Murray Urges Colleagues to Vote Down Rescissions Package in Its Entirety
FACT SHEET: Trump’s Rescission Package Would Shutter Local Public Radio, TV Stations Across America
FACT SHEET: Trump’s Rescission Package Would Gut Bipartisan Foreign Policy Investments
ICYMI: Vought Refuses to Rule Out More Illegal End-Runs Around Congress & Refuses to Detail How Trump Will Execute Cuts If Rescissions Bill Passes
***WATCH: Senator Murray’s floor remarks***
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor urging a no vote on a key procedural vote to take up President Trump’s devastating rescissions package that would shutter local news stations nationwide, gut funding for emergency alert systems, and slash bipartisan foreign policy investments, ceding America’s global leadership—all while doing nothing to get our “fiscal house in order.”
Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:
[HYPOCRISY ON DEBTS, DEFICITS, AND “FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY”]
“Two weeks ago, Republicans passed the most expensive bill in the history of the Senate. Why? All to cut taxes for billionaires while cutting Medicaid and SNAP for needy families.
“But now Republicans are pretending they are concerned about the debt, so concerned they need to shut down local radio stations, so concerned they have to cut off Sesame Street, so concerned they want to whack away at our global credibility and slash humanitarian aid in the process.
“The idea that this is about balancing the debt is laughable.
“You could cut every dollar ever spent on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting since it was created, and it would not cover the cost of the bill Republicans just jammed through. You could cut every dollar we have spent on foreign aid since World War II, and that total would still fall short compared to the cost of Republicans’ tax cuts.
“Or how about this: If Republicans cut the amount in this rescissions bill—every single day for a year—it still would not equal their tax cuts to help their rich donors. So I hope I made my point.
“So, let’s stop pretending this is about the debt. And let’s stop pretending there is no alternative to passing a partisan rescissions package that cuts bipartisan funding.
“Because I have been clear—over and over—there is an alternative. Which is to do what we always do and discuss rescissions as part of our annual funding bills—instead of doing Trump’s bidding.
[PUBLIC BROADCASTING CUTS]
“M. President, let’s talk about what’s at stake here. Starting with the damage these cuts would do to our communities by cutting rural areas off from local news and emergency alerts, and ending high-quality kids programming.
“If Republicans pass this package they are offering, they are going to slash funding for over fifteen-hundred local news stations nationwide. These are stations that provide an enormous community service—especially in rural areas, and Tribal communities. They cover stories that matter to families but that get overlooked by national news. These stations—and this funding—reaches 98% of all Americans.
“And let’s not forget they also deliver local emergency alerts. Some of these local radio stations are a genuine lifeline for communities when disaster strikes. Who among us thinks our communities should have less warning in an emergency? Because that is what voting for this package means.
“It also means cutting off funding for high quality kids programming. There’s a reason shows like Sesame Street are beloved by kids and parents. It’s not just entertaining—it gets kids thinking, it teaches them about math, and spelling, and caring and kindness. And if Republicans let shows like this get cancelled—they are going to open up the floodgates to a wave of what I call brain-rot TV that is engineered to keep kids watching.
“To my colleagues who think they have short-term, temporary fixes to reduce cuts to one or two public radio or television stations in their states: that won’t solve the problem. And what do you say to the 120 rural stations that will lose 25% or more of their funding? What will you say to the dozens of rural stations that will shut down because of this bill, and cut off local news, educational programming, and lifesaving services to the rural communities that we serve?
[CUTS TO BIPARTISAN FOREIGN POLICY INVESTMENTS]
“And let’s not forget: the other cuts in this bill would seriously undercut our credibility on the world stage. I thought American leadership was worth investing in?
“And, when we voted for these funds—so did Republicans. Did Republicans forget why this is important when we voted for them? Did Republicans forget that outbreaks spread if we don’t help stop them? Did they forget humanitarian assistance doesn’t just prevent death—but also chaos, and conflict, keeping American troops out of harm’s way? Did they forget these investments bring business to American companies and they help feed the world? Or that building alliances and playing a leading role at international organizations allows us to advance our interests, and counter our adversaries?
“And set aside the global strategy for a moment: we shouldn’t be voting to let children starve or die from preventable diseases. We shouldn’t be voting to go back on our word to the world.
“Saving a couple pennies is not worth losing our credibility or causing millions of deaths across the globe. It’s not even close.
“If Republicans really care about the debt they can start by revisiting the $4 trillion dollars in tax breaks they just showered on billionaires.
“Now, M. President, there is a lot more to say about how damaging these cuts would be for our country, but you don’t have to take my word for it. Because even several of my Republican colleagues have said it themselves: they don’t like this package. They’re already trying to dial it back the tiniest bit, but I know they still have concerns.
“Here’s a tip: If you don’t like it—don’t vote for it.
“Think about who you take orders from. President Trump? Russ Vought? Or your own constituents and communities?
[RIGHT WAY TO CONSIDER RESCISSIONS]
“And let’s be honest: for all of his bluster, President Trump will forget about this in the next week. He doesn’t care about rescissions—he probably doesn’t even know what that means. And if you don’t like this package—but you think we should do more targeted rescissions, we can discuss that in a bipartisan way—completely separate from this partisan package.
“I have been clear—and I will say it again right now: I stand ready to discuss rescissions as part of bipartisan spending bills—just as we have always done. That is the right way to go about this.
“Look, how many times have Republicans called for regular order? Well—at no point in our country’s history have partisan rescissions been ‘Regular Order.’ Any time we have done this in the past, it has been bipartisan.
“Republicans should join us to ensure this does not become a bad new first and to ensure our time on this floor is spent considering important legislation, including our funding bills, rather than one rescissions request after another.
“We are working to advance FY-26 bills right now—at this very moment—and hopefully in a bipartisan way. We passed the first two out of Committee last week, and I want us to continue that work. But I really worry passage of these bills will complicate the road ahead even more.
“Because if Republicans decide it’s fine to undo the last bipartisan spending deal with Trump’s partisan cuts, then getting these bills across the finish line is just going to get really hard. And if they keep this kind of thing up—one of these days Republicans are going to find they have broken the process.
“Let me spell out what that looks like though. Because I think there’s a misconception here that wrongly convinces some members—'it’s okay, this straw won’t break the camel’s back.’
“The reality is: bipartisanship doesn’t end with any one line being crossed. It erodes, it breaks down bit by bit, until one day there is nothing left.
“Don’t get me wrong, the negotiating table is always there. And in my experience, there are usually a few members willing to stick it out, and work as hard as they can to get a result.
“But here is the thing, the Senate doesn’t work off a few members: it works off consensus building and bipartisanship. And the more bridges you burn, the fewer paths you leave to get things done. You cannot just keep pushing people away and breaking the basic trust that keeps this place working.
“Not to mention, if Republicans pass this package of cuts, Russ Vought has made it abundantly clear he will send more.
“If Republicans pass this package now, we’re going to be back here in a month debating whether to rip away funding for afterschool programs next instead of spending our time passing laws, instead of considering the bipartisan spending bills we are working on right now. Is this floor going to be just drowning in package after package of partisan cuts? Fighting over how much of the last deal we unravel? Fighting over whose projects get canceled and whose community gets robbed?
“I hope not.
“M. President, I am going to end with something I discussed during our Committee hearing on this package.
“When I first came to Congress, one of the hot button issues, was the line item veto. President Clinton was asking to have it and Chairman Byrd was organizing against it with Republicans.
“I was asked, should a Democratic Senate, help a Democratic President, rip up the bills it worked to pass? I said ‘No,’ that is not how it should work.
“I came to help my state and my constituents, not to weaken or surrender those responsibilities to any President. That is as true for me today as it was then.
“And if my colleagues agree, which I believe many of you do, then the course we must take is clear. We have to reject this package outright. That doesn’t mean we can’t have a bipartisan conversation about rescissions as we write our funding bills—that is the way we need to do that and the way it has always been done. But we have to reject the new precedent of partisan standalone rescissions.
“If this place is going to work, if we are going to work together to serve the folks back home, we have to make choices that move us closer together and bring more people to the table—not choices that push us apart, and chip away, bit by bit, at the trust that makes this place work.
“Otherwise—one day, we will find we have none of that trust left.
“I urge my colleagues to protect that trust, and join me in voting no.”
###
Next Article Previous Article