Ron Wyden
Senator for Oregon · Democratic · United States
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 116 (Thursday, July 16, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 116 (Thursday, July 16, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4127-S4129] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, UNITED S…”
“We are forcing patients to come back again and again and again. That just defies common sense. And on the issues like skin substitutes, that has been addressed through a payment process, payment policy reform, to get at the incentives and wasteful utilization.”
“199 Leg.] YEAS--46 Alsobrooks Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Blunt Rochester Booker Cantwell Coons Cortez Masto Duckworth Durbin Fetterman Gallego Gillibrand Hassan Heinrich Hickenlooper Hirono Kaine Kelly Kim King Klobuchar Lujan Markey Merkley Murray Ossoff Padilla Peters Reed Rosen Sanders Schatz Schiff Schumer Shaheen Slotkin Smith Van Hol…”
“Fortunately, for--let me say to Senator Murray that I so appreciate your presentation, and particularly talking about the algorithms. And, also, the fact is that under what you have described very clearly, the big winner under this flawed experiment is a bunch of middlemen who are trying to profit off denials, and not the people who reall…”
“President Trump came into office saying he would not cut Medicare, but that was clearly a lie because right now his administration is trying to privatize Medicare; in part, by putting AI between Medicare beneficiaries and their healthcare. In January of this year, under Secretary Kennedy and Dr.”
“I have met with healthcare providers all over my State. Whether it is a rural hospital or a doctor in Seattle, no one--no one--has had anything good to tell me about prior authorization in traditional Medicare.”
The complete record
Every one of 90 lines we hold for Ron Wyden, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 2.
“phone carriers' failure to follow cybersecurity best practices, such as installing security updates and using multifactor authentication, and Federal Agencies failing to hold these companies accountable. The Federal Government still does not require U.S. phone companies to meet minimum cybersecurity standards. While it is too late to prevent the Salt Typhoon hack, there is still time to prevent the next incident. As such, I intend to object to considering this nominee until CISA agrees to release this report, which will enable Congress and the public to better understand the current threats and the need for stronger cyber defenses. ____________________”
“In a November 2024 joint statement, CISA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation confirmed that the Chinese Government hacked ``multiple telecommunications companies to enable the theft of customer call records data, the compromise of private communications of [[Page S2509]] a limited number of individuals who are primarily involved in government or political activity, and the copying of certain information that was subject to U.S. law enforcement requests pursuant to court orders.'' Vice President Vance subsequently revealed that his communications and those of President Trump were compromised in this hack. This espionage incident, and the harm to U.S. national security caused by it, were the direct result of U.S.”
“Citing his access to nonpublic reports and other ``very concerning information,'' the CISA official told the FCC that ``there have been numerous incidents of successful, unauthorized attempts to access the network user location data of communications service providers operating in the USA.'' He added that foreign surveillance went beyond location tracking and included ``the monitoring of voice and text messages'' and ``the delivery of spyware to targeted devices.'' CISA's multiyear cover up of the phone companies' negligent cybersecurity has real consequences.”
“On February 29, 2024, I wrote to then-President Biden, urging the administration to take action to address the serious national security threat posed by foreign governments exploiting U.S. phone carriers' weak cybersecurity. In that letter to then-President Biden, I stated that ``CISA is actively hiding information about [the threat] from the American people . . . CISA refuses to publicly release this unclassified report, which includes details that are relevant to policymakers and Americans who care about the security of their phones.'' The Biden administration took no action in response to my letter. CISA's inaction on telecommunications security prompted the Agency's top telecommunications security expert to file a whistleblower report with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the summer of 2024.”
“CISA has to date refused to release the report by making a claim that the report is predecisional and deliberative and protected by a so- called ``deliberative process privilege.'' Setting aside that a FOIA exemption does not apply to disclosures to Congress, based on my staff's review of this report, this report is a technical document containing factual information about U.S. telecom security. The report does not recommend or discuss specific policy options that CISA could take to address this threat. As such, this report contains important factual information that the public has a right to see and CISA should stop withholding the entire report under a purported ``deliberative process privilege'' claim.”
“Telecommunications Insecurity 2022.'' Congress and the American people have a right to read this report, and until CISA releases it, I must object to this nomination. CISA permitted my staff to read the report in person at the Agency's office in the fall of 2023. However, CISA has marked this unclassified report ``For Official Use Only'' and has refused to provide copies of the report to Congress and in response to FOIA requests from the public. I directly asked then-CISA Director Jen Easterly to release the report in a February 27, 2024, phone call; however, she continued to stonewall my requests until she left office in January 2025.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 64 (Wednesday, April 9, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 9, 2025)] [Senate] [Pages S2508-S2509] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] NOMINATION OF SEAN PLANKEY Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I must object to the Senate proceeding to the nomination of Sean Plankey of Pennsylvania, to be Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Department of Homeland Security. Since July 2022, I have repeatedly urged CISA to release an important, unclassified report by independent cybersecurity experts that the Agency commissioned, titled ``U.S.”
“As the backdrop for major television shows and box office hits alike, film production in Oregon brings with it good-paying jobs and tourism that in turn support local businesses and economic development across the State. Certainly all film producers in Oregon and across the country should aspire to achieve the remarkable success of ``The Goonies.'' Whether we are learning important life lessons from the stalwart friendships in ``The Goonies'' or taking note of how Oregon has grown a film industry no one could have imagined 40 years ago, what is important is that we all recognize the power in our differences--and to ``never say die!'' ____________________”
“All of them will be able to participate [[Page S2169]] in treasure hunts, costume contests, and many other Goonies-adjacent events. In addition to Astoria, the 40th anniversary festivities will also include a visit to Ecola State Park, home to some of Oregon's foremost coastal views and the site of some legendary Goonies adventures. Visitors to Astoria this summer will also be welcomed to the Oregon Film Museum, which eagle-eyed fans may recognize as the former Clatsop County jail, which played host to the Goonies iconic jailbreak scene. Just as the original Goonies fans and stars have grown and matured since the film's release in 1985, so has Oregon's film industry. With its magnificent and diverse natural beauty, Oregon has become a much sought after location for film production.”
“Indeed, so significant is the film's location that thousands of fans from around the globe gather each year in Astoria, OR, for a multiday celebration to commemorate the magic that is ``The Goonies.'' One of the reasons for the enduring success of ``The Goonies'' is the lessons it has imparted on generations of viewers who come away inspired to stand up to bullies, accept people who are different from them, and ``never say die'' when it comes to fighting for their communities and the things they believe in. As I travel to my townhalls all over Oregon and hear the deep concerns that so many Oregonians feel about the state of our country and the world, I hope we can all take an important lesson or two from ``The Goonies.'' Fans from around the world will flock to Astoria this summer for ``The Goonies'' 40th anniversary celebration.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 60 (Thursday, April 3, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 60 (Thursday, April 3, 2025)] [Senate] [Pages S2168-S2169] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] RECOGNIZING THE 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE GOONIES Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, this year marks the 40th anniversary of the release of the beloved classic film, ``The Goonies.'' With enduring and relatable themes of adventure, acceptance, and friendship, ``The Goonies'' has become one of the alltime great American underdog stories. ``The Goonies'' has withstood the test of time and firmly established its place in American culture. A large part of what makes this film unique and impactful is its iconic setting along the stunning Oregon coastline.”
“By supporting the Oz nomination, Republicans are sending a very clear message that they are a lot more afraid of Donald Trump than having to answer to their own constituents. Every Member of this body that votes to confirm Dr. Oz is going to own the consequences of this decision, those consequences that I spelled out. I urge the Senate to oppose this nomination when we vote later. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.”
“Oz agreed to come to Malheur County and explain Trump's catastrophic cuts, face-to-face, with Oregonians. I am going to hold him to that. He is going to have to answer to the people of Oregon and Malheur County about these inhumane policies. Republicans are full steam ahead with their plans to gut Americans' healthcare and put for-profit insurance companies and private equity firms in charge of America's health. So here is the real question with respect to this vote that will be coming up: What is at stake on the Mehmet Oz vote? What is at stake is whether your aging parents can be safe in their nursing home. What is at stake is whether your kids can go see a doctor. What is at stake is the very health and well-being of your family.”
“It will rip basic care away from seniors and kids. Dr. Oz will be responsible for executing the destruction brought down on the Medicaid Program by the cuts Republicans are preparing to make. [[Page S2151]] And there would be premium hikes--let me mention that: premium hikes-- for everybody else who gets their insurance through the marketplace when Republicans take away the tax credits that lower their premiums. During his confirmation hearing, I gave Dr. Oz the opportunity to go on the record and reassure the American people he wouldn't go along with the Republican scheme to rip away healthcare. He refused. So, I also asked Dr. Oz: If he was confirmed, would he travel to Malheur County in my home State? It is an overwhelmingly rural and red county and also has the most recipients of Medicaid in any county in Oregon. Dr.”
“Oz, unfortunately, has been out there peddling, over the years, unproven cures and treatments and encouraging people to ignore proven facts and science. The dangers of promoting unqualified wellness grifters to be in charge of healthcare in our country is not just a talking point. These are real and deadly matters. This week, Donald Trump and Senate Republicans are gearing up to pass their massive tax giveaway to billionaires and corporations. They are paying for it by gutting Medicaid and cutting off the services that millions of Americans rely on. Food stamps, Meals on Wheels, and Head Start are all on the chopping block, just so billionaires can go out and buy things like more yachts. These cuts to Medicaid are going to be devastating for kids and people with disabilities. It can destroy care in nursing homes as we know it.”
“Several weeks ago, Senate Republicans confirmed one of Trump's most unqualified and dangerous nominees to date, RFK Jr., who will be heading up America's healthcare at HHS. He was confirmed as well. Now our country is facing the biggest measles outbreak in decades, while the Trump administration touts the benefits of cod liver oil and convinces parents not to vaccinate their kids. The country has heard tragic tales of families following RFK Jr.'s advice on unproven alternative treatments for measles that end up sending kids to hospitals. Just this week, he abruptly fired more than 10,000 public health workers, many of whom reportedly helped seniors navigate insurance claims when they were denied care or provided oversight over nursing homes. Everything this administration is doing is an effort to make you and your family less safe. Dr.”
“Oz refused to answer my question. He claimed it was a complicated question. Not really, I told him. An AI chatbot paid for by private equity isn't going to take your mom to the bathroom or bring your grandpa his meals every day. I don't think it is at all complicated whether there ought to be a nurse on staff at every single nursing home. Dr. Oz is certainly very able on television, but he seems to have no understanding that technology is no replacement for real nurses and real medical staff. That attitude is going to have a real impact as Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress pursue nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts to achieve their billionaire tax breaks, which House Republicans have already passed.”
“Mr. President, ahead of the Senate's final vote on the nomination of Dr. Mehmet Oz to head up the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, I want to take a couple minutes to describe what is at stake with this vote. Dr. Oz is the second Trump nominee to pass through the Senate Finance Committee with a record of dodging Medicare and Social Security taxes. That means, if confirmed, the person running the Medicare Program thinks it is acceptable to not pay the taxes he owes into the programs he is running. Let me repeat that: If confirmed, the person running the Medicare Program thinks it is acceptable to not pay the taxes he owes into the program he is running. Now, in addition, during the consideration of this nominee, I pressed Dr. Oz on whether he believes nursing homes ought to be staffed with a registered nurse 24/7. Once again, Dr.”
“I always wanted to work with my colleague from Oklahoma on these kinds of issues, and we are going to stay at it until we deal with big-time fraud in a big-time way, in the U.S. Senate, in a bipartisan way. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.”
“Mr. President, just very briefly, my colleague says nothing is going to happen in the House to fight fraud. I have got to tell you that I don't see any fraud caucus out there in either the Senate or the House. There are no rallies for people who are committing outrageous fraud. I think we ought to move. We ought to move here. We have done the hard work. We have done the heavy lifting. My colleague from Oklahoma knows what it is like when he is trying to put together a bipartisan bill. We have done that work. I think we ought to move here and then talk to our colleagues in the House. Why don't you now pick up on the hard work we have done and we will get serious about fraud. So we are going to continue this conversation.”
“I want a big bill that goes after big-time fraud in a very aggressive way. I am still baffled by why we are not out here with a whole lot of Republicans who are cosponsors of my bill, with the Senator from Idaho as the chair, and saying: This is the way we ought to be governing. But I object. I hope we are back. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard. The Senator from Oklahoma.”
“Reserving the right to object, let me make sure we are clear with my friend because we do a lot of work together, and I am looking forward to continuing it. I don't see much to object to this afternoon. We both want to be all in on the fight against fraud. Those were the first words out of my mouth: Let's go all in on fighting this horrendous fraud. That is why we worked so long in a bipartisan way, because you are not the only Republican from the committee who worked with me and it is a large bill and it deals with a big problem. And, for the life of me, I can't figure out why we aren't dealing with the big problem and not creating innocent victims--more of them. At this point, I guess there is gridlock today, but I want to extend the olive branch again, which I have been doing from day one.”
“Therefore, I would ask the Senator to modify the request so that the Wyden substitute amendment, which is at the desk and is a text of the Wyden-Crapo Unemployment Insurance Integrity and Accessibility Act, be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection to the modification? The Senator from Oklahoma.”
“Democrats are all in--all in--on bringing criminals who defrauded the UI system to justice and building a more reliable, durable unemployment insurance system for the future. That is why, colleagues, we negotiated a really strong, bipartisan antifraud package. For the life of me, I don't understand walking away from that package now, especially in favor of a narrower proposal that would lose taxpayer dollars and sacrifice the effort to fight fraud.”
“Final issue with the proposal: The Trump administration has made a mockery of fraud prevention by illegally firing the Department of Labor inspector general. The inspector general's office successfully oversaw unemployment fraud investigations throughout the pandemic. In my view, firing the inspector general is a big setback in the fight against fraud in the unemployment insurance program. The Trump administration has also given DOGE unfettered access to unemployment insurance claims data. The bill before the Senate would allow DOGE to falsely accuse innocent workers of fraud years after unemployment insurance helped them keep food on the table during the pandemic. That is not being tough on fraud. That is making innocent people victims.”
“These workers didn't defraud anybody. A lot of those people who received overpayments had no idea they had gotten more money than they should have. The issue is that some States are running their unemployment insurance programs with decrepit, old systems that can barely keep up, and they made mistakes. Now 5 years down the line, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to claw back these payments--even from people who did nothing wrong. In fact, some of these people to this day aren't even aware they were overpaid. They certainly aren't fraudsters. States made mistakes in the heat of an economic crisis, and Congress shouldn't be punishing individual workers who had no idea in the first place what was going on.”
“Another issue with this approach I want to highlight is that the bill now before the Senate fails to provide any protection for workers who got overpaid through no fault of their own. Colleagues may remember that when the pandemic UI program was created, it was in the midst of the COVID crisis--highest unemployment since the Great Depression, tens of millions of Americans out of work, entire sectors of our economy essentially mothballed. Congress scrambled to create an unemployment insurance program for Americans who weren't eligible for traditional unemployment insurance. Without it, a whole lot of people would have gone hungry and lost their homes. In the rush to get urgently needed relief to those out of work, some States made mistakes, provided a number of workers more in unemployment than they were entitled to.”
“In fact, the bill before the Senate actually cuts $5 million of crucial fraud-prevention funding that Democrats secured after the pandemic. So you ask yourself, why are Republicans attempting to make this cut? The nonpartisan experts at the Congressional Budget Office, looked at this narrow proposal my colleagues have brought forward, and they said if Congress were to pass this bill, Republicans would spend more money--more money--trying to track down fraud than they would actually recover from the fraudsters. Government efficiency is something we are all interested in. You had me at hello on the concept of working on those kinds of issues in a bipartisan way. But here is a Republican anti-fraud proposal that loses taxpayer dollars overall, and to pay for it, they cut future fraud prevention. That just strikes me as defying common sense.”
“It would help States improve their unemployment insurance programs to get benefits out on time in the event of a big economic crash shall like we saw in 2020. It would make better use of data to prevent abuse. It would protect people who got overpayments entirely due to somebody else's mistake, who may not even know it to this day. I will tell you, I think it is odd at best but certainly disappointing that our Republican colleagues have decided to walk away from a really good bipartisan agreement. The proposal they brought to the floor is much smaller, is much narrower. In fact, instead of looking forward, it is looking backward--no improvements to unemployment insurance, no fraud prevention looking at the future.”
“Mr. President, first of all, I want it understood that we take a backseat to nobody--nobody--when it comes to fighting this fraud. That is why I negotiated a bipartisan package in the last Congress dealing with a host of issues relating to addressing fraud and making improvements to unemployment insurance. I negotiated that bill with our ranking member, now the chairman of the Finance Committee. I am a little struck by what is going on here because my colleague, my friend from Oklahoma, was a cosponsor of that proposal. In other words, we did what the American people say they want, which is to have people find common ground on commonsense matters like fighting fraud. Our bipartisan proposal went after pandemic-era fraud by extending the statute of limits on prosecution. It would help to prevent fraud in the future.”
“This is not a new gimmick. Chinese companies have been circumventing tariffs all this time with products like steel and solar panels. I have been bird-dogging this issue since I passed the Enforce and Protect Act nearly a decade ago. My de minimis bill that I hope to get bipartisan support for would stop the flood of low-value packages from all countries on a global scale. That is the only way to deal with this problem--not create, as my colleague from Alabama would do, a gigantic game of Whack-A-Mole. So I hope we will be back on this floor doing something comprehensive to fight the scourge of fentanyl, and I proposed it with legislation. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip.”
“If you just do it with China, Chinese companies are going to circumvent the rules and transship through other countries. That is why I felt so strongly about a comprehensive solution to get at this fentanyl, this poison, that has hit us so hard, because if you just go to one country, what you are going to have is something called merchandise laundering. We saw it when we did an investigation in the committee. A Chinese company ships its product through an intermediary in Vietnam or another third country. The intermediary then slaps a ``Made in Vietnam'' sticker on the Chinese product and falsely labels the product, and they can easily evade the Chinese product restrictions. And with millions of shipments coming in from China, there is no way for Customs and Border Protection to police Chinese products transshipped through third companies.”
“Mr. President, I listened very carefully to my colleague from Alabama, and I don't believe my colleague used the word ``fentanyl,'' and that is what we are concerned about in the Pacific Northwest. We are concerned that fentanyl has hit our country and our region like a wrecking ball. So maybe when this all gets sorted out, he will support my bill to crack down on fentanyl everywhere through reforms of this de minimis issue. And I would just say, for purposes of our discussion now, I understand--and we all await the announcement, I gather, sometime late this afternoon--the Trump administration only is going to address de minimis shipments from China and nowhere else. We have to make this comprehensive. My colleague serving as the Presiding Officer knows what it is like in the West with fentanyl hitting us so hard.”
“Getting a handle on these so-called ``de minimis'' imports will help our border agents detect the illicit imports of things like fentanyl and pill presses before they reach communities in the United States. So with that, Mr. President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of S. 1185 and the Senate [[Page S2114]] proceed to its immediate consideration, the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Senator from Alabama.”
“Less than 0.1 percent of fentanyl entering the United States comes from Canada. Fentanyl seizures at the northern border are down over 97 percent from July 2024. I think almost everybody understands that Canada is not the issue here. Instead of coming up with real solutions to get fentanyl off the streets and out of our communities, Donald Trump has decided he would rather make threats and tariff our closest allies. My colleague from Alabama is on the floor, and we are going to have a little bit of a discussion. We just talked about how we are going to handle it. But I want to be clear. If Donald Trump and the Republicans wanted to address fentanyl in an effective way, they would pass my bill to limit the millions of low-value packages that come into the United States from China and elsewhere.”
“It is time to reverse that trend. Those dates I mentioned were before my time, but I want everybody to know, on our watch, I think this has got to be a bipartisan concern. We have got to take these powers back, because if Republicans say it is not their fault that Trump is destroying our economy, why not do something like this to restore the power of Congress to set tariffs? I am going to close by addressing the bogus claim of the Trump administration that tariffs are actually intended to stop fentanyl trafficking from Canada. Let me be clear. Our immigration system needs reform, and the fentanyl crisis is a serious issue. Oregon is no stranger to the devastating effects it has wreaked on our economy communities. The reality is, there is no crisis at the northern border.”
“So the stuff we buy from Canada gets more expensive. And on top of that, in response, Canada has already slapped tariffs on a whole host of crops, ag products, dairy, alcohol, manufactured goods. The list goes on and on. Canadian grocery stores pulled U.S. products off the shelves. Our small businesses and farmers are losing sales as we speak because of the weird obsession in the Trump administration with attacking our northern neighbor. Plunging our economy into a recession because of the Trump desire to annex Canada is just bizarre--bizarre even by Washington, DC, standards. Congress has delegated far too much of its authority to the executive branch, and it is far past time for the Congress to take it back. In 1962 and 1974, Congress passed laws handing the President major portions of our constitutional power over tariffs.”
“When China was stealing America's trade secrets, subsidizing cheap solar panels, and then dumping them here to drive U.S. manufacturers out of business, we were shouting from the rooftops for more tariffs on Chinese goods. But Canada is not China. Canada is America's closest ally, not a rival. Making everything Americans buy from Canada more expensive for some bogus reason is, in the words of the Wall Street Journal ``the dumbest trade war in history.'' There are 8 million American jobs that depend on trade with Canada. Canada is the biggest export market for 32 States. It provides raw materials and potash that so often farmers need to grow their crops. U.S. farmers can't replace 90 percent of potash that comes from Canada, definitely not overnight. The only choice is higher prices--again, higher prices paid for by Americans.”
“Every credible economist, every automaker, every business on the record has said that Trump's trade taxes are going to make things more expensive for Americans. Ronald Reagan's favorite economist, Art Laffer, just released a study showing auto tariffs are going to raise car prices by $4,700. The Yale Budget Lab estimates that the full Trump tariff scheme is going to cost an average family thousands of dollars a year. It is one thing if tariffs are imposed with a good strategy, like decreasing sales in the United States by raising prices to punish countries that cheat on trade and changing their behavior so that U.S. workers get a fair shake. I have consistently supported targeted tariffs in the past as a tool to fight back against trade cheating, especially by China.”
“Mr. President, I rise to support my colleague Senator Kaine's joint resolution to terminate the Trump order placing blanket tariffs on products Americans buy from Canada. I am going to start by saying, as the Ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, I am always struck by how much doubletalk there is about trade. So let's be clear as we start this part of the discussion. Tariffs are taxes on things we buy from other countries. The bottom line is, those taxes make it more expensive for Americans to buy those products. No other country pays the tariffs. Let me repeat that. No other country pays the tariffs. The consumer pays the tariff. So if somebody tells you they can do tariffs and do it without raising prices--I am sorry, but anybody who says that with a straight face is basically taking advantage of you.”