Floor Statements

Madam President, I am asking why we are here--why we are here on the floor of the Senate as the hours tick down to the end of the Federal fiscal year and the shutdown of the Federal Government.

I have served here 15 years. I have seen my share of shutdowns, and I know how much they hurt, how much they hurt the men and women of our military, Federal law enforcement, folks who serve and protect our country at home and abroad. And they should not have to wonder when or if they will get paid.

A shutdown isn't good for our reputation abroad and our cohesion at home.

I have always worked to find some path, some deal, some way to keep the government open, and I have talked to a dozen colleagues in recent days about this fight and about tonight.

This is about healthcare. This is about my party saying: Enough is enough.

We know that if you have healthcare, everything else can work itself out. And if you don't have your health, almost nothing else matters.

President Trump ran on making America healthy again, on reducing prices, on making life easier for the working people of our country and their families. And, instead, what we have seen is decision after decision, action after action by President Trump and the Republicans in Congress that raise prices--raise prices on healthcare, on insurance, on drugs, on medications. Whether it is the tariffs being imposed on prescription medications or the decision to end subsidies that keep health insurance affordable, or it is laying off thousands of researchers working to help cure pediatric cancer or address ALS or do research into HIV AIDS--decision after decision that moves us in

the wrong direction, that makes us sicker, poorer, and more divided.

I am usually one of the first to walk across the aisle and say: Let's find a solution. Let's find a way out of this. And I have been doing that in recent days, talking with colleagues. But I can't see a way forward if we can't change direction and, together, say to the people we serve: We want to help with your healthcare. We want to stop the cuts to NIH and CDC. We want to reduce the increases in health insurance costs. We want to help you and your family.

In my home State of Delaware, emergency room wait times are too long. And as millions of Americans get thrown off of health insurance, they are going to go to the emergency room. And those wait times will get longer and longer for all of us.

Next month, we are going to find out how much health insurance premiums go up. For some Americans, they are going to double. But for all of us, they will go up.

Healthcare is getting costlier, and Americans are getting sicker. So why am I standing on this floor tonight saying I am not voting to keep this government open? Because enough is enough.

There are ways we can and should work together to change direction, to put on the floor the bipartisan health appropriations bill that will restore tens of billions of dollars to the NIH and CDC, that will stop Trump's cuts to American healthcare and insurance and research. There is a path toward reforming and extending the Affordable Care Act that both parties should agree on.

But, folks, if you are listening, your Member of Congress needs to hear from you, needs to know that you want us to work together to reverse course and end Trump's tragic cuts to healthcare.

If my colleagues don't get those calls, they won't change direction. If they don't change direction, we won't reopen this government.

Make no mistake, we have Republicans in control of the House and Senate and the White House. If they want to find a way forward that reduces the harm to Americans and our healthcare, we can. And I will be one of the first to extend my hand to find that path.

But if we don't change direction, we shouldn't reopen this government because Americans have taken too many hits already, too much additional cost, too much in cuts to healthcare research, too much increase to health insurance costs. This is a fight about America's healthcare, and we are fighting for you.

I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be permitted to speak prior to votes: myself for up to 10 minutes, Senator Cantwell for up to 10 minutes, Senator Murray for 5 minutes, and Senator Schumer for 5 minutes.

Mr. President, ``Jesus wept.'' ``Jesus wept.'' Most of us who grew up in Bible-believing households know this is the shortest verse in all of Scripture and, in some ways, the most powerful--one that haunts me. ``Jesus wept'' in John, the 11th chapter, 35th verse, because he had come too late, seemingly, to save the life of Lazarus. He wept because someone he knew and loved had died, and it had caused such harm and loss to his family.

Today, we are doing something on the floor of this Senate--my Republican colleagues are doing something on the floor of this Senate-- that I believe would make Jesus weep.

In Luke, there is a moment in the 10th chapter where a lawyer--and it is always a lawyer--comes to test Jesus and, in trying to justify himself, presses Jesus with questions.

What must I do to gain eternal life?

Jesus says: What does the Scripture teach?

He says: You should love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind. The second commandment is like unto it. You should love your neighbor as yourself.

Jesus says: You have read well. Do this, and you will gain eternal life.

But the lawyer, hoping to be justified, says: But--but--but wait. Who is my neighbor?

And what follows is the well-known ``Parable of the Good Samaritan,'' where the righteous, the priestly, the respected, the powerful walk on the other side of the road when they encounter someone who has been set upon by robbers: not my problem, not my neighbor. But in the ``Parable of the Good Samaritan,'' it is this person, a Samaritan, from a disfavored ethnicity--someone outside the circle of concern to the ancient Israelites--who does the right thing.

This parable would have been shocking at the time that it was preached by Jesus. The idea that the good neighbor was the outcast, the unexpected would be something that, frankly, would have been a surprise. So although today ``being a good Samaritan'' is a common term, it is important to know the history.

We are taught as children that we are to see all as our neighbors, not just those who live next-door, not just those who look like us or speak like us or pray like us, but the widest possible definition of ``neighbor'' is what we are called through righteousness to see in the world. What a difference it has made because our Nation has, for decades, embraced the cause of being present, of caring, of making lifesaving differences to young mothers and children, to widows and orphans, to the imprisoned, to the hungry, to the refugee, to those fleeing oppression, to those seeking relief from authoritarian governments, for those seeking a better way.

We are all God's children. And from childhood, we are taught that the Golden Rule, which appears in virtually every religion--``Do unto others as you would have them do unto you''--is the very foundation of the goodness of America: that we care for each other as neighbors and that we care for the world as neighbors. Yes, we are the most charitable, giving, philanthropic, engaged Nation on Earth. Yet all that we do in foreign aid is less than 1 percent of our total Federal budget.

Months ago, when Elon Musk and DOGE began roaming about the Federal Agencies of our government, their first target was that that delivers disaster relief; that helps feed the hungry; that helps welcome the refugee; that helps stabilize countries going through turmoil. They laid off thousands. They shut down programs. They canceled billions. Yet, here today, we are at it again. Republicans are proposing even deeper cuts. I want to talk about one area of the many that will be cut, I fear, later today: disaster assistance.

Our Nation was riveted as we watched the tragedy that unfolded in the Texas Hill Country, where a raging river killed dozens and dozens of innocent children. Do you know, around the world, when disaster strikes, it is the Americans who show up first? It is the Americans who show up with relief, with assistance, with skill and talent and ability. It has been this way for decades, and it should be this way still.

I was on a bipartisan trip to the Philippines just a few months ago with Senator Ricketts, and I was struck to learn that the Philippines, of all the nations on Earth, is the most prone to natural disasters. They value our partnership, our alliance. We have been security partners for decades. There are many Filipino Americans, and there is a close and deep relationship. But in meeting with their national leaders,

their elected leaders--their Senators and their Ministers of their Cabinet--they said: You know, it makes an incredible difference here in the Philippines. Every time there is a typhoon, an earthquake, a volcano, it is the Americans who come. It is the Americans who deliver the aid, who help us help ourselves with training and equipment and support.

Do you know, in the excess of DOGE's deep cuts, they fired and laid off most of our experts who were capable of delivering world-class disaster relief?

We saw the consequences with an earthquake in Myanmar just 3 months ago, where the few remaining folks who did this work were laid off as they were deployed, and, instead, the response was led by the Chinese. We are driving nations into the open arms of our adversaries. We have long been known as a nation that sought to be respected, admired, believed in, and embraced not for the example of our power but by the power of our example; that when there were dread pandemics killing millions, America showed up.

One of the positives of this day is that my Republican colleagues have recoiled from fully shutting down PEPFAR, and that is a positive. One of the best things we have ever done as a nation is to save 27 million lives across the world who otherwise would have been lost to

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 2856 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, it was Ronald Reagan who said America is great because America is good. My amendment would restore $496 million of international disaster relief funding by removing it from this rescissions package.

This money doesn't just save lives in countries around the world when they suffer earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, and natural disasters. It strengthens our standing, brings us closer to our allies, and helps us compete with China.

Two months ago, I visited the Philippines on a bipartisan codel and was struck to learn it is the most disaster-prone country on Earth. Today, they are giving us access to nine new military sites. They are one of our strongest treaty partners in the region.

And why? When I asked their leaders, they said because America helps respond to disasters.

Mr. President, $496 million, 0.01 percent of the debt Republicans have just added to our Nation in the last 2 weeks, and this money is implemented by Catholic Relief Services, World Vision, and the World Food Programme.

I ask my colleagues to support it.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following motion to recommit for the bill H.R. 4 be placed in the Congressional Record.

Motion to Recommit With Instructions

Mr. Coons moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4 to the

Committee on Appropriations of the Senate with instructions

to report the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting

any day on which the Senate is not in session, with changes

that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would prohibit the Director of the Office of Management

and Budget from authorizing the use of amounts from accounts

that are not subject to rescissions made by the bill for

activities funded by accounts that are subject to rescissions

made by the bill.

I have a motion to commit at the desk.

I ask for the reading of the motion to be dispensed with.

Colleagues, the ugly truth about this so-called Big Beautiful Bill is that it will kick 17 million Americans off their healthcare. This bill cuts almost $1 trillion from Medicaid and other healthcare programs by tying people up in redtape.

Republicans will tell you they are trying to improve Medicaid, but the truth is, they are not. It is cruel and dishonest to bury parents, kids, and seniors in paperwork and then blame them when they lose their healthcare, all to further rig our Tax Code for the very wealthiest.

This week, I met with 30 nurses from Delaware. Their patients couldn't come to DC, so they did. They care for seniors and newborns, families, and the disabled. And their ask to us: Don't take healthcare away from tens of thousands of Delawareans and millions of Americans.

Colleagues, support this Coons amendment to eliminate cruel and unnecessary redtape and allow Americans to keep the healthcare they need and deserve.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Motions to Commit for the bill H.R. 1 be placed in the Congressional Record:

Motion to Commit With Instructions

Mr. Coons moves to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee

on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would remove provisions stripping individuals in the

United States of the Federal benefits to which they are

entitled, by methods including but not limited to the

creation of new administrative burdens and paperwork

requirements.

Motion to Commit With Instructions

Mr. Coons moves to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee

on Finance of the Senate with instructions to report the same

back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day on which

the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would cause the bill to not increase the deficit for

the period of fiscal years 2025 through 2034.

Motion to Commit With Instructions

Mr. Coons moves to commit the bill H.R. 1 to the Committee

on the Judiciary of the Senate with instructions to report

the same back to the Senate in 3 days, not counting any day

on which the Senate is not in session, with changes that--

(1) are within the jurisdiction of such committee; and

(2) would apply the conflict-of-interest requirements

established under section 208 of title 18, United States

Code, to the President and the Vice President.

Mr. President, having just viewed a video of my friend and colleague Senator Alex Padilla being manhandled, thrown to the ground, and handcuffed after identifying himself as Senator Alex Padilla and attempting to ask a question of Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem in Los Angeles, I am shaken, I am angry, and I am gravely concerned about our path forward in this body and our Nation.

Democracy is a gift hard won and hard earned by the sacrifice of millions who have served, fought, and died, some in moments of tumult and challenge on the beaches of Normandy, on the fields of Gettysburg.

From the very beginning of our Nation until this moment, millions of Americans have stepped forward and said: I will risk it all so that my children and those I do not know can live free lives. Knowing the burdens of tyranny, knowing what it meant to live under the heel of a King, our forefathers risked everything.

In nations around the world that I have visited on your behalf as a Senator, people yearning for freedom and people recently free have come and spoken about how much the American example means to them.

Earlier this year, I was at a global security conference, concerned about what was happening in our Nation, about our division in the dialogue, and I heard three young parliamentarians from other countries talk about how hard they were working.

Part of our job as Senators is to ask hard questions. It is to pose challenges. It is to test the Cabinet of the President, to visit Federal facilities, to ask questions that are sometimes uncomfortable or unwelcome. Just this week, I was at three committee hearings and had three members of the Cabinet in front of me. Did they want to answer my questions? Probably not, but they did.

If a Senator of the United States who identifies himself as a Senator--in at least the video I just saw--gets handled this way, gets thrown to the ground and handcuffed, what is happening to those who have no such title or voice? If this gentle and decent and caring man is treated this way, what is happening along the margins in the dark spaces in the places we cannot see?

So I call on my Republican friends and colleagues to look hard at this moment and say: What comes next? What comes next? Are we to be at risk of arrest if we threaten to ask a question or deign to interrupt? Is our very service here as Senators hanging in the balance in this moment? As we all learn more of the facts of what happened in Los Angeles, the future of what will happen here in our country and in the world will wait on your answer.

Was this an overresponse? Was this a misuse of force? Was this a disrespect of the very Senate itself? Is this a moment when, as our Founders who wrote the Federalist Papers dreamed, my colleagues in the Senate will show their loyalty to the role, to the check and balance, to the independence of the Senate, more than they will show their loyalty to their party and their President and demand an answer, an apology, and a different path forward? Or is this a moment when all of us will watch this video of our friend--a member of the Judiciary Committee, a representative, a Senator of Los Angeles and the State of California--being roughly mishandled and say: Huh, too bad. At least it wasn't me.

If we answer this moment with silence, we will be damned, and our children and the world will say: They didn't really mean it.

The members of my family who served in the U.S. military knew that signing on that line meant being willing to give everything, and I believe and have been told that they understood that service to be in service of freedom--not in service of any particular President or party, any particular State or moment, but in service of democracy.

Democracy is a fragile flower, and around the world, people look to what we do to know what they should do. There are petty, tin-pot dictators, authoritarians, and strongmen around the world who will watch this video and be encouraged and think this is the way to silence their critics.

I can't image a Member of this Chamber who knows Alex Padilla, who has had the blessing of sitting with him in moments when he is asked questions or engaged in discourse, who thinks of him as anything other than a reasoned, reasonable, mild-mannered Senator. But even if he were not, even if he were outspoken, loud, aggressive, annoying, the title ``Senator'' and the role we have should entitle him to ask a question at a press conference. If the result is this mistreatment, heaven help us all, and heaven help our democracy.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, in 100 days, in 100 days, what can a President accomplish? In the last 100 days, President Trump has made Americans less safe, less prosperous, and less free. He has chosen to move us in a direction at home and abroad that is the opposite of what those who voted for him expected and that is aligned with what those of us who worked against him feared.

What I have heard my whole life, whether in business or in foreign policy, as a lawyer or in my community as a local elected official: Folks need trust, and they need predictability. Businesses say they need predictability in order to decide what to invest in, who to hire, where to grow. Other countries around the world say that they need to know they can trust us, that they can rely on us. And in the last 100 days, President Trump has shattered both of them.

I am going to speak for a few minutes about foreign policy because so many of my colleagues in my caucus have stood to talk about the disastrous cuts led by Elon Musk and DOGE and the ways they have impacted Americans all over the country. But if you think about our reputation globally, statement after statement and tweet after tweet by President Trump has puzzled, concerned, even alarmed our allies. He is going to invade Greenland, a NATO ally. He is going to take back the Panama Canal. He is going to take over the Gaza Strip and make it ``Mara-Gaza.'' He is going to turn Canada into the 51st State.

One of my Republican colleagues has said: Don't pay so much attention to what he says; look at what he does.

Well, lots of our partners and allies have looked at what he has done by imposing tariffs on trusted allies and partners and recoiled.

An election in Canada last night where Trump was the issue elected a new Prime Minister, Mark Carney, who ran on a platform of standing up to America, of standing up to Donald Trump.

Look, folks, the actions he has taken in slashing foreign aid, in abandoning decades-old, bipartisan programs around the world that save lives and that help other countries to trust us and rely on us, have weakened us abroad and created openings for our pacing threat, the People's Republic of China.

I was recently in the Philippines, a nation that faces more natural disasters every year than any other country on Earth--more typhoons, more earthquakes, more volcanos. For decades, they have relied on the United States and the help of USAID, volunteers, nonprofits coordinated through our government to respond to these disasters. It has built a long and close partnership of trust. Gone.

I was recently in Taiwan, a country looking to decide whether they can rely on us should China make real their threats to reunite Taiwan with the mainland by force. Can they trust us?

Well, what I am going to say is that in 100 days, President Trump has shown weakness in Europe and created openings for China.

We have long relied on a global network of allies and partners to keep us safe and strong, to make us prosperous, and to build our role in the world. China doesn't have that. They have nervous neighbors, client states, countries that can't count on them and view them as predatory. Yet now, through the actions of President Trump, Elon Musk, and DOGE, and the silence and the collaboration of Republicans in this Chamber, even our closest, most trusted allies, like Canada, question whether they can count on us.

Back to the Reagan days, Republicans have talked about ``peace through strength.'' What we have seen from Donald Trump in 100 days is weakness through chaos.

One hundred days in, he is not stopping Putin; he is preparing to sell out Ukraine and Europe to Putin. One hundred days in, he is not deterring Xi Jinping; he is backing down every time he says he is going to stand up to him. At the end the day, these first 100 days have shown that we are weaker, the world is less stable, and Americans are less safe.

I have to say that 100 days is more than enough time for my Republican colleagues to have seen enough, to stand up to this President, and to restore the role of this Senate and return our position of strength to the world.

Madam President, I get a lot of questions from my constituents. Delawareans raise a lot of issues, whether they are stopping me at the Wawa, talking to me on the train, knocking on my door. They ask me about three things more than anything in the last few months.

They are concerned about Elon Musk having huge access to their personally identifying information. They are concerned about the richest man on Earth, whom they didn't elect, getting into their data. They are concerned about Trump's tariff tax and how the tariffs he has just imposed are yanking up prices for everything in our country. And they are also deeply concerned about Social Security.

I am going to focus for a few minutes about the alarm I am hearing from Delawareans that the Trump administration, Elon Musk, and Republicans in Congress are going after our Social Security net--the social safety net--the Social Security benefits that so many rely on for stability and security in their lives, as part of the bill that is moving on this floor tonight to help pay for tax cuts for billionaires that are buddies of Elon Musk.

Ask American seniors what they think of Social Security, and they will tell you it is an earned benefit. It is a vital lifeline. It is the thing that keeps them out of poverty, pays for their medication, helps them afford rent, helps them live decently and safely. Seventy million Americans get Social Security benefits every month. Four out of ten rely on it for the majority of their income.

A few quick examples. Arleen reached out to my office. Arleen is a Delawarean whose husband died in January, and she relies on Social Security to keep paying her bills.

Senator, what is going to happen?

Ian, a disabled adult who is able to work a few hours a week but requires assistance from his mother due to his intellectual disabilities, without Social Security and the disability benefits, his whole livelihood is at risk.

Kathleen reached out to tell me what she thinks of Social Security. She said:

I am a 64-year-old disabled woman. I'm concerned about my

Social Security disability. I am totally dependent on that

check and I'm terrified of what's going on with DOGE.

Cheryl Ann wrote my office saying:

I am 68 . . . and still work to keep from falling behind in

my bills. Since COVID, prices have [gone] up, and with all

these new tariffs [or] taxes, seniors [can't] make ends meet.

. . . I [want] to retire but [I am afraid that] with Trump

messing with Social Security and [Medicaid], how can I?

A simple question: What happens to Arleen, Ian, Kathleen, and Cheryl Ann if Republicans are successful in further undermining the stability and reliability of Social Security? What happens to millions like them for whom this program is what keeps them able to afford their medications, keeps food on the table, keeps a roof over their heads?

I told you what Delawareans think of Social Security, but if you ask Elon Musk, he will be clear. He has called it a Ponzi scheme. Maybe you don't know Mr. Ponzi. A Ponzi scheme is a fraud. It is something that is fake. It is a Jenga puzzle that comes tumbling down when you pull one of the key pieces. A Ponzi scheme is a fraud.

Already, the DOGE boys are slashing the workforce at Social Security. They are making it harder for seniors to get the benefits they earned. They are cutting the budget, firing employees, closing offices, and these needless cuts will just make it harder for seniors to get answers to their questions and to get their checks, forcing those seniors who live in rural areas or who are disabled like the few I just cited, to struggle to access what they earned.

Doing all of this in the name of cutting waste and fraud is compelling because where there is waste and fraud, we should go after it, but there are tiny amounts of fraud in this program. Don't take my word for it. Listen to Lee Dudek, the Trump administration's chosen Acting Social Security Commissioner.

Lee Dudek, the Trump administration's Acting Social Security Commissioner, at a press conference just last month, estimated that of all the Social Security payments every year 0.00625 percent, less than 1/10 of 1 percent, are fraudulent. That is actually--I am sorry--less than 1/100 of 1 percent.

To give you some context, if you think about the entire world, the landmass of the world that is covered by Delaware is 0.003 percent. Delaware is pretty small, and the world is pretty big. That gives you a sense just how small the fraud is in this program that is treasured by Americans.

DOGE's favorite talking point about dead people collecting Social Security has been debunked more times than I can count. They claim there are people 200, 300 years old still getting benefits. Trump even said--President Trump said the same thing right here in the Capitol in his address to Congress as he read out the names of folks 200, 250, 300 years old.

There is only one problem. It is not true that they are getting benefits.

The badly outdated Social Security computer system has a problem with birth dates, and it automatically adds a reference point in certain date errors that is 150 years ago. So, yes, there are names on a register of people who were born, allegedly, a long time ago. But for the last decade, the Social Security Administration automatically stops payments to anyone over 115 years old--automatically. The checks aren't going out to people whose birth date is reported as 200 or 250 years old.

An independent inspector general looked at this question and said ``almost none of the number-holders discussed in the report currently receive SSA payments.'' So if the fraud doesn't exist, why do they keep talking about it? Well, they have to find ways to pay for tax breaks for billionaires.

House Republicans have made plans. They want to cut $2 trillion in spending to pay for their massive reconciliation bill that we will soon turn to, and you can't do that without touching Medicaid and Social Security.

Let me conclude. Social Security is not a giveaway. It is not riddled with waste, fraud, and abuse, and Democrats are united in protecting Medicaid and Social Security. We need to strengthen Social Security, not cut it, and I stand with my colleagues and every Democrat in this body in saying: Hands off of Social Security, President Trump and Elon Musk.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, today I would like to talk about MG Michael R. Berry of the Delaware National Guard.

Major General Berry is recommended for the Army Distinguished Service Medal for his exemplary meritorious service as the Adjutant General (TAG) for the Delaware National Guard (DENG). As the 35th Adjutant General of Delaware, Major General Berry's steadfast leadership, expertise in strategic planning, and keen operational oversight have sustained and grown the DENG as a reliable and effective force ready to respond to both State and national challenges and emergencies.

Throughout his tenure, Major General Berry ensured that DENG members and their equipment were always ready to respond and deploy in support of nations across the globe. During his time as TAG, the Delaware Army National Guard (DEARNG) deployed over 500 soldiers to Kuwait, Romania, Kosovo, Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan. Additionally, the Delaware Air National Guard (DANG) deployed over 800 airmen in support of six combatant commands.

Major General Berry's leadership was also crucial as demands for the National Guard reached unprecedented levels during the COVID-19 pandemic and civil unrest, both in the Delaware and our Nation's Capital. Under Major General Berry's leadership, the DENG was heavily relied upon to administer vaccinations and COVID-19 tests and to manage test sites for hundreds of thousands of panic-stricken citizens. Major General Berry also led the DENG as it supported several food distribution sites, conducted a contact tracing mission, and supported a nursing assistant program to fill the crucial void of nurses needed to combat the pandemic. Major General Berry also provided guidance and direction to support our Nation's Capital during the attempted insurrection on January 6, 2021, as well as support for the 59th and 60th Presidential inaugurations. Major General Berry's deployment of soldiers and airmen to Washington with little notice was critical in restoring order and helping facilitate peaceful inaugurations during these two periods.

In an effort to remain ready and relevant in aviation, Major General Berry led the DANG in two fleet conversions that included the acquisition of eight C-130H2.5 models and seven C-130H3 models totaling $450 million. These aircraft were critical in the modernization of the DANG's fleet, helping to decrease maintenance requirements and increase flight time. Major General Berry also led the acquisition of a UH-72 Lakota helicopter detachment with two aircraft including flight crew, maintainers, and support personnel. This unit enhanced the domestic response capabilities of the DEARNG. Major General Berry also made it a priority to ensure that DENG facilities remain current and professional, facilitating over $172 million in increased funding for property acquisition, as well as major and minor construction. These funds were utilized to procure land and build new armories, alongside other major military construction improvement projects.

Major General Berry's service as TAG will have a lasting positive impact on the DENG, Delaware, and our Nation. Despite serving during a tumultuous time, Major General Berry executed his tenure with poise and decisiveness, bringing professionalism and security to the citizens of Delaware. Thanks to Major General Berry's leadership, the DENG has never been better positioned to serve the State and Nation in times of crises. His outstanding leadership and legacy of excellence will endure long after his retirement.

Mr. President, I rise to bring the attention of this body to a broken promise by our President. Our President promised, in the campaign and recently in an address to all of us here in Congress, to make America affordable again; to deal with the high prices of groceries, of fruits and vegetables, of housing, of housing supplies, of energy--to deal with high prices. Millions of Americans who voted for President Trump said they did so out of frustration about high prices.

Well, today, President Trump has announced he is going to impose tariffs on virtually every trading partner we have, and I rise in support of a piece of legislation we are about to vote on here in the Senate that gives us the chance to do something.

So to my colleagues, if you have heard, as I have, from your constituents, calling with concern and alarm about how much prices have not gone down but have gone up, I recommend you think about one country, one of our most trusted and loyal allies--some of the nicest people on the planet. Who doesn't like Canadians?

Canadians have served alongside us in virtually every war we have ever fought. They are a NATO ally and partner, and for my small-but- mighty State of Delaware, our major export destination and the nation from which we import the most.

And yet, because of an emergency at our border, which I think is wholly unjustified by the data of how little fentanyl actually comes into our country across the northern border, President Trump is moving ahead with slapping tariffs on Canada.

Tonight, you have a chance, I say to my colleagues, to vote to undo the declaration of an emergency on our northern border. You can vote to undo the

harm to businesses, to small families, to retirement accounts. Don't look at your 401(k) if you don't want to know tomorrow the consequences of indiscriminately slapping tariffs on every one of our major trading partners.

This is not ``Liberation Day'' but ``Tax Day''--a new national sales tax that will harm the imports we buy from virtually every country and, because of the countervailing tariffs, harm our exports.

A tariff is a tax, and tonight we will take a vote. And I hope some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will join Senator Kaine and many of us in recognizing it is ludicrous to use the special emergency powers that Congress gave to the President assuming he would only do so in a case of war or active open hostility, not in the case of one of our trusted and loyal partners and allies, the great and kind people of Canada.

In recent meetings with Canadian leaders, they have said: Don't make us do it. Don't make us impose tariffs on you.

But, tonight, the Trump administration has imposed tariffs on dozens and dozens of our trading partners.

To my friends and colleagues, let's vote to undo this phony crisis and vote to undo the tariffs on U.S.-Canada trade.

I yield the floor.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

I ask my friend and colleague from New Jersey if he is familiar with Psalm 30:5.

And if not, I offer to repeat it because I think it speaks to this moment.

Weeping may endure for a night, but joy comes in the

morning.

Now, this is a holy month. It is the month of Lent. It is the month of Ramadan. It is the period of reflection preceding Passover. And my question to my colleague is rooted in a scripture in the Psalms known to both of us, one widely engaged in, in these days:

Weeping may endure for a night, but joy comes in the

morning.

This is a reminder both of the possibility of redemption, of the urgency of hope, and of your nightlong sacrifice on this floor.

Let me ask, if I might, two more questions of my friend and colleague. To my colleague from New Jersey: Are you familiar with a front-page story on the Washington Post entitled ``Trump's USAID cuts cripple American response to Myanmar earthquake,'' an article running today in the Washington Post?

I had suspected that that might be the case, given that my colleague from New Jersey has dedicated his night to standing tall and fighting hard to make sure that the people of the United States know what is going on.

I will share with you, just for a moment, that it hurt my heart to watch the national evening news last night and see a Chinese humanitarian emergency response team celebrated as they pulled survivors out of the earthquake rubble in Myanmar. It did not hurt my heart that there are Chinese nationals providing emergency relief, but it hurt my heart that exactly those people who are the very best in the world at responding to humanitarian crisis, exactly those people had just received termination letters and their work with USAID had just been suspended.

Normally, in every humanitarian crisis I have known in my lifetime, the first in are the men and women of USAID and the U.S. Armed Forces. Whether a tsunami, a tornado, wildfires, or an earthquake, we had world-leading humanitarian response capabilities.

And I think it is a tragedy--and it is reflected in both this article that I have asked my colleague about and in the response of the world-- that we have created an enormous opening for the PRC to come in and do what we previously did so well.

Let me ask another question, if I might, of my colleague: Are you familiar with what has just happened to food banks all over our Nation in terms of an announcement about impending deliveries of badly needed surplus food? This, I suspect, will be the focus of your future comments on agriculture, but I mention it as something that has impacted my State and, I suspect, yours as well.

I will simply, then, ask my colleague a question.

To my colleague, I ask the question: Are you familiar with the cuts that have been imposed on the U.S. Department of Agriculture, suspending hundreds of millions of meals to Americans in need and the justification for that being offered?

Last question.

To my colleague from New Jersey, I ask the question: Are you familiar with when, whether, and why NATO has invoked article 4 and how the service and the sacrifice that followed reinforces exactly the point I believe my colleague was beginning to speak to, which is the common cause and the common purpose shown by all of our NATO allies in America's greatest moment of need in recent decades after the attacks of 9/11?

To my colleague, are you aware which of our European NATO allies lost per capita the highest number of their soldiers in combat serving alongside American servicemembers, a nation I visited, a nation whose servicemembers I visited, a nation that is today aggrieved by comments made recently? Are you familiar with our trusted ally Denmark?

Denmark.

Denmark lost per capita, I believe--excuse me. Let me simply ask of my colleague one more question.

Is my colleague aware that broadly distributed across our NATO allies is service and sacrifice, including the loss of their troops in combat and that every single loss in combat was a loss of great service and sacrifice by our NATO allies?

Will my colleague yield for another question?

Is my colleague familiar with the testimony of Gen. Jim Mattis, a decorated four-star Marine Corps general who served as Secretary of Defense in the previous Trump administration who testified about what the consequences would be if we were to defund development and diplomacy?

Will my colleague yield for a final question?

Does my colleague have an opinion about whether it strengthens or harms America in our national security to have an earned reputation as a nation of compassion, a nation that comes to the aid of those suffering through humanitarian disasters, a nation of compassion that provides healthcare and access for retirement in decency, a nation that cares for the least of these on the margins of the world and that has a just and inclusive society at home? Does my colleague have an opinion about whether it strengthens or weakens our Nation at home and abroad to earn a reputation for compassion and reliability or instead to deserve a reputation for unreliability and cruelty?

Mnangagwa.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

Will the Senator yield for a question?

Is the Senator familiar with Rory Badger of Delaware? Is the Senator familiar with my guest to the speech to a joint session of Congress delivered by President Trump just a few weeks ago?

If I might, I simply want to ask my colleague--

To my colleague and friend from the great State of New Jersey, I simply am asking the question: Are you familiar with a marine from Seaford, DE? His name is Rory Badger. He is not a man of politics. He is not a partisan. And he only came to my attention when he called my office for assistance.

Rory Badger volunteered to serve our Nation, was deployed to Afghanistan, and is a decorated combat veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps. Working through the impact of his service, he has returned to the United States and was engaged by Fish and Wildlife in Delaware and doing great work to promote conservation.

With a young wife and a young son, Marine Badger reached for what was his dream job: to work for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. All Rory wanted to do, he conveyed to me in a letter and then in person when he came to visit here--all he wanted to do--was to help farmers on the Delmarva Peninsula conserve their land, create wildlife habitat, protect the environment, and be in places both beautiful and still.

As you, my friend and colleague, have documented in long discussion and debate in the last hour, he is one of thousands of veterans who woke to receive an unjust and unwarranted termination email that said it was for cause, without citing any cause, and that threw him into the chaos and hurt of having been summarily fired by the American Government.

He has ultimately been rehired, thankfully, but that period of chaos and of loss made him question our Nation and its commitment to our veterans.

I also--I will share with my colleague--had the opportunity to visit with our friend Senator McCain the prison where he was imprisoned for 5\1/2\ years, tortured repeatedly, and lived through the experiences you have just shared of fellow veterans risking their lives to do the most simple thing that we take for granted at the beginning of every day here: to pledge allegiance to our flag.

I had a chance, on visiting the ``Hanoi Hilton'' with our friend and former colleague Senator McCain, to ask him a simple question, which was at the end of his describing the period when friends were beaten horribly, when some were killed, and when his Vietnamese captors told him: We found out who your father is, a four-star admiral, and so we will release you any day.

I simply asked him: Knowing that you could at any moment, on any day, raise your hand and say, ``I will accept your offer,'' and go home, how did you endure another 5 years of torture and imprisonment?

His answer simply: To do so would not have been honorable.

My question to you, my friend and colleague: Was the firing of Rory Badger honorable? Is the leadership of our current administration and its treatment of our veterans honorable? Are the values shown by the decisions being made by Elon Musk and his team at DOGE honorable?

Are we putting at risk the very honor of our Nation in the mistreatment of the veterans of this country? This question I put to my friend and colleague.

Two thousand.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

You have, sir.

To my good friend and colleague, as we transition to comments about the economy, are you familiar with the very first time that Jesus stood in his home synagogue in Nazareth to preach?

He read from the scroll a passage from, I believe, Isaiah 61:1-2. This is recorded in Luke Chapter 4. And it is a well-known passage. I rely upon it to understand what was the ministry of Jesus centrally about.

He says:

This is fulfilled in your hearing today, the spirit of the

Lord is upon me. He has anointed me to preach good news to

the poor.

I don't think it is possible to read the Gospels and to read the Torah and to understand righteousness without hearing over and over and over in the course of the Old and New Testaments a call to respect those at the margins of life, a call to be generous and openhearted and kind to those who suffer and struggle, to be attentive to and present to those who are imprisoned, who are widows, who are orphans, to allow the gleaning of a field, which means to make sure that out of an abundance of our productivity on our farms, we make sure we feed those who hunger here at home and abroad.

You cannot miss the central message, which is, as you have said: kindness to those on the margins, attentiveness to those in need, good news to the poor.

So in this season of Lent, I ask my friend and colleague whether he is aware of our President's intention to impose significant tariffs sometime today or tomorrow that may raise the costs for working families in our Nation, that may make harder the lives of those who struggle to pay for their children's food and medicines and schooling, that instead of meeting his promise to make America affordable again, we will almost certainly make America less affordable for those who are exactly those to whom we are called to give attention kindness and service?

I ask my colleague and my friend: Are you aware of President Trump's so-called ``liberation day'' that will impose, in fact, thousands of dollars of additional costs on the working families of America who struggle so hard to make ends meet in a direct violation of a call to care for those in need?

Mr. President, Putin will only stop when we stop him. That piece of wisdom was shared with me on a trip to Europe by a former colleague, Senator McCain, and it seems to me to predict what has now unfolded over the last 3 years.

Three years ago, I was in Europe with colleagues, visiting American troops training with NATO allies and partners in Poland and Lithuania, on the day that the Russians began their illegal, unjustified, full- spectrum invasion of Ukraine. As more than 100,000 combat troops poured over the border, missiles flew in the air, and jets bombed, the world recoiled in horror and watched, expecting that the Ukrainians would be overrun in just 3 days.

Instead, President Zelenskyy, the elected President of a democracy, stood firm and stayed fast and defended his country. When offered a last-minute evacuation by America, he said: I don't need a ride. I need ammunition.

And I am thrilled to be on the floor today with a bipartisan group of my colleagues. Thank you to my colleague from New Hampshire for organizing this, and to my colleague from Maine for her words, which I will agree with from beginning to end. We must deter Russia's aggression in Ukraine.

If you look at who has joined the fight alongside Russia--Iran, North Korea--this is not a team America should be on. And if we look at who has come to the defense and aid of Ukraine, it is democracies from throughout Europe and the world--more than 50 countries--that, in combination, have done more than we have, significantly, to welcome Ukrainian refugees; to support the recovery of their economy; and to arm them in this ongoing, desperate, and critical fight for freedom in Ukraine.

Who is Vladimir Putin? He is a brutal and aggressive dictator. He is a war criminal. He is someone who has used every ounce of power and resource at his grasp to shatter the peace of Europe that has lasted decades since the Second World War and to attempt to drive a wedge between the United States and our European partners and allies.

The bravery, the determination, the skill, and the capacity of the Ukrainian people to stand and fight is breathtaking. And all of us who have had the honor of visiting Kyiv, of visiting Ukraine, of spending time with those who, behind the frontline, support

their troops and those who have served and sacrificed have been forever changed.

I had the opportunity, with our former colleague and friend Senator Portman, to go to Kyiv and to present the Liberty Medal from our National Constitution Center to President Zelenskyy. And to travel through a city shattered by war and to visit with people determined to continue their fight was as inspiring to me as I know it has been to many of my colleagues who have made that same trip.

We are here today to ask: Who are we and what will we do?

We are Americans. We have stood alongside and fought alongside those who have pursued democracy, those who have stood up for liberty, for decades, around the world, and we should not shrink from this fight. We can and should insist on a just and lasting peace.

We would all like to see this brutal war come to an end. We would all like to see the suffering stop. But to force on Ukraine a cease-fire that is really a surrender masked as a cease-fire would be to betray the sacrifice and service of so many. Asking Ukraine to willingly give up conquered territory and recognize Russian sovereignty, asking Ukraine to give up its desire for security and for integration into the West, to ask Ukraine to agree to limits on its military and its capacity to be prepared for what is a likely renewed Russian assault in the future--all of these would lead to not a neutral Ukraine but a neutered Ukraine.

We know what happens next. What happens next is that the world will look at whatever peace we can secure for Ukraine and ask: Are we reliable? Is the United States a reliable ally and partner?

Putin has already suffered a strategic defeat. NATO has already been expanded. The border between NATO and Russia has doubled. Our partners throughout the world have come to this fight, and they are committing even more, in recent weeks, as Europe has stepped up to pledge hundreds of billions of dollars more.

If we are to restore deterrence, if we are to sustain the peace, if we are to be the indispensable Nation that we have worked and fought so long to be, we must finish the job. We must deter Putin from future aggression by demanding that Ukraine be secured by a just and lasting peace.

The news today that intelligence and security cooperation has restarted is encouraging, but we have a resolution cosponsored by all the Members on the floor today that makes clear where we stand: We stand with Ukraine. We stand with democracy. We insist on a just and lasting peace in this instance, and we stand for Ukraine. ``Slava Ukraini.''

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today, Tuesday March 4, is the 100th anniversary of the Probation Act of 1925. The act created our Nation's Federal probation system and, for the first time, authorized Federal judges to impose a sentence of probation as an alternative to incarceration. Alternatives to incarceration like probation facilitate the fair administration of justice, enhance public safety, and positively impact the lives of individuals who become involved with the Federal courts. Our Nation's probation officers and staff do deeply difficult and too-often unheralded work that plays a critical role in the functioning of our criminal justice system, and I am committed to doing what I can in the U.S. Senate to support them in what they do. I firmly believe that we owe them a debt of gratitude for their service, and I am especially grateful for the incredible work of Delaware's probation officers and staff working to make Delaware safer every day.