Ted Cruz · TranslatePolitics.com

Senate

Unanimous Consent Requests (Executive Session)

2026-08-06

“The government wants to pass a disaster relief bill. The bill helps people in some states but leaves out one state. The government should change the bill to be fair to all states. The bill will pass if they include all states. The bill will fail if they don't. The victims of all states will get no help. That's a bad outcome. The government should be fair.”

Official Congressional Record

I would note that I agree with virtually every word that was said by the Senator from Oregon. I agree that this tax treatment taxing someone on a disaster relief settlement from, say, the power company that caused the fire--giving someone a big tax bill for that relief that they are entitled to, it is unfair; it is wrong. I am enthusiastic about passing this bill and passing it now. What I am not enthusiastic about is leaving thousands of Texans out because just like the citizens of Oregon who suffered devastating losses, just like the citizens of California, just like the citizens of Washington State who suffered devastating losses, there were also thousands upon thousands of Texans who suffered devastating losses. And my proposal is very simple: Let's be fair. Let's not exclude the Texans. Let's provide the relief that is right and just to everyone who has been impacted by these devastating wildfires. I will point out also the Senator from Oregon said there is an urgency to pass this. I want you to understand that--everyone watching--there are two paths that we can go down. One path is when I decline to make this modification, the Senator from Oregon could say nothing, could just be quiet, and then the Presiding Officer would say, ``No objection is heard,'' and this bill would pass the Senate with the Texans included so it would be fair. It would not be excluding people that are similarly situated. It would be treating everyone fairly, and it would go to the House. The House will be back in September, and we have a commitment from the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the committee that has jurisdiction over this, to take this up and pass it. So if the Senator from Oregon chooses simply to say nothing, this bill moves on its way, and it is substantially closer to being signed into law and giving actual relief to the victims of these wildfires. However, the other path--and folks in the Gallery should listen for two words the Senator from Oregon says, ``I object.'' What will happen is the bill dies. It doesn't pass. The victims in Texas get no relief; the victims in Oregon get no relief; the victims in California get no relief; the victims in Washington State get no relief. I don't understand why that is a good outcome. I think that is a terrible outcome. But the Senator from Oregon has complete control over which of those two paths we go down. I will not modify my request.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want the disaster relief bill to include my state's wildfires. The wildfires in Texas were very bad. Many homes and businesses were destroyed. The government should give tax relief to the people affected by the wildfires. The cost is small, and the House of Representatives will pass it. If my colleagues don't agree, nothing will pass. That would be bad. I want my amendment to be considered and passed. I want Texans to receive the same treatment as other wildfire victims. I want common sense to prevail.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the critical need for disaster relief in my home State of Texas for a Texas community that was devastated by historic wildfires. I will seek to improve the pending Disaster Tax Relief Act being considered by the Senate to address that acute need in Texas. No doubt the current version provides relief that is also badly needed elsewhere. I would like to speak directly to the families of Spokane, WA, who have lost their homes, their livelihoods, their sense of security. The people of Texas stand with you, and we are profoundly grateful to the firefighters and first responders risking their lives to protect their neighbors. That is a pain families in Texas know all too well. In 2024, Texas witnessed truly horrific wildfires. The Smokehouse Creek fire was the single largest wildfire in the history of the State of Texas. It killed two people. It burned more than 1 million acres. It destroyed more than 500 homes and businesses, and it killed approximately 15,000 cattle. The Windy Deuce fire was among the most destructive and fast-moving wildfires ever to strike the Texas Panhandle. It burned more than 140,000 acres. Despite the horror and the destructiveness of these fires, they were not treated as qualified wildfire disasters under Federal law. One result is that any relief payments are subject to Federal income taxes, which dramatically reduces the scope and effectiveness of the badly needed relief. Victims of other catastrophic wildfires do not incur such penalties on the relief they receive. Disaster relief is important. I am proud to support disaster relief. Americans step in and help their fellow Americans in times of crisis. But disaster relief must be fair. Disaster relief cannot demonstrate favoritism, choosing some recipients as more worthy or luckier than others. My amendment does something very simple. It includes in this disaster relief bill the worst wildfire in the history of the State of Texas. On any reasonable argument on the merits, the Texas Panhandle wildfires deserve to be included. I would note also that the score of this provision is, in congressional terms, quite small: $31 million is what this addition costs. In this body, $31 million is a sum that is usually too small even to be written down. Moreover, the House of Representatives and, in particular, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee has explicitly committed that if and when we add this disaster bill, that the House, in September when they return, will take it up and pass it. So this is the path, No. 1, to passing this disaster bill--which I very much want to do--but No. 2, to doing so in a way that does not unfairly leave out the Texans, the victims of the largest wildfire in the history of Texas. We have got to do both. And so I will now propound a unanimous consent request to take up and pass my amendment to the Doug LaMalfa Federal Disaster Tax Relief Certainty Act to designate the Smokehouse Creek fire and the Windy Deuce fire as qualified wildfire disasters, ensuring that relief payments to those affected receive the same Federal tax treatment as victims of other qualified wildfires. I urge my colleagues to pass this commonsense amendment today so that Texans receive the same treatment as other victims of wildfires. And I would note that if my colleagues choose not to accept the amendment, the alternative is going to be that nothing passes. That is not an alternative that is good for anybody, and so my hope is that common sense will prevail. Mr. President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Finance Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 5366, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the Cruz amendment at the desk 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.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 5345 (Executive Session)

2026-08-06

“I object to passing this bill. The House is not passing Senate bills. They need to pass Senate bills. I put holds on House bills to get leverage. My bill is good. The House should pass my bill.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, on the merits, there are no substantive objections to this legislation. However, we do have a challenge between the two Chambers of Congress. The Senate is doing its work. The Senate is taking up important pieces of legislation, reaching bipartisan agreement, and passing them; and they are going to the House of Representatives where right now they are simply sitting and languishing. House leadership has decided to adopt a strategy that is, frankly, indefensible. It is a strategy where they pass bills that originate in the House; they ignore bills that originate in the Senate, and they let them die. More than two-thirds of the bills to date that are passed into law have been bills that originated in the House of Representatives. There are numerous bills that this body has passed, often unanimously, 100 to nothing, that arrive in the House that no House Member has any substantive objections to them at all, and they simply put them in the freezer and do nothing. My colleague knows sometimes if you want to change the behavior of another Chamber, the only way to do so is to exercise leverage. And so, I have placed holds on all House bills coming over here unless and until they start taking up and passing Senate bills. Both Chambers need to do their work. Our Congress does not work if one of the two Chambers refuses to even consider legislation that has passed the other Chamber. I am in active negotiation with House leadership for them to start picking up and passing legislation here. One of those bills is a bill I authored called TREY'S Law. TREY'S Law was named for a young man in Texas just outside the Dallas area who was a little boy that was sexually assaulted at a summer camp repeatedly. He brought litigation. That litigation was settled, but as part of the settlement, he signed an NDA. He signed a contractual commitment to never tell anybody about the horrible sexual assault that he suffered. He lived with that grief, with that sorrow for the rest of what turned out to be his very short life. At age 28, Trey took his own life. TREY'S Law, which is named for him, is passed in the State of Texas; it has passed in numerous other States like Missouri and Alabama. It very simply says that NDAs are not enforceable to silence a victim of child sexual assault, that you cannot enforce contractual right to tell a child who has experienced that assault: You may not speak; you have no voice. This legislation in the Senate was bipartisan. I authored it with Senator Gillibrand. It passed the Senate 100 to nothing. It is sitting in the House, and they have declined to move. I say to my friend from New Hampshire, I am confident your legislation will pass and will pass the Senate as soon as the House ends its unreasonable blockade against Senate bills. I am in active negotiation with their leadership to get that result. We will get that result before the end of the year. I hope we get that result soon. I would very much like to lift all these holds and pass important legislation the Senate has already passed. However, because the House has not yet made that agreement, I have no choice but to object.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Senate

Executive Reports of Committee

2026-08-05

“I'm sharing these names so Senators can look at them. I don't want to pay to print them again. They're waiting at the Secretary's desk. One person has to make a promise first.”

Senate

Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 2069 (Executive Calendar)

2026-08-05

“I like Joni Ernst's bill. I voted for it. But I won't let it pass yet. The other side needs to pass my bill first. I put a hold on their bills to make them pass mine. I'm negotiating now. I think I will win. Then I will let Joni's bill pass too.”

Official Congressional Record

Reserving the right to object, I understand that my colleague from Iowa is deeply interested in getting this legislation passed, and I appreciate the diligence and effort she has devoted to this legislation. This is a good bill. I support her bill. Indeed, I voted for her bill, as did every other Member of this body. But the Senate also has a great many other bills that we are working on, that we have passed, and that have run into a roadblock in the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives currently is refusing to take up Senate-passed bills and, rather, is passing almost exclusively House bills. This is an unreasonable position for the House to take. Indeed, it is not a theoretical position; it is what the House has done on this very bill. On this bill, Senator Ernst introduced it, the Senate passed it unanimously, it was sent to the House, and what did the House do? They did not pass the Senate-passed bill; instead, they passed essentially the identical bill but as a House measure. Now, mind you, that was not because they had any substantive objections to Senator Ernst's bill but, rather, it was because they were refusing to do their job as another Chamber in this Congress. Among the bills that the Senate has passed that are sitting, languishing at the House right now is a bill that I have worked very hard to pass called Trey's Law. Trey's Law is named for Trey Carlock, a beloved citizen of Dallas who tragically, as a young boy, was a victim of sexual assault at a summer camp. Litigation ensued, and Trey ended up signing an NDA where he was blocked by law from sharing the details of the horrific sexual abuse he endured. That silence weighed on Trey powerfully, and he ultimately took his own life at age 28. Trey's Law is an initiative that has been championed by Trey's sister Elizabeth. Numerous States, including my home State of Texas and including, Mr. President, your home State of Missouri, have passed Trey's Law. In the Senate, I introduced Trey's Law as bipartisan legislation, and the Senate passed it 100 to none, and it is sitting at the House languishing--not because anyone objects to it but simply because the House has decided not to process Senate bills. So, as my friend Senator Ernst knows, I have placed a hold on House bills until the House starts taking up and passing Senate bills. I have been actively in negotiation with House leadership, and I am confident this issue will get resolved. The House is going to take up and do their job and pass Senate bills, and the Senate will likewise take up and pass House bills. And I am confident in particular that Senator Ernst will succeed in passing this bill into law this year--with my enthusiastic support. But often in Congress, the only way to get a change of action is to exercise leverage. That is what I am doing now to get the House to take up and pass important bills, so therefore, at this time at least, I object.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗