple that by adding value, price transparency, so that the family knows the price they pay before they go in for the service. That could be powerful.”
“So they put it on the credit card, and that credit card debt mounts. Indeed, if you look at the percent of income that Americans are now paying upon credit card interest, which means that they are carrying a balance, it has risen from about 1 percent to 3.2 percent. So 3.2 percent of their income is going to pay for interest on credit cards. This shows that they are rolling these big credit card balances forward. So with credit card balances not paid, but being the minimal amount being paid, they are up to $10,000. Much of this relates back to: How do you pay for healthcare? I don't have the money in my account. So I am going to use my credit card in order to pay for these large deductibles. Well, I have got a way to address that, Mr. President. We call it the MVP Act.”
“Now, it may be something like a routine visit, which is covered. They may have preventive care covered, like a mammogram or a screening colonoscopy. But, typically, they have got to put up $2,600, on average, if they go to the emergency room after a car wreck, and only then does the insurance begin to kick in. Now, why is that important? Because most families have less than $500 of cash in order to pay for their healthcare. In previous speeches, I have talked about how people are putting their healthcare expenditures on their credit card. And that credit card debt factors into 60 percent of household bankruptcies. So they have a $3,000 deductible, and they don't have the money in their bank account. Their child gets sick, and they bring them to the emergency room. They don't have the $3,000.”
“The other thing to recognize is that, when it begins to rise too much, then the employer pays less and less for the employees' health insurance. This can be manifested in a couple ways. Instead of paying 80 percent of the cost of the policy, they may pay only 60 percent. Or the small business may decide to get a less expensive policy, in which case they increase the deductible. Now, the deductible is what we pay out of pocket before the insurance kicks in. That is the problem. And so, if you look at, since about 2000, the amount of deductible at a big business is about $1,700. At a small business, for a single worker, among workers with a deductible, it is now about $2,600. So before the insurance begins to work for the employee, they have to come up with, on average, $2,600 to pay before the insurance kicks in.”
“But they have actually risen over 1,000-- almost 1,100--percent higher than they should have. To put it this way, if they should have risen 176 percent, they have actually risen about 1,100 percent. These are premiums. Now, by the way, these premiums continue to rise after the passage of the Affordable Care Act. Indeed, the rise became higher, faster after the passage of the Affordable Care Act. And so, if you are a small business, you are trying to make ends meet. Businesses contribute to the health insurance of their employees. Typically, they may employ--it depends upon the business, but they may give, oh, 100 percent. They may give 80 percent. They may give 60 percent. But whatever percent that the small business is contributing to their employees is going up.”
“And, in fact, what we are seeing is that the inability to afford healthcare is impacting the ability of small businesses to provide health insurance for their employees. The employer-based health insurance system is the most dominant form of providing health insurance for those less than 65, and it is crumbling. The percentage of working-age adults getting health coverage from a job has decreased from 67 percent--oh, about 25 years ago--to about 60 percent now. And the reason why is that premiums are going up so much, particularly for those 62 percent of Americans who get their insurance from a small business. There is a recent article in STAT which, based upon Federal Government information, if you look at inflation since about 1985, premiums should have [[Page S3924]] risen about 176 percent.”
“Others come to Washington to do something as a Senator. Lindsey was someone who came to Washington to do something as a Senator. I speak for myself, but I echo what colleagues have said. Lindsey Graham shall be missed. Healthcare Mr. President, we have got to do something about healthcare. Now, I am a physician. You might think I--of course, Bill cares about it. I can tell you who cares about it is the American people. I was with an Uber driver last night: What do you think--you know, if you were the President, Uber driver, what would you be talking about right now? She said: I can't afford things. I can't afford my gas. I can't afford my groceries, my housing. I can't afford my healthcare. Now, that has been echoed.”
“And I would say that many people knew exactly what he was talking about. At one point, I was talking to him about healthcare. He said: Oh, Bill, don't talk to me about policy. It gives me headaches. But he said he would fight to get it passed. We came up short but not because he did not and I did not fight. Once he said: I am going to go on ``FOX Morning.'' If I go on ``FOX Morning,'' I know the President is watching. And if the President is watching the ``FOX Morning'' show and I say we should be fighting to replace Obamacare, it will get the President engaged. He just knew how to find that audience that was important. He knew how to speak to them. He had a great sense of humor, and, again, he knew how to get things done. Ultimately, that is why somebody comes to Washington. Some people come to Washington to be a Senator.”
“Lindsey was effective as a Senator, in large part, because he was so well-liked by colleagues and because he liked them in return. He was affable, always willing to work with others, regardless of how different backgrounds, beliefs, and positions were. He just focused on getting things done and had the courage to take on issues that others would not. We collaborated on something called Graham-Cassidy, a bill which would have replaced Obamacare with coverage for everyone--literally everyone--but at a lower cost than the Affordable Care Act. I always chuckle when I say the Affordable Care Act. And we were a good team because we complemented each other. I was a doctor, always thinking about healthcare. He was the politician's politician. He told me: Bill, you are good at policy, but you are a terrible politician.”
“And, Senator Cornyn, again, you and I are both--we are both here for another 173 days. We got--and I say that not because I am counting the days to leave, but I am counting the days that we have to make an impact. And I hope I can continue to work with you on this and other bills to even make it better. We are, unabashedly, unapologetically, pro-Second Amendment Republicans. But we are smart about it, and we have the courage to step up when we see a change can be made that will keep us true to those values but also keep our communities safer. And I appreciate your leadership on this. Mr. CORNYN. As I do yours. We yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana. Remembering Lindsey Graham Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise, as so many others have, to give tribute to Senator Lindsey Graham.”
“I will dedicate an hour to somebody who wants to come into my office and prove to me that one--one--negative behavior by any State or local government or Federal Government has occurred. This is what happened, folks. But you want to come to my office, I will guarantee you, you refer to this C-SPAN segment and you want to come to my office and prove that something bad happened, I will take that. My guess is, I will get that hour back, and that is what I mean. You know, at some point on these tough issues, we keep kicking the can down the road because we let people off the hook for saying things that are patently untrue and then not hold them to account a year or two later. Well, I am here to tell you: I am here for the next 173 days before I retire. Anybody who wants to come in and prove one bad outcome from this bill, give me a call.”
“But, Senator Cornyn, let me just say it for anybody--for the 20 people watching on C-SPAN--and, hopefully, some will cover our statements--I defy anybody--anyone--who opposed this bill, who scored it, who threatened Members to vote against it, I defy them to come to my office and find one example of what they were telling people to oppose this bill that actually came to pass--one. Here it is: Public challenge. Guys, you who so--you were out there. You were emailing. You were raising money. You were saying the world is going to end, guns are going to be confiscated, that straw purchases were going to destroy--you know, that we weren't going after trafficking, that we were going after law-abiding officers, and their licenses were going to be--all these things, all this noise.”
“They need to take other people down with them, and there is a phenomenon called death by cop, where they know that by engaging a law enforcement officer, that they ultimately will be killed of necessity by the law enforcement officer to prevent causing more harm. But I want to ask just one last question. Are you aware, has anybody contacted your office, or have you read anything in the press or seen anything on broadcast media that would indicate that a single law- abiding American has been denied access to their Second Amendment rights because of this law? Mr. TILLIS. No, quite the contrary. That is why I am saying--look, I love saying I told you so, and I believed that that was going to be the case here.”
“There is no question in my mind--just the sheer number here--there is no question in my mind that we saved the life of somebody who is buying a gun for that purpose. There is no doubt in my mind the numbers stipulate that. Mr. CORNYN. And one of the things that I learned back, years ago, when I had a protective detail and I was the whip, is my Capital Police officer said there is this phenomenon, which I never fully appreciated before. If you think about it, some of these mass shootings are actually an act of suicide themselves because these shooters go into these situations, knowing--or likely knowing--that they will never make their way out of it. But they don't have the courage to take their own life.”
“But one of the things that I think, as we are talking about the harm of a young person who is suffering from mental illness or with a criminal record, a juvenile record of that--I am sure you are aware of this, but I just happened to double-check. The Pew Poll says that 62 percent of the gun deaths in America are suicide. These are people--perhaps a disturbed young person-- Mr. TILLIS. Purchased later. Mr. CORNYN.--suffering mental problems who got--who actually then used that gun to kill themselves or harm themselves. Has that been your-- Mr. TILLIS. That is exactly right. Mr. CORNYN.--your experience? Mr. TILLIS. You take a look at the--I spend a lot of time and focus on behavioral health, Senator Cornyn, and the data is compelling.”
“I believe we have got something that we should be proud of. And I also believe, Senator Cornyn, that the straw purchases, the gun trafficking, all the other things that we didn't spend a lot of time on--we can come down here and do a colloquy and talk about more and more of the positive aspects of this bill. And I appreciate your leadership in moving it. Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I just wanted to say there is one thing that Senator Tillis said that I disagree with, and that is that he said he is not a statesman. He is. And it took a lot of [[Page S3923]] political courage to do something that we knew we were buying trouble because we knew that this can be such an emotional issue and so easy to mislead people about what the facts are, that we knew that there would be a political price to be paid in order to take on this challenge.”
“I want to thank Senator Cornyn for his partnership. It was not an easy bill. It was a lot of work, but we got it done. I thank Senator Murphy, and I should have mentioned Senator Gillibrand--or not Gillibrand--wrong Kirsten--Senator Sinema for working together. I mean, we had people across the political spectrum, folks. Chris Murphy, whom I consider a friend and colleague, about as liberal as anybody in this Chamber--and I think he would admit that. And we have got John Cornyn, who is one of the most conservative. And then you have got me and Sinema probably somewhere in the middle. We got together, and we got this done. And there are more people safe, and I believe there are people alive today that may not have been if this bill hadn't passed. So, Senator Cornyn, I appreciate the work that you did on this bill.”
“And let's make sure that we continue this trend of being sure that when a person applies for a weapon, that they can safely own it, they are going to be safe for themselves and their community, and stop this nonsense of fearing any sort of positive change because of political repercussions. This bill is one of the best bills that I had the privilege to work on. And the thing that is amazing about this bill is, it went from concept to implementation in fewer than 6 weeks. That is what happens when Congress gets together, they set aside their partisan differences, they refuse to listen to the false information trying to kill a bill, and they do something good for their State and their country. That is exactly--on this anniversary of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act-- what we accomplished.”
“And I want to give Senator Cornyn an enormous amount of credit for stepping up and doing what he did to make Texas safer, make the country safer, and make these people and their loved ones and their neighbors in the community safer. The last thing I will leave you with is, to the States that do have red flag laws--including, I believe, the State of the Presiding Officer--let's get those red flag laws consistent with due process and show respect to gun owners because I am not aware of any red flag law, even in red States, that come close to the sorts of protections that we also put into this bill. So let's give them an incentive to get it right. Let's make sure that every law-abiding citizen who wants to have a gun can--like me and like Senator Cornyn and like so many other people--but let's be smart about it.”
“What has happened is we may have saved 1,600 people who may have been buying that gun to hurt themselves, maybe to hurt their community-- maybe not. But what we know is that day was not the day that we should allow them to leave that gun store with a weapon for their safety and the safety of the community. This is Congress at its best. It is looking at the people that you generally support--and Senator Cornyn was first among them--and the gun rights community and saying: Guys, I can't take the top-line arguments against this because you all know it is not really true. It is this black-and-white world that we live in here, and it requires the very seldom impactful language like, and legislation like, the Communities Act ever get done because people get afraid of the noise and they back into their corners.”
“I could talk about people who accidentally in North Carolina shot their girlfriend a year before and all of a sudden--at 17 and wanted to get a gun. Does anybody in their right mind think that is a good day for that kid to get a gun? I am not talking about a 38-year-old person going in. I am talking about an 18-year-old. I am talking about a 19-year-old. I am talking about a 20-year-old. All we did was say: Guys, let's make sure that this is a safe decision for the child and for the community. That is what this bill did, and that is why this bill has withstood the test of time and not a single--not one scintilla--and I would defy anybody who was against this bill to find one of the things that they predicted and guaranteed would happen have actually occurred.”
“About 4,000 people who were going to be denied based on the law have been denied. So look at these numbers again. Talking about mass confiscation, how disruptive this was, how nobody was going to be able to get guns, right? That is what all the people said: Send money, we are defending your Second Amendment right here in Washington. Almost 551,000 transactions for purchasing guns have been processed as of June of this year. About 3,800 of them were denied for reasons that existed before we ever passed this law. What we have done though is found some 1,630 young people that that was not their day to buy a gun. That was--I could go through a long list. I could talk about people being convicted of assaulting a police officer. I could talk about people who had a long gun after they had been convicted of a crime in their car.”
“All we did was say: If you are under 21, we are going to try and find out as much as we need to know about you for your safety and for the safety of your community. So all we did was say: We are going to go to local law enforcement. We are going to try and get information out there and encourage States to provide the information to our national center for clearing gun purchases in West Virginia sooner so that those who do not have a bad record can get their gun purchased sooner so that we can in a matter of 3 to 10 days get this done. All the people that were opposed to this bill said that we were not going to get any approvals done, that even the good law-abiding over 21s were going to get swept into this somehow. Well, let me tell you what has happened since June of this year. The NICS system is doing just fine.”
“Does anybody think that really makes sense, that the crime you committed a couple of months, let's say a month, 60 days, 90 days earlier, would have not been relevant? That is absurd. Of course if you are under 21, we need to have some insight into what your life looked like when you were 16 or 17 years old. That is what the enhanced background check was, and yet some of these gun advocacy organizations thought that was horrible. It was going to lead to a mass confiscation of guns. It was a backdoor, I think. It was a backdoor into just taking all of our guns away. It was going to devastate the Second Amendment protections of our Constitution. I heard them all saying it, saying some of it. Let me tell you what actually happened.”
“All we are saying--show of hands, do we have any pages that are 18 years old? OK. Younger or older? Younger, OK. So these kids right now, whatever--sorry, these young adults right now, whatever they are doing, if they have got a committal, a behavioral health committal, if they assaulted a police officer, shot at one, got prosecuted for it when they were 16\1/2\ years old or 17 years old, on their 18th birthday, it is like that device in--what was it--``Men in Black,'' where you erase that. Can you imagine that? If you were 18 years old on your birthday and you had been convicted of a crime or had a serious legal entanglement, when you go to the NICS system, it was as if you were a day old.”
“Those same people who were saying: Send money now, support us because [[Page S3922]] we are defending your Second Amendment right. I should mention as speaker of the house, we expanded concealed carry rights of North Carolina at levels that people couldn't imagine. I am a concealed carry permittee. I have more than one gun, but I am a responsible gun owner who also finished the concealed carry class and also hunter safety. And I think we all need to be responsible gun owners. But at the end of the day, you have got to decide whether or not a kid going into a gun store on their 18th birthday, if that is their day to buy a gun. So let's talk a little bit about what this bill really does versus what the mercenaries were trying to do to raise money and kill this bill.”
“We had a lot of people, actually organizations I have been a member of in the past, spread a lot of false information about this bill. They said it was going to be a red flag bill. Well, the fact of the matter is, there is funding in this bill for red flag, for States that have implemented red flag laws. Here is the little secret: not even Republican red flag States satisfy our rigorous standards for due process, which is why they haven't applied for any funding. They wouldn't qualify for it unless they changed their plans. So this didn't cause a wave of red State laws to be implemented. Quite the contrary, it provided resources in behavioral health and veterans courts and drug courts and family courts to help people that may be in crisis ahead of them.”