Floor Statements

Mr. President, first, along with Senator Gary Peters, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate observe a moment of silence in this Chamber to honor the four people and many more wounded yesterday in Grand Blanc Township.

Mr. President, today, I rise on behalf of the community of Grand Blanc, a community in unspeakable pain, grief, and anger. I stand on the floor of the U.S. Senate as Michigan's junior Senator, along with our senior Senator Gary Peters, to represent and honor what has gone on in our community.

At 10:30 yesterday morning, a man drove a car into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Grand Blanc Township. The gunman set fire to the building and started shooting. At this time, four are deceased, more are injured and at the hospital. In this small community just 15 minutes from my own community, we are shocked to the core.

In addition to mourning the dead, we pray for the injured. We pray for the community that will be living with the effects of this for months and years to come, and we thank the professionals who are taking care of those in shock today.

Everywhere you go in Michigan, whether I was picking up a cup of coffee or picking up my dry cleaning, Michiganders are very raw.

I think the most important thing, first, is to thank our first responders but also use them as an example. The first officer was on the scene 30 seconds after the 9-1-1 call, and it took law enforcement 8 minutes to neutralize the shooter--8 minutes. They did a masterful job addressing an incredibly complex act of violence, and their efforts are what are keeping people afloat.

I want to give special recognition to two officers: one from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, the other a Grand Blanc Township police officer who happened to be in the area close by and risked their lives to protect the innocent. They did not wait. They ran toward the danger without hesitation. They are heroes today.

I visited Grand Blanc Township this morning. We made a point to go with both Democratic- and Republican-elected leaders, local, State, and Federal. What I saw in the community is confusion and deep pain that something like this could happen in this small place. It is a community where fender benders are much more common than any kind of violent crime, and there is a feeling of pain that such a senseless and useless act of violence happened in our community.

I think it is important to learn that lesson from law enforcement. From everyone I talked to, whether it was local law enforcement, our State folks, our Federal folks, they all said: We just all joined in. We didn't think.

They put their heads down, and they started protecting people. That is the example I hope we can all learn as we try to understand this moment in our country's history.

We have a problem in this country. We have an epidemic in this country, and we have to acknowledge that. The only way we get better is by acknowledging we have a problem. We have a problem with mental health, and we have a problem where people think violence is a legitimate option in voicing disagreement in our system. Whether it was the death of Charlie Kirk, State legislators in Minnesota, people worshiping in Grand Blanc, those who attacked the President of the United States, it is normal to look for an ideology and a reason why they would perpetrate these kinds of attacks. But I think more than anything, what I ask Michiganders and ask Americans to do is look not for the specific reason why but understand that what is happening in our country, we are signaling that we are unwell. We are unwell. Whether it is in Nevada or Michigan, people are unwell, and we have to understand that it is our responsibility to address that.

In Michigan, we, unfortunately, have had five mass shootings in the past 4 years. Oxford High School, Michigan State University, the Splash Pad in Rochester Hills, another church in Wayne, MI, and now Grand Blanc Township is added to this sick fraternity of communities that have to endure this kind of violence.

I would dare say that myself, this is the fourth time I have personally dealt with one of these mass shootings. I can see that it desensitizes you after all these times. You get used to it in a way that I just can't reconcile.

It was important for us to come together--Democrats and Republicans-- to put out the message that, please, take a breath. Don't watch everything social media is putting forward. Learn from our law enforcement officials to be serious and judicious, and let us all be leaders in our own lives. Either you are working every day in your community to make things better or you are working to split people apart.

This targeted violence was meant to terrorize us. It is meant to make us scared in our houses of worship, where people were just trying to pray on a Sunday morning. It is meant to terrorize us in our high schools, in our colleges, in our places of political discourse, on our university campuses. But what it does by making us afraid is, it is infringing on our freedom. If people don't feel that they can go to their sanctuaries--the place where they and their children are supposed to be safe--that is infringing on our freedom.

I would say we must acknowledge as Americans that we have an illness, and the symptom is this extreme violence that is being perpetrated on our most innocent civilians.

I hope today, after a long month of violence across the country, that Democrats and Republicans, especially in this body, can rise above the petty political games and come together to get to work on this epidemic. It is our responsibility as leaders. It is our responsibility as the people look to us to lead.

I just encourage every American to rise above the anger and vitriol of this moment and instead focus on our communities and what we need to come together and heal.

With that, I yield to my senior Senator Gary Peters.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a very simple idea: that in the most powerful country in the world, every American should have access to healthcare they can afford.

Protecting Michiganders' healthcare is why I ran for the House originally. It is why I am here in the Senate.

I, frankly, never thought I would run for political office. But, in 2017, I watched on CNN as my then-Representative smiled and cheered in the Rose Garden as President Trump repealed the Affordable Care Act in the U.S. House. I looked at my TV screen, and I said: No, you don't get to do that. You don't get to ignore your constituents, vote against their interest, and keep your job.

I am a former CIA officer. I served alongside the military. In the military, they have a term for this. It is ``dereliction of duty.'' It is a fireable offense. I ran that year to fire him, and, in 2018, we did just that.

This issue has particular salience for me because of my mom. My mom passed away in 2011 from ovarian cancer, and she had survived breast cancer many, many years ago, when I was a little girl. So she had that preexisting condition for the rest of her life.

She lost her job. She had financial issues. She couldn't afford the insurance that was on offer to her and walked into an emergency room and was diagnosed with stage IV ovarian cancer.

It was like a grenade went off in our lives. It is something I would not wish upon my worst enemy.

I took a leave of absence. I came home to Michigan. And at the same time that she was fighting for her life to get tests and emergency surgery, it was the same moment that we were fighting the insurance company so that she could get care.

She fought hard for 18 months, but she passed away in 2011. And that experience drives the work that I did in the House and, certainly, why I am here on this floor today.

Sadly, we are nearly a decade after that original attempt by President Trump to repeal the ACA, and we are in a similar place. President Trump and my Republican colleagues are doing everything in their power to cut healthcare for average Americans. They are just doing it in different and creative ways because they know it is politically unpopular to tell you to your face.

We are coming up on a big deadline here. We all know that. On September

30, the government runs out of money. I don't know a single person who wants a government shutdown. After almost 16 years in the Federal Government, where I was on the receiving end of those shutdowns, I do not want our government to run out of money. But if my Republican colleagues want my vote on that bill, they are going to need to act like adults and come talk to me about it.

And what I will say to the State that I am representing, as well as to my colleagues, is that if you want that vote, you are going to have to talk to me about healthcare. That is the place to start.

If we would roll the tape back to just a couple of months ago, the President and my colleagues voted on the Big Beautiful Bill. The Big Beautiful Bill did important things to change the face of healthcare in the United States, and we are only now just starting to feel the effects.

So if you want my vote next week or in the next couple of weeks, we are going to have to talk about the significant Medicaid cuts that you made, the ending of a bunch of subsidies for the marketplace, or Obamacare, and talk to me about putting money back into things like cancer research that you slashed, because there are few things as fundamental as providing healthcare to your family, and yet there are few systems in America that are as broken as healthcare in America.

I don't know of a single person who thinks that our healthcare system is working well. Do you know a single person who thinks they are paying too little for healthcare?

And then, on top of that, we don't even get the health outcomes they get in other countries.

And, now, President Trump has made these cuts even worse. As I mentioned, in the Big Beautiful Bill, they did two really important things: They cut Medicaid, and they cut the subsidies for Obamacare.

Why did they do that? That was the math that they needed in order to pay for permanent tax cuts for the very wealthy. Right? They didn't want to say that out loud: that in order to pay for those tax cuts for the very wealthy--those permanent tax cuts--they had to cut healthcare in America. They had to, in order to make the math work.

But we know that those kinds of cuts could potentially shutter hospitals, particularly in the rural parts of my State. Community health centers could close. Every hospital I have talked to is talking about which services are they going to have to cut, particularly things like birth and delivery services. You are going to have communities that have to drive 30, 40, 50 miles just to have a baby or to make it to the ER.

And, now, Michiganders on the other side of the ledger--those who have private insurance--are starting to feel the heat, because if you cut those other programs, if you cut Medicaid and Obamacare--and maybe you say to yourself: Well, I am not on Medicaid. Well, I am not on the marketplace. I don't have Obamacare. The healthcare companies have already started, for their private insurance, increasing the rates, starting January 1.

They are starting to send out letters, like this one I have in front of me. This was sent to a man in Macomb County, in Sterling Heights. I met him this past weekend.

I said: I am really concerned that private, employer-provided healthcare is going to go up starting January 1.

He is like: I have already got my letter.

His letter here says: Last year, the cost of your healthcare program in total was $36,969--so almost $37,000. Starting January 1, if you want to continue this program, it is $43,000.

That is happening across the State of Michigan already. So if you thought that the Big Beautiful Bill was cutting someone else's healthcare, that cost--which is so personal to so many people because it is whether we can provide health to our loved ones--is now going to go up. So every single American is either at risk of losing their health insurance or having the price of their health insurance go up.

Other Michiganders are going to see an even bigger price hike than those who are in private insurance, especially if they are one of the half million Michiganders who get their coverage through the ACA marketplace or ObamaCare. Open season is this November 1. They are going to start to feel that pain immediately. We are hearing stories of people who are going to get a 79-percent increase in their bill starting January 1.

I had the head of a big Michigan private insurance company come in today. She was telling me that other insurers have just decided to get out of the business of providing healthcare plans for people on the marketplace. You are going to have fewer choices. Companies like HAP, Molina, and Meridian have already decided, because of the bill President Trump pushed for in July, they are no longer going to be offering plans through the ObamaCare marketplace. So less choice, higher prices.

Just to put this in perspective, here is an example of what President Trump and my Republican colleagues have brought to working Americans: A family of four making $129,000 a year, two kids, if they are on the marketplace plan, they are going to see their healthcare plan go up by $5,000 next year starting January 1. That is how much they will pay just for the increase.

And a 60-year-old couple, two elderly folks--or 60-year-old folks, not elderly--living on about $85,000 a year, they are empty nesters. Their kids have left home. They will see their premiums go up by over $10,000 next year. What do you do if you are 60 years old, and there are two of you? Your plan was already expensive. Now you have another $10,000 on top of that.

You know that those people are thinking to themselves: You know what? I am just going to go without insurance. I can't--he is raising my bills in every single category, and so I am just going to take the risk. I am going to go without health insurance and hope that I don't get into a car crash or into a major accident.

President Trump literally campaigned on lowering your costs. That was what this election was about. He said he was going to put more money in your pocket. Can anyone name a single place, if you are a working American, where your costs have gone down and not up since January of this year?

And many Michiganders are going to end up in the position my mom was in--walking into an ER, getting that diagnosis--your brother, your mother, your child--needing care and having to choose between bankruptcy and getting some sort of care for that terminal illness.

We can't end the fight there. I am willing to negotiate with my colleagues. I know that plenty of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle think that it is absolutely insane to raise the price of healthcare; that they don't want to be associated with that. There are so many people who feel that way. We have people retiring on the other side of the aisle.

But the only way that we move the needle is if we get loud about it. That is exactly what happened in 2017. Why is it that cutting healthcare was President Trump's signature campaign goal in 2016? Why did he talk about it obsessively every day in 2017? While the House of Representatives on the other side of this building did repeal ObamaCare, but we still have it today--why is that? It is because the public said no. The public said: You are not going to take away my healthcare, my protections for preexisting conditions, and get away with it.

And the public turned so hard against the Republicans on that issue that in this body, on this floor, John McCain cast the deciding vote, thumbs down, on repealing ObamaCare. That is why we have it today because of the bravery of that man.

I wish and pray for the bravery of someone like John McCain to be back in this body on the other side of the aisle who has the ability to say: No matter what my party, I am not going to charge Americans more for their healthcare.

President Trump has done the opposite of that. If you want to understand what happens when you get your letter--and they are all coming. October for Michiganders is when we understand the plans are sending out their letters. When you get that letter and gasp how your price has gone up on your private insurance, your employer-provided healthcare, you understand exactly who gave you that price increase, exactly who put you in that position, exactly who told you that he was going to lower your costs, and now

you are going to have to eat that cost starting January 1. That is Donald Trump. That is my Republican colleagues who sit across the aisle. That is everyone who said: I am going to do the political thing instead of what is right for the average American.

Healthcare is something that this country should be providing to its citizens so that everyone can afford it. That is just a basic thing we should do as the most powerful Nation in the world.

All I ask my colleagues across the aisle, especially as we hit this September 30 deadline, is ask yourself: What would John McCain do? What would John McCain have done on the Big Beautiful Bill and what would he do if he had the chance to restore people's healthcare and he had that moment on the Senate floor?

Please, grow some spine and help your constituents. Let's have a conversation about healthcare.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to deliver my maiden speech. This is a proud and personal moment for me to represent my home State of Michigan as a junior Senator, alongside Gary Peters, and to follow in the footsteps of legendary Senators like Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin.

This maiden speech has been a longstanding tradition in the Senate. Every junior Member gets to deliver in their freshman year their vision for their States and what they plan to do in their time in office.

Thank you to my colleagues from both sides of the aisle who have joined me and to my great staff and my interns, even my niece who came in. If you remember nothing else, I want you to remember two things: First, nothing is more important to me than the State of Michigan. I am a third generation Michigander. For me, Michigan is where it all started. Everything I have done in my life, everywhere I have gone, everything I have done, everyone I have met, it all started in Michigan.

It is where I learned the values that still shape me today: community, putting your head down and working hard, taking care of your neighbors when they are in need.

Nothing matters more than my home State, so this speech is my love letter to the State of Michigan. To stand here and represent the State that I love on the floor of the U.S. Senate is the greatest privilege of my life.

Second, my goal for my time in office is to address what I believe to be the existential threat of our time to my State and to all Americans: the threat of a shrinking middle class.

Now, I am a national security person by training. I am what is called a 9/11 baby. I happened to be in New York City on my second day of graduate school when 9/11 happened.

I was recruited into the CIA right out of grad school, and I served three tours in Iraq, alongside our military, before serving at the Pentagon.

I served proudly under Presidents both Democrat and Republican. I have come face-to-face with some of the greatest threats facing our country, but I believe, in my bones, that the single greatest threat today to our national security is not coming from abroad but coming from the very real threats that come from that shrinking middle class.

So my goal as a Senator is to deliver for Michigan's middle class, to expand it, to secure it. That mission is personal. Michigan is where my family achieved that very American dream. My great-grandfather, at 13 years old, came through Ellis Island not speaking English. He ended up starting a meat company, moved to Michigan, and built an iconic hot dog that Michiganders have enjoyed for 60 years.

Michigan has been the place where hard work means something. It was where the middle class was literally invented, it was where you could work at an auto plant and afford the car that you were building. That was a revolutionary idea at the time; it shouldn't be revolutionary now.

So as a U.S. Senator, my highest priority is to help make Michigan a place where that American dream is achievable again. Today, too many Michiganders are falling out of that middle class; too many families can't get in at all. I lived on my family farm in Holly, MI. Growing up, I was surrounded by families whose path to the middle class ran through Michigan's factories, our farms, our small businesses.

We are people who build things and grow things; people proud of their role in manufacturing America's future, our cars, our tanks, our food; people who, like my great-grandfather, were prepared to work hard for success and often achieved it.

But over the years, I have watched younger generations of those same families live a very different story. Parents can't provide for their kids what was provided to them. That fishing cabin up north that dad had, the son can't have. A trip to Disneyland, can't do it.

Across Michigan, there are so many families who feel like hard work doesn't seem to be enough anymore. No matter what your political views are, it is just a fact that the middle class has shrunk over the last 40 years. And I have seen firsthand what happens next.

When people feel like they can't get ahead, when they can't provide for their kids what was provided for them, they feel anger, they feel shame. They lose their dignity, and they look for something or someone to blame.

In a multiracial, multi-ethnic experiment in democracy, people end up blaming people who don't look like them or speak like them or pray like them. I have seen this up close and personal how that kind of anger and suspicion can tear communities apart.

If you want to understand how we got to this moment in our politics-- this angry, vitriolic, polarized moment in

American history--all you have to do is understand that shrinking middle class. So even among today's chaos, especially now, there are things we have to do, simple things, to bring back that middle class and make it thrive.

This is my North Star. It will guide my work in the Senate. OK, so how do we do that? Our government certainly needs to change. I don't think it is hard to understand that our government is not working for a majority of Americans--not just Republicans, Democrats as well. We have to hear that loud and clear.

Fundamentally, I believe that government needs to get back to the basics. No one cares about your trick plays if you don't have your fundamentals right. Government needs to set the conditions for success, and Michiganders and Americans need to work hard to achieve that success.

These basics are jobs that pay you enough to save every month, healthcare you can actually afford, a home you can call your own, schools that prepare our kids for the workforce, energy to power our lives, an environment we can pass on to our kids, and safety and security from fear. That is it.

First, on jobs, we need job creation for Michigan's middle class to create the jobs of the future. Imagine that the middle class is basically a ship at sea. For the better part of 40 years, it has been taking on water, and now we are about to hit a category 5 hurricane in the form of artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence has the potential to change our economy more than the internet did. Think about that.

Productivity will go up, jobs will be gained, but jobs will also be lost. Maybe not Michigan jobs at first. Entry-level college jobs like paralegals or accountants are probably first on the list, but change is coming, and we need to be ready.

Job creation in the era of artificial intelligence means supporting our small businesses. Small businesses employ half of all Americans. They are intrinsic to the American dream. It is about betting on yourself. And we need to own the fact that it is hard to start and succeed as a small business. We need to make life easier for Michigan's small businesses.

Second, we need to bring critical industries and critical supply chains back home to the United States. Michiganders understand this better than most because of what we do, our manufacturing, no foreign country should ever have a veto on our economic security. We should always make critical items here in the United States, and I want to bring as many of those jobs and industries back to Michigan.

And, finally, let us say it very clearly: We need an immigration system that actually works and is key to our economy. Immigrants are critical for our labor shortages in our factories, in our hospitals, in our firms. More than that, we are a nation of immigrants. I am standing here today because my great-grandfather left fear, persecution, and death at 13 years old and found a place in America.

So we need an immigration plan that brings legal, vetted immigrants into our countries, key to our economy, sometimes more, sometimes less; and we need to have border security that literally makes sense. Without immigrants, there is no America, and without immigrants, our economy will not thrive.

Second, on healthcare, is there anyone in America who thinks healthcare is working? Is there anyone in America who thinks we are paying too little for healthcare? Is there anyone in America who is missing the ground swell of anger because we cannot provide the healthcare we need to our parents and to our children?

Few things are as fundamental. There are just, in my mind, few systems as broken as healthcare in America in 2025. And we all know it.

This is, again, extremely personal to me. It is why I ran for office in the first place. Of all my time spent in war zones, in dangerous places, nothing was harder than my mom being diagnosed with stage IV ovarian cancer when she did not have insurance.

There is nothing worse than that desperate feeling when your parent, that first parent to get sick, needs emergency tests and emergency surgery, and the same moment that you are fighting to get those things, you are struggling just to fill out the paperwork so she won't go bankrupt.

We are at a breaking point. We must change our healthcare, and this is as good a time as any. Every American deserves access to healthcare they can afford, regardless of your job, regardless of your income or your age. So I support a nationwide public insurance plan at a reasonable price for every American.

Second, we have got to be able to afford the medicines that we are prescribed. Is there anyone who thinks that we are paying too little for our drug prices? We need, in every part of our healthcare system, to be able to negotiate the price of our drugs. It is like Costco; you buy in bulk, you get a lower per unit price, and we are prohibited from doing that across the country.

Why? Because I have never seen an issue in Washington more polluted by lobbyists and corporate PAC donations than this issue. I have never seen an industry with more control over elected leaders than on the issue of healthcare.

Right now, I am one of six Senators who doesn't take corporate PAC money, 6 out of 100. It should be 100 out of 100. The middle class does not have a lobbyist, but they sure have the leaders that they elected.

On housing, there is nothing more foundational to the American dream than having a home of your own. It is as fundamental to us as Americans as apple pie.

Right now, the average age of a first-time homeowner in America is 40 years old, completely different than in generations before us. This is not a good story. Today we could declare, in this body, a housing state of emergency. We need 4 million units of housing built in our country. That is a national strategy, yes, but I want Michigan to be ground zero for responding to the urgency of that need.

On education, we need schools that actually prepare our kids for the future. So much of what we were able to do as a middle class was because people could afford the education in front of them. If you wanted to go to college, you could, but in Michigan, if you wanted to work with your hands, succeed, go on, become rich, only if you had a high school diploma, you could do that. There were job options for you.

We need an obsessive focus and reorganization of our job training Federal programs. We have 17 different organizations doing job training. It is broken. We need to focus on trade schools and apprenticeships and an education system that prepares us for what is coming.

On energy, we all know we are using more energy. Every single one of us in this room right now are using more energy than we did 10 years ago. Modern life is demanding it, but supply isn't meeting demand. And Michiganders are seeing that hitting their wallets every single day. If you don't plan now, it is going to get worse, rolling blackouts and brownouts in a decade.

And what I am asking for is not a renewable energy plan or a fossil fuel plan, it is an ``all of the above'' energy plan. Natural gas, you can't do it without it. Nuclear, batteries, renewables, solar, hydropower, new stuff that is in creation right now, we need all of it. And we can't be willing to scrap certain energy because it is woke. Anyone who disagrees with that is just scoring political points and doesn't give a damn about people's electricity bills.

On the environment, I am committed to protecting the environment, especially our water. In Michigan, clean water and the Great Lakes are not partisan, it is our heritage. It is in our blood. No single Michigander lives more than 6 miles away from a lake or 82 miles from a Great Lake.

We all know the sound of water hitting the beach or how the light looks up north. Our water is why people raise their kids in Michigan. And sharing that legacy with our kids is the dream that every Michigander has. We have the responsibility of being the stewards of the Great Lakes.

So when our water is threatened, when our kids are poisoned, when they can't swim in contaminated lakes, it is not just a health issue, it is a security issue: Lead, PFAS, invasive species in our Great Lakes, these are threats to us as Michiganders, and it is my job to fight these threats.

And last, can we just say climate change is upon us? Twenty years ago it

was theoretical; now Michiganders understand that extreme weather is real, it is here, they feel it in their pocketbooks. We have to mitigate it. We have to accept it, and we have to be ready to prepare ourselves when we have these crazy ice storms, these crazy once-in-a- generation tornadoes and move on and not exclude people because they don't want to talk about woke policies.

Safety and security, finally. Every Michigander has the right to live free from fear, to feel safe in their own home, and in the country they love. That is what got me into public service in the very beginning right after 9/11. Shootings in our schools and our businesses are a threat to our lives. Our government and our computers, our personal data shouldn't be hacked--neither should our cars or our homes.

And we should get to know and understand always who is coming across our border. We are a border State in Michigan. Every country in the world has a right to know who is coming inside its borders.

So in the Senate, I am going to spend my time protecting American citizens, as I have always done. For that, we need the best military in the world, one that understands the threats that are coming around the corner, not just the threats of the past.

We need to be able to control our own fate. That means not letting our national debt be controlled by countries like China.

And we need to understand that, to make people safe in America, we need a strong leadership role in the world, because the next 100 years are either going to be dominated by the United States of America or by China.

And while we make mistakes every single day, and I will own that--I served in Iraq, and I saw it close up--I will take American leadership over Chinese leadership any day of the week.

So, in conclusion, let me just say that we all know--everyone here knows--that we are going through an extremely tough time in American politics. We know that, when people look back on this period in history, they are going to say: That was the moment that Americans were turned against each other, when neighbors turned against each other.

But it is not the end, and it is not always going to be this way. As Michiganders, we understand how to survive bad times by rallying together, by helping one another, by living up to our Midwestern values, and getting back into the fight.

As elected leaders, and certainly as a Senator, I have a responsibility to chart the path through the dark tunnel and into the light, not by just complaining and whinging that it is all bad but by charting a strategy from beginning to end on how we get through this moment.

And we will. For God's sake, people, the Detroit Lions are going to win the National Championship and the Superbowl, and they were in the toilet for years.

So it is my privilege to stand on behalf of my State here. It is the most important thing I have ever done. It is the most impactful thing I will ever do. It is my job, as that next generation of leader, to change the course of this place and this country, and I commit to you I will not let you down.

Thank you very much.

I yield the floor.

(Applause.)

Mr. President, today I honor the life and legacy of SSG Troy S. Knutson-Collins. He was a patriot that made the ultimate sacrifice serving his country while deployed to Lithuania this March. His dedication, honor, and courage live on through his children Braylee, Kendra, Emery, Leif, and Skadi; his wife Ayrelle; and his parents Robert and Tonja.

Born in Battle Creek, MI, in 1996, Troy graduated from Harper Creek High School in 2015. He played semi-professional football before enlisting in the U.S. Army at the age of 20. Troy's dad says he was destined to work with tools from a young age, and he became a decorated mechanic for the Army stationed at Fort Stewart, GA. He deployed twice to South Korea and was on his deployment in Lithuania at the time of his passing.

His pursuit of excellence earned him numerous awards, including two Army Commendation Medals, one Army Achievement Medal, two Army Good Conduct Medals, the National Defense Service Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Medal, and the Master Technician Badge. He was described as an expert, an incredibly talented mechanic, and a warrior by his commanding officers.

Troy was not only a dedicated servicemember but also a loving husband and a devoted father to his five children. He was a man of integrity, kindness, and unwavering love for his family and friends. He was a passionate football fan, a skilled woodworker, and always full of energy. He brought a bright light to the lives of those around him. His sudden passing has left an unimaginable void in the lives of his family, friends, and fellow servicemembers.

We thank the more than 150 people from the U.S., Polish, and Lithuanian Armed Forces and other rescuers who took part in the recovery mission. We remember the lives of the three other soldiers of the 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, who lost their lives alongside Troy: Jose Duenez, Edvin Franco, and Dante Taitano. These soldiers were a part of United States-led NATO Operation Atlantic Resolve to enhance deterrence along the alliance's eastern flank. It is a testament to the important mission they were all serving that multiple countries joined forces and worked tirelessly to bring them home.

His loss is felt deeply by the soldiers in his unit, the Army community, his friends, and his family. His service and sacrifice serve as an example to us all. We are lucky to live in a country with tireless patriots like SSG Knutson-Collins. May his memory continue to inspire those who seek to serve and foster positive change in our world.

Madam President, I rise today to talk about the threats to the VA Administration and to our veterans, all in the name of finding $6 trillion in the couch cushions for President Trump's tax plan.

I come to this very openly because of my background. I am a former CIA officer and Pentagon official. I did three tours in Iraq alongside the military. I spent my entire professional life before coming to elected office serving in the sorts of jobs that had me working on an hourly basis with the military. I served in the House and served on the Veterans' Affairs Committee there and serve on the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee.

What I am concerned about right now is that in this rush to cut everything for the sake of cutting, we are going to affect the very people that should be treated as nonpartisan.

It shouldn't be a partisan issue to serve our veterans, who have risked their lives, put themselves in danger, and come home with the express understanding that their Nation owed them a debt.

What we have seen so far is deeply disturbing. Secretary Collins, who is someone I served with in the House of Representatives, has already cut 2,400 employees from the VA.

Now, look, everyone has the opportunity to go after waste, fraud, and abuse. I served in places like the Pentagon. If you would have come to me and said ``You need to cut 10 percent of your workforce,'' I could have come up with a plan that was targeted and thoughtful but that cut out missions and organizations that probably didn't need to be there anymore.

But that is not what this was. You can't say with a credible, straight face that those 2,400 people--all were people that made sense--weren't important to the mission of helping veterans. We know that because people who were fired on a Friday were rehired on a Monday.

Now we are facing the prospect of 70,000 to 80,000 additional people from the VA being cut across the country. That is the kind of cut that no mission to veterans can survive.

The VA is in a different position than a lot of our government Agencies. The VA, unlike a lot of our government offices, just went through a moment where they are taking on more veterans for care.

Just a couple of years ago, this body, on a bipartisan basis-- Democrats and Republicans--voted on something called the PACT Act, which expanded coverage at the VA for our 9/11-era veterans-- Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia.

Anywhere we burned trash in a combat zone, where people were inhaling that trash, we said: Look, that experience is showing up with more cancers, more unusual cancers. We should give our 9/11-era veterans the benefit of the doubt on that care and not make them wait 40 years the way we did with Vietnam veterans and Agent Orange.

This body voted on that, and we are going through a significant expansion of care to veterans because of that--younger veterans, veterans with different needs, veterans who have PTSD and head trauma, in addition to all the other things we know that they suffered, injuries seen and unseen. So when you start talking about cutting 70,000 to 80,000 people out of the VA, there is no way you do that without cutting services.

Here is the thing. I held a veterans townhall a couple of weeks ago in my home State. This is not a partisan event. These are people who are the heads of veterans service organizations. They do outreach to veterans. They are almost all veterans themselves. Ninety-five percent of them are veterans themselves.

What they said was: Look, we see that they are cutting, for instance, people who answer phones.

That may not seem like it is direct medical care to our veterans, but if a veteran has to file a claim to get a surgery and instead of waiting a month to get approval, they have to wait 18 months to get approval, that is damaging veterans' access to care.

So it is not just what doctors are doing in the workplace--and we know that some healthcare professionals in our hospitals have been cut. It is also the wraparound services that our veterans get.

So Secretary Collins was in Michigan--in Howell, MI, right in the center of my State--just in the past 10 days. That is a place--a county--that has a tremendous number of veterans and a tremendous number of veterans service organizations. It is just a really incredible county for supporting our veterans.

He was asked a direct question: Hey, you fired 2,400 people, but what about this leaked memo we heard about firing 70,000 to 80,000 people? Where do you stand on that? That can't be right.

And he doubled down.

He said: We are not going to lose any care. In fact, we are going to improve veteran healthcare, but we are going to cut 70,000 to 80,000 people.

I just don't understand how the math on that works. I don't think anyone in that room understood how the math on that worked, unless this is some big move to privatize the VA, which is something my Republican colleagues have wanted for a very long time.

I will tell you I feel very strongly, as someone who has served in combat zones alongside the military, that there are some things that this Nation should not do through private contractors, not through private health insurance, not through ``whatever,'' but as a mission of the government. When you volunteer to put yourself in harm's way, you make a commitment to the Nation. So we should make that commitment back to you.

So we are waiting to see what happens. Unfortunately, we are seeing the veterans on the ground in our States come forward and, again, come back into the fray, come back into the fight, come to townhalls, and ask tough questions. Again, these aren't political people. These aren't elected officials.

These are people who are saying: Hey, I fought three tours in Iraq or in Afghanistan. Now you are telling me there is not going to be anyone answering the phone at the suicide hotline or at the claims department; that we are going to cut research; that we are going to cut all of these things. What are you doing to my care? Answer for that.

So I think we have to be aware of what is happening, and we have to hear the voices of our veterans as they are saying these things to me.

I happened to be up at the veterans hospital up in Iron Mountain, MI, in the UP of Michigan, the Upper Peninsula. It serves the entire upper peninsula, which is a huge swath of territory. It serves a ton in Wisconsin and even into Minnesota. It is the only VA hospital around. When I went there, the director of the hospital is walking us around, and he is saying, ``Right now, we are all right,'' but he has no idea what is on the horizon. He can't say for sure what is on the horizon with that kind of instability, that inability to plan. You know, he wants to open a new specialty wing so that veterans can get specialized care when they come in. Should he open it? Should he not open it? Should he move forward? He doesn't know.

So it is just creating an uncertainty around our medical centers, which are, in some cases, the only hospitals around for 400, 500, 600 miles for our veterans to access.

You know, the other thing that I am completely concerned about is access to veterans' data. What we are seeing through DOGE is a bunch of 20-, 22-year-olds going into these Departments and Agencies and going over the heads of the Cabinet officials, saying: We know that you were just confirmed by the Senate, but we don't care what you think. We are coming in. We are going to take all your programs, put them through a meat grinder with artificial intelligence to sort of look at key words and key things, and we are going to make decisions coming in over your head. And, by the way, in some cases, we are going to bring in our own servers--literally, carrying in servers, plunking them down in the Agency, piping in all the plugs and getting all that data.

We have already seen them at the Treasury get access to taxpayer data. We have already seen them through Medicare get access to healthcare information.

Now, I am concerned. What are they going to do with veterans' information, with Active-Duty uniformed military information? with base information? with spouse information?

I think most Americans agree we don't want our data floating around on random servers that aren't protected from the national security threats that we know are after our data.

Data is the future. Having data and huge amounts of data is absolutely essential for our foreign adversaries and for bad guys all over the world. They want that--not to mention private sector companies, right? It is hard to miss that Mr. Musk and the Silicon Valley set that are now so close and doing the bidding of President Trump are deeply interested in that data. They can monetize that data and use that data to understand how to target you, what algorithms to use for you.

So I have asked Secretary Collins and everyone else coming up here for confirmation: Please affirm for me you will protect our veterans' data. They don't want it sold, and they don't want it used.

I have gotten no assurances. They will not provide fitting assurances or they provide assurances in the way the Secretary of the Treasury did.

Secretary Bessent came in for his confirmation hearing, and he said: Of course, I won't let people get access to taxpayer data

And literally, that week, DOGE got access to taxpayer data.

So we now have a situation where even taking the word of the Secretary of the VA is hard to do, given what has been going on in other Departments and Agencies.

I want to make one additional comment before I wrap up and turn it over to our next speakers. I just want to note that, just as we see the risks to our veterans, I am also watching significant risks to our uniformed military and that desperate desire that I hope we all have to keep them apolitical.

Earlier this morning, we learned about the dismissal of one of our senior-most generals in our national security community, General Haugh, who was the head of the NSA and Cyber Command. These are the people who keep us safe from cyber threats, who do our wiretaps on our adversaries abroad. These are folks who are critical in keeping us safe.

As a CIA officer, I worked every single day with the NSA. It was like a tag team. We would understand the intentions and goals of our adversaries--the Chinese, the Russians, the North Koreans, the Iranians--by getting that superclassified information, that top secret information that only intelligence communities can pick up and then turning that into a plan to protect the country and then, in some cases, go offensive, right? Just like our enemies are going against us, we have very sensitive information and operations that go against our adversaries.

General Haugh is deeply respected. He served in the military for more than 30 years. He is a good man of dignity and was basically fired for no reason.

From what we understand, a White Nationalist walked into Donald Trump's office--a woman who is a well-known conspiracy theorist. She just fingered certain people she thought should go, including two- and three-star generals, and, the next day, they were gone.

I want to say that I have heard the general brief the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee many, many times. He has some of our most sensitive assignments in the entire military. What concerns me is this has become a new norm. This is going to become normal. They are going to say: Well, he is tainted.

So we are going to take someone who has served more than any of those people who are sitting around in the Oval Office, and we are going to kick them out and say: We don't like the looks of you.

We are going to say that service means nothing to your country and that, while we know the military swears an oath to the Constitution and not to any one political party or any one leader, we don't believe them, right? We believe ourselves and our conspiracy theorists more than the decency and service record of a respected general.

So, while I apologize to him and to the other leaders in his Department who now are dealing with that absence, we have a hearing next week with that leadership. I wonder if that hearing can go forward to tell us about the most pressing threats--a classified hearing.

What I am most worried about is the signal it sends to so many other uniformed officers serving their country. They signed up to serve, and they are being treated like trash. They are being treated like a piece of political trash because of conspiracy theorists who have a greater influence on this President than the men and women who serve every day.

It is a shame on the heads of this President and on the Secretary of Defense for letting it happen, and I can't let a day go by without marking this time in space.

Who is the next general who is going to be fired? What is the next mission that is going to be thrown out simply because someone looked at it the wrong way? That is the moment we are in.

I am shocked at my Republican colleagues, who have always claimed themselves to be pro-defense, pro-patriot, pro-America, pro-flag. Then stand up for people who have served 30 years, and don't let them go down in flames because you are scared of the spotlight being put on you. You are scared of that man.

So many actions that are happening on the floor of the Senate these days are out of sheer fear, right? There are very few true believers. They are terrified of being primaried. They are terrified of someone turning against them.

Stand up for at least the U.S. military. Every single person in this Chamber has lived a good and decent life. They haven't had bombs going off. They haven't had missiles flying into our country every single day, the way war-distraught towns and cities in other countries live through. We do that on the grace of our military, and they are being treated like trash by Donald Trump and by everyone in this Chamber who doesn't stand up.

And, while we are talking about veterans, I can't escape the notice of what is going on in our uniformed Active-Duty military, the soon-to- be veterans.

I yield the floor.

Thank you, Senator.

I mean, I think what we are all here talking about into the dead of night is this idea of whom we want to be as a nation when it comes to providing healthcare.

Do we believe that the greatest country in the world should be able to treat the people who need help in our country or are we OK with the poorest among us, the weakest among us--those who are disabled, those who are elderly, those who are children--just not having access to care?

As the Senator said, when you look around at the math--right?--this isn't a political statement. The math of needing to find $880 billion with a ``b''--the math just doesn't work without gutting Medicaid. I think it is important to understand, at least in my State, that this isn't just about people who have Medicaid as their primary insurance, right? We have 10 million people in Michigan, and 2.6 million people are on Medicaid. The vast majority are children, right? They are people who can't live up to work requirements, people who just happen to be young, people who happen to be born where they were born. Thirty-seven percent of all of our births in Michigan are handled and covered by Medicaid, and two out of every three of nursing home elderly are covered by Medicaid. So it is not just about the people who are receiving direct care; it is about what Medicaid reimburses in funds.

It is the idea that 65 percent of our nursing homes could potentially go under if they don't get this funding. It is the idea that our rural hospitals from Hillsdale to Marquette, MI, have come to see me, and they say: Look, this is--we are not Democrats; we are conservative people, but if you take away this reimbursement, we will collapse. They were already suffering after COVID, and they are barely hanging on. So access to rural hospitals is something we are deeply, deeply worried about.

I think the bigger question is, Who do we believe we are, and do we have a commitment to serve and protect and provide basic healthcare to people in our States?

Now, you mentioned this, but I think it is important to realize that, with a number that big, we are not just talking about Medicaid. There is a real risk of Medicare Part D being touched--the prescription drug piece of that--and the Affordable Care Act, which so many people depend on, the many, many people being cut off from that at the end of the year. The math just doesn't work.

So what we are really talking about is, in the State of Michigan and in the United States, the potential for either people to lose their coverage or to have the price of their coverage go up because everyone who is talking about these Medicaid cuts back home has also mentioned, by the way, if we don't get the Medicaid reimbursement at our hospital, I am just going to charge more to the people who have insurance. There are going to be more people in my ER. I am going to have to pass that expensive cost off to customers who do have health insurance.

So it is just important to understand the full spectrum of what we are talking about here. Now, I am sure you have heard a ton of personal stories, right? It is important to understand that we are giving a talk on the Senate floor, and we are talking about numbers, but at the end of the day, these are human beings, and I am sure your phones are as flooded as mine are with people who want to tell their personal stories.

I will say, for me, it feels like ``Groundhog Day'' because I decided to run in 2018 for the very issue of healthcare because I happened to live through my mother getting stage IV ovarian cancer without having insurance. She had no insurance.

That first month of that terminal diagnosis, where you are desperate to get her tests and coverage and some kind of emergency surgery, you are using your credit cards, you are doing whatever you can while you are just feeling completely lost that you know your mother is going to die. That feeling is the worst feeling I have ever experienced, and it is what we are proposing to millions of additional Americans by the end of this year.

I am sure you heard a lot of personal stories on your phones. I don't know if you want to walk through a couple of

those stories, but I think it is important to make it a human issue, not just a numbers issue.

Yes. We talked about rural hospitals. I think, again, even if you are not on Medicaid, you have never signed up, you have never been in a low point in your life where you have needed a bridge, you have never had a child with a disability, you have just never touched the system, I guarantee you the hospitals that you depend on, the clinics that you depend on, the nursing homes that you depend on for your mom, your dad are dependent on Medicaid. I guarantee it.

And what we are hearing from our rural hospitals is: Look, we are the only hospital in 3 hours where you can get care. If we go, where do our people go? Where do we tell them to go?

If you are delivering a baby and you have to come off the Upper Peninsula into the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, there is just no way that we can function that way. So it is not just about, as you say, individuals--although, those stories are striking--it is about access to care for everybody.

I was talking to a doctor from the Lansing Care Free Medical Clinic. It is completely Medicaid covered. It is the folks who are left out of the system. He will just close. We will have clinics just close. So I think we are talking about something that, again, comes to the heart of who we are as a community.

I will also just say, I think it is important to put a warning label on it, and then I will turn it to you to maybe finish out.

There is a lot of magic math going on right now on the other side of that.

How do you take a group of people who both want to cut Medicaid in a devastating way, want to cut other healthcare in a devastating way, and match them up with a bunch of people who say, ``I can't,'' colleagues on the other side of the aisle who say, ``I can't accept cuts like that''? How do you balance two completely different factions in the same party? And it happens. Right?

What, normally, we would see is tough choices being made, right? Either the other side of the aisle is going to acknowledge we have to make these devastating cuts, or they are not going to cut them. But what we see now is that third secret option, which is magic math, which is: We are going to tell you we are not cutting anything, but we are going to quietly make the math just work so that we are actually cutting all these things, we are able to reap the benefits, or we push those cuts out to the outyears. So you don't notice them today, but maybe later, maybe after other elections, you are going to feel those Medicaid cuts.

So I guess my big warning label on the whole story here is that there is magic math going on from beginning to end on this package.

And don't be fooled. They are coming for your healthcare. You are either going to be paying more, or you are going to lose your coverage. That is just a fact based on the math that they put out publicly and voted on today.

So I thank my colleague for the opportunity to do my first colloquy. I didn't know this was a thing that we could do. Thank you for giving me that opportunity, and I will let you finish us out.

Madam President, I am not enjoying my first vote-arama, but I do call up my amendment No. 664 and ask that it be reported by number.

Madam President, my amendment is simple. It prohibits cuts to the funding and staffing necessary to respond to and control avian flu. This should be an easy no-brainer. Avian flu is jumping between species. We are culling thousands of birds, and egg prices are the highest they have ever been in U.S. history.

I want to believe that this body should be able to agree that a biohazard that impacts every single one of our States should be something that we maintain funding for. It is our job to protect our constituents. That is basic. Avian flu is a threat. You know it. I know it. The world knows it.

I urge you to put partisanship aside. Vote for this very simple amendment. Maintain funding and staffing on avian flu.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the budget resolution we have been discussing here tonight.

I am a new Senator from the great State of Michigan. I am a former CIA officer and Pentagon official. I did three tours in Iraq alongside the military, and I have worked very proudly for both Democratic and Republican administrations. So I come to this job thinking about security quite a bit.

I really understand my job as one where I am meant to protect the physical security of my constituents and the economic security of my constituents. What I mean by that, when I think about that, is, first on physical security, you can't do anything if you are not safe--in your home, in your neighborhoods, in your country. Then your economic security, No. 2, is being able to live the American dream that all of us grew up on that you could work 40 hours a week, one job with good benefits, and you could do well, and your kids could do better. But I rise today to defend that security because I think it is under threat.

We know that the majority is crawling all over the Federal Government looking for $6 trillion in cuts, right. They have been open about that. That is not a hidden thing. They are looking for $6 trillion in every couch cushion they can find because they are preparing a major tax bill with all kinds of tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans. In that process, they have put us on a dangerous path with this budget resolution. It adds billions to our national debt. So let's dispense with the idea that the Republicans are deeply concerned about our national debt. You cannot say that and in the same breath, support this proposal.

Then, in addition, it guts programs that we all rely on--again, for our physical and economic security--with no regard for those two things.

Of course, this does nothing to get at the things that President Trump said he was running on, right. He ran very loudly on lowering costs for the average Americans, making things easier to manage. There is no connection between the search for $6 trillion and lower prices for the average person.

Now, there are a lot of things that are at risk of being cut that are deeply connected to Michiganders' well-being.

Let me start off by saying thanks--very sort of parochial--to the Great Lakes, and that is the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, something called the GLRI.

Michiganders understand that our national heritage, our State heritage, is our Great Lakes, our waters, and our water. The GLRI is the big fund that both Democrats and Republicans have supported year after year, championed by the woman I am replacing, Senator Debbie Stabenow, to keep our water clean, our water safe, and support, again, Michigan's economy, our tourism, our economic security.

Three out of the 4 years that Donald Trump was in the White House previously, he cut the entirety of the GLRI--so all the money for invasive species, all the money to keep out our algae blooms, all the money to keep our drinking water safe, to help deal with transportation in the Soo Locks in Michigan--and every year, we pushed that back.

You better believe that in their search and hunt for that $6 trillion, they are going to again target the very thing that keeps our Great Lakes safe and secure.

The Gordie Howe Bridge. We are about to open up the largest commercial border bridge in the history of our country. It is named after Gordie Howe, who was a Canadian hockey player who played for the Red Wings. The Canadians have paid for this bridge. It is set to open in September because our current bridges and tunnels cannot handle the sheer volume of traffic going across the bridges and tunnels every day.

How are we going to staff that if we are sending Federal workers home? How are we going to support that bridge, which will allow you to drive from Montreal to Miami without stopping for a single streetlight, if we can't support hiring of new Federal workers and we are sending our Federal workers home? Border security is obviously a priority, especially for a border State, but how do we do that without throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

Then we have things that have been affecting Michigan now for the past year-plus. Bird flu, right? Avian flu. We have got geese now showing up dead all over the State of Michigan. We see the bird flu transiting between species. That is never a good sign. That means it is mutating; it is changing; it is getting stronger. Egg prices, as a consequence, are the highest ever in American history. But instead of dealing with that problem head-on, as a responsible administration would, they are cutting people who are working on avian flu, monitoring, who are helping to understand how we prevent the spread of yet another biohazard. The people who are doing that are getting pink slips.

The administration has now terminated people just, again, to rehire them. Can you imagine the morale of our Federal workers who are supposed to be keeping us safe right now?

Then we have our primary industry in Michigan, which is the auto industry. The automotive industry is our heritage as well. It is fundamental to our State economy, and my priority, my job as a Senator in this State, is to make sure that the auto industry, the tier 1 and tier 2 suppliers, that that continues to be the basis for a strong middle class, the foundation for a strong middle class in Michigan.

What deeply worries me right now is we have got unelected billionaires who are monkeying around with our industry, our principal industry in the State of Michigan. Mr. Musk, it has to be said, runs a competitor to the Michigan-based auto industry, and he is right now actively welcoming and championing Chinese interests into our supply chains. Just recently, he has made clear that he is deeply interested in moving all his operations, all the things he has got going on in Shanghai, to Mexico. He wants to create an easier backdoor for those Chinese companies to supply him, to supply other autos, to build those cheap vehicles, and then use NAFTA to bring them into the United States easily.

His interests and the interests of everyone who works for an American auto company do not align. He is interested in enriching himself and strengthening his own supply chain. He does not care about the threat to our national security, and he certainly doesn't care about a threat to economic security in the State of Michigan.

I think this is an important thing to highlight as we think about this budget resolution that has been presented to us. This budget resolution is an attempt to get President Trump what he wants so that he can do, unfettered and hidden away from the American people, whatever he wants with our physical security and our economic security. And it is something that I think many of us feel is being jammed through.

Now, it is hard to understand what is happening. There is chaos among the Republicans. The President says he wants one bill. The House says they want one bill. The Republicans here say they want two bills. It is unclear exactly what is happening. They are trying to figure it out. But in the meantime, all we can do here is defend our economic and physical security. That is our job.

My fear is that past is prologue: The administration's approach is going to be reflected in this budget, and American citizens are going to find out months later about the cuts to programs they care about, to things that Michiganders depend on, and I believe that is the wrong approach.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I rise today as a very new Senator, a freshman Senator, to talk about the confirmation prospects for the nominee for the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.

I think context matters here. I am the first CIA officer to ever be elected to the U.S. Senate. Before I ran for office in Michigan, I had a career in national security. I am what is called a 9/11 baby. I happened to be in New York City on my second day of graduate school when 9/11 happened. It changed my life. I decided to go into national security.

I got recruited by the CIA right out of grad school and then was quickly sent on my first of three tours in Iraq alongside the military, providing intelligence to the U.S. military to deal with the groups that were shooting at U.S. forces and plotting against the U.S. homeland.

I worked in national security roles very proudly in both administrations, Democratic and Republican. I worked in the White House for George W. Bush, and I was there the Friday that he left office and the Monday that Barack Obama walked in. I did the same job for two very different Presidents, one for each party. I went on to be a Pentagon Assistant Secretary of Defense. But in between all of that time, one of the things I got to do was help stand up the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

I was the intelligence briefer in Baghdad for Ambassador John Negroponte, who was the first Ambassador to Iraq under the Bush administration. I would provide him intelligence briefings early, early in the morning.

One day, he came back from a trip to Washington and said: I am going to be nominated to be the first Director of National Intelligence. It is this completely new position. It is a position that has been created because of the failures of 9/11, our failures to anticipate the attacks of 9/11, to put the pieces together between the FBI, the CIA, the military, all those who had a piece of the story but didn't have a place and a venue to combine it all together to anticipate the most devastating attacks on the U.S. soil since Pearl Harbor.

I came home and happened to be one of those first employees to set up the Director of National Intelligence. I think I was employee No. 5. I was John Negroponte's first special assistant. So I was his, you know, body person, helping him set up that office.

So when I talk about the nomination of Tulsi Gabbard, I don't do it willy-nilly. I don't do it without a background on these topics. And I believe that the people who should be taking the positions that are critical for national security should be people of competence and character.

What does the Director of National Intelligence do? The Office was created, as I said, to combine all of the different threads of information at the 17 different intelligence community Agencies that we have to prevent intelligence failures like we had on 9/11.

This is a serious position. This is a position that in the past has been in the Oval Office every morning with the intelligence briefings provided by the Agencies. This is the position that in the dead of night makes consequential decisions on the security and safety of people here.

Most Americans have no idea the number of threats we still thwart every single month against our homeland. We sleep well at night because the intelligence community is working together to prevent those threats, along with our partners and our allies and our military.

So, for me, I want to know that the person who is going to be woken up in the middle of the night to make those last-minute decisions--do we move on that intelligence? do we act based on that threat?--that they are someone, again, of competence and character, and what I have seen from Ms. Gabbard does not meet that threshold.

She has, first of all, repeatedly questioned the integrity of the intelligence community. She has gone after the intelligence community that she hopes to lead.

She has labeled tens of thousands of intelligence personnel as deep state without even a semblance of understanding of what they do every day to keep her safe.

She has questioned the findings of the intelligence community.

I think more egregious than anything, she has shown a repeated preference for our adversaries over the intelligence community and the United States of America. Most notably, a surprise trip to visit the now-ousted President of Syria, Bashar al-Assad.

Imagine the decision making that goes into planning a secret trip to visit a man who has killed thousands of his countrymen, thousands of relatives of Michiganders that I represent; a man who we know has used chemical weapons, violating international law, devastating communities; a man who has seemingly sat aside as insurgent groups, terrorist groups took territory in his area and allowed them to project attacks into neighboring states and to plot against the U.S. homeland.

She makes the decision to go and visit this man, throw flowers at his feet, do public TV with him, go publicly and show her support. Now, I don't know if she is just deeply naive. I don't know if in some twisted way, she thought that this was her way of being helpful. But whether she did it out of naivete or she did it knowing what this man has done and the implications of her actions, either way shows a complete lack of judgment.

The same goes for her seeming glorification of Vladimir Putin. It is hard to understand, coming from the country that defeated the Soviet Union in the Cold War, that we would put a woman in charge of our entire intelligence community who has shown over and over repeated interest in Vladimir Putin, taking his side of the argument, wondering what he has done right and our intelligence community has done wrong.

Can you imagine what it feels like to be a member of the intelligence community right now, with everything going on, with all of the discrediting of what they have done and what they do every single day, and now this woman is going to be in charge of this Agency? It is an insult to people who have dedicated their lives and put themselves in harm's way, to have her confirmed into this position.

Now, we have watched her flip-flop on a bunch of issues, right? Issues that Democrats and Republicans have concerns with. You know, she used to have a lot of concern about what is called section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. She fought against it. Now she is somehow for it. I am not saying people can't change, but I am just saying someone who doesn't have the backbone to stand up and be clear with their principles--I am having a hard time imagining them lead in the heat of the moment, when you are in the Situation Room and consequential decisions are being made.

I think the feeling that I have about where we are in this country right now is that we are sort of in this fever dream. There is this race to discredit, to attack, to cut. And, look, I will be the first person to say that there is fat on the bone in the Federal Government. I worked in the Federal Government. There are plenty of things that can be reformed in the Federal Government. But the double whammy of attacking the people who keep us safe every day, of trying to push them out--I just had a Republican Member on my way here say: Hey, I just heard about what is going on at CIA. Are they trying to get everyone to leave? What about people who are in sensitive positions?

Great question. But the other punch is to put someone in charge of the intelligence community that has such disdain for our allies, for our intelligence officers, and such love for our adversaries.

So I urge all of my Republican colleagues to search their soul. Play the long game. Don't live in fear of the Trump administration and Donald Trump specifically. You know in your heart that these people aren't qualified and that the life and limb of American citizens is in their hands.

So I urge all of my colleagues to vote against Tulsi Gabbard. I will be voting against her here later today.

I hope that we as American citizens can come up for air from this fever dream and remember that reform of the Federal Government does not mean slashing the people that keep us safe every day.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, thank you for being here.

Thank you to the floor staff, to the clerk, the entire Capitol team here who has been here overnight.

This is actually the first time that I have ever spoken on the floor. I am a freshman Senator, newly elected from the State of Michigan. I did not anticipate doing my maiden speech so quickly and in reaction to what is going on right now in the country. They tell us that the maiden speech is supposed to be something you think about and you build up to it. In the first 3 or 4 months, you give your first speech. And I find myself here early in the morning, participating in an attempt to stand up on behalf of something very, very simple, which is the U.S. Constitution.

Before I was a Senator, I was a dedicated career public servant. I was a CIA officer. I am what is called a 9/11 baby. I happened to be in New York City on my second day of graduate school when 9/11 happened. It completely changed my life.

I got recruited by the CIA right out of grad school, and within a year, I was on my first of three tours in Iraq alongside the military.

I worked at the CIA, I worked at the Pentagon, and I worked very proudly for both Democratic and Republican administrations.

I was detailed to the Bush White House, the George W. Bush White House. I was there the Friday that he left office and the Monday that Barack Obama walked in. I did the same job proudly for two very different Presidents from two very different parties. In those two administrations, I briefed the President and other senior officials on the most serious national security issues.

I eventually went on to be nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense. I was at the Pentagon for 7 years, and that is where I was until 2017.

In 2018, I decided to run for Congress. This was never a body I was looking to be a part of. When you grow up in the national security world, briefing Congress, doing hearings, you are not often looking to be a part of this body, but to me, it was important to get in the fight for the country that I love.

In 2018, I won my first race for Congress and then just most recently won my first race for the Senate.

I am very keenly aware that I won as a Democrat on the same ballot as Donald Trump. So that means the very independently minded voters of Michigan voted for Donald Trump and Elissa Slotkin on the same ballot. That gives me a very specific mandate. That means wherever I can, I am going to be looking for places that I can work together on things like veterans issues or broadband internet or agriculture, but I think every day, my challenge is going to be to figure out what are the things I have to compromise on and

what are the things I should never compromise on.

In my short 30 days here, what has become clearer and clearer to me is that the issues that I should never compromise on go right to the heart of who we are as a people; that is, our Constitution, our democracy, and our rights.

I think there are going to be plenty of areas where I can overlap with Trump policies. The auto industry, agriculture, dealing with China, I think there is going to be overlap. But what has disturbed me the most in my first month here, 30 days on the job, is the willingness of people in the city and in this body to roll over as the Constitution, our most sacred document, is pushed aside.

For Medicare, I vote no.

Mr. Speaker, today I honor the remarkable life and legacy of Rev. Dr. William R. Saunders, a trailblazer who broke barriers as the first Black full-time chaplain in a correctional institution in the United States. His steadfast commitment to faith and community left a profound impact on Michigan and beyond.

Born in Selma, North Carolina in 1917, William Saunders dedicated his life to ministry and service. He earned a Bachelor of Theology degree from Lynchburg Theological Seminary and College in Virginia, pursued further studies at Hartford Seminary in Connecticut, and was later awarded an honorary doctorate from Temple University in Illinois.

He became a minister of the gospel and was ordained in 1941 by the late Doctor A.B. Johnson, Superintendent of Missions of the General Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. In 1948, he made his way to Michigan, where he served as Assistant Minister of Second Baptist Church in Detroit. It was during this period of his life, in 1952, that he married his beloved wife, Mary E. Debnam.

Two years later, in April 1950, Rev. Saunders made history when he was appointed Chaplain of the State Prison of Southern Michigan. His tenure spanned 34 years, working under eight wardens and alongside twelve other chaplains before retiring in 1985. In a role defined by his compassion and resolve, Chaplain Saunders ministered to incarcerated individuals, offering guidance, spiritual support, and hope for renewal.

Rev. Saunders' influence extended far beyond the prison walls. He founded and pastored Southside Baptist Church in Jackson, Michigan, and held leadership roles with numerous community organizations. He served as President of Family Service, President of Potential Developmental Homes, Inc., and Board Member of the Inner City Child Day Care Center. A committed civic leader, he was an active member of the NAACP, Civitan International, and the Jackson County Ministerial Association, where he served as Treasurer. His dedication to public service earned him recognition from President Gerald Ford for his contributions as a member of the United States Draft Board.

A passionate advocate for youth and education, Rev. Saunders supported the Boy Scouts of America and served on the Jackson Public School Advisory Committee, where he helped empower generations of young leaders.

Rev. Saunders' decades of tireless efforts to uplift others exemplified his compassion, integrity, and dedication to service. Though he passed away in 1987, his values live on through his three children, Theresa, William, and Anne (Percy Brown), as well as his two grandchildren, Jason and Haile.

It is with deep respect and gratitude that I celebrate the life of the Rev. Dr. William R. Saunders and recognize his legacy. May his example continue to inspire those who seek to serve others and foster positive change in our communities.

Mr. Speaker, today I honor the Michigan Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials, a cornerstone of leadership, collaboration, and advocacy in Michigan since its founding in 2004. For two decades, the Caucus has provided a forum for local elected officials to network, mentor, and support one another, fostering stronger and connected communities throughout Michigan.

First organized in March 2004 during the Michigan Municipal League Conference in Lansing, the Caucus began with 45 Black local elected officials before officially becoming an affiliate of the Michigan Municipal League later that year. The organization has grown in scope and impact under the leadership of its Presidents--Clara Shephard of Muskegon, Lois Allen-Richardon of Ypsilanti, and its current President, Brenda F. Moore of Saginaw. Together, these leaders have guided the Michigan Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials in its mission to amplify the voices of African American municipal officials and promote equitable governance across the state.

Through leadership development, data-informed policy, and its committees, the Caucus ensures that the needs of Michigan's diverse communities are heard and addressed. Its collaboration with state partners as well as national organizations has advanced policies that improve outcomes and representation for the African-American community. Additionally, its scholarships for high school students help ensure that the next generation of leaders has the tools they need to succeed in higher education.

The Caucus also serves as an important resource for its members, offering workshops, regional conferences, and a network of officials who share ideas and solutions to challenges faced by local governments. Through these efforts, it strengthens Michigan's cities, towns, and villages, empowering local governments to deliver meaningful progress and opportunity to their residents.

The Michigan Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials exemplifies the power of collaboration and shared purpose. By fostering equity, supporting emerging leaders, and advocating for policies that uplift the communities they serve, the Caucus has left an indelible mark on Michigan and beyond.

It is with great respect and gratitude that I ask that we recognize the Michigan Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials for its contributions and its role in shaping a more inclusive and prosperous future. May it continue to lead and inspire for many more years to come.

Mr. Speaker, today I honor the Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce, a vital institution that has provided transformative leadership to Greater Lansing, Michigan, since 1901. Over that time the Chamber has worked tirelessly to help businesses connect, grow, and thrive, while also strengthening local communities and fostering an equitable and vibrant economic landscape.

Through its advocacy, programming, and partnership, it plays an instrumental role in making the Lansing region one of the best places to live and work in Michigan. By collaborating with corporate executives, small business owners, elected officials, and local leaders, the Chamber drives initiatives that promote shared success.

The Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce's focus on equity, reflects a commitment to creating an inclusive environment where all individuals and businesses can thrive together. By providing resources, mentorship, and professional development opportunities, the Chamber is helping to shape a future that celebrates and supports diverse and equitable communities. Initiatives like ATHENA Lansing exemplify this mission by empowering women to achieve leadership and professional growth, ensuring that their voices are at the forefront of progress.

What sets the Lansing Regional Chamber further apart is its belief in bipartisanship and its ability to unite people across political and ideological lines. The Chamber consistently brings together stakeholders from all walks of life to find common ground for the benefit of the entire region. Its leadership in tackling issues like infrastructure, housing, education, and healthcare has established it as a trusted voice and a force for positive change. We need more practical, common-sense, solution-oriented influence in our civic life, and I applaud generations of Chamber leaders for their work to put community interest ahead of politics.

For over 100 years, the Chamber has provided valuable tools and resources to members, helping them navigate challenges, innovate, and succeed. By fostering a stronger, more connected, and supportive network of businesses and individuals, it has enriched communities and left an indelible mark on the Greater Lansing area.

It is with great respect and gratitude that I recognize the Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce and its outstanding contributions and enduring legacy of service here in the official record of the People's House.

Mr. Speaker, today I honor the 120th anniversary of the founding of the REO Motor Car Company, a pioneer in American automotive history founded by Ransom E. Olds. Established in 1904 in Lansing, Michigan, REO played a foundational role in shaping both the automotive industry and the city of Lansing. Throughout its years in operation, REO Motor Car Company stood as a symbol of innovation, producing vehicles that helped define an era in American transportation.

REO Motor Car Company had a profound effect on Lansing. By the 1920s, REO employed 10 percent of the city's population, underscoring the company's importance not only as a major employer but as a pillar of the community. The REO Clubhouse, built in 1917, served as a social center for employees and their families, hosting weddings, patriotic events during World War I and II, and even Lansing's first radio station. Through its commitment to its workforce and the community, REO helped shape Lansing's identity as a manufacturing hub.

Among REO Motor Car Company's most celebrated vehicles were the REO Speed Wagon, the Flying Cloud, and the Royale. Introduced in 1915, the REO Speed Wagon set a new standard for trucks with its speed and durability, paving the way for the modern pickup truck. The Flying Cloud, launched in 1927, was known for its advanced hydraulic brakes, which set a new benchmark in automotive safety. The 1931 REO Royale featured a streamlined design that made it a true trendsetter in American car design.

Although REO ceased car production in 1936 to focus exclusively on truck manufacturing, the company remained a force in the industry. During World War II, REO Motor Car Company contributed to the war effort, supplying trucks to U.S. allies in a time of great need. REO continued to produce trucks until 1975, ending more than 70 years of innovation and service in the automotive industry.

Today, the legacy of REO Motor Car Company is preserved by the R.E. Olds Transportation Museum in Lansing. The museum stands as a tribute to both the company and its visionary founder, Ransom E. Olds, displaying a collection of rare and historic vehicles that allow visitors to appreciate the craftsmanship and ingenuity that defined