Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the following four motions to commit be printed in the Record.

A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance to

strike provisions that would increase the health insurance

premiums or out-of-pocket costs under the Medicaid program,

the Children's Health Insurance Program, or the private

insurance marketplaces established under the Patient

Protection and Affordable Care Act for middle class

individuals or families.

A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance to

make changes to the bill to prevent children, individuals

with disabilities, or seniors from becoming uninsured.

A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance to

eliminate provisions that would force the closure of

hospitals or otherwise reduce access to affordable health

care.

A motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Commerce,

Science, and Transportation of the Senate to ensure that no

provision of the bill would displace staff from the National

Science Foundation or otherwise reduce the agency's ability

to carry out its mission.

Mr. President, I rise today to lift up the fact that this reconciliation bill will do real harm to countless American families. It is not theoretical or hypothetical. Families are hurting right now: the opioid crisis that has ravaged large parts of my State, the mental health crisis that people across this country are so concerned about and are begging for help about, and so many other challenges that every single family knows the fear of a health crisis.

Like Susan, a mother I met at a townhall down in Egg Harbor--a townhall that was part of a series of townhalls that I did trying to highlight the challenges that so many families are facing--and in this crowded room full of hundreds of people, a woman named Susan shared her story, a mom of a 24-year-old son with Down syndrome.

They use Medicaid to be able to cover his care. She broke down at the weight of her fear and worry for her child, something a lot of us can relate to.

She said to me that this is the face of Medicaid. As I went over to give her a hug, I remember she said: ``It's real.''

And it is real, and I know everyone in here knows that. I know because offices on both sides of the aisle are getting the same calls. Our phone systems broke down because of the overwhelming volume of people calling and literally begging--begging--us not to do this, begging us to protect Medicaid so their kids can see the doctors, begging us not to cut SNAP benefits so their students could have access to healthy food.

It is a humbling experience seeing a parent begging for the resources to take care of their sick child. Yet, as I look around, I see far too many people rushing through this process to get it done with little care about the resulting impact it will have, generational damage that will be done.

While we are rushing through, barreling through without the ability to properly debate this, I want you to know the people of New Jersey, the people of this country, this budget represents an abandonment by their government, and this will hurt everyone we are supposed to be helping.

Some of the people that could be impacted the most are people within the disability community, hundreds of thousands of people in New Jersey with disabilities that rely on Medicaid for coverage, over 15 million across our country, including a man named Tom Spadaro, a disability advocate in Ocean County, NJ, who joined me for a townhall.

After a gun accident when he was 11, Tom is a total quadriplegic, dependent on a ventilator and others. Medicaid helped him go to school, then college, and in his own words has given him dignity.

When talking about this bill that we are debating here today he said:

If I lose Medicaid, I feel like I'm getting shot in the

head again. This time, it's not a bullet. It's legislation.

I want his words to echo through this Chamber today for everyone to hear. If this budget passes, families in every single State across this country will feel these cuts long after the media and the Trump administration have decided it is time to move on and ``get over it.''

A cancer patient doesn't just ``move on'' when they have to delay treatment because they have lost insurance coverage, when a family has to upend their lives to become caregivers to their parents because they can't afford elder care, when a hospital closes and the new closest emergency room is hours away after the child is in an accident and needs help now, not in 5 hours, they won't ``get over it.''

America will feel this long after Donald Trump is no longer in the White House, and they will remember what has happened to their lives because of it.

Now there are some people listening who might not think that this is going to affect them, but these cuts to healthcare in this bill are so dramatic, it is going to have an impact that reverberates all throughout our communities.

I talked to a hospital leader in New Jersey who said that these cuts could be so devastating for their revenue because of how much they get through Medicaid reimbursements, that they are not sure that they are going to be able keep their doors open, a hospital not certain if they can keep their doors open.

This is not the only story like this across my State, across the country, whether it is rural hospitals or it is suburban or urban. We are going to have a lot of challenges that are going to reverberate beyond just those on Medicaid. It is going to affect every single one of us and raise prices at the same time.

Losing that critical care in communities not only abandons people in their time of most need, but it leaves a tragic ripple effect on others and other hospitals.

So today I am putting forward an amendment to this bill that would stop this from happening and directly take out the parts of this bill that would force hospital closures and reduce access to affordable healthcare for so many across this country.

In no reality should we be helping billionaires send their rockets to outer space while turning people away at hospitals. And yet, this is the reality we find ourselves in, deciding how much care is acceptable to take away from families across New Jersey to fit a budget cut or how many patients can be turned away from lifesaving medication just so the wealthy can have a nice tax break.

A doctor from Frenchtown shared some profound words with my office.

She said:

Medicaid is a reflection of our values. It is how we show

up for each other when life gets hard.

Well what does it say about our Nation as we are having this debate that could very well take a trillion dollars out of Medicaid; about those who need the care the most as if they are just expendable, as if they are just some remainder on the equation of capitalism that is just pushed to the wayside?

As just an inevitability, as a shrug of the shoulder of our society to say: I am sorry what happened to you, without a care and an extended arm and a hand to reach out and pull them up.

Let's be very clear. This bill will cause prices to drive up. In New Jersey alone, over 454,000 families will see higher costs in premiums, according to the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance, which is why I am introducing an amendment to make sure this bill wouldn't raise these costs by striking provisions that would increase premiums or out-of-pocket costs under Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, and some private insurance marketplaces too.

We cannot allow billionaires to get richer while working families are seeing drastic increases to their premiums or out-of-pocket costs, costs to keep their children healthy as we deal with the worst measles epidemic in decades, costs to afford their kids medicine while we see our government attacking science and fact, making parents have to work that much harder to keep their children safe.

With all the challenges we are dealing with right now, it is painful to think through what will happen if this bill goes into effect and the fact that these healthcare cuts will increase our gaps and worsen conditions for our vulnerable communities, including children. If we can't stand up for them, for our children, who are we willing to stand up for?

And as I said at the beginning, every family has a healthcare story. Everyone has felt overwhelmed in the face of sickness and injury. Just a year ago, my father took a fall. I got the call while I was on the campaign trail. I rushed down to the hospital. But even after the surgery, what we learned is there was an even more debilitating challenge that we faced, a cognitive decline as my father is descending into dementia.

I just spent Father's Day weekend with my father, the entire weekend, but it was in the emergency room as he had twice fallen in 2 days--two separate trips to the emergency room.

My family is overwhelmed right now. We struggle to think through his needs that go far beyond what we can be able to provide, goes far beyond what Medicare can provide.

And it is not just my father and my family. We have failed seniors. We have failed as we have failed to plan and create a place for elder care in this country that preserves a foundation of dignity and decency for everybody.

And when you are in the trenches fighting for your own life or gripping the hand of a loved one struggling, the last thing you want to think about is worrying if you are eligible for this treatment or that.

You want to be able to provide what it takes for your loved one to survive, to go a little further, spend a little more time on this planet with us, and to grow our love deeper.

When we think about that and then we ask ourselves, well, why is this bill happening, why are these cuts happening, it is not to bring down the deficit. Instead, it is going to balloon the deficit by trillions of dollars. Who among us in this country think that the problems that we face as a Nation is because the wealthiest among us don't have enough?

The distrust in government right now, it is not because politics isn't doing enough to help the most well-off in our country, the billionaires and the millionaires.

I ask my colleagues to find the courage to do the right thing. I want to bring us back to 2017 in this very Chamber as Senators gathered to decide the fate of the Affordable Care Act, which was, at the time, hanging by a thread.

Many of my colleagues here in this Chamber were also on the floor at that time. I was not. I was a regular citizen, angry at what I was seeing unfolding, watching it on my phone.

A citizen that felt so detached from what was happening in this Chamber, I remember thinking to myself, How could the Senate be seriously considering doing such harm to this country, to so many Americans by trying to gut preexisting condition protections, the Affordable Care Act, so much others? I asked myself: Am I missing something? Am I missing information to understand why it is that this is even happening?

And we saw rushed conversations, and we saw people running back and forth. And we also saw Senator John McCain step up and signal with his arm that he did not stand for this. Senator McCain's vote was a rare moment of doing what you know is right even when you are surrounded by noise telling you it is wrong.

It is surreal now finding myself on the floor of the Senate in a similar moment in our own Nation's history with so much on the line with this vote, and I look around this Chamber and yet again think the exact same questions from 8 years ago, How can the Senate seriously be considering gutting care for so many?

And now with the benefit of being here, the conversations and the information, I am still left with this question of, Am I missing something?

How is it that such an esteemed body that is meant to protect the American people, in this Chamber where so many decisions have been made to protect the American people, that we are on the cusp of doing something that will do generational damage to so many American families?

This vote before us seems as surreal and reckless from within this Chamber as it does from outside. But while the problem is the same, so is the solution. It is about courage--the courage John McCain had; the courage that so many of my constituents have.

So many people have called and shared their personal stories--stories about their families' health they probably had never told anybody, but they feel so desperate right now to do something that they are willing to open themselves up, be able to pull back the curtain of the dangers and the pain that they have endured, to be able to try to do anything to stop this bill from hurting Americans. That is courage.

And it is courage about standing up against the big money and the special interest, and sometimes it feels insurmountable.

And I say to my colleagues here today that you won't be remembered by whether or not you passed this bill on President Trump's timeline or if you feigned concern about constituents just to be able to stab them in the back later. You will be remembered by your courage to stand up and say no. You will be remembered by your courage to speak out for the people--not just a few who have paid, but for all of us.

You will be remembered in the same way as our former colleague was remembered by what he did 8 years ago. I urge you to remember that this job is bigger than all of us--bigger than any one man, any one party. It is about using our vote and our courage to make lives better for those that we represent.

History and the American people are watching. You still have time. We still have power. I still believe in this Chamber and believe it can be a force for good. Let us use it for the children, for the disabled, for those not in this room.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to enter into a colloquy with Senators Hagerty and Gillibrand. As we vote on the GENIUS Act today, it is imperative to make clear for the Congressional Record that the drafters of amendment No. 2307 included section 9, Anti-Money Laundering Innovation, language to enable the Federal Government to address illicit activities involving stablecoins by directing the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) to establish guidance and notice and comment rulemaking relating to the factors set forth in sections 9(d)(1)-9(d)(4) based on the results of the research and risk assessments required under section 9. Prior versions of amendment No. 2307 and/or S. 1582 set forth that FinCen shall issue guidance or notice and comment rulemaking for such purposes. The drafters of amendment No. 2307 explicitly amended such provision to require that FinCen shall issue guidance and notice and comment rulemaking. While this change from ``or'' to ``and'' was reflected in the text of section 9(d) in amendment No. 2307, the title of section 9(d) inadvertently does not reflect this explicitly stronger language. The congressional intent of the drafters of amendment No. 2307 was to ensure that FinCEN shall issue both guidance and notice and comment rulemaking with respect to the factors set forth in sections 9(d)(1)-9(d)(4). With that, I yield to my colleague the Senator from Tennessee.

Mr. President, I have no words to describe just the absurdity of this moment and the dangers to our country and our Union. For us to be able to stand here on the floor of the Senate in this Chamber that many such important decisions have been made in, a place of deliberation--it is not only in this room that we as Senators should be able to voice the concerns that we have about the direction of our country and the problems that our Nation faces, that we get to be sworn in as U.S. Senators, that we try to do our best, that we are U.S. Senators--United States Senators--that we represent this entire Nation as a body.

And the idea that just--as I just saw the video--one of my colleagues here is thrown to the floor, handcuffed, humiliated--it is not a humiliation of that individual Senator; it is a humiliation of this body.

The shamefulness by which that was perpetrated, that the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security--shame upon those that instigated this, that followed through on this.

It is something that all of us collectively need to stand against. This isn't about partisanship. It is about what does this institution, what does this body mean and whether or not our words and our actions, as dictated by our oath that we swear to the Constitution of article I, as well, that lays out what our job is, that that is very much under threat right now.

I feel for my colleague. I don't know what is happening right now. I hope that we are able to get greater clarity about that, but what we see and what we saw on that video transpire, I hope that is something that every American in this country sees, that they see the actions that have taken place.

As someone who has worked in other nations--I worked in diplomacy and national security; I worked in nations with authoritarian leadership--I never thought I would see anything like this here at home--transpire here in the way that we saw it unfold.

Again, the humiliation befalls our body as a whole. Now the question is, What will the Senate do to stand up for ourselves? That is something that I hope every single Senator is thinking about right now.

This is not a time to put your finger up in the air and figure out which way the wind is blowing, to try to think through what type of reaction might come from the White House if we speak out against this.

This is a time for us to stand up together and stand up for each other and for this institution. And not just right now. It is about: What credibility do we have as a body going forward?

And I know, I get it. I am new here. I am one of the newer members here. I came here--I wanted to serve in this body because of what it stood for. I wanted to serve in this institution because I believe that this is an institution of incredible honor, integrity.

And even at this challenging moment in this country's history, we need this body to be able to come together.

So I call on all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to condemn this action, to stand united with one voice, standing up for ourselves. Otherwise, we will just cast ourselves to the margins of irrelevance in this Nation right now.

What point is it for us to stand up and show up to work every day if this is the kind of treatment that can befall any of us in this day, right now, in this country? I am outraged, and I hope others are too.

This is not a time to be silent. This is a time for us to be united and show the rest of the country what this institution means. Otherwise, we might as well go home. I, for one, want to fight for my colleague, fight for each other, fight for the Senate, and fight for our democracy.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1644 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid for their caregivers and in support of those caregivers in whose arms we entrust those we love the most.

This morning, I needed to rush up to my father as he took a bad fall. His leg, muscles atrophied by polio, won't heal and must be immobilized fully.

My father has no capacity to be able to dress himself, no ability to care for himself, and I had a long and emotional conversation with his caregiver about caring for and tending to his wounds and about his limitations.

I will be honest with you. It is hard leaving his side to drive straight here to the Capitol tonight for votes that could very well determine if aging seniors like my father will get the care they need.

My amendment will ensure that caregivers are protected from efforts to gut and cut Medicaid.

I could only be here voting today because a caregiver is there looking after my father right now. These caregivers deserve someone looking after them. I cannot--we cannot--abandon those who give so much to care for those whom we love. Let's pass this amendment and protect caregivers from these dangerous cuts.

I yield back.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I rise today to tell the stories of the nearly 2 million New Jerseyans who rely on Medicaid for their critical care. I do this because their care is at risk. I do this because the care of more than 72 million Americans across our country enrolled in Medicaid is at risk. They are at risk because Republicans in the House and the Senate have chosen to take away their care so that Elon Musk and the very richest Americans can pay a little less in taxes.

That is the choice they have thrust upon the American people. It is a choice that I don't believe they truly understand, so I would like to take some of my time today on the floor to explain what happens when we choose Elon Musk's well-being over the people we have sworn to serve.

To truly understand this, you need to understand that for tens of millions of Americans, Medicaid is their lifeline from the womb to their final years.

In New Jersey, nearly one out of three births is covered by Medicaid. But even before that birth takes place, mothers receive prenatal care covered by Medicaid. That means that for millions of parents across the country, the first images they see of their child in those early ultrasounds are because of Medicaid. It means that prenatal vitamins that provide the folic acid necessary to ensure proper development are because of Medicaid. It means that if there is a complication in a pregnancy, those parents can focus on their health and the health of their unborn child, not whether or not they will be able to cover the costs of their care. That is because of Medicaid.

So when Republicans are saying we need to cut Medicaid, remember that it is Elon Musk who wins and those expecting parents who lose.

When those children are born into the world, tens of millions rely on Medicaid. Nationally, about 40 percent of children are enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP. In New Jersey, one-third of children--one in three kids in my State--are enrolled in Medicaid.

As a father of a 7-year-old and a 9-year-old, I can tell you that the most important thing is knowing that your kids are healthy.

There are a lot of things that are outside of your control as a parent. You can do everything right, but sometimes you just need help. Kids get sick, and having that assurance that they can get the care they need is an important thing.

When you take away Medicaid, you are not just taking away care, you are taking away the peace of mind that parents deserve. You are taking away the ability for parents to look their kids in the eye and say: It is going to be OK.

I wanted to share with you two stories that have stuck with me. I heard from Nicole, a mother from New Jersey who has a developmentally disabled son, Jordan. Jordan is 24. His mother said that a Medicaid cut would be ``catastrophic.'' She said that the care she receives from Medicaid is ``vitally important.''

That sense of importance and urgency I heard from Nicole I saw echoed from Jamie from Hazlet. Jamie's son David was born paralyzed, nonverbal, and he is relying on a feeding tube. Jamie told reporters that one of David's medications ``can cost up to $1,000 a month.'' She said that if Republicans are successful in cutting Medicaid, ``we would have to choose--are we going to eat? pay the bills? or keep him alive?'' She said, ``It is a life-or-death situation.''

So when Republicans are talking about cutting Medicaid to hand tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, the choice they are making is to leave people like Nicole and Jordan, like Jamie and David behind.

At some point, our children grow up and leave, but even then, so many across this country rely on Medicaid for their basic care. In New Jersey, one in seven adults between the ages of 19 and 64 is covered by Medicaid.

When you look at the choice ahead of us between care and tax cuts for the superrich, I want you to think about Caroline from Mount Holly. Caroline called my office asking that I oppose this budget plan. When she outlined her reason for not cutting Medicaid, she spoke in the clearest possible terms:

I will die if there are cuts to Medicaid.

Caroline is disabled. Her daughter takes care of her through the Managed Long-Term Services and Supports Program.

She ended her message by saying:

Please, I need help. A lot of us need your help.

These are the people that need help, not Elon Musk, not the billionaires.

It is people like Caroline from Hackettstown. Caroline called my office because her brother is on Medicaid. He is scheduled to get heart surgery in the next couple of months--something that is scary enough when you have the certainty of healthcare. But Caroline doesn't have that if her brother's Medicaid is cut.

She said:

I'm really scared for him. I'm really scared for my parents

who are about to retire. . . . I'm scared for myself, someone

who also has multiple health issues and is trying to keep

down a full-time job despite it all.

These are the people that need help.

Our neighbors who sometimes need the most help are those who are disabled. In New Jersey, one out of every three working-age adults with a disability is on Medicaid.

Just last month, I invited Kevin Nunez--a disabled New Jerseyan and an advocate for his community--down to the Capitol. Kevin relies on Medicaid for his care, his caregiver, his basic quality of life. I brought him to the Capitol because I wanted Donald Trump to have to face someone whose healthcare he was threatening to take away.

But it wasn't just Kevin there at the Capitol; we saw his caregiver Edna there. The work she does every day is truly incredible.

We should support our caregivers, should honor their service, and cutting the funding that allows them to do their job is not the way to do that.

Kevin is 1 of more than 15.5 million people across America with a disability who are covered by Medicaid. He is 1 of approximately 4.5 million people who use Medicaid for home care workers like Edna.

The choice we are facing is abandoning those Americans like Kevin and Edna, who just need basic care, or giving another tax cut to those at the very top. For me, that is not a choice.

Finally, as we go through adulthood and age, Medicaid becomes more important than ever. Seniors across our Nation are relying on Medicaid for the care they need to live. Sixty percent of nursing home residents in New Jersey use Medicaid to pay for care. When seniors are on a fixed income, like so many of them are, Medicaid can be the difference between life or death.

Annie, a teacher in New Jersey, called my office recently. Her mother is on Medicaid--71 years old, recently had hip surgery. She has no other income than her Social Security and asked that we do everything we can to make sure that her Medicaid isn't cut.

As someone who is not just a father of two young kids but as a caretaker of an older parent, it weighs on me, and I understand the challenges that are there, knowing that you have to do everything you can to make sure the people you love have the care they need.

Life is hard enough. Care is hard enough. The point of Medicaid, the

point of government, is to make it a little easier, a little more bearable.

So when Republicans come to the floor with a budget that threatens to cut Medicaid so they can give tax cuts and tax breaks to the ultrarich, the choice they are putting before us is making your lives worse and make their lives better. It is making your healthcare worse to make their bank accounts bigger. It is making your future more uncertain to make their futures brighter.

That can't be an acceptable choice, and it is not one we have to make. We can reject this budget resolution and save Medicaid and save healthcare. We can reject this budget resolution and choose to support that expecting mother who just wants to give birth to a healthy child. We can reject this budget resolution and choose to support that child as they grow. We can reject this budget resolution and choose to support our neighbors who work hard but just need that little bit of help to stay healthy and achieve the American dream. Finally, we can reject this budget resolution and choose to support our seniors. We owe the best care to them in their golden years.

This is the moment to show the 2 million New Jerseyans on Medicaid, the nearly 80 million Americans on Medicaid, and every other American across this country that we choose their well-being over the wealth and power of those who already have plenty. Let's reject this budget resolution and do the right thing for them.

I yield the floor.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

Thank you, Senator Booker, and thank you for coming to the floor tonight and speaking up. I have a few questions for you. So why don't you catch your breath.

I wanted to start by saying how proud I am of you to represent our great State of New Jersey, alongside each other. And it is not just me. I want to tell you--because I know you have been here in this Chamber nonstop for hours--but I want to tell you that people are paying attention, and they join me in thanking you in this moment. In fact, I saw a few posts I thought I would share.

Stacy from Bayonne said on Facebook:

I couldn't be prouder to be a life-long New Jerseyan than I

am tonight. Keep it up. Get in that good trouble. Lead the

way and hopefully others will follow.

Janie in Princeton said:

Thank you. Proud that you are my Senator and that you are

bringing ``Big Jersey energy'' to DC tonight.

Vicki in Ewing said:

We are sending our strength to you. Medicare and Medicaid

should not be touched.

And someone on Reddit even said:

I hope he wore the most comfortable and supportive shoes he

could find.

In your opening, you said something that resonated with me. You said:

Our constituents are asking us to acknowledge that this is

not normal, that this is a crisis.

I can't tell you how important it is to internalize it. That is why we are here at this late hour in the U.S. Senate. That is why you are leading here to make the case to the American people that this is a crisis. That resonated with me because I hear this over and over again. I hear it from people all over our home State, whether at townhalls or other rooms that are packed with people saying this moment is not normal; this moment constitutes a crisis. I am glad you are speaking on the floor and said that because what you said isn't just Cory Booker saying that; it is that millions of New Jerseyans we represent are saying it. And you are lifting up their voice. It is not just you are saying that; it is that millions of Americans who see something fundamentally wrong, and they are angry about it.

I have some questions for my colleague. But I want to add some context for this because I want to dig in a bit on why people are so angry at this moment and why what with we are seeing from Donald Trump and Elon Musk isn't in response to that anger; it is the cause of it.

A common refrain in the townhalls that I held are that people feel like nothing is working for them. There is a promise, a uniquely American promise that is simply going unfulfilled for too many. That promise is simple: Your government will work for you; your economy will allow you to advance if you work hard and give your kids a better future; and your country will keep you safe by ensuring the world is stable and secure.

Senator, you and I are here because we know that this promise is going unfulfilled. To say that the American promise is going unfulfilled would be a tragedy in its own right. It would be something that we as a Congress should put our entire focus into restoring. But the sad fact is that this isn't just about a promise unfulfilled; it is about a promise that has been hijacked. It is about a promise that has been distorted to work for those who have been paid to play to be denied for everyone else.

Let's start with the promise that your government will work for you. This is the basis of our democratic Republic. We are public servants in that we serve the people. It is the people's priorities that we put first. It is their lives that we work to make better every day. It is their futures that we are endeavoring to brighten.

But when the people look at Donald Trump and his administration, they don't see that. They see Elon Musk who donated nearly $300 million to buy his way into a seat in power. The world's richest man has been handed the keys to our government. And the same person who has been handed nearly $40 billion in your taxpayer dollars to prop up his corporations is now working to fire veterans from their jobs, make the Social Security Administration less responsive to seniors, and make it harder for your government to work for you. That is what we have seen in the collection of billionaires that buy their way to fulfill their own American promise--a government that works for them and only them; a government that keeps them rich and at a cost to your Medicaid, to your Social Security, to the food you put on the table; government where they pay and they benefit and if you can't, you are left behind.

That is not the government our parents were promised. That is not the government we were promised. That is not the government we want to pass down to our kids.

As Senator Booker mentioned, our Nation is in crisis. Bedrock commitments are being broken. That starts with the first American promise. We can rebuild and restore that promise by actually working to make our government work for the people. Where we see corruption, we must call it out and combat it. And the corrupting power of money in our politics is one example. And the extreme wealth of billionaires like Elon Musk is drowning out working Americans, and that must be addressed.

And as we approach the 250th anniversary of the independence of our country, we have an opportunity to remind people that the promise of America is something bigger than ourselves. And that public service, not private enrichment for those at the very top but

public service is core to what makes this country special.

So let's talk about that second American promise. This is the promise of the American dream, that Rockwellian notion of the house and the white picket fence and the kids in the yard only works if you can pay for that house. It only works if you can afford childcare and healthcare for those kids. It only works if you can work hard and deliver something bigger and better than you are handed. And right now, that is not happening.

While we are fighting to bring change to our economy to make life more affordable and the middle class more accessible, what we are seeing from Donald Trump and Elon Musk is another promise hijacked for those at the very top.

Senator Booker, I want to just take a step back as I get into these questions here because you are talking about Social Security, talking about Medicaid, talking about so many of these other issues here. But in that broader context, what we have situated here is the recognition that we live in the time of the greatest inequality in our Nation's history.

So it isn't just about these programs and how we rely on them, it is that we are seeing the wealth gap widening, and it is happening faster and faster.

In many ways, I consider this to be the great fragility of America right now. We are the greatest, richest, most powerful country in the world but not for everybody. And what we see right now, it is not just about Social Security; it is not just about the checks, but as you mentioned, Social Security offices are closing, worry about customer service, people call on the phone lines. And it feels like efforts are on the way to try to sabotage our Social Security, our Medicare, our Medicaid, and then have people say: Hey, look, it is not working, and that is why we need to get rid of these things.

And that sabotage is something people see right before their very eyes. I mean, you heard the Commerce Secretary talk about how seniors won't mind if there are late payments. He said those that complain are fraudsters, as you mentioned. That is directly trying to undermine people who are working hard over the course of their lives.

I have to say, it is a great irony in many ways, this idea that the richest man in the world is criticizing the hard-earned savings of seniors that are just getting a little bit every single month for them to just try to get by, and then he calls it a Ponzi scheme.

My father, as you mentioned, is one of those that depends on Social Security for his entire livelihood right now. I heard another person at a townhall describe the feeling that she has right now, and I think you can connect with it. She says it feels hard to breathe right now because there is so much anxiety in the American people. I am glad you are shining a light on this because people are scared and they are worried and they want to know what comes next.

My question to you here is something that was actually shared by a constituent of both of ours talking about all the concerns of Social Security of this time.

But I thought it was very poignant in pointing out that what we also need to put forward to the American people right now is a vision going forward of how to not just restore and protect this promise but how we take it to the next step. If we live in a time of the greatest amount of inequality, not just to think about how we hold on to a receding tide but how to try to put forward some vision that can try to inspire the same way that Social Security did and put forward generational change--I wanted to ask you that sense.

Do you believe in that sense that right now, more than ever, as people are faced with this anxiety that is hard to breathe, that, yes, we will stand here on the floor of the Senate and do everything we humanly can to be able to protect what they have. But do you agree that we also have to put forward that positive vision of where do we take Social Security, where do we take Medicaid, Medicare; where do we take our economy to better work for everybody so we are not just trying to figure out how to better divide and hold on to the pennies that the billionaires are willing to share with the rest of us while they don't give us anything else to be able to move forward on.

And how do we come up with a vision that tries to shrink that inequality and live in a society that is willing to share that wealth and recognize there is more than enough to go around? And that is not zero-sum and that we can be stronger together in that way.

I would love to hear how you can paint that vision for the American people.

That would have been 2004. Twenty-one years.

Twenty-one.

That is right.

Will the Senator yield?

What you raised is absolutely right, and it is front and center in everyone's mind.

You know, when my parents immigrated here 50 years ago, they didn't know anybody in the entire Western Hemisphere of planet Earth. But America called them. It inspired them.

I asked them once: What was it that drew you here?

And they said that they felt that, here in America, they could guarantee that the family that they raised, that their kids--me and my sister--would have a better life and more opportunities than they did, and that was the sense of that generational progress that is made.

But now, you know, I am standing here with a 7-year-old and a 9-year- old--I am hoping fast asleep right now--and I don't know if I can make that same promise to them right now, that I can guarantee them that they will have a better life and more opportunities.

So, you know, there is that growing cynicism and pessimism about that American promise I talked to you about, and I just feel like there is an unraveling happening here, where we see this sense of concern, and it is being weaponized by some who create that sense of zero sum to push us away from this idea that we are a part of something bigger than all of us and that we can all lift each other up in that great American project.

It is sad because, as we were getting to that 250th anniversary, you know, it should be a time when we rededicate ourselves to the American project--right?--like recommit ourselves to what the next 250 years will be. But we are entering it now with a sense of pessimism on that front. So, you know, I guess my question to you here is, how do we break out of that tailspin on that front?

Yes.

Yes.

Thank you so much. Keep up your energy.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today because there is nothing-- nothing--that keeps a parent up at night like the health of their child. It doesn't matter if you are a Democrat or a Republican, if you live in the reddest rural areas or the bluest cities. One of the things that binds us as Americans, as people, is that every parent looks at their kids and wants to know that they are doing everything that they can to keep them safe.

And let me tell you, that is not an easy task. I am a father of a 7- year-old and a 9-year-old, two little boys, and I every day wonder, am I doing the right thing for them? Am I being the kind of father that they deserve? Am I looking out and being thoughtful about what they eat, about whether or not I am keeping up with their health, and that they are exercising?

And like most families, I can tell you it is tough to know that you are always doing the best thing for your kids. But like most families, we do what we can.

My wife and I, we try our very best. But we don't have all of the answers.

I mean, how many parents out there, when your kid gets sick and it is too late in the night to find a way to call the doctor or the nurse, you are trying to figure out where to turn to for information?

Where do we go when it is that we feel like we have reached the limits of our own personal knowledge and we need to find a place that we can trust? And that is what this is about. It is about knowing that there is someone you can trust when you feel like you don't know where else to turn, that someone can have your back and you can trust that they have your best interests at heart.

When we think about our doctors, when we think about our nurses, our health professionals, when we think about those making decisions in this great Nation of over 330 million people about our healthcare, we want to trust those individuals, these people that are making these decisions.

And I know for the people in New Jersey, over 9 million people there in the State of New Jersey, they are wondering who they can trust. We live in tough times. In fact, we live in the time of the greatest amount of distrust that we have ever seen in modern history of this country.

And that is most pronounced, most clear when it comes to our health. And one of those people we need to trust the most in our country is the person who runs the Department of Health and Human Services.

I rise today because I have met with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. I have questioned Mr. Kennedy in committee. I have read his statements and examined his record, and I want to say here on the floor of the Senate that he is not someone I can trust with my kids' health. And in good conscience, I cannot vote for him.

If I cannot trust him with the health of my own kids, how can I ask the families of 9 million other New Jerseyans to go do it or for families across our country to trust this man?

I have had the chance to be able to meet him, talk to him in person, ask him questions, that is more than most anyone in my own State is going to have a chance to talk to him. I took that as a deep responsibility to try to use that time and that opportunity to try to deduce whether or not this man rises to the level of trust that I think the people of New Jersey and this country deserve.

And I have come to the conclusion that I cannot support Mr. Kennedy to lead an Agency in charge of our Nation's health. And he has too often diminished that trust in the very healthcare that he would be in charge of and too often has spread disinformation about the diseases and challenges and threats that we face.

Now, what you will hear from his supporters is a story of an advocate for change. They will tell you that he is fighting against a broken system, that he simply wants to make America healthy. And, look, I think all of us, hopefully, can say that we want to make America healthy, that we care about the health of Americans across this Nation.

And I don't think anyone in this Chamber would disagree that there are broken problems that we face when it comes to our healthcare, to our government, to so many aspects of our society.

But, unfortunately, like most things coming out of this current administration, what we are seeing is corruption and conspiracy disguised as false promises of change. It is important that we take this moment to call it out and to expose it, to explain to the American people why this is a position--the Secretary of Health and Human Services is a position where trust is so important.

Because if he is confirmed, Mr. Kennedy will have an incredible platform, well beyond the strong platform that he already has developed--a bully pulpit. But this would be an official platform of the United States, of our government, paid for by the taxpayers, to shape the health of my children and yours.

Let's begin with the Agency he is nominated to lead. HHS employs more than 80,000 people across the United States and around the world. Their mission is simple: to enhance the health and well-being of all Americans. And to put that another way, their job is to make it easier for parents to sleep at night by making sure their kids can stay healthy.

Now, I am not going to go over every single one of the 13 operating divisions of HHS, but let me name a few you have probably heard of. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, they are on the frontlines of preventing the next pandemic; the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, they operate Medicare, Medicaid; the Children's Health Insurance Program, otherwise known as CHIP; and the Health Insurance Marketplaces. All of these provide healthcare for more than 100 million Americans, including my mother and my father who are under Medicare. That is about one in three people under the services of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Then there is the Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA. You probably know them because when there is some sort of outbreak that impacts the food supply, they issue the recalls. But they do a lot of other stuff, too, from approving new medicines to countering bioterrorism.

Now, those are three of the divisions you have heard of. Maybe you haven't heard of the National Institutes of Health, an Agency that sits at the cutting edge of medical research--not just in the Nation but around the world. Or the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, an Agency that does work to combat the real addiction and mental health crisis our country is facing.

The Lakewood Community Service Corporation, Lakewood, NJ, received a $2.5 million grant to improve mental health care in one of our State's fastest growing services. Cape May County Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse received a $300,000 grant to tackle substance abuse issues in South Jersey, both important causes that my colleagues from both sides of the aisle can agree to support.

And then, finally, there is the Administration for Children and Families, and whether you heard of it or not, you or someone you know probably is touched by it. It is the second largest Agency in HHS, and it is the Agency that manages temporary assistance for needy families: Head Start, childcare and foster care programs.

I wanted to outline all of this because I want you to understand the enormity of the task ahead of the next HHS Secretary. This is not just someone who can walk in and just say: We need to be healthy again. This is someone who will be tasked with operating programs on a day-to-day basis that mean the very life and death of over a third of all Americans.

So when I say that trust is important, it is not just a buzzword. Who do you trust with your health? Who do you trust with your children's health? Who do you trust with your parents' health, as they age and face challenges of physical and cognitive decline?

Let's look at some of the things that show why we should not trust Mr. Kennedy. One of the first things that many parents have to deal with--vaccines. A lot of us have had to hold our kids through those vaccines. We talk to our pediatricians--people we trust--and they talk to us about the importance of making sure that our kids are protected.

Mr. Kennedy has used his stature to push lawsuits that he personally stands to profit from--including over a common vaccine given to children. And throughout all of this, Mr. Kennedy has claimed that he is ``not anti-vaccine.'' While it is clear that we cannot trust him, what is even more clear is that his deception has had a real impact on the lives of people.

Mr. Kennedy's push to sow distrust in Samoa in 2019 helped lead to a measles epidemic that claimed the lives of 83 people, mostly children under the age of 5. While Kennedy said in his hearing that ``We don't know what was killing them,'' the Samoan Director-General of Health, Dr. Alec Ekeroma, called his words ``a total fabrication.''

The doctor said that if Mr. Kennedy is confirmed, he would be ``a danger to us, a danger to everyone.''

That is not someone we can trust.

In a speech on the Senate floor in the 1960s, then-Senator John F. Kennedy, said that ``the treatment of its older citizens is said by anthropologists to be one of the most basic tests of how civilized a society or nation has become.''

I would broaden that test to be our most vulnerable, our neighbors who are

targeted simply because of who they are.

And when Mr. Kennedy spreads false claims like the COVID-19 virus was engineered to spare Jewish Americans and Asians, he uses the trust that he has been given to divide and spread anti-Semitism and anti-Asian hate.

And when Mr. Kennedy, in response to the questions asked of him by Members of this body, refused to acknowledge the importance of taking commonsense steps in our foster care system to protect trans youth, he uses the trust he has been given to divide and spread hate and fear. That is not someone we can trust.

My reasons for opposing Mr. Kennedy's nomination don't just come from the concerns I have for my children; it comes from an understanding I have from my parents.

A little over 50 years ago, my parents came to America from South Korea to start a better life. They did so by working to keep Americans healthy. My father earned his Ph.D. and became a genetic researcher trying to cure cancer and Alzheimer's. My mother worked as a nurse in hospital systems across New Jersey.

They worked hard to earn the trust of people around them, their colleagues, their patients that they had worked on every single day, but also the trust that they had in the people around them for their own health.

My father was a polio survivor; my mother struggled with Lyme disease. They have had their fair share of health struggles. And through them, I have seen a common denominator that our public health system only works when we have people working together with trust and that we the public, in turn, trust them.

But then when I hear Mr. Kennedy say this about Lyme disease. He said:

Another thing that keeps us from enjoying the outdoors and

keeps us locked inside and the idea that this may have been,

is highly likely to have been a military weapon, and we

cannot say 100 percent for sure, but we do know that they

were experimenting with tics there. Now, the American Lyme

Disease Foundation wrote:

Some claim that Lyme disease was introduced into the

northeastern region of the U.S by a man-made strain that

escaped from a high containment biological warfare lab on

Plum Island.

They said:

However, there is ample evidence to indicate that both the

Ixodes ticks and the bacteria causing Lyme disease were

present in the U.S well before the Plum Island facility was

ever established.''

According to a Washington Post article written by a Professor Sam Telford, ``It's an old conspiracy theory enjoying a resurgence with lots of sensational headlines and tweets. Even Congress has ordered that the Pentagon must reveal whether it weaponized ticks. And it's not true.''

When it came to the disease of polio that disabled my father since he was a baby, Mr. Kennedy had this to say about the vaccine that nearly eradicated polio from the face of the planet. He said the vaccine, for a period of time, may have led to cancer due to a contamination with a virus that ``killed many many many many many more people than polio ever did.''

So with the polio vaccine he said: ``Did it cause more deaths than it averted? I would say, I don't know.''

And he said this just a year and a half ago.

A large study was published that concluded that the polio vaccine under concern was not associated with increased rates of cancer, and other studies showed that the virus of concern was killed by the same process used to inactivate the polio virus.

And in that same podcast, Mr. Kennedy said:

There is no vaccine that is safe and effective.

Again, this was just a year and a half ago. Now he is coming to us and saying: I am all for the polio vaccine.

What are the American people left to believe?

Again, our health and our Nation is founded on trust. That is part of the compact we have as Americans for generations. We want trust for our families.

As I said, I am a father of two little boys. All I want for them is to be healthy and happy. They are the reason that I am here in the U.S. Senate, to take actions to be able to give them the best type of lives, to give other kids and other grandkids the kind of lives they deserve.

And I worry about the foods that they eat, and I support efforts to address ultraprocessed foods in America, to try to make sure we can have Americans eating healthy. But I also want someone who is not going to shoot from the hip and spread disinformation.

Our healthcare is far from perfect, and we do need major reforms to get it in a place where it can better serve the American people. We do need massive changes in the way our healthcare, childcare, elder care, and nutrition systems are run, but not without trust.

We need research--more and more research--to understand safety and to power the innovation that will come up with the cures and the medicines of the future. But, this week, we see efforts to undertake massive cuts at NIH, cuts that would set back the very research we need to keep improving our health.

As I conclude here, these efforts to cut and slash our research at NIH and elsewhere would continue under the leadership of Mr. Kennedy. HHS Secretary is a big job. We can't just hand it to someone we can't trust--not for my kids or for my parents or for yours.

I encourage my colleagues, again: Reject this nomination so that every parent in America can go to sleep having trust in a person tasked with ensuring that our children will be healthy in the morning.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today because we have a crisis of confidence in our government. It is a crisis that is being driven by the Trump administration with one goal in mind: to let the well-off and the well-connected play by their own set of rules while you, the American people, continue to scrape by.

It is a crisis that puts us at a crossroads. Will we take the steps necessary to address the corruption and restore trust or will we break our institutions even further and usher in a golden age of corruption?

In order to answer those questions, we need to have a real understanding of a few things. One, how deep is this crisis in confidence? Two, in what way is the Trump administration putting their thumb on the scale for the well-off and the well-connected? Three, how is that impacting the rest of us and how will it impact America's future? Four, and finally, how can we fight back?

Now, let's start with the crisis that we are in. When I talk about this crisis in confidence, what we are talking about is the belief that your government is working for you; that it is working for the American people--all of its people--a belief that, no matter the challenge you face or the ambitions that you have, that your government has your best interests at heart. That is the fundamental credence of our democracy. It is of, by, and for the people. And that belief is always important. But when times are tough, it is even more critical than ever.

Let's be clear: These are tough times. I don't think there is a single person in America that would disagree with that. We have challenges before us. We have challenges with the high cost of living and affordability problems. It is a top issue that I hear about in my home State of New Jersey.

We have a lot of crises of confidence in this moment about whether or not we can step up as a nation and be able to rise through the challenges that we face. And the challenges we face are significant. We have to acknowledge that.

Over the past couple of years, as we recover from a generationally defining pandemic, I have heard from so many families who just don't believe that they can get ahead. They don't believe or think that they will do better than their parents and that their kids won't do better than them.

I think about that in my own family situation--my parents coming here, emigrating to this Nation 50 years ago. And I remember asking them why they did it. And my parents said to me just one simple line. They said: We did it because we felt that here in America, we could guarantee that the family that we raise--that you and your sister-- would have a better life and more opportunities than we do. That was it. It was that simple.

They weren't driven by greed. They weren't trying to take it all for themselves, as if this was some zero-sum, survival of the fittest. It was a sense of America and a sense of the opportunity that it can bring for everyone, including two immigrants from South Korea who were born during the Korean war into poverty and came to this Nation.

And now, as they get older, there are challenges that they face as being seniors, the elderly--the healthcare and other challenges that they face with their budget fixed. And now myself, as a father of a 7- year-old and 9-year-old, I wonder: What kind of America are my kids going to grow up in?

I know it is not just my family that worries about this. When the costs of basic goods go up, it makes it harder to save for everybody. And when families can't save, it makes it harder to achieve that crown jewel of the American dream--owning a home, something that my family has struggled with over the years, something that so many other families are facing right now as we see the cost of owning a home skyrocket. It puts that dream even more out of reach. And for those that can't own, even the cost of rental prices are going through the roof, demoralizing people.

I remember hearing from this young man, a recent college graduate, and he just came to me just feeling so deflated. He said: I don't think I am ever going to own a home. That is how he put it. I have to tell you, just hearing that from him, just how pessimistic he was, just how demoralized he was about his place in our society--but it wasn't just about his place. It was about this moment for this country and the fact that he doesn't see us moving in a trajectory where someone like himself and people in his generation are going to be able to have that opportunity and that chance that generations before had.

So you throw in that rising cost of higher education that he is struggling with, trying to pay off the bills, trying to keep up with student debt, and you have that general sense that we are losing that sense that we are part of something bigger than all of us.

It is easy to understand why people just don't think the system that should be working for them is working for them. That is the place that we are in right now--that in this moment we find ourselves living through the moment of the greatest amount of inequality in our Nation's history, even worse than the Robber Baron Age that we studied about in history books; that somehow we see just such extraordinary wealth but for just a few, whereas the vast majority of Americans are struggling paycheck to paycheck and won't be able to step up if they face some type of crisis, a car accident or something else that could just lead them into catastrophe.

That lack of trust is very clear in the numbers that we see from the American people. A Pew study from last summer showed that public trust in the Federal Government is at approximately 22 percent. And in 2023, only 16 percent said the government always or most of the time is something that you can trust. According to Pew, that was among the lowest tally in nearly 70 years.

That number was reflected in a survey conducted by the Partnership for Public Service in the spring of 2024. Their research shows that only 23 percent of Americans trust the Federal Government. That is down from 35 percent the year before. We are just seeing it go down and down. Only 15 percent think the government is transparent, down from 21 percent the year before.

This erosion that we are continuing to see in our country and in the public trust has to be at top of line, because how can a government function, how can a democracy function, with that much distrust?

Alarming in that group is trust among people age 18 to 34--that age group of that young man I told you about who had such pessimism about his future. And in that group, we saw trust decline by half of 30 percent to 15 percent.

Now, you might think this is just maybe a red State problem. But let me tell you, it is a massive issue in my home State of New Jersey, as well. In May of 2023, a poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University showed that over 80 percent of New Jersey residents--that is over 80 percent-- believe that their State's politicians are corrupt. That shows you just such a devastating number, the distrust that is out there and how widespread it is.

We certainly have had our challenges of late in New Jersey. When you see the corruption, when you hear about the news of indictments and convictions--I remember one time I went to a neighbor of mine, asked him what he thought about the state of corruption in New Jersey, and he just said: That is New Jersey. He threw up his hands.

This sense of helplessness, this sense of apathy, the sense that that is just how things are now; there is nothing we can do about it--there are a variety of reasons why this is a case in New Jersey, but it all comes back to the same thing, a singular question: Are the people in your government working for you or are they working for themselves? Are they trying to lift up their own personal wealth or to look out for their friends or their associates or their families or for special interests?

I always often felt like one of the most important questions you can get a sense from the people is this question of: Do your elected officials, do your government officials care about you? Because sometimes it just feels like we are in this moment in this country where we have this crisis of empathy right now; that we are losing touch with that idea that we are part of something bigger than all of us. We are having trouble. We are struggling to see the world through someone else's eyes and walk in their shoes.

In this Nation of over 330 million people, how can we continue if we continue to only think about ourselves and lose sight of that which is around us?

Obviously, this is all the more important in times like these when we need our government working to solve the problems that we face. As we said, we face significant challenges.

So what happens when we have a government where the people aren't working in the public interests, when those that are charged by the people to take up the public common good are not following through? What happens when we have a government where those people working to protect the public interests are fired or pushed out or marginalized?

Luckily for us, history may not repeat, but it certainly rhymes. The Founding Fathers established the Federal workforce to be one built on merit. It was something that they took quite seriously--so seriously, in fact, that during debate in the weeks after Washington's first inauguration, James Madison stated:

Wanton removal of a meritorious officer is an impeachable

offense.

George Washington himself wrote that appointments into public service would be the most difficult and delicate part of his work.

In the history of the Federal service, in a report published by the Office of Personnel Management, the evolution of this debate from one of merit first to one of political gain becomes very apparent. As political parties grew, so did the pendulum swing over retaliation and actions that further politicized public servant positions, but the dam broke just a generation after the founding of the Republic.

The Tenure of Office Act of 1820--not exactly a household name--was one of the first dominoes to fall. It led to what was eventually called the spoils system. By limiting the terms of many officials to 4 years, in corresponding to the President, it basically meant that public servants would come in and out with the tides of the Presidency and not be based on need or qualifications--just a pendulum swing of partisanship--the qualification being that of loyalty rather than skill or merit. The impact of the spoils system became very apparent, which was of wholesale patronage and corruption and a rejection of the status quo that looks very familiar to what we see today.

Senator Henry Clay, on the Senate floor, called it a ``detestable system''--a ``detestable system.''

George William Curtis, one of the leaders in the fight to reform the civil service, said that the spoils system ``presents a most ridiculous, revolting, and disheartening spectacle.'' He said that, through it, the United States seethes with intrigue and corruption.''

Over time, the pushback against the system and the damage it did to the U.S. Government and its people built a reform movement that eventually resulted in the passage and enactment of the Pendleton Act in 1883. In many ways, the Pendleton Act brought our public service back to its original roots--codifying it, protecting it--by calling for an open selection of government employees and creating a Civil Service Commission--our modern civil service--and it required that the applicants pass a civil service exam. The bill was the first domino of several to help to restore trust in government by ensuring that those who serve will serve the people and not themselves--will serve the people and not just some loyalty test.

In so many ways, the battle that led to the passage of the Pendleton Act continues today and answers the first question I posed: How deep does our crisis and confidence in our government go?

In short, it goes back to a friction we have seen for most of our history. It is a friction between those who want to use power for their gain--to enrich themselves and their party--at the expense of other Americans. On the other side are those who seek only to swear an oath to the Constitution and to deliver on the promise of making the next American generation more prosperous and secure. To have that sense of progress as a nation, which we know we cannot take for granted, we have to work for it.

So, when you look at Donald Trump or look at Elon Musk, you are not seeing something new. You are not seeing the disruptors they tell you that they are. You are not seeing an innovator. You are seeing something that is very old, just another power-hungry politician--an elite figure--seeking to hoard power at the expense of real American families--in this moment right now, as I said, that is a moment of the greatest amount of inequality in our Nation's history--and doing that by attacking

the very people who work for the people, and they are not beholden to the well-off and the well-connected.

Another person leading the charge to bring us back to the golden age of corruption of the 1800s is a man named Russell Vought.

Now, Russell Vought was born to make corruption safe again. As a staffer in the House and the Senate, he worked for Members of both Chambers who attacked and demeaned civil servants in order to get them out of the way and let big corporate interests through. He worked for nearly a decade at the Heritage Foundation, taking dark corporate money and translating it into a systematic takedown of the same protections those corporations were lobbying against.

When the Trump administration came into office in 2017, Mr. Vought was one of the first in the building at the Office of Management and Budget, the OMB. Then, like now, Senators had serious concerns when he was nominated then for Deputy Director and, eventually, for Director of

Thank you.

For our working families struggling to pay the bills, I vote no.

Mr. President, I rise today to try to make some sense of it all. Why are we seeing nothing but chaos coming from the White House? Why are people feeling a sense of fear and confusion? Why should Americans be paying attention to any of this?

I want to start by saying to the American people: You are not alone in feeling overwhelmed by what is going on right now.

Just yesterday, my office received more than 700 calls asking questions about the Trump administration's unconstitutional and brazen decision to take money away from them, to freeze programs that help people in every corner of our State and country. That translates to a call every 2 minutes.

I am going to share some of the stories of concern that I received yesterday, but before I do, I want to try to explain what exactly is going on.

On Monday, the Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget sent a memo ordering Federal Agencies to ``temporarily pause all activities related to obligations or disbursements of all federal financial assistance.''

I know that sounds complicated, so let me put it another way. The Trump administration said that taxpayer money going to help people across the country was stopped. That is money that you have paid through your taxes that goes to do important things. It helps provide meals to seniors. It keeps roofs over people's heads. It helps combat the fentanyl crisis. It helps get veterans healthcare. It keeps childcare programs open and schools funded. It helps small businesses get back onto their feet after disasters.

That is just a small example of what the Trump administration attempted to take away from you. And let's be clear: This is your money, and they tried to take it away.

What happened next was they got caught, and the backlash was fast. The outrage was real. Their actions were stopped last night when a judge issued an injunction and questioned the constitutionality of the administration's actions.

Then today, in the span of an hour, the Trump administration rescinded their directive, only to contradict that with a tweet from the White House Press Secretary:

This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze.

It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo.

Why? To end any confusion created by the court's

injunction.

It goes on to say:

The President's EO's--

Executive order--

on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and

will be rigorously implemented.''

In short, the first time we tried to take away your money, it was probably unconstitutional, but we are going to keep trying in different ways until we get it right.

If this feels like your head is spinning, I get it. We have seen nothing but mass confusion and chaos for the past week and a half since Donald Trump reentered the White House. It is not governance; it is whiplash.

If you are watching me on C-SPAN or catching a clip on social media, there is one thing I want you to take away: The chaos is just a smoke screen for corruption. It is quite clear. They want to take away your money and give it right to the billionaire donors and corporate interests.

The Trump administration isn't taking this money away from you because they are serious about making government more effective or efficient. They are not doing this because they want to help more people and target our resources where they can do the most good. They are doing this because they are getting ready to gut programs you rely on every day and use that money for another round of tax cuts for those at the very top. They are doing this because the big corporate interests want to dismantle the public servants who work every day to make sure that your water is clean, that your kids get a good education, and that your parents are able to safely get to their doctor's appointments.

We should not lose sight of what is at stake here. We shouldn't get wrapped into the noise and confusion and chaos that the White House throws at us because behind that chaos, there are real

victims of this corruption. There are real lives on the line when people are left behind. Let me share just a few stories.

I heard from a lot of seniors and people who support seniors about their fears about what this means.

Yesterday morning, I got an email from someone who helps operate senior living facilities in Edison, NJ. They said the freeze was ``obviously alarming'' for those ``who rely on federal funding to help people with disabilities become more independent.''

One of my staff received an email from a leader of senior services organizations in Hackensack and Jersey City who said:

Those in most need of services in New Jersey will lose all

support.

Another staff received a message from Frank in Toms River. Frank said:

I am paralyzed and use Ocean Ride to get to all my doctors

appointments. . . . I am unable to travel in a regular

vehicle and without the significant discount of Ocean Ride, I

could not afford to get to the doctor. Ocean Ride is

essential to my daily life.

Now, you may never have heard of Ocean Ride, but for people like Frank, it is their lifeline. These actions by the Trump administration to take away money could force Ocean Ride to close their doors.

It is not just our seniors who lose out in this corruption and chaos; it is our kids.

I got a call from Kelly, a nurse from Parsippany.

I work with children who need food from free school

programs, babies who need WIC, children who are bullied in

school, children with disabilities.

She told me that the Trump administration should ``quit playing games with politics.''

I heard the same thing from Manny from Bergen County, a public school teacher who said that he had ``students that benefit directly from programs'' that are on the chopping block. Manny said that this moment makes it hard to look at his 3\1/2\-year-old and think about the future. It is a feeling that so many of us have right now.

I heard from Susan from Hudson County who works in a nonprofit that helps the homeless. She said in a call to our office yesterday:

Our funds have been frozen. We are not going to be able to

serve our clients or our staff. This is going to have a

significant impact, not only with my agency, but the entire

community of those we serve.

I am sharing these stories with you because it is important to remember that the impact of the decisions made at the White House go beyond the feeling of hopelessness and helplessness. If the White House continues down this path, those at the very top--the well-off and the well-connected--will get their tax cuts and whatever else they want. They will get it at the expense of a senior who will have to miss a doctor's appointment because their ride support program has been cut. They will get it at the expense of a young kid whose aftercare was cut or free school lunch was eliminated. And they will get it at the expense of the person who just needs a helping hand to put a roof over their head.

Mr. President, this isn't just about ending this chaos; it is about protecting our neighbors, our communities, and our families. We know this fight is not over. The White House was very clear about that today. This was just the beginning.

We have seen these freezes for infrastructure spending that could impact big projects like the Gateway Tunnel and small projects like paving the road you drive on to take your kids to school.

These freezes could make America less competitive on a global stage by cutting research for AI and other next-generation technologies. In a week where we are seeing China make gains, we can't take our own foot off the gas.

And these freezes could stop critical research into diseases that impact Americans across the country. We should be supercharging our efforts to cure Alzheimer's and cancer, not cutting them.

Meanwhile, we have seen nearly 20 inspectors general fired from government Agencies, trying to hide what is happening. The American people want more accountability, not less. And making it harder for watchdogs to call out bad behavior could result in a golden age of corruption.

But when it comes to standing up against attempts to take away your healthcare, your childcare, your eldercare, the basic protections that your government provides because you pay into it, we will be with you every step of the way to fight back.

This is just the beginning. We hear your concerns, your frustrations, your anger. Your voice still matters. Your story stills matters. And Democrats in this Chamber will lead the way. But together, we will push back and make sure that it is the people's priorities that win the day.

Mr. President, I ask the American people to see the chaos for what it is: a smoke screen to benefit the ultrawealthy. And although I know this chaos is unnerving and it is frightening, the American people can rest assured that we will fight this chaos and focus on what matters most here: protecting you from the blatant corruption that is the administration's attempt to take money from our working families and give handouts to those at the very top. Let's get to work.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today because it is inevitable that at some point in the near future, President Trump will have to convene his national security team in the Situation Room at the White House in response to a global crisis, whether in Ukraine or in the Taiwan Strait or in some other hotspot.

The Situation Room is a room that I have had the privilege of working in as staff on the White House National Security Council. It is a room where the

most consequential decisions are made, where the safety and security of our country is decided, and where the lives of people are determined. But who will be in the room with the President, advising the President during these difficult and stressful times? As the President sits at the end of the table, flanking him will be some of the most senior advisers. One of them, the closest to him, will be the Secretary of Defense.

Mr. President, I rise today because I know the importance of that role in that room. I have seen what it means for the President to turn to the Secretary of Defense for counsel. In fact, I even worked at the Pentagon, in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. I have seen the massive operation that the Secretary needs to lead every day and what it takes. I have seen the readiness necessary for the Secretary of Defense to turn to the President and provide the right recommendations for America's national security.

I have seen Mr. Pete Hegseth make his case. I have seen his answers in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee. I have seen the reports. I can say from my experience in the Secretary of Defense's Office as well as in the Situation Room, that Mr. Hegseth's appointment is an unnecessary risk in a dangerous global moment.

Now, I get it. President Trump wants to be a disruptor. He wants to bring in people who are going to shake up the system. He wants people who represent a change from the status quo. I am sure a number of us here in the Senate would like to see some changes at the Pentagon-- changes as to how things are done and understanding that the status quo is not something we can lean on. We certainly have disagreements on how best to add certainty and stability to the world that seems to be off the rails in this moment. But there is talking about change and there is actually having the skills and the capacity to implement change.

The Department of Defense is our largest employer in our government and one that requires critical leadership.

Let's look at the world that Mr. Hegseth would inherit as Secretary of Defense, the world that President Trump will ask him about in the Situation Room.

On Ukraine, it is clear that Mr. Hegseth simply doesn't know his history. During his nomination hearing, he called Russia's 2014 invasion of Crimea a ``minor incursion.'' He has also downplayed the threat that Putin's Russia poses to our NATO allies.

On China, Mr. Hegseth demonstrated a lack of depth of knowledge when asked by Senator Duckworth to name the importance of even one of the ASEAN countries and the type of agreement we have with them. He could not name one. These countries--including multiple treaty allies--are on the frontlines of our competition with China. Multiple ASEAN members are locked in territorial disputes with China.

This is a critical partner, so much that the Department of Defense 2 months ago released a strategic document called ``U.S. Department of Defense Vision Statement for a Prosperous and Secure Southeast Asia'' that was centered on ASEAN and even mentioned that ``The United States has worked closely with ASEAN on defense and security in the Indo- Pacific region since former Defense Secretary Robert Gates attended the inaugural ASEAN Defense Ministers' Meeting . . . in 2010.'' It goes on to say that the ``U.S. Secretary of Defense has attended and supported ASEAN at every single one of those gatherings ever since.''

In a moment where these disputes could easily flare up to conflict, the President needs a Secretary by his side who doesn't draw a blank on questions about our allies.

And on the Middle East, Mr. Hegseth remarked that ISIS was ``raging across Iraq'' when President Trump was first sworn into office in 2017 was simply not reflective of the reality on the ground at the time.

Combined, that lack of knowledge and qualifications alone should disqualify Mr. Hegseth from this role. But there is one more disqualifying factor, which is his character.

Now, there has been a lot said about this already in terms of personal challenges and behaviors, so I will leave it at this: Someone who is being asked to lead millions of uniformed and civilian personnel, his statements on women and transgender servicemembers are simply unacceptable.

Claiming that standards have been lowered for women and that allowing LGBT Americans to serve in the military is somehow part of a Marxist agenda is beyond offensive; it is absurd. And it is far beneath the person that is supposed to be setting the standard and serving as a leader for the men and women who have dedicated themselves to protecting this country.

I have said before that every President, including President Trump, has the prerogative to choose the people who sit at that table with him in the Situation Room. But our job here in the Senate is to make sure that those people have the competence and the character to serve our country. This is not a reality TV show. This is real life, and there are real lives at stake.

Mr. Hegseth should be recognized for his service, but he should not be Secretary of Defense. If that is not enough, we are voting also to approve someone to be the sixth in line of Presidential succession. Is Mr. Hegseth ready for either of these distinctions? The answer for me is no.

For the sake of our country and our national security, I encourage my colleagues who want to support this President to oppose this nomination and bring forth another nominee more qualified for the role, more ready for the role. I encourage my colleagues who want to deliver change to oppose this nomination and bring forth another nominee with the experience and credibility to deliver it. I encourage my colleagues who want to make our country safe, who want to make our world a more stable place, and who want to leave a legacy of peace and strength, to oppose this nomination and bring us a nominee ready to deliver for the American people.

I urge a ``no'' vote on Pete Hegseth for Secretary of Defense.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues to call for section 708 of the NDAA to be removed from the final bill.

As you know, I am new to the U.S. Senate. I come to the floor today with great humility but also great urgency because, while I am new to the U.S. Senate, I have had the honor of serving the past 6 years as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, just on the other side of this building.

During my time as a Member of the House, one of the things I have been most proud to work on is issues involving our military servicemembers and their families. As a House Member, I represented Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, the only triservice joint base in the country. Because of that, I represented tens of thousands of military families who signed up to serve our country.

When you talk to military families, the last thing you hear about is politics. In fact, the last thing they want to talk about is politics. Military families often struggle with sufficient housing or putting food on the table. They

face inadequacies in healthcare. Military spouses often face barriers to finding work. While it is only the servicemember who swears the oath, it is the whole family that serves.

I come to the floor with great urgency because Speaker Johnson sought to politicize this important National Defense Authorization Act by inserting a dangerous provision after the Armed Services Committees in both the House and the Senate came to bipartisan agreement. This kind of action undermines trust in negotiations and sets a dangerous precedent for what is widely considered the last true space of traditional bipartisan legislation.

Let's be clear. Section 708 would harm those who serve by denying healthcare for military families. By banning TRICARE from covering gender-affirming care for minors, we are standing in the way of military families and the healthcare their doctors have prescribed. We are putting politics into a bill where it simply does not belong. We are sending a signal to our military families that if your loved ones are transgender, we don't have your backs or theirs.

As the former ranking member of the Military Personnel Subcommittee on the House Armed Services Committee, there is a lot about this National Defense Authorization Act to support. Our junior enlisted servicemembers will receive a 14.5-percent pay raise, and all others will receive a 4.5-percent pay raise. Our servicemembers will have greater access to meal support so we can address hunger in our ranks. They will have additional funding to improve military construction of housing so they will have better roofs over their heads. And we have made real progress in improving access to healthcare.

These are all wins we should be proud of. They are bipartisan. They build a stronger national defense. That is all the more reason to strip this harmful provision, section 708, from the bill.

We shouldn't play politics with our national security. We shouldn't target transgender youth and further spread fear into a community that has seen so much hate directed toward it. We should pass an NDAA that supports our servicemembers and their families--all of them--without politics or prejudice. I hope my colleagues join me to that end.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today one final time in this sacred chamber to thank my neighbors in the Third District of New Jersey for the honor of getting to represent them in Congress over these past six years.

It is an honor that I never thought I would have. This was the district my parents chose to create a life and build a family. This was the district that raised me. I went to public schools in the same area I represent now. I played little league on the same fields I drive by heading to meet constituents. It's these places--and these people--that shaped me. I am forever grateful for that.

As I grew up, I watched my parents--my mother, a nurse, and my father, a medical researcher working to find cures for cancer and Alzheimer's--work to give back to the community that gave us everything. They had a saying that service isn't just a job, it's a way of life. And so, it was for my community and for my parents that I served.

If service is a way of life, then it's important that you start by understanding the people you serve. To do that, I held at least one town hall every month I served--81 in total--to hear directly from the people I represent. Sometimes, those people didn't agree with me. Oftentimes, I came away learning something new. Every time, I walked away with a renewed dedication to working for them--no matter who they supported or how they labeled themselves.

From town halls to small business walks to tours of organizations just trying to help, I carry with me still a million conversations that inspired me. Whether it was the Superstorm Sandy survivors who just wanted a fair process in rebuilding, volunteers at food pantries who just wanted to make sure that their neighbors didn't go without a good meal, or those military families who were looking for ways to give back after their service was over, I want to say thank you for every constituent who helped give me purpose.

It was that purpose that drove my actions. Last month, I helped to cut the ribbon on a brand new VA health clinic in Ocean County--one of my first major priorities and a reminder that there should be no mountain too big to move to help our veterans. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I was proud to deliver wins for our servicemembers, their families, and my own community. From pay raises to better health care to improved childcare, I would like to thank every person who served and for the honor of getting to work for you as a member of the House. And it was the purpose I derived from those conversations that helped me start to lay the groundwork for building a brighter future for our state. From delivering on infrastructure and passing bills like the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act to make investments in the jobs of the future, we can better prepare New Jersey to lead in the rest of the 21st century.

If there is one thing I am most proud of during my six years representing my community in the House, it is the seemingly small acts that made a massive difference to our constituents. The thousands of casework cases closed and tens of millions of dollars returned back to our community showed that public service can make an impact. It doesn't matter if it was a passport expedited so a grandparent could see their new grandchild or critical Medicare or VA benefits secured so someone could put food on the table and pay rent, this work mattered and was our way of giving back.

No member of Congress does this alone. While our names are on the doors, it's the people behind the doors that work every day to serve and make our communities better. I want to thank each and every one of them for their hard work--often under very difficult conditions--to give back. Every win that I have been lucky enough to achieve is theirs too. As a thank you, I would like to submit their names for the record so that they can be properly recognized for the imprint they've made on this district.

My current team: Elizabeth Antonowicz, Marshall Burkhardt, Thomas Carnes, Amanda Carte, Anna Connole, Anthony DeAngelo, Kristen Foca, Ben Giovine, Danielle Giulino, Gabriela Hartney, Julianna Heck, Jason Ingle, Catherine Melman-Kenny, Hafiza Kazi, Amy Oliver, Amy Pfeiffer, Nikitha Rai, Forrest Rilling, Jerome Townsend, Lynette Whiteman.

Previous staff: Riham Amin, Sharon Anderson, Hillary Caron, Anna Conn, Gianna Djuric, Sophie Friedfeld-Gebaide, Sean Gregory, Sarah Izaak, Benjamin Kamens, Matthew Knowlton, Yujin Lee, Benjamin Olarsch, Susan Pansius, Antoinette Miles, Nathan Riggins, Cecily Scott Martin, Thomas Smith, Tyrus Stokes-Ballard, Virginia Walkey, Maura Weaver.

As I look ahead at my new role getting to serve my state, I do so with excitement and humility. I look forward to get to serve my community again--this time in the United States Senate--but always remembering the work done, the conversations had, and words that will forever echo from my parents, that service isn't a job, it's truly a way of life.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the selfless service and incredible accomplishments of Dr. Calvin Moon, a United States Navy Veteran, who passed earlier this month.

Born in Yardville, Calvin spent his life in southern New Jersey. After graduating from Bordentown High School, he served in the United States Navy Submarine Service as a Petty Officer First Class Radar Operator on the Razorback Submarine in World War II. His bravery during his service played an integral role on the Pacific Front. After his service, he returned to New Jersey and earned a bachelor's degree in agricultural research from Rutgers University. Calvin then continued his studies at the University of Pennsylvania earning a doctorate of veterinary medicine in 1952.

Calvin was also a devoted veterinarian practicing in his hometown. While he began his career at the Wood Veterinary Hospital, he later helped launch the Hamilton Veterinary Hospital. Additionally, Calvin was a key player in establishing the Columbus Central Veterinary Hospital and served 20 years as their Medical Director, in addition to his service as a diplomat with the American Board of Veterinary Practitioners. His devotion to ensuring the beloved pets of families were taken care of was an inspiration to all those who knew him.

Outside his professional work, Calvin was an active member of his community. Having served on the Northern Burlington High School Board of Education and as scoutmaster for Troop 55 in Crosswicks, Calvin received the Father of the Year Award in Chesterfield, New Jersey. In addition to all those contributions, he was also a radio operator for Mercer County Emergency Service, a member of the Rutgers Oral History Society, the Base Commander of the New Jersey South Submarine Veterans, and Honorary Life Member of the USS Razorback Association. I commend him for his deep roots in our community, and for his desire to uplift youth, veterans, and all of his neighbors.

Calvin was, at his core, a loving husband to June Ann Moon. In their 76 years of marriage, the Moons had four children, seven grandchildren, and now five great-grandchildren.

While many community members locally know Calvin and his positive impact in our community, today I'm proud to honor his tenure as a veteran of the United States Navy, a valued member of our community, and as a husband, father, grandfather, and great-grandfather. We are fortunate to be able to carry on his legacy of service and to have his life's work as inspiration in our community.