Floor Statements

Mr. President, in just a little over a year since taking office, the Trump administration and the Department of Homeland Security have completely broken trust with the American people. In the last year, President Trump has made sweeping cuts to programs and personnel at the Department, undermining key missions from counterterrorism and cyber security protections to assistance following national disasters.

These actions are putting the safety and the security of Americans at risk at a time when many of the threats the Department was created to address--like terrorism and cyber attacks--are on the rise because of the President's war in Iran. These cuts to critical national security missions have all been at the expense of the Trump administration's singular focus on indiscriminate immigration enforcement that has led to serious disruptions in communities all across our country.

It was only 2 months ago when the country watched in horror as two U.S. citizens, Alex Pretti and Renee Good, were killed by Homeland Security law enforcement officers. We saw with our own eyes how officers have routinely deployed tear gas and pepper spray against Americans who were simply exercising their First Amendment rights.

Secretary Noem's leadership as the Department head has been a disaster, and Americans want to see a course correction, but I am not convinced that one change in leadership is enough to right the ship.

President Trump and advisers like Stephen Miller are continuing to drive so much of the chaos at the Department of Homeland Security.

When the President nominated Senator Mullin to lead the Department, I came into the process with an open mind. However, I do not believe that he is the right person for the job. We need a Secretary who has a clear understanding of the Department's many different missions and a keen awareness of the challenges that the Department faces. We need a Secretary who is a steady leader, who won't rush to judgment without having all the facts, and who won't add fuel to the fire when there is a crisis. At a time when political violence is rising, we need a Secretary who will condemn violence, not encourage it. And we need a Secretary who can be trusted to be transparent and open with information to both Congress and the American people, especially-- especially--when an emergency strikes.

Unfortunately, I have not seen the nominee exhibit these desperately needed characteristics in his confirmation process, and I urge President Trump to reassess his administration's prior record and nominate someone who will help return the Department's focus to all of its critical national security missions. We need someone who will be more than just another rubberstamp. We need someone who will be thoughtful, deliberate, and work to restore the trust in the Department.

Therefore, I will be voting no, and I urge all my colleagues to do the same.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, in just a few moments, Senator Murray is going to get up and offer an opportunity for us to open up key components of the Department of Homeland Security--components that need to be opened up, components that should not be held hostage by my Republican colleagues while they push back on our efforts to bring in just commonsense guardrails when Federal officers are operating on our streets. The bill which she will put forward has unanimous consent. Every Democrat has already consented to this bill. We want to get this done.

The question now before us is whether the Republicans will object. If they object, it will send a very clear signal that they are not interested in opening up the TSA at our airports, FEMA for natural disasters, or CISA to protect us from cyber threats.

I would hope my Republicans would join us to open up the government as to these key components of Homeland Security. We are concerned about lines at our airports. We are concerned about our TSA agents being able to pay their bills for their families. If Republicans do not object to Senator Murray's bill, they will move forward. They will get paid. Those resources will be released. If Republicans don't, it is on them. It is on my Republican colleagues to keep the TSA closed.

Let's be very clear: This is very simple. On FEMA, as we are moving into a time when natural disasters will be hitting us--we had a natural disaster in Michigan just this week with tornadoes--we need FEMA operating. We need FEMA employees being paid and being able to do their jobs. Senator Murray is going to fix that unless--unless--we get Republicans who oppose it, and then Republicans will own it.

We are also at war right now with Iran. In speaking as the ranking member of Homeland Security, probably one of the most significant threats to the homeland from Iran are cyber attacks. They are good at it. We know they are. We know we have to have persistent defenses against those cyber attacks against the homeland.

I will just say, even prior to this debate about appropriations, let's also be clear that the Trump administration has basically fired one-third of all of our cyber experts who would be on the frontline protecting the homeland from a cyber attack. They fired them. They got rid of them. The Agency doesn't have the tools necessary to protect the homeland at a time when we are at war. It is unacceptable. But now we have got to make sure that those folks who are remaining will continue to get paid and have the resources to protect us. That will happen unless Republicans object to the bill that Senator Murray is going to put forward.

I will just say, if they object today--if my colleagues on the Republican side object--and we are hit with a cyber attack and aren't fully prepared, they will own that, not the Democrats. The Democrats, right now, are saying to move this bill. We all agree that it has to be done.

I know we might hear some arguments about the CBP and ICE. We know that they are already funded. Let's be clear: The big bill that passed last year basically provides five times the amount of money that is actually in the appropriations bill that we are currently debating; so they are getting their resources. The only thing that is happening, if Republicans object to this bill, is that TSA is closed and isn't getting support, as well as FEMA and CISA, and let's not forget the U.S. Coast Guard and all the amazing work they do protecting us each and every day. We want to fund the Coast Guard, TSA, FEMA, CISA. That will happen today out of the Senate as long as my Republican colleagues do not object.

But I want the American people to be clear: Don't listen to all the rhetoric from the other side. Republicans will own this if they object.

So I would encourage all of my colleagues to let this move forward, and when Senator Murray puts forward this proposal, please do not object. Let's do this for the American people.

Mr. President, on Saturday morning, the United States military started conducting airstrikes on Iran, dragging America into yet another war in the Middle East. Since President Trump's reckless decision to escalate this conflict, at least six Americans have been killed in service to their country, and many more have been injured. And President Trump himself has said:

There will likely be more before it ends.

And then he also said:

Well, that's the way it is.

Well, my heart goes out to their families and loved ones, and I will be forever grateful for their service and for their sacrifice.

It has been days since this attack, but President Trump has yet--has yet--to make it clear to Congress--and, more importantly, to the American people--what exactly our objectives are. What does victory look like? What he does say seems to change daily, if not more frequently.

The American people have a right to know the facts and a right to know the truth.

And our Constitution leaves no room for doubt that Congress--not the President--has the sole power to declare war. And that check is in place for a very important reason: Our Founders did not want to place the immense power over whether or not to go to war in the hands of just one individual.

They argued, if the President alone could make such a decision unilaterally, it would be the equivalent of granting the President the power granted to a King. We all know our history. The United States had just defeated a King in the Revolutionary War, and our Founders were in the process of creating a constitutional Republic, not a monarchy.

Talking to my constituents in Michigan, and certainly as evidenced by numerous polls that have come out recently, President Trump has decided to start a war that Americans clearly do not want. The American people instead want us focused on issues that will improve their lives here at home.

When I hear from Michiganders, they tell me they want lower prices; they want safer streets; they want more attention to their challenges here at home. But if Americans are going to send their sons and daughters into harm's way across the world, they certainly deserve to know what the President's end goal is and what is the exit strategy.

Now, make no mistake, Iran is a brutal authoritarian regime, and I have long said that we must ensure that Iran never ever produces a nuclear weapon, but unless we face an imminent threat, the President cannot--he cannot--unilaterally drag us into war.

Our country knows too well that war in the Middle East comes at a very high cost to our servicemembers and to their families, and it is also an incredibly expensive endeavor for our taxpayers.

In September 2021--20 years after the United States invaded Afghanistan--Brown University released a comprehensive report that outlined the staggering cost of the War on Terror. It found that those military engagements added approximately $8 trillion to our national debt. We are still grappling with the cost of all of those wars, and now the President is starting a new one, all without properly consulting the American people.

But let me be clear: This is not about partisan politics. This is not about that at all. It is about fundamental constitutional obligations. In fact, in 2013, Democrats made the Obama administration come to Congress with a plan for its involvement in Syria. It was Senate Democrats who forced a vote to authorize the use of military force by a Democratic President. They did it because it was required by the Constitution. It was not a party issue. But, unfortunately, my Republican colleagues seem to be content to simply act as a rubberstamp for President Trump and not require a vote as required in the U.S. Constitution.

During my time as a lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy Reserve, I served in Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, places where, right now, our servicemembers are at a heightened risk because of this operation--and my thoughts and prayers are with these brave servicemembers and the nearly 40,000 U.S. troops serving within range of Iranian missiles--and a situation on the ground that is changing rapidly.

What comes next is critical for U.S. servicemembers, the American people, and the entire world. That is why, today, the Senate will vote on a resolution that would assert Congress' power over the President to declare a war, as outlined in the Constitution, and put forward by our Founders.

It would not prevent us in any way from defending ourselves against an attack, but it would ensure that President Trump cannot escalate this war with Iran without congressional approval--and, more importantly, the approval of the American people.

The American people deserve answers and our servicemembers deserve real leadership and that is why I will be voting yes on the resolution before us here today. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it because it is past time for this administration to show the American people a real plan. It is past time for Congress to start acting like a coequal branch of government.

We need to exercise the checks and balances that our Constitution expects from us. And that means every Member of this Chamber right here, right now, needs to go on the record to say whether they want to be passive, ignore their obligation to the Constitution, and allow the President to continue this war without a clean, clear plan for the American people or--or--do they want to require the President to be fully transparent and accountable to the American people and, importantly, preserve the integrity of our beloved constitutional Republic?

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to celebrate the centennial of Hillel at the University of Michigan. When it was founded in 1926, Michigan Hillel was the fourth Hillel to be established in North America. As a center for Jewish life, the University of Michigan Hillel not only provides programming and a physical space where students can observe their faith and celebrate their community.

Arising out a need for a growing Jewish student population to find familiarity and fellowship, Hillel provided a foundation for carrying forward their cultural and social traditions into adulthood and to future generations. Whether it be celebrating Shabbat, the High Holidays, or any day in-between, Hillel has provided a forum to encourage Jewish students to more fully engage with and explore their identity. This important work has and continues to help shape the Jewish American identity.

Hillel's impact extends far beyond its Jewish religious and cultural programming. Hillel provides students with opportunities to develop their leadership skills and engage with the broader campus community, by encouraging student-driven engagement on campus and beyond. Dozens of student groups have grown out of and are supported by Hillel, providing educational programming partnering with other social, educational, and cultural groups within the university ecosystem.

Hillel has left an imprint on the university's legacy. Hillel supported producing the first performance of then-student, now renowned playwright, Arthur Miller in 1937. In the 1960s, Hillel encouraged students to engage in the great societal debates of the Civil Rights era, including the Vietnam war, helping to shape the discussion on campus. More recently, in the 1980s, has continued its mission of encouraging student engagement in the intellectual debates of the university community, exemplified by its support of Consider Magazine, which highlights topics of interest to the Michigan community and enables a presentation of many perspectives on those topics.

Given the passion with which Hillel has pursued its mission and commitment to the university community, it is not surprising it has received several awards, including the Outstanding Campus award by Hillel International in 2020. It is a testament to Michigan Hillel's success that University of Michigan is recognized as one of the best schools in the country for Jewish students. I congratulate Michigan Hillel on reaching this great milestone in its history and wish it, its current students, and alumni continued success and meaningful engagement in fulfilling its mission.

Mr. President, I was unable to attend votes on January 15, 2026. Had I been able to attend, I would have continued to vote in favor of H.R. 6938, Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations on rollcall vote No. 10.

Mr. President, on Saturday, America witnessed another horrific tragedy in Minneapolis when Alex Pretti was shot and killed by Department of Homeland Security law enforcement agents.

By all accounts--all accounts--Alex was a dedicated member of his community. He served as an intensive care nurse at the Veterans Affairs clinic in Minneapolis.

On Saturday, he was simply exercising his rights as an American--the very same rights for those veterans that he fought to protect. He used his First Amendment right of free speech to show up for his community and record interactions between Homeland Security officers and his neighbors. When agents became violent with a female protester, he stepped in to protect her.

He also exercised his Second Amendment right to bear arms. Despite no evidence that he was threatening anyone or holding anything but a phone in his hands, officers still shot him repeatedly and killed him.

The American people have watched the videos. They have seen with their own eyes the evidence of DHS's unjustified behavior and excessive use of force. But mere moments after the shots were fired, DHS officials jumped to the claim that Mr. Pretti was a domestic terrorist and an assassin who wanted to massacre law enforcement.

I want to be very clear on this. Those statements are lies. They are lies used to justify the unjustifiable actions of some DHS officers.

The blatant lies of DHS leadership and misconduct by the officers involved in the killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good are indefensible, and they cannot stand. They violate the public trust and stand in direct opposition to the values and the professionalism of many Federal law enforcement officers who follow the law and serve with integrity every day.

Since these tragic events, people from every corner of America have made their voices heard. My office has heard from thousands of Michiganders about their outrage at the fatal shootings of both Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

The American people's message is loud and it is clear: They are fed up with the Trump administration's mishandling of immigration enforcement, and they are demanding--they are demanding--that we do something about it.

Americans have every right to be enraged. I am outraged, and every Member of this Chamber should also be enraged. This is certainly not the country that I grew up in, and this is certainly not the country that we can leave to the next generation.

In this moment, we have no choice but to stand up for our communities, for Renee Good, for Alex Pretti, and for the very principles that our country was founded on. That is why I will be voting no on the bill before us unless--unless--DHS funding is stripped out or unless critical reforms are incorporated into the bill.

If the leader put the other five appropriation bills on the floor today, they would pass. They would pass with bipartisan support-- overwhelming bipartisan support. The DHS components have unique but important functions beyond immigration enforcement--securing our borders, combating human trafficking, seizing deadly narcotics being smuggled into our country, and facilitating trade and travel--but personnel from these components have been pulled from their core missions and have instead been pressured to focus exclusively on arbitrary quotas and removing immigrants from our country, even those who pose no serious threat to public safety.

This corruption of DHS's mission has directly contributed to the chaos and violence we have seen in Minneapolis and communities all across our country. That is why Senate Democrats are calling for commonsense reforms--reforms like ensuring DHS officers wear clear identification so people know who they are dealing with in law enforcement and can hold them accountable; requiring DHS personnel to wear body cameras so we have proper recordings of their conduct in immigration enforcement; and requiring proper investigations after tragedies occur like the recent shootings of both Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

These are just a few of the examples of commonsense practices that strengthen accountability and help ensure the safety of both law enforcement and our communities. Our local law enforcement personnel already follow them, and we shouldn't expect anything less from our Federal law enforcement.

There is no question that immigration enforcement is necessary, but we must conduct it in a way that is both humane and safe. Clearly, that is not how this Agency is operating today.

Now--now--is the time to act, and I urge our Republican colleagues to join us in putting real guardrails in place and not just acting as a rubberstamp for the Trump administration.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am once again asking my colleagues to do the right thing and to unanimously agree to repeal a provision that was included in the government funding legislation in November.

You will recall that the funding bill included a provision that many Senators were simply not made aware of. It came in at the last minute. It set up a special payday of $500,000, paid for by the taxpayers, for a select--a select--group of eight Senators. That policy is simply wrong. It goes against everything that we are supposed to be doing as elected representatives to make life better for the people who live in our States and in the country.

We have all heard a lot of excuses trying to justify why a handful of Senators deserves a big financial windfall. Let me remind you why they are wrong.

This all began when President Trump and his political allies cooked up a scheme to try to overturn the result of the 2020 Presidential election, all so he could stay in power. You will remember that he lost the election, but instead of respecting our Nation's nearly 250-year history of peaceful transfers of power, President Trump and his allies launched a pressure campaign to try to install slates of fake electors to overturn the election results in several key States.

While Senators were here in this Chamber pushing back on those false efforts, President Trump instigated a riot, urged his supporters to come here and try to stop Congress from carrying out our sworn democratic responsibilities.

We just observed the fifth anniversary of that attack last week, where so many Members came to the floor--I was here--and shared their memories of the horror and violence of that day.

Those actions, led by President Trump and his allies, were criminal-- simply criminal. Those crimes were exactly what the Department of Justice was investigating when subpoenas were issued for certain phone call logs. These logs weren't being targeted for political reasons; they were part of a legitimate and serious investigation into criminal activity. The Justice Department followed standard legal practice in seeking those phone logs. This should be just common sense.

But, unfortunately, there are those who believe a select group of Senators have the right to profit from being caught up in a legitimate criminal investigation, and they are OK with American taxpayers footing the bill.

They have claimed that this provision was never meant to enrich Senators, but the reality is, there is nothing in the law to prevent that from actually happening.

They have claimed that the special counsel and the judge overseeing this matter acted in bad faith, but in reality, there was no departure--absolutely no departure--from established Department of Justice and judicial practice.

I am not opposed to debating the merits of this matter and determining whether there needs to be forward-looking changes. In fact, I would support some of those forward-looking changes. But that is not what is happening right here. Instead, without any thoughtful consideration, this body approved a provision to retroactively rewrite the law and set up the opportunity for special financial payments to a select group of Senators.

When our House colleagues learned of this, they were as surprised as most all of us that were here in this Chamber. Our House colleagues did the right thing. They quickly and unanimously--that is right, the House unanimously--that doesn't happen a lot--the House unanimously, 426 to 0, passed a bipartisan bill to repeal this provision because they knew it was wrong.

We should be here working to lower costs for our constituents and not using taxpayer dollars irresponsibly. I hope my colleagues will join me in righting this wrong today.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 6019, which was received from the House and is at the desk. Further, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to say that I greatly appreciate Senator Graham's proposal that he has put forward just now. We received this last night, but I think it is against the most critical issue here, which is the retroactive rewarding or awarding of $500,000 per violation of damages to a handful of Senators. I very much appreciate Senator Graham for doing that, but I don't believe that it gets to the full bipartisan-bicameral solution that we need.

Senator Graham, I am sympathetic to the arguments you have made here. I can rebut some of them, but I don't want to get into that debate right now--back and forth--to do it. But I understand where you are coming from on a lot of those issues.

I think there are other concerns in this statute that were enacted in November that need to be addressed, including some potential for abuse for the target of a criminal investigation provision that is in the statute that remains retroactive. That could create a lot of problems for Senators here on the floor, to Senator Graham's point. Certainly, dealing with the damages provision, as my colleague proposes in this proposal that he put forward just now, is a significant part of the solution, but it is not the whole solution.

Senator Graham, I just hope that this can be a very positive starting point. Thank you for making this offer here today. I would ask if we could get together and try to find some common ground here to make sure that some of the concerns that you have are addressed because I think those are reasonable. As to the part that you are pulling out, which I think is unreasonable, I appreciate that you now agree that that, too, is unreasonable. But let's have an honest, frank discussion about the rest because, certainly, the points you have raised are ones that I want to have the opportunity to talk about. I understand where you are coming from, and I think we can find a solution that will work for this body and for the American people.

With that, I object.

Mr. President, just in response to Senator Graham, I appreciate the offer.

As for the notification requirement that you bring up, I believe in that. I think it is absolutely critical that we have that for the reasons that you cite. There are some problems in the provision in that we think there are some glaring exceptions to that that would allow folks to say: No, we are not going to notify you. That is unacceptable. We should make sure that that notification requirement applies without the abuse of the administration, regardless of who is there, on what side, because you are right.

Ultimately, our job is to protect this institution as a coequal branch of government, and you and I share that sincere belief. I think these are just some technical aspects we could work out, and I look forward to that opportunity.

Mr. President, today we mark the fifth anniversary of one of the most shocking attacks on our Nation and on our democracy. For the first time in our Nation's history, our longstanding tradition of the peaceful transfer of power was disrupted in a violent and deadly assault on the U.S. Capitol.

I remember that day vividly, sitting in this Chamber, conducting the ceremonial certification of our election before our proceedings were abruptly stopped.

In the hours that followed, thousands of our brave law enforcement officers, first responders, and National Guard members took swift action to protect every Member of Congress. They put their lives on the line to fend off the violent insurrectionists.

Those U.S. Capitol officers, the DC Metropolitan Police, the National Guard, and all who stepped in deserve our deepest gratitude and recognition for their valiant efforts to defend democracy on that infamous day.

We must also remember the legacy of the five heroic officers who lost their lives in the aftermath of that attack. The attack took an unimaginable toll on the first responders. It also deeply affected the Capitol Hill community and Americans all across our Nation who witnessed the assault on the heart of our democracy with their own eyes on television. We saw the images of officers engaged in hand-to-hand combat with the rioters. We saw pictures and videos of attackers with zip ties in the Senate Chamber and rioters with nooses on the Capitol grounds. To this day, those images are absolutely shocking.

But I have been astonished how quickly so many of my colleagues seem to have forgotten about the events of that day.

Following the horrific attack, as chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I joined with then-Ranking Member Portman, Rules Committee Chairwoman Klobuchar, and Ranking Member Blunt to lead the first bipartisan oversight hearings, investigations, and report on the immediate changes needed to secure the Capitol and prevent a future attack.

This bipartisan effort evaluated the security, planning, and response failures related to the January 6 attack, which resulted in the implementation of significant recommendations that I am proud to say have strengthened security here at the Capitol and has better prepared us for any future attack.

I also led investigations into the failures of our Federal law enforcement and intelligence Agencies to prevent and respond to January 6 and the threat of domestic terrorism more broadly.

Both the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security missed warning signs that could have prevented that day's attack. This was both a failure of imagination and a failure of leadership during the first Trump administration as they directed resources away--away--from the threat of domestic terrorism.

Five years later, I fear that, despite these efforts, our Nation has not learned, and the right lessons from this attack are being forgotten. Instead of confronting the dangerous threat of domestic terrorism head-on, the current administration has spent the last year dismantling the counterterrorism infrastructure meant to keep us safe.

President Trump has also twisted the meaning of the domestic terrorism threat beyond recognition, using it to label and target political speech and groups that he does not like and in ways that threaten all of us in this country.

President Trump has also made major cuts to key components of both the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, and he has diverted resources from our law enforcement and intelligence communities that should be focused on addressing terrorist threats to bolster--the reason for this is to bolster his political priorities.

Instead of condemning the violent attack and holding the attackers accountable, President Trump called them ``patriots.'' And he pardoned nearly 1,500 individuals who were found guilty of assaulting the very same law enforcement officers that we are honoring today--found them guilty in the court of law. Let us be clear, they were found guilty in the court of law because this Nation is a rule of law. But he pardoned them because the views of these rioters and attackers were his political supporters, rather than offenders who should be held accountable for breaking the law.

There is no question that President Trump prizes loyalty over the law, but he has taken that favoritism too far. Not only did he pardon people responsible for those heinous crimes on that day 5 years ago, he also targeted and fired the Justice Department experts who investigated and prosecuted the cases holding the January 6 attackers accountable for their crimes.

But the most concerning outcome in the 5 years since this attack is how quickly many of our elected leaders have helped to rewrite history and minimize the danger that our democracy faced on that day. Instead of uniting to condemn the attack--and the effort to overturn a free and fair election--too many of our Nation's political leaders were cowed by President Trump and repeated his lies and his conspiracies. Those actions have directly contributed to rising climate of political violence that we see today all across the political spectrum.

And finally, I was furious to see some of my colleagues not only fall in line to rewrite the history of this attack, but to insert a provision in recent legislation to give Senators a special payday because they were part of the criminal investigation into President Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, the effort that led directly to the January 6 attack.

For the past 5 years, so many of my Democratic colleagues have joined me in calling for all Americans to put our country before our party and to commit to upholding our most cherished democratic principles before we lose them forever. It has been disheartening that many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not joining us in those full-throated calls to defend our system of government that makes our Nation so unique.

If we, as the U.S. Senate or as a country, cannot agree on the lessons of the past, I fear that we are setting ourselves up to repeat them. Over the past year, in particular, it has never been clearer that our democratic institutions--our standards and our traditions--and the rights of every American are still under attack.

We can still come together and stand up for the Constitution, and we can stand up for the rule of law. We could still come together and use our authority as a coequal branch of government to hold this administration accountable for these ongoing attacks and actions that risk making our Nation less safe. And we can still come together to protect the promise of our democracy for generations to come.

So today I implore my colleagues to join me in unequivocally condemning the attack on our democracy on January 6 in 2021, and I urge all of them to help us protect our most treasured democratic principles. We have a chance to restore faith in our democratic way of life, but our democracy and our institutions can only endure as long as our elected leaders have the fortitude and the strength to protect and to defend them against all threats, no matter their origin.

In the 5 years since January 6, we have fallen short of that responsibility. In the darkest times of our Nation's nearly 250-year history, we have always found a way to come together to protect our democracy. And if we continue down this current path that we are on now, I am concerned that we are losing our most cherished freedoms for good. We cannot and must not ever let that happen.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, we are quickly approaching the end of 2025, and this past year, particularly here in Congress, we have been met with a lot of challenges, chaos, as well as change. But there is one issue that unfortunately has not changed, and that is our ballooning national debt.

Throughout the year, I have repeatedly come to the Senate floor to pound the drum on this very serious issue. I have outlined the history of how we got to this point, and I have urged all of my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, to join me in taking action to address our runaway debt before it is too late.

So as we end the year, I am back on the floor today to remind my colleagues of the dire financial situation we currently face and to focus specifically on the harmful consequences that it has on the everyday lives of hard-working Americans.

Let's first take a quick bird's eye view of the situation. At the start of 2025, our national debt sat at a staggering $36.2 trillion. Today, thanks in part to the irresponsible ``Big Ugly Bill'' that Republicans and President Trump passed this summer, that number has now ballooned by $2 trillion. Just 1 year later, our debt now sits at $38.4 trillion.

To put that number into perspective, when I was sworn into Congress back in January of 2009, the national debt stood at $10.6 trillion, so that means that in 16 years, our national debt has nearly quadrupled. Unfortunately, it is only getting worse.

I think I speak for most Americans when I say it is hard to even fathom that amount of money. And Americans might wonder what our debt actually means for them and for their personal finances. Well, the reality is that it isn't some abstract, made-up number; the national debt is a real-life burden that our country has to contend with. Ultimately, the brunt of that burden falls hardest on the people who are just fighting to make ends meet in this increasingly unaffordable economy.

So let's break it down. On one front, it is simply an issue of having fewer resources available to invest in American families. Because our debt has gotten so out of control, each year, Congress is having to use more and more of everyday tax dollars to pay down just the interest on that debt. We are not even paying off the debt itself; we are just paying down the interest. In fact, the interest alone that we pay annually on our debt now exceeds the amount we spend on every single Federal program except Social Security.

That means fewer of your tax dollars are being sent back to your community to invest in stronger roads, safer neighborhoods, and better schools. It means that less resources are available for programs that help Americans put food on the table, afford childcare, or gain new skills through workforce training initiatives.

Particularly as American families continue to face an affordability crisis--the prices just keep going up--this support is needed now more than ever. Failing to invest in those who need it most because our debt is bogging us down will only add fuel to that fire.

On another front, Americans have continued to experience high inflation this year that can be tied to this growing national debt. When inflation goes up, the Federal Reserve has to raise interest rates to combat those higher prices. As interest rates rise, so do Americans' largest expenses, from their car payments, to their home mortgage, to their student loans.

Essentially, the longer we go without addressing this national debt, the purchasing power of Americans' hard-earned money will shrink each and every day, and families will continue struggling to afford the cost of everyday life because, unlike the Federal Government, Americans actually have to live within their means and adhere to their household budget. But unfortunately, today, too many American households find themselves trapped in a cycle of debt and financial insecurity just to meet their bottom line. More and more we see this is the case, even when both parents are working and doing everything they can to give their children a better future.

This is an entirely different reality than what Donald Trump and his billionaire supporters live in. Instead of paying their fair share like most Americans, Republicans just wrote for President Trump and the richest Americans a more favorable Tax Code, making sure that they get to hold on to their wealth and watch it grow. And when the richest Americans still don't succeed, they are given the leeway to bail themselves out.

We don't have to look any further than our President, whose companies have filed for bankruptcy at least four times. Four times, filed for bankruptcy--the President of the United States. Yet he contributes less to servicing our national debt than teachers and firefighters and hard- working Americans who play by the rules each and every day. The average American isn't afforded that luxury.

As a result, our Federal deficit has grown, inflation remains high, and the American people are left with nothing but rising prices, stagnant wages, and bitter, bitter feelings about being left behind.

For too long, we have propped up the wealthy and forced middle-class Americans to pay the bill. It is unacceptable, and if we have any hope of getting our fiscal house in order, this needs to change.

Congress is about to wrap up for the year, but when we reconvene, our debt will still be there--the largest it has ever been. We just can't make this debt go away. Lawmakers are going to have to put policies and politics aside and come together to figure out a way to address this issue.

So, in 2026, I am going to keep sounding the alarm on our national debt, highlighting the everyday consequences, and delving into the ways in which we can finally take steps to put our country on more sound financial footing.

We all say that we care about addressing our growing debt--everybody here in this Chamber says it--but in 2026, let's actually put our money where our mouth is, and let's make it happen.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am going to be asking shortly for unanimous consent on three bills.

The first one is my bipartisan Disaster Assistance Simplification Act, which basically makes a commonsense change to create a universal application for disaster survivors to more easily navigate the available Federal assistance after they have been hit by a natural disaster.

Currently, disaster survivors must complete separate and detailed applications, often with duplicative questions, which can take weeks and sometimes months to complete--something folks who are suffering from a natural disaster simply don't have the time for, and certainly they need immediate help. The separate processes can be overwhelming to disaster survivors who are just trying to piece their lives back together, causing many to give up on seeking the help they certainly are qualified for.

My bill would simply ask Federal Agencies to design one combined application and work together to share information amongst themselves, with the necessary data-sharing protections in place, to make the obstacles to overcoming a disaster a bit less onerous for folks who are suffering.

I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this bill, which passed through the Senate unanimously in the last Congress. I believe we must make this simple change so that when disaster strikes, disaster survivors can more easily access the assistance they certainly deserve.

The second bill is my bipartisan U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officer Retirement Technical Corrections Act, which ensures that a number of DHS law enforcement officers will receive the retirement benefits that they were promised--that they were promised--when starting their service almost 20 years ago.

In 2008, CBP incorrectly informed a group of newly hired officers that they would be eligible for an enhanced retirement benefit without having to hit a certain retirement age or reach 20 years of service to qualify. CBP realized this mistake a decade later--a full 10 years later--and in 2021, that group of officers abruptly lost access to the retirement package they were promised when they were hired.

This bill directs CBP, along with the Office of Personnel Management, to provide those affected officers the benefits they were promised when they accepted those positions.

None of us would stand for the government telling us after almost 20 years of service that we were not going to receive the benefits we were promised when we began those positions. We shouldn't expect these law enforcement officers to do so either.

This bill is necessary to fix an Agency error that upended the retirement plans of 1,400 officers, including 70 officers who live in my State of Michigan.

Last Congress, the Senate unanimously passed this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill once again.

The final bill, the third bill, is my bipartisan, commonsense bill, Helping Eliminate Limitations for Prompt Response and Recovery Act, and is going to repeal section 695 of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, which limits the length of certain contracts in the aftermath of a disaster.

This bill aligns the Department of Homeland Security with more recent governmentwide rules. Matching DHS with governmentwide requirements will alleviate confusion and streamline the response to and recovery from disasters.

This is a straightforward, good-governance step that will benefit disaster survivors; therefore, I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this bill, which the Senate previously passed by unanimous consent in the 118th Congress.

Mr. President, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc: Calendar No. 252, S. 594; Calendar No. 253, S. 727; and Calendar No. 264, S. 861.

Mr. President, I further ask that the bills be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, all en bloc.

Mr. President, notwithstanding the passage of Calendar Nos. 252 and 253, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendments be agreed to; that the bills as amended be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Madam President, I rise to recognize the extraordinary public service of U.S. Comptroller General Gene Dodaro, who will retire this month after a remarkable 52-year career at the Government Accountability Office. Comptroller General Dodaro spent more than half of his career in leadership roles, including 9 years as Chief Operating Officer, before his confirmation in December of 2010 as Comptroller General. During his tenure, he has shaped GAO into the high-performing organization that we rely on every day here in Congress.

Comptroller General Dodaro helped build an impressive team of scientists, cyber security analysts, and other experts to provide reliable and timely information to Congress on rapidly developing fields like artificial intelligence and quantum computing.

He has worked with Congress, across multiple administrations, on major management reform initiatives, and he directed the first-ever audit of the consolidated financial statements of the Federal Government.

I can speak personally about the indispensable role that Comptroller General Dodaro and the GAO staff have played in providing support to me and to my staff, especially in my work on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. It is not just me that can attest to Comptroller General Dodaro's leadership. GAO is consistently ranked as one of the best places to work in Federal Government, a testament to the professionalism, the reliability, and the honesty that he has embodied as Comptroller General.

It is absolutely critical that the next Comptroller General embody these same values. They must be professional and fair, willing to call balls and strikes, regardless of which party occupies the White House. They must uphold the values of independence and nonpartisanship, and they must be ready to manage a diverse and multidisciplinary workforce.

Congress relies on the GAO to help safeguard taxpayer dollars from fraud, waste, and abuse across Federal programs, often seeing a return on investment of over $100 for every dollar invested in the GAO.

They provide expert testimony on a range of issues, and the reports identify problematic and operational improvements to the Federal Government. I look forward to working with Leader Thune, my HSGAC counterpart Chairman Paul, and the other members outlined in statute to initiate the appointment process and identify a suitable candidate to fill the very big shoes of Comptroller General Dodaro.

He leaves a legacy of tremendous credibility, integrity, and independence at the GAO, and I think it is critical that we work together in a bipartisan fashion to preserve an indispensable role that GAO plays as part of the legislative branch, helping to protect taxpayer dollars and hold the executive branch accountable.

I commend Comptroller General Dodaro for his decades--his decades--of outstanding public service, and I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Comptroller General Dodaro for his dedicated service to us and to the American taxpayers.

I yield the floor.

I ask unanimous consent that the previously scheduled vote start immediately.

Mr. President, this week, we have an opportunity to lower healthcare costs for the American people. For months, my Republican colleagues have refused to extend existing Affordable Care Act tax credits that help nearly 22 million Americans afford quality healthcare. These tax credits have been one of the single most successful tools to ensure that every American has access to the care they need.

As we near the end of the healthcare enrollment period for the new year, Michiganders are experiencing the real-world consequences of Republicans' actions. Right now, folks across Michigan are shopping for 2026 healthcare coverage. When they log on to the Marketplace, they are seeing staggering--staggering--price hikes for the exact same coverage they currently have.

For example, this year, an average plan for a 26-year-old living in Michigan's Upper Peninsula costs about $340 a month. Next year, that monthly payment is scheduled to double, costing them $600 to $800 per month.

A family of four living in Detroit paid $980 a month in 2025 for the average plan. What that same plan will cost now if Republicans allow these essential healthcare credits to expire--well, that family is now going to be paying $2,700 a month.

Finally, let's take a 64-year-old couple living in Kent County. They currently pay roughly a $600 monthly premium for their coverage, but soon that cost will be over $2,000 a month for just their premium if Republicans continue to block these healthcare credits.

Remember, these monthly costs don't even count towards their deductibles. Folks will still have to pay more before their insurance even kicks in.

It is simply unacceptable to let these subsidies expire, and every single Member of Congress knows it. Working families cannot afford these increases without sacrificing other necessities, especially as inflation is making the cost of everyday goods more expensive.

We know the Trump tariffs are adding thousands of dollars of costs to the average family each and every year. As a result, too many families are being forced to make a gut-wrenching decision to go without their healthcare coverage altogether.

According to data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services, nearly 14,000 fewer Michiganders have enrolled in the Affordable Care Act plan compared to this time last year. That is almost 14,000 Michiganders who may have to go without healthcare all next year because my Republican colleagues refuse to act.

We know that when less people have insurance, it drives up the cost of healthcare for everybody else in the country.

There is no question that America is facing a healthcare affordability crisis, and these credits are the best tool we have to provide some financial relief right now--right now--for families who desperately need it. But Republicans have made it clear time and time again that they are perfectly fine letting this program expire, all the while offering no true alternative vision for how we can keep healthcare costs down for everyday Americans.

But Democrats--we are not going to sit back. We are not going to stall any further. This week, the Senate will vote on a bill that would extend these critical tax credits for 3 years. This commonsense proposal would protect access to affordable, comprehensive healthcare that helps keep American families healthy.

Simply put, if we pass this bill, we could literally save lives. That is exactly why I voted to pass the Affordable Care Act into law during my first time in the U.S. House back in 2009.

This week, I will proudly vote, once again, to make healthcare more affordable and accessible for every American. That is who we are as Democrats. That is what we have always fought for because we believe that access to affordable healthcare is a fundamental right.

For the sake of hard-working Americans in Michigan, as well as all across our country, I hope my Republican colleagues will join us in protecting that fundamental right.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Lt. Col. Susie Dunham on her distinguished 22-year career of dedicated service to the Air Force and Air National Guard. Lieutenant Colonel Dunham served as the lead liaison for the National Guard Bureau appropriations and expertly managed engagements with Senate and House Appropriations Committees.

She facilitated seamless communication between military leadership and the U.S. Congress while directly managing correspondence with over 90 congressional offices in the House of Representatives. As the National Guard's primary point of contact for House Appropriators and Budget Committee

Members, Lieutenant Colonel Dunham oversaw a diverse portfolio of Air and Army National Guard priorities, coordinating across the National Guard Bureau joint staff, as well as ANG and ARNG staffs.

Commissioned into the Air Force in 2003 after graduating from the University of Virginia, Lieutenant Colonel Dunham earned both Top Graduate and Top Academic Awards from Undergraduate Air Battle Manager Training. She then served in the E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System Unit at Tinker Air Force Base, OK. She accumulated over 2,000 E- 3 flying hours, including 580 combat hours during Operations Enduring Freedom/Iraqi Freedom. She also gained 200 hours on the MU-2 and served as both an instructor and evaluator air battle manager.

As an Air National Guardsman, she defended the National Capitol Region Special Flight Rules Area and prosecuted hundreds of tracks of interest in support of Operation Noble Eagle. During this time, she served as a tactical coordinator, air defense liaison officer for NCR rotary wing operations, air weapons officer, instructor, evaluator, and chief of training at the Joint Air Defense Operation Center and National Capitol Region Coordination Center.

Lieutenant Colonel Susie Dunham exemplified selfless service to our Nation during her 22-year career in the Air Force and Air National Guard. I ask the Senate to join me in celebrating her extraordinary career and enduring legacy.

Mr. President, I am just so disappointed that the UC request from my colleague from New Mexico was rejected--was objected to--by Republicans here on the floor of the Senate.

The fact that we are here trying to fix a terrible wrong that occurred last week is simply outrageous. While Senate Democrats were fighting to lower healthcare costs and trying to provide some financial relief for families who are seeing their costs skyrocket across the board, the Senate Republicans snuck in--and this is literally true-- they snuck in, in the dark of night, a provision, at the last minute, that would allow them to basically line their pockets.

This provision would allow a very select group of Republican Senators--let's be clear. This is to seek at least a half million dollars. It could go into the millions of dollars.

Very good.

This is what happened. Let's be clear. What the law does is that a group of folks can get over half a million dollars for records that were obtained. They were obtained as part of a legitimate criminal investigation.

It is unconscionable, at a time when families across the country are feeling the squeeze and struggling to make ends meet, that such a self- serving, retroactive provision was included in legislation to fund the government.

Let's be clear. No citizen of the United States gets this. No House Member gets this. This is just about Senators.

It has all the appearances, certainly, of a cash grab. And if the American taxpayers who are going to have to foot this bill--let's be clear. No Senator should get special treatment or a special payday for legally obtained records. I want to stress that part. These records were obtained through a standard legal process as part of a legitimate criminal investigation related to January 6, involving authorized subpoenas of those Senators' potential involvement.

I have heard this described as partisan, political targeting. But unlike

the bogus investigations President Trump has ordered into his political enemies, this whole situation arose from President Trump's own efforts to overturn a free and fair Presidential election. During the Department of Justice's investigation into this crime, the Special Counsel petitioned the court for a subpoena for those records, and the court approved it.

Mr. President, you know that is the law. That is the process. You go and get a subpoena. You have to go before a court. You have to present evidence, and the court looks at that evidence and then makes a decision. And the court approved it.

It is completely legal because it was relevant to their investigation of the President's attempt to overturn election results and to stay in power illegally. We can't forget that. We can't whitewash that. We cannot let attempts to spin this into some sort of partisan targeting against certain individuals.

First off, it sets a very dangerous precedent that could chill any effort to conduct legitimate investigations of criminal wrongdoing by Members of this body or anywhere else down the line. We surely should not put the American people in the position of being, basically, a slush fund for a few individuals interested in making a whole lot of money and having the taxpayers foot the bill.

I want to give my colleagues the benefit of the doubt about how this provision was put into the bill. Today, they had a chance to do the right thing. They had a chance to repeal it and say: Yes, this is bad. That is the way we ensure that no Senator gets special treatment, and we can get back to doing the work to better serve our constituents.

So I hope we can fix this wrong. Our friends across the Capitol here, in the House, voted unanimously--every Republican and every Member of the Democratic caucus. We came together.

Do you want to see bipartisanship in Washington? Everybody says: Gosh, I wish this body could come together in a bipartisan way.

We saw it in the House today. They said that this provision is terrible. They said it was outrageous, and they said it was a cash grab--and they did it unanimously. We could have done it unanimously here today. We could have fixed this.

Again, I don't know how it got in there. I am sure there was nothing nefarious. I am not saying there was anything nefarious. But it got in there. It clearly is wrong. Anybody who looks at the face of it knows it is wrong. That is why the House voted unanimously, and that is why I hope at some point we can do the right thing and fix this.