Floor Statements

Mr. President, the chairman and I share a bipartisan commitment to putting our veterans first, including providing them with the kind of memorial and cemetery recognition that they have well earned. There is no difference between us on that point.

And I think we also share a belief that Members of the U.S. Senate have a duty--it is a constitutional duty--to hold accountable the executive branch and demand information from the executive branch to perform our obligations of oversight and scrutiny.

I think we also share a respect for Sam Brown's service to our Nation. As a veteran--as a decorated veteran--who has earned appreciation for his service, the kinds of qualifications he brings to this office are impressive. But this nominee was advanced out of committee by a 10-to-9 vote. So it is clear he does not have unanimous support.

He said, when he was asked about whether he would support the Trump administration's plan to fire nearly

one-fifth of the VA's workforce, including many who are veterans themselves--in fact, one-third of the VA's workforce are veterans:

We owe it to the Secretary in good faith to hear his full

plan, which none of us have heard yet.

That is really the point. This issue is bigger than Sam Brown. It is about information that has been denied to our committee and to us as Senators.

The Secretary of the VA is actively working to undermine our bipartisan oversight efforts. Cuts have been made to contracts that delivered critical support and services to veterans. Despite multiple bipartisan requests, the Secretary refuses to share the list of canceled contracts. Thousands of VA employees have been bullied, driven off their jobs, or fired by Elon Musk and Secretary Collins. And there are plans to fire 83,000 employees, and we haven't seen those plans. All the Secretary has told us is that it is his goal and he will accomplish that goal. He denied us that basic information.

So I have said I am opposing this nomination until we are given the information and disclosure we need to do our jobs. The Secretary has issued a pause on rulemaking that effectively halts efforts underway to provide veterans, including K2 veterans suffering from radiation exposure, the benefits they desperately need, or PFAS victims or other victims of toxic exposure. And he has refused to indicate when this so- called pause will be lifted or whether it is permanent.

Again, we have a job to do, and we have a right to demand--in fact, the Constitution requires that we make that demand--the VA must be transparent and accountable. Instead, the Secretary has come before our committee. He dissembled, he obfuscated, he has attacked anyone who questions him, and he denies us the basic information--denies the American people the information--that he owes us.

My request is simple. If the President or my Republican colleagues believe that a certain nominee is a priority, come clean with the American people. Give us the information we need. What contracts have been canceled? Who is impacted by that action? What research has been stopped? Who has been fired, and who will be fired? What is the plan? Address the unprecedented levels of obstructionism from this administration and give the American people, including our Nation's veterans, the full and public debate they deserve.

For these reasons, I object.

Mr. President, I respect the points that my colleague from Kansas has just made as chairman. We have worked together in a bipartisan way. I hope we will continue to work together to make sure that the National Cemetery Administration is given the resources it needs and the personnel that are required to make sure this Nation honors our veterans.

As we speak, members of that workforce, the National Cemetery Administration, have been fired or are being fired or will be fired. Resources may be strangled. We deserve to know--we need to know--to honor our veterans. That is the information we are demanding from this Secretary of the VA.

I respect the assurances that Sam Brown will do his job. But when he was asked specifically at his hearing whether, if directed by the President to take action that would break the law, he responded that he could not ``imagine a scenario where the President would ask me to do anything unlawful.'' We know the President has asked members of this administration to do unlawful actions.

But the main point is bigger than Sam Brown. What are the resources that are being withheld in both workforce and dollars to expand our cemeteries as is required to make sure we provide places that honor our veterans? This basic information is an absolute prerequisite for us to do our job and assure that veterans are really honored on this Memorial Day and every day of the year.

We owe our veterans that honor--honor with action--every day, not just Memorial Day. Americans who lay wreaths this Memorial Day are entitled to know what dollars, what commitments, what plans there are for our national cemeteries. We need and deserve that disclosure.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, a lot of Americans are watching this spectacle: a $400 million gift from Qatar, which President Trump has called a ``palace in the sky.''

It would be for his personal use now and then afterward when he is a private citizen. And they are wondering, Isn't there a law that prevents it? Isn't there some statute that stops this corruption--a gift to the President from a foreign power that makes him beholden for his personal benefit and use?

And the answer to the American people is, yes, there is a law. In fact, it is in the Constitution. It is a specific clause. It is called the foreign emoluments clause. It states:

[N]o person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under

them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of

any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind

whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

And the reason for this clause, which was written by the Founders centuries ago, is so powerfully shown today. At the beginning of our Nation, we were a small country, potentially influenced by big foreign powers--England, France.

The Founders were concerned that our Presidents or other officials could be bought, could be influenced, could be pressured by those foreign powers. So they specifically wrote into the statutes a measure that protected our small Nation then.

It applies equally now. In fact, now, it is even more a protection of our national security. This plane is emblematic of a core, metastasizing corruption, an economic cancer that has infected the White House, but it is also emblematic of a national security threat from nations who would buy our President--maybe not signed, sealed, and delivered but exert undue influence.

In fact, the national security threat is even greater from this plane, which would have to be taken apart--a huge expense to American taxpayers--literally taken apart down to its shell.

As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I can tell you that there are foreign powers all over the world who would like nothing better than a Qatar plane to be carrying the President of the United States--potentially bugged, infiltrated by systems that could be hacked by them, not just by Qatar or other Mideast nations.

It is a threat to our national security to have the President of the United States riding in this plane unless it is, in effect, taken apart and put back together with the systems and the safeguards that are included on Air Force One.

This blatantly corrupt act shows that the President is just in it for himself. In fact, that kind of equipping of the plane will take billions of dollars of taxpayer money and years of work to bring this aircraft up to the requirements--the minimal requirements--of Air Force One, ready in time for the President to use it after he leaves office. And President Trump won't even pay the transfer fees.

The reports that the U.S. Air Force will pay all of the costs related to retrofitting and transferring this plane to the United States, even to the Presidential library, show the blatant corruption here. Accepting the plane is bad enough, but foisting on taxpayers the expense of retrofitting it and updating it and then transferring it to his foundation is an insult to every American.

And my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would like to say it is only Democrats who are objecting, but, in fact, MAGA media personalities strongly agree. One described the planned gift of this plane as a ``bribe''--pretty right on. Another called it ``indefensible''--also right.

Even Laura Loomer opposes this gift. She described this incident as a ``stain'' on the Trump administration. I never thought I would say that she is right, too, but it is a stain not on the Trump administration alone. It is a stain on America. It is a stain on our national honor. It is a stain on the integrity of the greatest country in the history of the world.

Foreign governments have figured out how to get to Donald Trump. It is through his wallet, his vanity, and his bank account.

It is not just this ``palace in the sky.'' The Qatari Government has signed a $5.5 billion deal with the Trump Organization to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar, complete with Trump-branded beach side villas and an 18-hole golf course.

And it is not just Qatar. President Trump has also pursued new business deals with the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and others, including Serbia.

On May 1, Trump's cryptocurrency firm announced that an investment fund backed by the United Arab Emirates would be using President Trump's digital coins to complete a $2 billion transaction. Through this deal, President Trump and his family stand to gain hundreds of millions of dollars from a foreign state, and their ``cryptocurrency empire,'' if I can use that term loosely, which includes World Liberty Financial, as well as their meme coin, $TRUMP, is making hundreds of millions of dollars--literally, hundreds of millions of dollars, for example, through the transfer fee involved in FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT. That is the reason that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations Minority Staff, which I head, has written asking for more facts from FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT and World Liberty Financial.

But this crypto corruption is, again, just one more of the ongoing corrupt con games that President Trump has helmed. LIV Golf, backed by the Saudi Government, will host a tournament at Trump National Doral resort later this year, and the Trump Organization has announced new real estate developments on government-owned land in Serbia and elsewhere.

Now, there is a kind of fundamental principle here, and it goes back to the Founders. The American President is supposed to work for the American people, not for his own enrichment. In foreign policy and on the international stage, he is supposed to represent the United States of America, not his own

business interests, or any foreign state or any business privately.

And that is what the emoluments clause is meant to guarantee. It protects our national security, as well as the integrity of our political system.

When President Trump, brazenly and shamefully, flouts the constitutional protections implemented by the Founders to avoid improper influence, he violates one of the core principles of our Constitution. He has never come to Congress asking for any permission for any of these deals; that is for sure. His willingness to use the privileges of his office to enrich himself and his family seems to know no bounds. Congress simply cannot stand aside because Congress is the one who has to enforce the emoluments clause.

I know. I went to court during the first Trump term. I organized many of my colleagues in both the House and the Senate to ask the courts to enforce the emoluments clause, and we won in district court. Our case failed in the court of appeals because of lack of standing; that is to say, we lacked authorization, specific permission from the House or the Senate to go forward.

There were 214 other Members of Congress who joined in my lawsuit to enforce this clause. There is no other party that is an enforcer for this clause, and if the President refuses to seek our approval for acceptance of these foreign benefits, we have no choice but to go to court again.

I am hopeful that my Republican colleagues will join me in saying: Well, we may be wrong about all of this corruption, about what Blumenthal is saying about the violation of the foreign emoluments clause, but let's let a court decide. Let's bring it to a judge on the Federal court--because in my view this violation of law is so abjectly and obviously clear that it demands an answer from the courts.

Accordingly, in a moment, I will ask for unanimous consent to pass a resolution that would direct Senate legal counsel to file a lawsuit on behalf of the U.S. Senate to enforce the emoluments clause.

And I will just close by saying to my Republican colleagues: I challenge you. I challenge you to prove that you are more than just lackeys to President Trump, that you are just more than automatic approvers of whatever he does, his self-enrichment schemes, and show that the Senate still has spine, still has self-respect, and still has respect for the Founders, who said that no one is above the law.

No one can brazenly and shamefully commit corruption that endangers the national security of the United States of America and makes our Nation vulnerable to this kind of interference from foreign powers, whether they are in the Middle East or Russia or anywhere around the globe.

And so, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 219, submitted earlier today, and that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, if President Trump is everything that my colleague has just said, he never would have suggested this $400 million boondoggle. He never would have thought that the American people should pay billions of dollars to retrofit the plane. He never would have risked the American security in the threat that is posed by foreign powers bugging or hacking the security devices or disabling the mechanisms of this plane.

And if this President never flies on this plane, it will only be because of the vocal and vehement protests that we are seeing, not only on the floor of the U.S. Senate but across the country, from MAGA personalities and commentators to everyday Americans who are aghast that hundreds of millions--in fact, billions--of dollars will be spent on this boondoggle that puts at risk American security. If President Trump never takes possession of this plane, it will only be because he has been embarrassed and shamed by our vehement and vocal protests against doing it. And the reaction of everyday Americans has been one of vehement objection.

But this plane is only the most visible and tangible evidence of a corrupt administration--and, particularly, the crypto corruption, where hundreds of millions of dollars are literally flowing into the bank accounts and pockets of President Trump and his family. And everyday Americans are suffering losses because of it.

The investors in his meme coin--tens of thousands of them--are losers. They have lost money. And many other Americans are likely to suffer losses as well. So the tangible impact of that crypto corruption is real and present and ongoing.

And so I think enforcement of the emoluments clause through a lawsuit brought by the Senate of the United States, authorized through this resolution, is absolutely necessary and appropriate now.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Town & County Club in Hartford, CT, a remarkable organization dedicated to advancing the interests of women.

The Town & County Club is a private women's city club located in Hartford's historic Asylum Hill neighborhood. The club was formed in 1925--just 5 years after women gained the right to vote--by a group of 400 progressive and determined women. Investing their own resources and time, the early membership was committed to three objectives: to provide an organized center for women's work, thought, and action; to advance the interests of women; and to promote the sciences, literature, and art.

The focal point of the club is the historic 1895 Theodore Lyman House. At this beautifully maintained facility, the club serves as a retreat for both members and guests to converse, connect, and celebrate, hosting a wide variety of events, special occasions, and other activities. This includes everything from birthday parties, weddings, anniversaries, and memorials to business events, conferences, and presentations.

The club also undertakes significant and remarkable philanthropic activities. This includes the Town & County Club Scholarship Fund, created over 23 years ago to assist women who are actively pursuing an undergraduate college degree in the Greater Hartford area. To date, over $350,000 in scholarship funds have been awarded to 142 deserving women, the majority of whom were both working and raising a family as they pursued their education. The club also hosts the Lyman Heritage Preservation Foundation, a nonprofit organization whose purpose is to restore and preserve the historic property, as well as engage in educational and outreach initiatives in local communities.

The Town & County Club is celebrating their 100th anniversary on May 21--a truly remarkable milestone--and remains dedicated to its original principles of scholarship and the uplifting of women. I hope my colleagues will join me in celebrating the Town & County Club and the outstanding services they provide for the Greater Hartford community.

Mr. President, I am here to speak against S.J. Res. 7.

This resolution would prevent millions of students, educators, and families from getting online--literally from enjoying the vast benefits and resources of the online world.

Today, students and educators are dependent on broadband to learn and teach, to communicate with each other, to establish relationships and communities. Digital education has allowed for more flexible learning opportunities for all of us, whatever our ages, but most specifically, for students doing their homework, doing lectures, engaging in discussions, and so much more--all of it online. It is a different world, and now S.J. Res. 7 threatens to cut off and constrict that world.

The internet can be a tremendous educational resource, opening new doors for curious students, and digital literacy skills are fundamental to succeeding in this digital economy, but that economy also creates a new system of haves and have-nots. In education, that divide is called the homework gap. It is a fundamental question of equity and fairness to close that gap. Studies have shown that without broadband at home, people earn lower grades than their connected classmates--no secret as to why. It is a resource that enables better learning and more achievement. That learning loss sets them back in career prospects and other opportunities. It sets them back for a lifetime, potentially. We saw the impact of the homework gap during COVID, when students were forced to take classes and exams from the parking lots of McDonald's. Literally, some of us saw students in those so-called hotspots, away from their homes, because it was the only way they could access their homework.

Now, to combat that homework gap, Congress established a fund in 2021 for schools and libraries to loan Wi-Fi hotspots to students and educators. The program was an enormous success, ensuring nearly 18 million students at over 10,000 schools and libraries could get online. In Connecticut, that Federal support, in addition to State funding, was wildly successful to our closing the homework gap. We made sure that every single student had access to a laptop and to high-speed broadband. I am so proud of everyone in Connecticut who was responsible for this program of combining Federal and State resources in the best way; but, unfortunately, Federal funds ran out.

Rather than leave students behind, the Federal Communications Commission issued a rule last summer that would allow schools to continue providing Wi-Fi hotspots under its E-Rate program. The E-Rate program exists to help schools and libraries provide affordable internet access; so that was a natural step for the FCC last summer. In Connecticut, funds from the E-Rate hotspot rule are supporting hotspot lending programs in Hamden, Norwalk, and at countless other libraries. I have visited them. I have seen the faces of educators and students excited about this enormous potential that brings together communities, frankly, from all different political parties.

There is nothing partisan about this program, but, today, my Republican colleagues are trying to cut off those students in Hamden, Norwalk, and elsewhere in Connecticut and millions and millions of their peers all around the country. This resolution would nullify the FCC's rule that allows schools and libraries participating to join Wi- Fi hotspots to students.

I have to ask, Really? Are schools and teachers crying out to repeal this rule? Really? No, they are not. How does this proposal make any sense for them or for families? for the parents? for the community? It makes no sense.

This resolution would undo, in fact, all of the hard work in closing the digital divide in States like Connecticut, where people have devoted lives and careers to helping students close that homework gap and do better. It will renew and exacerbate those inequalities of access for rural and low-income communities. It will set back millions of students in the name of--what? In the name of what? What is the rationale? There is none. It is an embarrassment. It is a disaster. It is a self-inflicted wound that we can avoid here on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

I want to remind everyone here that once we vote in favor of this rule, we can't go back, literally. You all know the rules. We can't go back. The FCC may not adopt a similar rule in the future. This is an irreversible, self-inflicted wound. So I urge my colleagues to reject this misguided, wrong-headed resolution. It would be a disgrace if we deprive those students and their families of this vast resource, of literally life-changing access to a really necessary service that helps them not just now but throughout their futures. We ought to expand internet access, not constrict it. We ought to be enhancing it, not cutting it off.

And this effort is in the name of what? It makes no sense except that it exemplifies some of the cruelty and meanness and stupidity of the Elon Musk approach to public service and public access and fairness in our society.

I urge my colleagues to take the positive step--and it would be a positive step--of continuing this enormously important program in the name of educational future, tomorrow and in the days afterward, for our students in Connecticut and around the country.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, of all the thrills of living in a democracy, none is more meaningful than walking into a voting booth and casting a ballot. I can remember the first time I did it when I came of age.

I can remember, always--and I see it again and again and again--new citizens walking out of the courtroom after the naturalization ceremony, with their certificates of citizenship in their hands and handing it to the League of Women Voters person who is doing voter registrations. It is the thrill of their lifetime to be registered.

Of all the rights we have, voting is perhaps the most meaningful and the most practiced. It is foundational to all the others. It is the way we preserve the others. And that is why the fight for voting rights-- and blood has been spilled in the effort to secure it--is a storied bedrock of our American history.

And, now, again--as there has been throughout our history--there are efforts to suppress that right for political reasons, for political gain. That is what we have in the SAVE Act, an effort to erect obstacles and to require documentation that, very simply, Americans-- many of them--don't have.

This measure is a solution--supposed solution--in search of a problem. There is no widespread voter fraud. Undocumented people, noncitizens, almost never try to vote. And I am using the word ``almost'' because I am tempted to say ``never.'' But, of course, you can't rule out a negative. You can't prove it.

But the fact of the matter is, widespread voter fraud, even significant voter fraud by noncitizens, is an imaginary, delusional issue. Some 21 million U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote don't have the requisite documentation that would be required under the SAVE Act. To solve the delusional nonproblem, the SAVE Act would deprive real citizens of the real right to vote--21 million of them. Married women, younger voters, voters of color--they are the ones who are going to be impacted. I don't know how they would vote in Connecticut or elsewhere, but they have a right to vote, and we should not be fooled by this wolf in sheep's clothing, a measure that masquerades as preserving democracy.

We should not let our voter rolls be purged by a measure that has false pretenses. We must protect the right of every eligible citizen to vote. The best way to do it is to say no to this bill, and I ask my Republican colleagues to join me in saying no because this issue is larger than any one of us.

I hear again and again and again from my constituents in Connecticut about their concern that the right to vote may be restricted. I say to the people of Connecticut right here and now: I will fight this bill because it is wrong, because it eviscerates voting rights, and because it threatens our democracy.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am honored to follow the ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee and to be followed by another distinguished member of that same committee and to focus on these first 100 days.

The focus on the first 100 days of an administration, I think, comes from

the time of Franklin Roosevelt and his 100 days in the midst of deep depression, despondency, and despair on the part of the American people, and the whirlwind of activity that he brought to addressing our Nation's depression.

And there are dramatic differences between those 100 days and the 100 days we have seen from President Trump. First and foremost, our economy was at near full employment, at a time of solid prosperity, 100 days ago, and we are now sliding toward exactly the kind of economic downturn that F.D.R. helped to address.

Second, in those first 100 days of the Roosevelt administration, there was a whirlwind of congressional activity, inspired by the President, with his proposals for new Agencies and programs and investments. Congress was a partner. In this administration, President Trump has acted unilaterally by Executive order--illegally, unconstitutionally, and unchecked, except by courts that have been a bulwark.

In those first 100 days of the Roosevelt administration, F.D.R. appealed to our ``better angels,'' our willingness to give back, to be generous to our fellow Americans. He later inspired us with the call to ``a rendezvous with destiny.'' In this administration, which is plagued with corruption, crypto theft, and Musk exploitation of Agencies, it is a downward spiral, a race to the bottom in an appeal to self-indulgence and self-enrichment.

There are many, many other differences, but the whirlwind of activity here has produced chaos. That is the operative word: chaos. The turmoil and turbulence have produced confusion and, yes, anxiety, deep fear, and apprehension about the future of this country. And the poll numbers only reflect not only the downward spiral of our economy but of our confidence in the future.

This administration has been cruel, and it has been dumb. It is unmatched for its meanness and stupidity--the harm and hurt done to everyday Americans in real life and realtime; the harm in tariffs already having effect on the uncertainty of businesses about the future, their inability to plan, to invest in new manufacturing, and the fear of people that they will be jobless and lose the dignity of work and be hit with higher prices for everything from groceries to gasoline, to housing; the harm done in healthcare already, our federally qualified health centers deprived of funding, NIH research grants for curing cancer, for diabetes or hypertension canceled or frozen; in education, the uncertainty and loss of funding for special education and other programs that benefit children and the neediest and most vulnerable of our districts, in rural areas as well as urban; and, of course, the damage to our fundamental freedoms, women's reproductive freedoms, the suspension of title X grants, and the assault on women's healthcare--other freedoms: the basic due process of people who should have a right to receive notice and the opportunity to be heard before they are deported, before they are detained, before they are imprisoned or put on a plane to be imprisoned out of the country.

Basic fairness and due process rights that involve also the President intimidating law firms with threats that they will be denied access to security clearances or even to go on to governmental property, and intimidation and threatening our universities, supposedly in the name of anti-Semitism--nobody hates anti-Semitism more than I do, but I despise using anti-Semitism as a pretext or a guise simply to attack people or institutions because they disagree with a public official.

We live in a time when the rule of law is under threat, perhaps as never before in my lifetime, and the cause of freedom, all around the world, is in jeopardy. Ukraine has been betrayed. This Nation has switched sides to the enduring and deep detriment of our standing in the world, our reliability as a partner and ally. The harm may be irreparable.

We must stand with Ukraine. We now have more than 60 cosponsors of a Russia sanctions bill that I have been proud to lead with Senator Graham--it is bipartisan, evenly divided in cosponsorship--to send a message to Vladimir Putin: We are going to hit you, and we are going to hit you hard economically if you continue to stall and string along America, if you continue to play the President.

But Donald Trump has been a seemingly willing partner in being played by Vladimir Putin, his bro, his role model, perhaps.

Nobody has a stronger right to claim credit for preserving our freedoms in the past and now than our veterans, and they have been betrayed by this administration. For our veterans, it has been 100 days of chaos, of cruelty, stupidity, anxiety on their part, and apprehension, and 100 days of decisions made about their healthcare and their benefits. They were promised healthcare, and they were promised benefits. And now this administration is breaking those promises, not by coming to Congress and asking for a rescission or changing the PACT Act, which we passed in a bipartisan way, but simply by firing the people who were supposed to approve those claims for PACT Act benefits for veterans who have been exposed to toxic chemicals or burn pits.

And this is an administration that has fired already 2,500 of those dedicated VA employees, close to one-third of them veterans themselves, thousands from the Federal workforce, generally, close to 30 percent of them are veterans as well. And make no mistake, every one of these days has been a time of crisis for those veterans. Since day one, the administration has systematically shortchanged and betrayed veterans with its policies.

They have not only fired that 2,500 in reckless mass terminations of probationary employees--our young workforce, starting out on jobs, our VA future, and some of them dedicated multiyear employees who have just been promoted and, therefore, are in those new positions on a probationary basis. They have been promoted because they were good at their jobs and dedicated and hard-working, and they have been fired.

That is why I have proposed the Putting Veterans First Act, which would put those veterans back on the job--all of them from the VA--and put those veterans back on the job from the Federal workforce, and make sure that anybody who is terminated in the future gets a right to a personal, individual evaluation, and not just fired because Elon Musk wants to meet certain numbers or apply an algorithm or have his tech bros pick out randomly, arbitrarily names from the list.

There are 83,000 of those VA jobs on the chopping block. The approach of this Secretary of the VA, of Elon Musk, and Donald Trump is ``Fire first, plan later''; ``Fire first, evaluate later.''

I am disappointed that so many of my Republican colleagues are seeking to minimize or diminish the human impacts of these cuts, because I am hearing from veterans, just as I am from people in Connecticut and all around the country.

I went to Michigan just last week to talk to folks there. Those human impacts are heartbreaking because these actions are heartless, and they are impactful not only on the incomes of these people but on their self-worth, their sense of dignity. They have devoted their lives to caring for veterans, and now, with the sweep of a hand, they get the back of a hand from Elon Musk, who has never ever even thought about wearing the uniform of the U.S. military.

These human impacts include world-class researchers who are looking into how to predict stroke risk among veterans; enrollment of veterans into clinical trials for advanced cancer delayed because of the VA's hiring freeze; openings for new clinics that have been delayed because the VA can't hire the necessary staff to open their doors; the VA mental health staff forced to conduct counseling sessions in open cubicles without privacy, basic privacy, for the veterans who are talking about their innermost doubts and fears; service lines at VA hospitals and clinics that have been halted; beds in operating rooms at VA facilities that have been suspended. We are hearing about VA supply teams now understaffed and behind on placing critical supply requests for medication and equipment; support lines for caregivers that have been reduced; Veterans Crisis Line employees fired and, after a public backlash, maybe some rehired, as we heard today in a hearing of the Veterans Affairs' Committee. But the impact is enduring because suicide prevention has to be done in the moment, and suicide

prevention training sessions have been postponed or canceled.

Earlier this month, the Secretary announced he will be abruptly canceling the VA Servicing Purchase Program, known as VASP, on May 1. Now, I know very few of my colleagues have heard about VASP, but it is a program that enables veterans to get some very temporary, short-term help so they can avoid eviction from their homes and the homelessness that we are all ashamed to acknowledge continues to exist in the greatest country in the history of the world.

Our veterans are on the streets without shelter because they lack homes, and here is a program designed to keep them in their homes, and the Secretary is canceling it.

With housing more unaffordable than ever and veterans losing their jobs, I am at a loss--total, absolute loss--to understand how he can cancel a critical program that helps veterans undergoing financial hardship to stay in their homes.

I challenge the Secretary of the VA; I challenge the President of the United States; I challenge my colleagues across the aisle: Instead of saying yes blindly to Elon Musk, when he says ``Slash and trash the VA, fire those thousands of people, and end those programs,'' look at them not as waste but as an investment.

Yes, if there is waste, let's eliminate it. But as the national commander of the VFW--Veterans of Foreign Wars--said to us in one of our hearings, when he was wounded in combat, the surgeon who took the shrapnel out of his arm did it with a scalpel; he did not cut the arm off with a chain saw. Let's give up Elon Musk's chain saw, and if there is waste, do it with a scalpel.

These first 100 days have been disgraceful and shameful, cruel and dumb, deeply un-American. These VA employees are the ones delivering healthcare to the people we love and revere.

To my colleagues across the aisle, I just want to remind you in closing that this is a moment that will define you, your career, your reputation. It is a moment of profound historic challenges that has been recognized with massive marches here in the Nation's Capital, in Connecticut, around our State--New London, New Haven, Westport, New Britain. I have been to many of them.

Veterans are one of most powerful voices in our country, and I urge them to use those voices and their faces to say: We need the PACT Act. We need veterans' healthcare. We need to fulfill our promises.

As VFW commander Al Lipphardt said at that hearing, apply pressure and stop the bleeding.

These heartless and heartbreaking cuts, firings, freezes are un- American. My Republican colleagues, who have been almost entirely silent, please do the right thing. Our country has made a sacred promise. Our duties as Members of Congress is to keep our promises.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, earlier today, I was unable to vote on Executive Calendar No. 80, David Perdue to be Ambassador to the People's Republic of China, due to my attendance as ranking member at a Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee hearing on mental health care for veterans. I would have opposed Mr. Perdue's confirmation had I been present for the vote, rollcall vote No. 215.

Madam President, I am here today in the hope that our colleagues will join me in condemning actions taken by President Trump and Elon Musk that are devastating to the healthcare of our veterans, as well as their disability benefits under the PACT Act, and most especially, deeply harmful to mental health care and suicide prevention for veterans, and to engage in this call for action restoring the doctors, counselors, psychiatrists, all who are essential to veterans' healthcare and have lost their jobs--thousands of them.

The plain, staggering fact is that Musk and Trump are kneecapping the VA healthcare system at a time when the VA projects a 59-percent increase. That is right. In this fiscal year going to 2032, a 59- percent increase in inpatient and outpatient mental health care is projected.

Now, they have taken a wrecking ball to the VA in order to save money that then can be used for tax cuts going to people who need them least--the ultrawealthy, the billionaires and millionaires--at a time when veterans who need healthcare most will be deprived of it.

The reason is quite simply the staffing shortages that they have purposefully created--2,400 already; on the chopping block, another 83,000--without a plan or a strategy, admitted to us by the VA itself. They are making it up as they go along, but they know they want to slash and trash the VA workforce.

This kind of cruel, heartless, heartbreaking approach to the VA comes at a time when they already have 40,000 openings of exactly the kind of skilled professionals that they are firing--40,000 openings, including 3,000 physician positions, 6,000 nurses, thousands of counselors, janitors, schedulers. And they are firing the very kind of people they are trying to recruit.

You would think that the Trump administration's top priority at the VA would be to bolster its mental health workforce at a time when 59- percent increase is projected, but they are doing just the opposite.

Since the beginning of this administration, there have been 2,400 employees unjustly and illegally terminated already, including Veterans Crisis Line employees. And the VA's newest staffing goal--that 83,000 number that I mentioned before--is going to be cutting employees at a time of ever-increasing demand, even in the short term.

All these cuts will do is to harm veterans. There is no elimination of waste or fraud or abuse. In every Agency and in every program, there is some waste, but the way to eliminate it is not to slash indiscriminately and draconian cuts as a way to do it.

While we wait for these 83,000 employees to be axed by Trump and Musk, we already see the impact. Employee assistance programs and mental health support contracts for the VA workforce have been canceled. Staff at vet centers--VA community-based counseling centers-- have been fired. VA mental health staff are being forced to conduct counseling sessions in open cubicles, putting veterans' privacy at risk. World-class researchers performing research on mental health and substance abuse disorders among veterans have been terminated.

Most devastating of all, Veterans Crisis Line has seen a recent increase in call volume largely from veterans who were either terminated from the Federal workforce or who were concerned about losing their benefits or both, because at least a quarter up to a third or more of the Federal workforce are veterans, and they need that mental health care.

Amidst that flood of cruel actions taken by the administration, I am proud that my Democratic colleagues have been united in our resistance to these relentless attacks on veterans.

It is not only on mental health care, it is all healthcare. It is not only on healthcare, it is on the PACT Act for veterans who need that screening, benefits, care. And it is not a matter of eliminating waste because we know the way to eliminate waste is to go line by line, item by item carefully and thoughtfully--or as Al Lipphardt, the national commander of the VFW, told us--and he was describing a wound that he sustained while in combat during the Vietnam war:

I am thankful that the medics who treated me chose not to

take my whole arm for the sake of efficiency. It took a

trained eye, a skillful hand, and human intuition to fix me

up and get me back in the fight. In my experience, those

operating with a scalpel have a better chance at saving limbs

than those who operate with a chainsaw.

What we are seeing right now is the DOGE tech bros under Elon Musk operating with that famous chain saw that he has displayed, and they are doing it to the detriment of our veterans and to those who are being fired.

As Mr. Lipphardt said, these veterans are now being told their skills are no longer useful to the government. We are losing people who are genuinely committed to the mission and find a continued sense of purpose in what they do.

These dedicated, patriotic veterans--the ones who work at the VA, the ones who are served by the VA--are deeply disserved and damaged by these actions. As Mr. Lipphardt said, finally: We need to stop the bleeding. We need to, as he said, ``apply pressure and stop the bleeding.''

I am joined on the Senate floor today by two of my colleagues who have been integral to this fight, Senator Sanders and Senator Duckworth, who will be calling for passage of their own resolutions aimed at reversing damage from the Trump/Musk attacks on veterans.

I hope that our votes on these resolutions send a message. I hope we will have unanimous support for my resolution and for theirs, that we will keep faith with our veterans, and we will leave none of them behind.

Madam President, first, I ask unanimous consent that the text of my resolution be printed in the Record.

As if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of my resolution, which is at the desk. Further, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon table with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, I want to respond very quickly by saying, first of all, I think we share a lot of goals, but we need action. The VA is in crisis impending right now, in real time, affecting real lives in real time, people who need mental health care now, who need the Veterans Crisis Line now, who need those counselors and psychiatrists now.

What I am asking is unanimous consent for a resolution that calls for restoring the VA workforce to meet that crisis and to doing right by our veterans. It shouldn't be partisan. It isn't partisan.

I have been critical of the VA under Democratic administrations, under General Shinseki when he was there and the delays were unacceptable, and nobody was more direct or critical than I was.

We can be bipartisan in our praise and in our criticism, but we need to stand up to the Musk-Trump slash-and-trash regime that has been so harmful to our veterans. And we can't go about it with business as usual. These draconian, indiscriminate cuts are doing harm to our veterans as we speak, and to avoid action is not only inappropriate, it is injustice to our Nation's heroes.

Reserving the right to object, let me first say I appreciate the work of my colleague, the chairman of the VA Committee, where I am the ranking Democrat. Chairman Moran and I work together in a very bipartisan way on a lot of legislation.

I would like to support his resolution, but we received it only about an hour ago, and so I have been unable to check with my colleagues on this side as to whether there is any objection among them.

Second, although I would like to support it, I have to say no, not because of something it has but what it lacks, and that is, it fails to mention anything about the Trump-Musk assault on the VA and its workforce and particularly the negative impacts of those actions on veterans' mental health and suicide prevention. It fails to call for restoring the VA's skilled professional workforce that is necessary to provide sufficient healthcare, particularly mental health care.

I should also note that prior to Secretary Collins and DOGE, wait times for care--before they took over and seized control, wait times actually decreased in 2024 while the number of new patient appointments increased by 11 percent. So this idea that somehow the VA was wholly failing before this administration is exactly the opposite of reality. The time to process each claim actually decreased. The VA processed 116,192 veterans' appeals, representing a 12.5-increase over last year's record. Those are claims for disability and compensation. Additionally, under the previous administration, veteran homelessness reached record lows--a 55.6-percent reduction since 2010.

The VA also made it easier for veterans to seek mental health care while reducing wait times for that care in new appointments.

Claims that the VA has been placing more barriers for veterans to receive care in the VA and through community care are simply untrue. Since 2019, the VA has made enormous improvements in customer service and has become more welcoming to veterans through historic outreach.

If we listen to veterans, as I do every weekend because I go home every weekend, what I hear is customer satisfaction rising and happiness with VA healthcare. Sure, there are criticisms, and we need to meet those criticisms. There are shortcomings, and we need to improve VA healthcare to address those shortcomings. But VA trust has increased to the point of 80.4 percent this year--an alltime record and an increase of 25 percent since 2016.

Let me just say about labor rights and union activities at the VA, labor organizing and collective bargaining actually expedite conflict resolution. It reduces legal costs. It actually saves money through collective bargaining, not to mention the waste, fraud, and abuse that it helps the Department uncover and address. Those negotiations have allowed the Department to bar criminally bad actors from receiving settlement funds and being reinstated.

There is a lot more to say on this topic, but let me just finish by saying that I hope we can work together. I hope the chairman and I can work together in a bipartisan way to put together our two resolutions and devise one that will pass muster on both sides.

Because of the shortcomings of this resolution, I object.

Madam President, I thank Senator Schumer for opening this tremendously important segment of our argument, our case, against this budget resolution. I am here to talk about veterans--what they deserve and what they are being denied, what they have earned and what is being taken away.

I rise to honor veterans, who deserve our accolades for their service and their sacrifice.

Very often, we fail to appreciate who our veterans are. They are members of our family, our neighbors, our friends, my two sons who have served, one as a Marine Corps officer in Afghanistan and the other as a Navy SEAL. They are role models, as veterans of previous generations were role models for my two sons. They look like America, men and women--increasingly women--different races, religions, backgrounds, national origins. Some are immigrants.

What is common to all of them is that they share a bond. The bond among veterans is unique. And they are increasingly a smaller portion of our population. Less than 1 percent of Americans are veterans or even families of veterans.

More and more, they serve in multiple deployments. That is what we have seen over these last wars in Iraq and Afghanistan--multiple deployments.

We know that families serve as well as veterans.

And so the impact of the Veterans Affairs governmental structure, or VA, is more important now--or, at least, as important as ever before-- in keeping our word and our promise to those veterans that we will leave no veteran behind in jobs, in education, in skills training, and, yes, in healthcare.

The VA Healthcare Administration is the gold standard for this country, and veterans know it. They deserve it.

Today, we are in a crisis in veterans care. It is a crisis of this administration's making. It is a self-inflicted wound. It is a bleeding wound, and I am here to echo the commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars when he asked us in one of our hearings: Stop the bleeding. Stop the bleeding in our services to veterans through PACT Act care and benefits, in our VA hospitals around the country, in the Veterans Crisis Line, in programs to keep them in their homes. Stop the bleeding.

Already, 2,400 have been fired, and 83,000 jobs are on the chopping block. The VA Secretary has said: They are going to go.

We are here to sound the alarm and reverse this self-inflicted, ongoing, destructive cruelty and incompetence.

I would like to think that it is malign neglect, not purposeful malevolence. But one way or the other, the impact of Elon Musk and Donald Trump and, yes, Secretary Doug Collins has been monumentally destructive, and it is stupid. I am going to use a word that I told my children never to use--a four-letter word, D-U-M-B. It is dumb. There is no rhyme or reason to firing 83,000 members of the VA workforce, about a third of them veterans, when, at the same time, there are 40,000 openings for the same kinds of positions: surgeons, physicians, nurses, counselors, schedulers, janitors--they are all part of a team-- and including claims processors for the PACT Act, the Dole Act, and other kinds of benefits that they have earned and they deserve not next year but now. There is no sense in firing people for the very positions for which the VA is trying to recruit. It makes no sense.

We are at a moment of historic challenge that demands accountability. It demands actions, not just words. I understand the notion of accountability may be scary for the President, for Elon Musk, for Secretary Collins. Elon Musk is unappointed, unelected, unaccountable. But Doug Collins was chosen for this job, and he promised to be accountable.

He made a lot of other commitments that led me to vote for him, and that was a mistake for me, and I apologize to the people of Connecticut and the veterans of America for that error. But it was based on the commitments and the promises he made at the time, and one of them was to be accountable.

He has so far refused to answer my written questions and requests, not even the courtesy of a letter back. He is perhaps reluctant to provide those responses when he knows he is on the wrong side of the law. These firings, cuts, and freezes are illegal. He is on the wrong side of the facts. He is on the wrong side of history, and the veterans of America deserve better, and they know better.

Instead of coming before Congress under oath, hosting a regular press conference, like his predecessor, or attending a townhall open to the public--I have invited him to Connecticut--Secretary Collins hides behind social media and deceitful assurances to veterans. He attacks the media, veterans' leaders, Members of Congress. What he owes is the facts and actions to correct the mistakes that are being made in real time.

Veterans know better. They know that the Biden administration was delivering more benefits and more healthcare to more veterans than ever before, as a result of the PACT Act. They know that the care they receive at their local VA hospital or clinic is among the best in the country. They know they can rely on it. And they know that this administration is systematically betraying them with policies that put their interests last, not first; with the goal of saving money, not saving them. They know that that money is designed to finance tax cuts, not for them but for the billionaires and millionaires that populate this administration and drive this administration's policies.

And veterans know that this administration has fired 2,400 VA employees with consequences that are mushrooming in their disastrous impact. We are talking about people in positions of healthcare and disability benefits processing.

Now, I know disability benefits processing is a complicated abstract term, but what that means is, as every veteran knows, the compensation you deserve for injuries you have sustained is not just some hypothetical check in the distant future. It is now because it is needed now. It is not a promise that, a year or 2 years from now, you will be getting the benefits that you have earned and you deserve. It is right now that you need those benefits to put food on the table, to pay rent, to finance education, to pay for your kids' clothes. And the reason is that often our veterans with disabilities or veterans who have retired need that money to simply stay alive.

The health professionals who save lives every day, the schedulers and support staff who connect them to the care and services they need, and the claims processors who were producing at historic levels as of 3 months ago, I am disappointed to say a lot of them have been fired.

The cuts in funding, the freezes on hiring, the firing of the VA workforce have direct human impacts on real people in real time, and I am disappointed that a number of my Republican colleagues--so many of them--are seeking to minimize or diminish the human impacts of these cuts in funding, freezes, and firings.

But the human impacts are what trouble me the most. These heartless cuts, freezes, and firings are heartbreaking. We held a shadow hearing just a day or so ago where we heard from people whose lives had been upended, not just their lives but those they serve.

The human impacts of the firing of, for example, Shernice Mundell, an Air Force veteran, illegally fired after starting a new position in the Office of Personnel Management, confirmed DOGE's ``Fire first; aim and analyze later.'' That is, apparently, their strategy. Elon Musk has taken it over and weaponized it.

She said:

A lot of people get confused when they say OPM is the one

that is doing the firing. It is not OPM. It is DOGE, and they

are doing it, and they are just going under the guise of

being OPM.

She also confirmed that no one from DOGE ever reached out to understand her role or the role of her office at OPM, helping retired Postal Service employees with healthcare and benefits.

Her termination was announced in a prerecorded video. She had just been promoted because of her exemplary performance, and in that new position, she was provisional. She was fired. Maybe it was an algorithm or an AI formula, because she was provisional. One of our best and one of the first to go--it makes no sense.

Similarly, Jonathan Kamens, another of the mass probationary terminations. We heard from him and some of his colleagues that they were no longer needed. Really?

Before he joined his team at the U.S. Digital Service in 2023, his role was vacant for nearly a year due to the lack of qualified candidates, and there are live postings for the exact positions he and other fired colleagues held.

Now, his role was to protect the privacy and integrity of data in the VA system. Nobody is doing it now. The VA will be recruiting for it, but they have just fired him.

These are real life impacts on real people, and veterans know it, and they are telling the administration that they know it. They are telling the administration:

Our freedom was paid for in blood. Have some respect.

Remember our veterans. Remember those human impacts on the world- class researchers who were doing work on mental health and substance use disorders among veterans? They have been terminated. There are openings of new clinics that have been delayed because the VA cannot hire the necessary staff to open their doors. Our colleague from Virginia told us about the Hampton facility, which has been delayed because of an inability to fill those positions.

VA mental health staff are being forced to conduct counseling sessions while in open cubicles, putting veterans' privacy at risk.

Service lines at VA hospitals and clinics have been halted. Beds in operating rooms at VA facilities have been suspended. Support lines for caregivers have been reduced. Veterans Crisis Line employees have been fired, and suicide prevention training sessions have been postponed or canceled.

And just yesterday, the Secretary of the VA announced he will be canceling the VA Servicing Purchase Program, known as VASP. Everything in the military, in the VA has an acronym. This one is the Veterans Affairs Servicing Purchase Program, and it will be canceled at the end of the month.

What does that mean? This program helped veterans experiencing severe financial hardship avoid foreclosure and stay in their homes. It currently serves roughly 15,000 veterans. Like everyone else in this country, veterans are encountering financial hardship and tough times. They need to stay in their homes. We don't want them to be homeless. Veteran homelessness is a scourge that is unforgivable in the greatest country in the history of the world. This program enables them to avoid foreclosure. The VA is canceling them.

Housing is more unaffordable than ever before. Veterans are losing jobs across the Federal Government--83,000 from the VA alone, thousands of others from other Agencies, because the Federal workforce consists of about one-third veterans.

It is reprehensible that the Secretary is canceling a critical program that helps veterans undergoing tough financial times to stay in their homes. It is simply another heartless and heartbreaking decision by the Secretary that puts veterans needlessly, recklessly, incompetently at risk.

This Secretary apparently just is signing off and accepting every suggestion--maybe it is every order--from Elon Musk. He has the obligation--he took the oath--to put veterans before Elon Musk, to put veterans before savings to finance tax cuts for the billionaires, to put veterans first always.

That is the reason that I have introduced a measure called Putting Veterans First that would reverse all the firings from the VA. It would reverse all the firings of veterans from the Federal workforce. It would provide rights of appeal, the right to an individualized performance rating before someone is fired, not the videos or the mass firings that have been used. It would protect the privacy of veterans in the VA system from the rummaging and monetizing, potentially, of veterans' data and information, most sensitive and confidential information about them in those files of the VA.

I am joined in this criticism of the VA not only by many of my colleagues but by leaders of the veterans community, the VSOs who have come before our committee and have told us about their concerns.

I quoted earlier the national commander of the VFW, Alfred Lipphardt. I want to quote him again:

I was wounded in combat during the Vietnam war. I am

thankful that the medics who treated me chose not to take my

whole arm for the sake of efficiency. It took a trained eye,

a skillful hand and human intuition to fix me up and get me

back in the fight. In my experience, those operating with a

scalpel have a better chance of saving limbs than those who

operate with a chainsaw.

Unfortunately, it appears humans have been taken out of

what is a human capital issue. It has been reported to us

from veterans who have lost their jobs that the emails they

received letting them go were disjointed, and inconsistent

across the board. This leads us to believe they were

automated with little to no oversight or thought. When it

comes to complex problems, we rely on humans to make the

right choices at the right times. We should never leave the

hard decisions that impact people's lives and livelihoods to

an algorithm or an email distribution system.

He goes on:

``Honor the Contract'' the government made with those who

have already served and sacrificed so much for America and

their fellow Americans. It's time to apply pressure and stop

the bleeding.

``[S]top the bleeding.'' That is what the VFW national commander has asked us to do. Respect human beings--not only the humans who are affected. Make them in a human way when decisions put them and their futures at risk.

Stop the bleeding when it comes to the benefits under the PACT Act. We know that in 2023, the VA delivered more disability compensation benefits to more veterans than ever before. The VA delivered $163 billion in earned benefits, including $150 billion in compensation and benefits to over 6 million

veterans and survivors. The VA processed almost 2 million veteran and survivor claims.

The rate of processing and the time required have gone up since then. The numbers served have gone down. These are real-life consequences with impacts on real human beings in real time.

I am hopeful that this cause will be bipartisan. Our Veterans' Affairs Committee has always been among the most bipartisan in the work they have done and the collegiality that has been inspired.

I am hopeful that Republicans will join this fight. I hope we can work together as we have in the past. But it will require standing up to Elon Musk. It will require Doug Collins to say no to the Musk-DOGE tech bros, who are trying to eliminate waste by laying waste to the whole VA. It will require using a scalpel, as Al Lipphardt said--not sawing off the limb but taking the shrapnel out of the wound; eliminating waste in a targeted and calculated, calibrated way that involves keeping the limb--the program--and eliminating the waste. It is there. It is in every big organization we know, private sector or public. But it requires care, not cruelty.

That is, at the end of the day, in a sense, what most troubles me about these Musk-Trump cuts. They are cruel. They are needlessly mean, dumb, malevolent. Trying to eliminate waste with a chain saw has that effect.

I ask my Republican colleagues to join me in saying no more business as usual if it means using a chain saw on the VA, if it means punitively putting our Nation's heroes at risk.

I will be offering an amendment to the budget resolution later today that will seek to safeguard veterans' access to care by ensuring that the Veterans Health Administration is adequately staffed and funded. We owe our veterans no less--a lot more but no less than making sure we provide the resources and the staff to ensure they continue to have gold-standard care in the hospitals they visit, in the clinics they populate, in the claims they make under the PACT Act. All have been bipartisan in the past. I urge my colleagues on the Republican side to join me in this effort.

My amendment will reaffirm our Nation's commitment to veterans. Their lives are on the line, and I deeply hope my colleagues--regardless of whether your State is red or blue, it certainly makes no difference to veterans, and party is of no consequence to them when they need care and benefits. It ought to be of no consequence to us in making sure we keep our commitment to our Nation's heroes. Put veterans first.

Mr. President, I am honored to follow my colleague from Maryland, who has described so well the reasons we should oppose these tariffs.

I thank my colleague from Virginia, Senator Kaine, who has demonstrated once again his leadership that makes him such a great Member of this body.

I want to begin--and I hope the Presiding Officer will forgive me-- with a four-letter word. It is a word that I say to my children that they should never use: ``dumb,'' D-U-M-B.

These tariffs are dumb. They are also cruel, and they are stupid. They are imposed in the name of, perhaps, building manufacturing in this country, which they won't do, or in the name of raising revenue to cut taxes for the wealthy, which is adding insult to injury, or simply for vengeance. So much of what this administration does is for the purpose of vengeance and vanity.

Careless, cruel, reckless--that is what these tariffs are, particularly as directed to Canada.

Let's be clear. The tariffs proposed by President Trump are a tax. They are a tax. There has been no tariff ever imposed in the history of the United States of America that has ever lowered prices. These tariffs will raise prices. They threaten not only higher costs for everything from gas, to groceries, to rental housing, but they also deeply threaten a recession.

I have been reading a book called ``Freedom from Fear,'' written by a great historian, a professor at Yale named David Kennedy. ``Freedom from Fear'' is about the events and the misdirection and mistakes that led our Nation to the Great Depression.

What began as a recession, what started as a Wall Street problem, became a global depression because the world failed to realize that, even then, our economies were connected and that tariffs could hurt all countries when all countries adopted them, when a trade war ensued. And a trade war now is what we face.

Canada has long been one of our Nation's closest allies and trading partners. We have a bond with Canada that goes beyond simple economics, although, frankly, our relationship with Canada supports millions of jobs, protects the competitiveness of American businesses, and ensures our long-term economic prosperity.

Our countries have countless trade and investment agreements, and cross-border projects such as communications, highways, bridges, and pipelines

have resulted in integrated energy networks and transportation systems. We have a longstanding defense and security partnership providing us with greater security than we could have alone.

And we share a border. But the border is a symbol of a bond that our people have in common, a friendship that goes deep, a heritage and a culture that we respect. These bonds will be betrayed by a reckless trade policy the administration is pursuing that threatens to derail that valuable--in fact, precious--partnership.

These tariffs are going to hurt all Americans. We have with Canada one of the most comprehensive and important trading relationships. I can go into the numbers. In 2024, Canada was the United States' second largest trading partner, with $761.2 billion in total trade--the largest single U.S. export market for goods. Every day, nearly half a million people and billions of dollars in goods and services cross that border.

But I want to focus on Connecticut for the moment because Connecticut demonstrates what will happen to America as a whole, and I represent the people of Connecticut. This regimen of tariffs will be catastrophic for Connecticut. Friends in Connecticut, listen to what these haphazard tariffs will do. Canada is Connecticut's single largest trading partner, accounting for 20 percent of our total trade in 2024, including 13 percent of our exports and 25 percent of our imports.

Consumers in Connecticut already face some of the highest electricity prices in the Nation, with an average cost of 28.16 cents per kilowatt- hour, compared to the national average of 16.26 cents per kilowatt- hour. Connecticut and New England as a whole get a significant share of our electricity from cheaper Eastern Canadian hydropower. The 10- percent tariffs proposed on energy resources from Canada will directly impact and drastically increase those electricity costs. ISO New England has estimated that this tax would add $66 million in annual consumer costs.

I hope President Trump will listen to the people of Connecticut and New England when it comes to electricity costs. Do not impose these tariffs.

The harm to Connecticut is far from limited to just energy prices. Some of the largest State industries--including aerospace, defense, advanced manufacturing, medical devices--all rely on trade with Canada to remain profitable. These industries source key production imports from Canada, including aerospace parts, critical minerals and metals, basic chemicals, and petroleum and coal products. In return, we export billions of dollars of goods to Canada.

We are talking about hundreds of thousands of people across Connecticut--jobs, employment--who all stand to see their livelihoods threatened if this tax is allowed.

It will ripple across Connecticut. It will reverberate through the country to the Presiding Officer's State, to Virginia, New York, Maryland, colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

The cost of living in Connecticut will rise drastically. We already have one of the highest costs of living in the country. Taxing these goods will put an undue financial strain on individuals and families across Connecticut but, most important, on people who can least afford a higher tax--our middle-income and lower income members of the workforce, working people in Connecticut who have to buy stuff depending on their paychecks--for groceries, for gasoline. A tax on those products will hit them in the pocketbook. It will hit their families. It will hit them at the kitchen table, when they go to the drugstore to buy pharmaceuticals, when they have downpayments on homes, on furnishings--across the board.

So I am not here to make a speech; I am really here to make a plea: Mr. President, please reconsider. These tariffs are fundamentally misguided. They are dumb. They are cruel, reckless, and careless. They play fast and loose with America's credibility around the world.

I urge my colleagues to vote yes on S.J. Res. 37 and join us in trying to save the American economy and our credibility around the world.

I yield the floor.

Will the Senator yield for a question?

Thank you, Senator. Unlike Senator Schiff who said that he didn't know of your stamina before now, I knew well the stamina of Cory Booker. I have always admired it--not just physical stamina, but moral stamina, the courage of conviction, the stamina to stand up and speak truth to power, which has become now one of the most common phrases that is used in public life.

But Cory Booker has epitomized it throughout his career, not only in this body, but as mayor of Newark and as a leader in sports when he was an all-American athlete at Stanford. That physical stamina was matched by a moralism that is invaluable today because Americans have come to prize, above all, integrity, authenticity, genuineness, which Cory Booker epitomizes.

It is not just his eloquence today on the floor and the soaring rhetoric that we have heard from him; it is his understanding and his sense of real-life impacts of what we do here on everyday Americans, and what everyday Americans are doing right now as we speak here on the floor.

Everyday Americans are in the grocery stores where they are seeing higher and higher prices. Everyday Americans are at the VA hospital where their doctors and nurses and clinicians and schedulers and counselors may be out of a job because they may be among the tens of thousands targeted for dismissal. Everyday Americans are in schools, K through 12 and higher education, where the resources available for their teachers in the classrooms right now in realtime are going to be

cut. In fact, the workforce at the Department of Education will be cut by one half as we speak and funds will be no longer available to teach everyday Americans.

And, of course, everyday Americans right now are in hospitals and clinics. They are undergoing treatment for life-threatening diseases. Right now, they are lying on a hospital bed with a needle in their arm, receiving other kinds of treatment that have been made available-- lifesaving treatments--by the research at NIH that will be crippled because of the cuts that we are seeing.

And, of course, everyday Americans are receiving Social Security checks, and Social Security will be cut by this administration-- Medicaid that provides for those everyday Americans who are in doctors' offices right now in America, even as we engage in this kind of soaring rhetoric.

Everyday Americans are contending with the real-life problems of living in America. We live in a country that has never been so unequal in terms of wealth and pay. If we look back to our own history, we see that inequality is a danger to us all. The stock market crash and depression occurred after the gilded age, when inequality became so drastic that the middle class was in danger.

And, of course, everyday Americans who, right now in the military, are experiencing anger, disgust, fear because the secrets about what they are doing, even as they engage in operations around the world-- like those pilots who were going to bomb the Houthis, engaged in that Top Secret mission have learned that the details of that mission--the time of their launch, the targets, the timing of their strikes, the weather, the identity of their targets--all were being discussed over a nonsecure channel by a careless, reckless Secretary of Defense. I don't need to go into the details of what was discussed, except to say our allies are reacting with that same disgust, anger, and fear and they are having doubts about sharing intelligence with us. The Israelis are outraged by what they have seen. The intel communities of other countries are aghast and appalled.

And we have yet to explore fully all of the potential ramifications, like what other conversations may have been on that unsecured kind of platform. Who else knew about them, what the motives were? There needs to be a criminal investigation. I have called for it. And everyday Americans have a right to be fearful and angry, just as those pilots should be and our allies and intelligence communities all around the world. We need not only an investigation, we need action to hold accountable the individuals--beginning with the Secretary of Defense, who should resign; the National Security Advisor, who should resign-- but a criminal investigation launched by the FBI National Security Division, to hold accountable anyone responsible for this breakdown of security, to meet the standard of public service that Senator Booker has outlined as what we should demand of ourselves, and the responsibility that the American people have a right to deserve.

So my question, really, is about the standard of public service that we should expect of our leaders and whether there is something we can do.

I am asked so often, Senator Booker, as I go back to Connecticut, and I am sure you are in New Jersey: What can we do?

What can we do?

You are meeting us on the floor of the Senate by showing what we should be doing--fighting back, sounding the alarm for everyday Americans who are in the grocery store, in their schools, at the VA clinics, Social Security offices. What can we do?

I know about that.

Mr. President, I am here on the floor because we are in a moment of crisis for our veterans. It is a moment of profound historic challenge to the Veterans' Administration, and what we need from Members of this body--and I am encouraged by the response so far-- is a call to action. We need a plan for accountability. That is our job--to hold responsible officials who have the obligation and opportunity to serve our veterans at a time when Elon Musk and Donald Trump are slashing and trashing our Veterans' Administration, with real-life impacts on the healthcare and disability benefits that are afforded to our Nation's heroes. It is a disgrace, it is shameful, it is unacceptable, and we need to muster the courage and fortitude on the part of this body to call it out and call it off.

That is why I am here, and it is only the beginning of a plan for accountability that will include others--my colleagues coming to the floor this week and next--as well as hearings that we will organize, shadow hearings--not necessarily formal hearings of the committee but hearings that we will have on aspects of this challenge that call for us to highlight the need for action.

We are going to come to the floor as well to seek unanimous consent on measures that will stop the degrading and decimation of the Veterans' Administration. It is illegal. It is immoral. It is immoral because we have a solemn responsibility--I don't need to make a long speech to tell my colleagues about this responsibility. We recognize it rhetorically all the time. I am here not to make a speech but to have an impact.

Next week, we are going to be voting on the next VA Deputy Secretary nominee, Paul Lawrence, and I just want to be really blunt. I voted for Doug Collins to be VA Secretary. It was a mistake because Secretary Collins has not been forthcoming with facts. He has not been transparent. He has not been responsive to us or to veterans and his employees who are asking questions about what the future of the VA will be given the firing of 80,000 members of the VA workforce, projected, in the next few months without a plan, without a strategy, without any forethought about what its real-life impact will be.

I voted for Doug Collins, and I regret it. I apologize for it. I am not making the same mistake with Paul Lawrence. There is no reason to believe he will be any different--not to mention any better--because he is the Deputy. I have respect for their service in the military, as I do for anyone who has worn the uniform, but I cannot--I cannot--vote for Paul Lawrence. I hope my colleagues will be as vigilant as I am seeking to be in voting against him. I will oppose his nomination.

Since taking office, this administration has shortsightedly shortchanged and systematically betrayed our veterans with policies that are against their interests. The goal here: save money so that tax cuts can be financed--tax cuts for the billionaires and millionaires that populate this administration and drive its policy.

They fired already 2,400 VA employees, many of them high performers. They have been promoted to provisional positions because they have been high performers. They are in those provisional positions for a time when they would become permanently in those positions, but because they are provisional, they have been fired; likewise, the younger members of the workforce who have just been recruited for positions that are open and where their talent is vitally needed. They are the future of our VA, younger VA employees who want to make a career of it, want to serve fellow veterans.

Thirty percent of all the fired workers are veterans because 30 percent of the workforce there is veterans. In fact, the newer employees may be veterans in a higher percentage. We are terminating the future workforce of the VA--again, simply to save money to finance tax cuts for Elon Musk and his fellow billionaires and the ultrawealthy.

Now, the workers who have been fired are in positions of healthcare and disability benefits processing. So what is at risk here is literally the everyday medical needs of our veterans. They are physicians, thousands of them; nurses; schedulers; counselors; the janitors who make sure the facilities are clean. The surgeon who goes into the operating suite can't do it alone; he needs his team. We are firing his team as well as the medical care providers.

On the disability benefits side, the increase in workforce that took place in recent years is to deal with the PACT Act increase in applicants for disability benefits, our veterans who have been exposed to burn pits and toxic chemicals. They are in need of screening, advising, consulting, as well as care and treatment.

We had bipartisan support for the PACT Act. The law is dead letter if it is implemented haphazardly, and we are betraying the goals and the trust we sought so proudly to espouse when we passed that PACT Act that recognized the sacrifice veterans are making--and their families--when they have cancer or hypertension or diabetes or any of the diseases that can result from exposure to those toxic chemicals.

VA Secretary Doug Collins has claimed falsely that there will be no impact to veterans' healthcare and benefits as a result of the administration's malign directive.

At the end of the Biden administration, the VA was delivering more benefits and more healthcare to more veterans than ever before as a result of the success of the PACT Act, for toxic-exposed veterans, and trust in the VA was at an alltime high.

We are risking the healthcare and benefits to veterans not just now but in the future because the credibility of the VA will be decimated, along with its workforce.

The cancelation of contracts eliminates another source of resources for our veterans. VA employees are the ones delivering healthcare. VA employees are the ones processing the PACT Act benefits.

I am disappointed and dismayed that so many of my Republican colleagues are seeking to minimize or diminish the human impacts of these cuts, firings, freezes--the cuts in funding, the freezes in hiring, the firings of employees who are there now--even at a time when there are 40,000 open positions. The VA is recruiting to fill them-- 3,000 surgeons, 6,000 nurses, thousands of counselors and schedulers-- open positions. At the same time that it is trying to recruit people to fill those positions, it is firing the workers who have similar or the same positions right now. It makes no sense.

But the human impacts are what trouble me the most. To my colleagues or anyone who claims there are no impacts, go host a veteran townhall in your State. Talk to the local VFW or American Legion or any of the other veterans service organizations. Go visit a local VA medical center or clinic or talk to employees who work there. When you meet face to face with your constituents, the immediate impacts of this administration's malign directives, whether it is out of malevolence or simply malign neglect, will become apparent, and either way, it is unacceptable.

I invite Secretary Collins to actually come to a townhall--make it Connecticut; make it anywhere--a townhall where you will meet face to face with a group of veterans who will tell you what these cuts, freezes, and firings mean in real life to the services that are supposed to be provided to them and will be denied because of these directives.

Let's be clear: The one behind this is Elon Musk. The one who is directing these cuts, freezes, and firings is an unappointed, unelected billionaire who has never contemplated wearing the uniform of this country, not to mention helping or serving our veterans in any way.

Elon Musk, you come to a townhall with veterans. You face them and tell them that they can't have the medical care they need and deserve to treat cancer or hypertension or any of the diseases or illnesses that result from exposure to toxic chemicals or burn pits.

I attended a veterans event last week. I talk to veterans all the time when I am back in Connecticut. I know firsthand what these cuts, freezes, and firings mean to them. The impacts caused by Musk and Trump--heartbreaking, heartless cuts and other damaging directives--are being felt in every corner of my State of Connecticut and every part of our country.

I just want to read a few sentences from Sioux Falls Live, a newspaper in South Dakota:

``Staffing cuts in the federal Department of Veterans

Affairs are disproportionately affecting the veterans that

the department preferentially hires,'' said members of a

South Dakota veterans' advocacy group.

They worry the Trump administration's goal of cutting

80,000 VA employees will put more veterans out of work

without a vetting process, and erode the quality of services

provided.

Eugene Murphy, of Sioux Falls, is a past national commander

of Disabled American Veterans and a Vietnam War vet who was

paralyzed by gunshot wounds.

``How are you going to treat my brothers and sisters like

that?'' He said. ``This is not right.''

I hope those words will echo in this Chamber. It is not right. It is not right. These veterans in South Dakota have a right to be angry, not to mention concerned and worried not just for themselves but veterans across the country.

We heard that a VA hospital in South Dakota is at risk of losing nearly 20 percent of its staff as a direct result of Trump and Musk's illegal and indiscriminate reduction-in-force plans.

And yet Secretary Collins continues to dutifully carry out

the Musk plan with no buy-in, no consultation, no townhall

with that.

Now let me read you an excerpt from an article in the Spokesman- Review that contained interviews with some of the VA employees that Collins illegally fired. VA employees like Ricky Noschese who worked at Lovell Federal Healthcare Center.

Here is what Ricky Noschese--I apologize for the mispronunciation-- Ricky Noschese says about that Federal health center where he supervises a team of technicians in charge of keeping equipment running at the hospital--another corrective. He supervised them.

Lovell serves 90,000 patients a year, including veterans, Active-Duty servicemembers, and their dependents:

In less than a year on the job, Ricky had identified more

than $10 million in cost savings and had a long list of ideas

to improve operations and complete long-delayed projects.

With the support of his boss, Noschese wrote a detailed four-page document to justify his employment. He described how he had helped save taxpayers more than $10 million by using nearly two decades of experience as an HVAC technician to identify efficiencies and find cost-effective ways to extend the life of air-handling units.

He was head of a 12-person team responsible for ensuring clean water, fire safety, and other essentials required to maintain the hospital's accreditation.

Noschese and his bosses hoped he would be exempt from the mass firing, but after they sent the justification memo up the chain, they got a curt, simple, stark response: The document was too long. He should sum up his position in no more than three sentences.

Noschese was told a member of hospital leadership did that, but it made no difference. He had to turn in his badge and go home.

Now I tell you this story in some detail because it shows that efforts to eliminate waste when they are draconian and cruel and indiscriminate actually create more costs. Laying waste to the VA with across-the-board cuts without careful, selective consideration actually raises the expense, as it will in Noschese's job where there is nobody to do that excellent work based on his experience and expertise; and, ultimately, the costs will be higher as a result. But Elon Musk, apparently, doesn't care, nor does Doug Collins.

Take disabled veteran Megan-Richelle Cole. She worked at Lovell, managing the supply of medications and ensured patients so that they would receive only the best drugs, not

expired or recalled drugs. When she was fired--simply on the basis of being a probationary employee--she was in the final stages of buying a house. Disabled veteran, doing work responsibly and well, about to buy a house--suddenly, she has no income.

Let me read a few more lines about her:

To make matters worse, the VA didn't provide her with a

form required to file for unemployment benefits, and she had

to withdraw from that home purchase. ``Everything was going

smoothly, like it was supposed to,'' she said, until the

sudden termination left her feeling humiliated and lost.

``Nobody knew anything. It was just heartbreaking.'' Cole's

supervisors, again, tried to help her preserve her job to no

avail.

Let's be clear: This administration's actions have a real lasting impact on veterans' care and benefits despite Secretary Collins' blatantly disingenuous claims that there have been none, there will be none. Elon Musk should know what those consequences will be, and Secretary Collins should be transparent with the administration and with us.

These heartbreaking and heartless cuts will destroy lives and livelihoods. VA Secretary Collins, Musk, and Trump are prioritizing a ``fire first, analyze later'' mindset and strategy at the expense of the very people they are supposed to serve--people who served and sacrificed for us: America's veterans. It is unconscionable. It is unwise and ineffective. It is immoral.

I will say this in closing: Nobody is claiming--certainly, I am not-- that there isn't waste that we can eliminate, that fraud or abuse shouldn't be pursued. In fact, if this administration were serious about fraud and abuse and waste, they wouldn't have fired Mike Missal, the inspector general, whose service under both Democratic and Republican administrations has been exemplary.

He has been saluted and praised in Republican administrations, as well as Democratic, by my colleagues on the Republican side, as well as ours, but he was fired inexplicably, inconsistently with the goal of eliminating waste and fraud. It belies their claims and pretensions to want to eliminate abuse and fraud and waste to fire the watchdog who would call it out, investigate it, and refer it for prosecution as he has done saving tens of millions of dollars for taxpayers and benefits for veterans.

He has served both Republican and Democratic administrations, and there is nothing partisan about anything that I have said here, about the impact on veterans, the cruelty, and deeply heartbreaking consequences of these actions.

My Republican colleagues should join us when we begin next week with floor speeches and unanimous consent requests and the hearings--shadow hearings--that we will conduct and other actions that we will undertake in this call for accountability--a call for action.

Nothing partisan should deter them from joining us. This responsibility is one that we share in this body to highlight and call out and call off the Musk-Trump disastrous and disgraceful cuts in benefits and healthcare for our veterans.

We are hearing from veterans, and again, I encourage my colleagues to hear more directly, immediately, personally from them. I invite Secretary Collins to join me in a townhall as soon as possible.

I invite him again, as I did in a letter recently, to appear on April 2 before a shadow hearing we will conduct in this Capitol. He can explain himself. He can tell me why I am wrong but, most important, he can answer to our Nation's veterans who deserve and need better from this administration.

America's veterans deserve nothing less than for every single Member in this body to call into question these damaging policies. They deserve nothing less than the gold standard in healthcare, as well as full and complete benefits of the PACT Act and in every other respect, the respect and responsibility that we have. To disrespect them is un- American.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I am honored to follow my friend and colleague from New Jersey, whom I salute for his passion and his eloquence. And thank you to Senator Warren for her leadership in bringing us together today and to my colleagues who are rising today in opposition to S.J. Res. 18, which seeks to undo the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's overdraft fee rule.

Now let's be very clear: This overdraft rule never should have been necessary. If big banks were doing the right thing and playing fair with their customers, this rule would never have been necessary. Taking that fee from $35 to $5 simply reflects what the possible cost is of overdrafts rather than banks, in effect, making money on overdrafts, which are commonly the result of people not having enough money in their bank account. And that is commonly the result of people being poorer than they want to be.

I suspect that most of this administration hasn't had an overdraft fee recently. I am guessing--I think it is an educated guess--that Elon Musk has not had an overdraft fee recently.

Overdrafts hit people who are living paycheck to paycheck, people who are at the bottom rung of our economic order through no fault of their own--often the result of discrimination and denial of rights that others are fortunate to have.

But put aside the inequities of this rule or the overdraft practices that it tries to ameliorate, the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau is, in effect, the watchdog or the top cop in the beat of preventing consumers from being scammed as they are by overdraft fees.

It is under attack by the Trump administration. It has returned $21 billion to consumers. And most relevant to our conversation here today, lowering overdraft fees from $35 to $5 would save households $5 billion annually. That is $5 billion that goes into our economy rather than into the coffers of banks that have over $10 billion in assets and who trick people into paying those excessive overdraft fees; and they earn profit from the most vulnerable families in this country.

I want to focus on one group in particular who are particularly vulnerable--and I say it as a member of the Armed Services Committee and the ranking member of the Veterans Affairs Committee. Servicemembers and their families in particular have a higher stake in this rule prohibiting exploitive overdraft fees.

And the reason is--despicably, disgustingly--servicemembers are often targeted by bad actors and financial institutions for abusive and predatory practices like overdraft fees or that result in overdraft fees.

A Department of Defense survey revealed that 10 percent of Active- Duty and Reserve servicemembers paid overdraft fees two or more times in the

past year, which is more than the average American. Let me just repeat: Two or more times in 1 year, they paid overdraft fees. My guess is that most Members of this Chamber haven't paid overdraft fees in years and years, maybe not since you were in college or law school, graduate school.

Two or more times, our servicemen and -women have been exploited by these banks in charging fees for overdraft.

For years, servicemembers across the country have filed complaints with the CFPB over these unfair and deceptive practices, like skyrocketing fees.

Just one example: A servicemember in Connecticut filed a claim with the CFPB in 2018 about Wells Fargo's predatory overdraft practices. He reported he had an overdraft protection turned off his account, but Wells Fargo still allowed autopayments to be taken out and then charged $35 rather than denying the payments for lack of funds.

These overdrafts should have been denied, but instead, they went through and cost this servicemember over $60 in unwanted fees.

Now, I know to a lot of Members of this body, 60 bucks is no big deal. Anybody familiar with the young enlisted men in our U.S. military today who live, literally, paycheck to paycheck knows that $60 may be the difference between having the means to get home on leave. It may be the difference between enjoying a weekend on leave.

So the $60 in unwarranted fees that that servicemember paid was a big deal to him. But today, the Republicans unfortunately are shamefully doing the Trump administration's bidding. They are stripping crucial protection away from working American families and our military members, and it is simply and plainly a gift. It is a gift to Big Bank.

We can speculate on what the motives are. They are big banks. They contribute a lot of money to campaigns. But every attack on the CFPB, including this CRA, is an attack on consumer protection, commonsense safeguards that make sure that Americans can avoid being exploited by big and powerful institutions.

Overturning the overdraft rule is yet another giveaway to these big banks and the billionaires who control and run and own them.

I have said before but it bears repeating: President Trump will always help his billionaire friends at the cost of helping you.

Today, I urge my colleagues to vote against this attack on the CFPB. Vote no on S.J. Res. 18.

I yield the floor to my great friend and colleague from Massachusetts Senator Warren.

A perfect segue to my remarks, if I may be recognized, Mr. President?

Mr. President, it is the perfect segue to my remarks because ``downwind'' means we are the recipient of their air and their pollution, which are the small particulates. They are often the size of, literally, a quarter of the head of a pin, and the reason that they are so dangerous is that they are inhaled to the very deepest parts of our lungs, where they do the most damage.

And so I am grateful to be talking about the good neighbor rule. That is actually the purpose of my coming to the floor, to talk about the rule that applies to those powerplants and States that are supposed to be good neighbors. And, according to this rule, they would be good neighbors, but the EPA is rolling it back, withdrawing it.

And so I am grateful to be here with two champions, my great friend and neighbor the Senator from Rhode Island, Senator Whitehouse, who has made this battle a constant struggle from his seat on the floor, in meetings, in townhalls, in forums, literally, around the world; and my neighbor from Massachusetts, the author of the Green New Deal, which I was proud to join in its first day and still represents a milestone in environmental advocacy. And we are here today to advocate.

I am joyous, even though saddened by the need to be here--joyous--to be amongst this band of brothers and sisters who are going to stand strong and steadfast against the Trump administration's sellout.

You heard it from Senators Whitehouse and Markey: These rollbacks are a gift. They are literally a payback to the lobby--the anti-environment lobby, the fuel and oil and gas lobby--that has so infiltrated and permeated our government, including, now, the Environmental Protection Agency.

And so let me begin by highlighting for people who care, and that should be everyone. It really should be everyone who has children, who will inherit the mess we are creating. It should be everyone who cares about the planet and what we are leaving for others, our stewardship of the environment.

The EPA is becoming a shell. Literally 65 percent of its workforce has been fired; 65 percent are planned to go. There is no way that the EPA, as a law enforcement Agency, can function with the remaining 35 percent of its staff.

But perhaps most egregiously, the Administrator of the EPA announced, just 2 weeks ago, that he was targeting 31 climate and health protections to roll back. He called it ``the largest deregulatory announcement in U.S. history.'' He said it was the most momentous day in the history of the EPA. In my view, it is a day that will live in environmental infamy. It marks a step back by decades.

And for people who think, well, we need some disruptors like Elon Musk, who is behind these steps to decimate the Agency, disruption can sometimes be constructive, but not when you burn down the house, burn down an Agency, burn down a framework of laws that have been carefully built and reflect not only an intellectual commitment but also a deliberately constructed way to balance the needs of environment and energy and other interests that serve the public.

This administration is destroying that balance. It is easy to destroy things. It is easy to burn down a house. It is much harder to construct it. And this administration is blatantly and malignly and cruelly destructive, firing 65 percent of a workforce that has dedicated itself to caring about the environment and acting on our statutes to protect the environment.

So let's just call it what it is. Elon Musk and Donald Trump are using Lee Zeldin--I am tempted to say he is their puppet; certainly, he is their instrument--to take a wrecking ball to environmental protections that have safeguarded Americans from toxic air and water pollution for decades.

And so, far from ensuring clean land, water, and air for all, Elon Musk and EPA are giving Donald Trump's big polluters a carte blanche to trash the planet--no exaggeration, really. I mean, come right down to it. Let's call it for what it is. The administration is running roughshod over our Federal environmental protection laws, writ large.

I am going to focus today, as I mentioned just moments ago, on one of the rules that EPA is rolling back: the Good Neighbor Plan. And it is appropriately called the Good Neighbor Plan because it is a landmark environmental protection law that literally safeguards Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New York, and other States of New England against the pollution generated in Ohio and other Midwestern States that is brought by the prevailing winds.

The polluters didn't create those prevailing winds, but, nonetheless, the pollution is carried on them toward the east coast. The funny thing about those little pieces of soot created in fuel-burning powerplants is they have no respect for State boundaries, none.

I don't know why. You know, we have in Connecticut--as Rhode Island and Massachusetts do--strong laws that protect our air and water. And those pieces of soot, the nitrogen, the other pollutants have no respect for our boundaries.

The Clean Air Act, through its good neighbor provision, empowers the EPA to step in when States' emissions are significantly contributing to the air quality problems of another State.

In 2023, the EPA released its final Good Neighbor Plan, which would ensure 23 States meet the Clean Air Act's good neighbor requirements by reducing pollution that significantly impacts downwind States, like Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island.

Connecticut has some of the worst air quality in the country--let's be honest here--largely due to pollution traveling from powerplants in the Midwestern States. Data shows that anywhere from 90 to 95 percent of air pollution impacting Connecticut on high ozone days originates from outside our State, and it is causing serious harm to Connecticut and our residents. Last year, Connecticut exceeded the Federal health standards for ozone on 23 different days. That is almost a month out of the year.

Three of Connecticut's cities--Hartford, New Haven, and Bridgeport-- rank within the top 100 most challenging cities to live with asthma last year. That is according to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America Annual Report. One of the top 100 most challenging cities in which to live with asthma is a pretty lamentable distinction.

These consequences are cumulative. They mean more hospital visits, more healthcare costs, more missed school and workdays, and, ultimately, more serious illnesses, more premature deaths.

They are the equivalent of imposing second-hand smoke on children or people with asthma or other kinds of respiratory problems.

Zeldin, Musk, and Trump's rollback was touted as lowering the cost of living for Americans--lowering the cost of living. It is going to do just the opposite.

Not only is protecting the environment the right thing to do for our planet; it also benefits America economically. The EPA projected: In 2026, the first year the Good Neighbor Plan was set to be implemented, Americans would see significant health benefits because of this rule, including preventing approximately 1,300 premature deaths, avoiding more than 2,300 hospital and emergency room visits, cutting asthma symptoms by 1.3 million cases, and avoiding 430,000 school absence days and 25,000 lost workdays.

One estimate found that this Good Neighbor Plan would provide over $16.2 billion in net monetary benefits when you count the hospital visits, the lost workdays, the school days, the doctors' treatments-- all that adding to $16.2 billion. That is no bargain for the United States of America. What you may say on day 1, you pay in multiples on day 5 or 10, throughout the year.

Only the Federal Government is empowered to protect the people of the United States who live downwind from these powerplants. Connecticut cannot do it, nor can Massachusetts, nor Rhode Island on their own. It is legally and physically impossible.

But protection is impossible if Musk and Trump, through Lee Zeldin, roll back this rule. And let's be, again, honest about what is happening here. This Good Neighbor Plan rollback is part of a larger pattern and practice to undermine and undercut and eventually eviscerate environmental protections. It is the reason they are firing 60 percent of the EPA's workforce. It is the reason why they are slashing and trashing other Agencies that are vital to environmental protection. It comes as Trump's EPA has moved to cancel hundreds of grants for climate projects across the country.

For every action they take to chip away at our bedrock environmental protection, the world is less healthy. The world is less healthy and our planet is more endangered.

I urge my colleagues to stand in strong opposition to the Musk-Trump- Zeldin shameless attack on the Environmental Protection Agency and on our environment.

I yield the floor.

Absolutely.

If the Senator from Rhode Island would yield.

I would add a footnote to that important conversation, which is they teach economics, and they teach that those externalities are, in effect, a subsidy if they aren't charged to the consumer and made transparent. But they can also distort the market.

When those subsidies caused consumers to buy cars that are more polluting or to use fuel that is more contaminating to our environment, they also avoid the benefits, the public-interest benefits, of cleaner fuel and better cars.

Just to give you an illustration, for many years, Senator Markey and I crusaded for safer cars--cars that were better built, cars that had seatbelts, cars that had airbags. The industry resisted--almost comically now in retrospect--because once they started installing these devices, once they made cars safe, you know what they found? Consumers wanted safer cars. They also wanted cars that were more energy efficient.

Lo and behold, when they saw the benefits of these kinds of energy- saving and environmentally friendly measures, consumers voted with their feet and their wallets and their dollars.

If we did not have these kinds of hidden subsidies, consumers would vote for electric cars if there were more charging stations, if there were batteries that took them longer distances without having to recharge.

I am kind of surprised that the President of the United States isn't having a showroom on the White House lawn for all electric vehicles, not just for Elon Musk's Tesla. Why not provide that kind of boost and elevation for electric vehicles generally? And the car manufacturers would bet on cleaner cars if they were given the true cost and enabled to enjoy the true benefits of electric cars generally, not just the ones produced by a billionaire--unelected, unappointed official, unconfirmed official--acting, in effect, on behalf of Donald Trump with Lee Zeldin as his instrument to fire hard-working people at the EPA and to roll back rules that benefit consumers.