Andy Kim

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today because every single one of us in this Chamber knows someone who relies on home and community-based service workers to maintain their quality of life. Maybe they are someone with a disability who needs an aide to help with essential tasks. Maybe they are a senior who requires a home health worker to keep them safe and healthy. Maybe they are a constituent you have met or a family member you love. All of them are dependent on someone who works hard every day because they care. We owe them the same level of care they give to those we love. That is what this amendment does. It strikes language that makes it harder for them to advocate for their own pay and conditions by adding the burden of needless redtape. It strikes language that makes it harder for them to ensure that they can provide the best care possible. Mr. President, the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that the number of home health and personal care aides will increase by more than 20 percent--nearly 1 million people--by 2033. Millions of people will be working to help those we care about the most. I urge my colleagues to pass this amendment and stand with those who serve the people who need it most. I yield the floor.

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 2817 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today to lift up the fact that this reconciliation bill will do real harm to countless American families. It is not theoretical or hypothetical. Families are hurting right now: the opioid crisis that has ravaged large parts of my State, the mental health crisis that people across this country are so concerned about and are begging for help about, and so many other challenges that every single family knows the fear of a health crisis. Like Susan, a mother I met at a townhall down in Egg Harbor--a townhall that was part of a series of townhalls that I did trying to highlight the challenges that so many families are facing--and in this crowded room full of hundreds of people, a woman named Susan shared her story, a mom of a 24-year-old son with Down syndrome. They use Medicaid to be able to cover his care. She broke down at the weight of her fear and worry for her child, something a lot of us can relate to. She said to me that this is the face of Medicaid. As I went over to give her a hug, I remember she said: ``It's real.'' And it is real, and I know everyone in here knows that. I know because offices on both sides of the aisle are getting the same calls. Our phone systems broke down because of the overwhelming volume of people calling and literally begging--begging--us not to do this, begging us to protect Medicaid so their kids can see the doctors, begging us not to cut SNAP benefits so their students could have access to healthy food. It is a humbling experience seeing a parent begging for the resources to take care of their sick child. Yet, as I look around, I see far too many people rushing through this process to get it done with little care about the resulting impact it will have, generational damage that will be done. While we are rushing through, barreling through without the ability to properly debate this, I want you to know the people of New Jersey, the people of this country, this budget represents an abandonment by their government, and this will hurt everyone we are supposed to be helping. Some of the people that could be impacted the most are people within the disability community, hundreds of thousands of people in New Jersey with disabilities that rely on Medicaid for coverage, over 15 million across our country, including a man named Tom Spadaro, a disability advocate in Ocean County, NJ, who joined me for a townhall. After a gun accident when he was 11, Tom is a total quadriplegic, dependent on a ventilator and others. Medicaid helped him go to school, then college, and in his own words has given him dignity. When talking about this bill that we are debating here today he said: If I lose Medicaid, I feel like I'm getting shot in the head again. This time, it's not a bullet. It's legislation. I want his words to echo through this Chamber today for everyone to hear. If this budget passes, families in every single State across this country will feel these cuts long after the media and the Trump administration have decided it is time to move on and ``get over it.'' A cancer patient doesn't just ``move on'' when they have to delay treatment because they have lost insurance coverage, when a family has to upend their lives to become caregivers to their parents because they can't afford elder care, when a hospital closes and the new closest emergency room is hours away after the child is in an accident and needs help now, not in 5 hours, they won't ``get over it.'' America will feel this long after Donald Trump is no longer in the White House, and they will remember what has happened to their lives because of it. Now there are some people listening who might not think that this is going to affect them, but these cuts to healthcare in this bill are so dramatic, it is going to have an impact that reverberates all throughout our communities. I talked to a hospital leader in New Jersey who said that these cuts could be so devastating for their revenue because of how much they get through Medicaid reimbursements, that they are not sure that they are going to be able keep their doors open, a hospital not certain if they can keep their doors open. This is not the only story like this across my State, across the country, whether it is rural hospitals or it is suburban or urban. We are going to have a lot of challenges that are going to reverberate beyond just those on Medicaid. It is going to affect every single one of us and raise prices at the same time. Losing that critical care in communities not only abandons people in their time of most need, but it leaves a tragic ripple effect on others and other hospitals. So today I am putting forward an amendment to this bill that would stop this from happening and directly take out the parts of this bill that would force hospital closures and reduce access to affordable healthcare for so many across this country. In no reality should we be helping billionaires send their rockets to outer space while turning people away at hospitals. And yet, this is the reality we find ourselves in, deciding how much care is acceptable to take away from families across New Jersey to fit a budget cut or how many patients can be turned away from lifesaving medication just so the wealthy can have a nice tax break. A doctor from Frenchtown shared some profound words with my office. She said: Medicaid is a reflection of our values. It is how we show up for each other when life gets hard. Well what does it say about our Nation as we are having this debate that could very well take a trillion dollars out of Medicaid; about those who need the care the most as if they are just expendable, as if they are just some remainder on the equation of capitalism that is just pushed to the wayside? As just an inevitability, as a shrug of the shoulder of our society to say: I am sorry what happened to you, without a care and an extended arm and a hand to reach out and pull them up. Let's be very clear. This bill will cause prices to drive up. In New Jersey alone, over 454,000 families will see higher costs in premiums, according to the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance, which is why I am introducing an amendment to make sure this bill wouldn't raise these costs by striking provisions that would increase premiums or out-of-pocket costs under Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, and some private insurance marketplaces too. We cannot allow billionaires to get richer while working families are seeing drastic increases to their premiums or out-of-pocket costs, costs to keep their children healthy as we deal with the worst measles epidemic in decades, costs to afford their kids medicine while we see our government attacking science and fact, making parents have to work that much harder to keep their children safe. With all the challenges we are dealing with right now, it is painful to think through what will happen if this bill goes into effect and the fact that these healthcare cuts will increase our gaps and worsen conditions for our vulnerable communities, including children. If we can't stand up for them, for our children, who are we willing to stand up for? And as I said at the beginning, every family has a healthcare story. Everyone has felt overwhelmed in the face of sickness and injury. Just a year ago, my father took a fall. I got the call while I was on the campaign trail. I rushed down to the hospital. But even after the surgery, what we learned is there was an even more debilitating challenge that we faced, a cognitive decline as my father is descending into dementia. I just spent Father's Day weekend with my father, the entire weekend, but it was in the emergency room as he had twice fallen in 2 days--two separate trips to the emergency room. My family is overwhelmed right now. We struggle to think through his needs that go far beyond what we can be able to provide, goes far beyond what Medicare can provide. And it is not just my father and my family. We have failed seniors. We have failed as we have failed to plan and create a place for elder care in this country that preserves a foundation of dignity and decency for everybody. And when you are in the trenches fighting for your own life or gripping the hand of a loved one struggling, the last thing you want to think about is worrying if you are eligible for this treatment or that. You want to be able to provide what it takes for your loved one to survive, to go a little further, spend a little more time on this planet with us, and to grow our love deeper. When we think about that and then we ask ourselves, well, why is this bill happening, why are these cuts happening, it is not to bring down the deficit. Instead, it is going to balloon the deficit by trillions of dollars. Who among us in this country think that the problems that we face as a Nation is because the wealthiest among us don't have enough? The distrust in government right now, it is not because politics isn't doing enough to help the most well-off in our country, the billionaires and the millionaires. I ask my colleagues to find the courage to do the right thing. I want to bring us back to 2017 in this very Chamber as Senators gathered to decide the fate of the Affordable Care Act, which was, at the time, hanging by a thread. Many of my colleagues here in this Chamber were also on the floor at that time. I was not. I was a regular citizen, angry at what I was seeing unfolding, watching it on my phone. A citizen that felt so detached from what was happening in this Chamber, I remember thinking to myself, How could the Senate be seriously considering doing such harm to this country, to so many Americans by trying to gut preexisting condition protections, the Affordable Care Act, so much others? I asked myself: Am I missing something? Am I missing information to understand why it is that this is even happening? And we saw rushed conversations, and we saw people running back and forth. And we also saw Senator John McCain step up and signal with his arm that he did not stand for this. Senator McCain's vote was a rare moment of doing what you know is right even when you are surrounded by noise telling you it is wrong. It is surreal now finding myself on the floor of the Senate in a similar moment in our own Nation's history with so much on the line with this vote, and I look around this Chamber and yet again think the exact same questions from 8 years ago, How can the Senate seriously be considering gutting care for so many? And now with the benefit of being here, the conversations and the information, I am still left with this question of, Am I missing something? How is it that such an esteemed body that is meant to protect the American people, in this Chamber where so many decisions have been made to protect the American people, that we are on the cusp of doing something that will do generational damage to so many American families? This vote before us seems as surreal and reckless from within this Chamber as it does from outside. But while the problem is the same, so is the solution. It is about courage--the courage John McCain had; the courage that so many of my constituents have. So many people have called and shared their personal stories--stories about their families' health they probably had never told anybody, but they feel so desperate right now to do something that they are willing to open themselves up, be able to pull back the curtain of the dangers and the pain that they have endured, to be able to try to do anything to stop this bill from hurting Americans. That is courage. And it is courage about standing up against the big money and the special interest, and sometimes it feels insurmountable. And I say to my colleagues here today that you won't be remembered by whether or not you passed this bill on President Trump's timeline or if you feigned concern about constituents just to be able to stab them in the back later. You will be remembered by your courage to stand up and say no. You will be remembered by your courage to speak out for the people--not just a few who have paid, but for all of us. You will be remembered in the same way as our former colleague was remembered by what he did 8 years ago. I urge you to remember that this job is bigger than all of us--bigger than any one man, any one party. It is about using our vote and our courage to make lives better for those that we represent. History and the American people are watching. You still have time. We still have power. I still believe in this Chamber and believe it can be a force for good. Let us use it for the children, for the disabled, for those not in this room. I yield the floor.

Mr. KIM

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

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I have no words to describe just the absurdity of this moment and the dangers to our country and our Union. For us to be able to stand here on the floor of the Senate in this Chamber that many such important decisions have been made in, a place of deliberation--it is not only in this room that we as Senators should be able to voice the concerns that we have about the direction of our country and the problems that our Nation faces, that we get to be sworn in as U.S. Senators, that we try to do our best, that we are U.S. Senators--United States Senators--that we represent this entire Nation as a body. And the idea that just--as I just saw the video--one of my colleagues here is thrown to the floor, handcuffed, humiliated--it is not a humiliation of that individual Senator; it is a humiliation of this body. The shamefulness by which that was perpetrated, that the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security--shame upon those that instigated this, that followed through on this. It is something that all of us collectively need to stand against. This isn't about partisanship. It is about what does this institution, what does this body mean and whether or not our words and our actions, as dictated by our oath that we swear to the Constitution of article I, as well, that lays out what our job is, that that is very much under threat right now. I feel for my colleague. I don't know what is happening right now. I hope that we are able to get greater clarity about that, but what we see and what we saw on that video transpire, I hope that is something that every American in this country sees, that they see the actions that have taken place. As someone who has worked in other nations--I worked in diplomacy and national security; I worked in nations with authoritarian leadership--I never thought I would see anything like this here at home--transpire here in the way that we saw it unfold. Again, the humiliation befalls our body as a whole. Now the question is, What will the Senate do to stand up for ourselves? That is something that I hope every single Senator is thinking about right now. This is not a time to put your finger up in the air and figure out which way the wind is blowing, to try to think through what type of reaction might come from the White House if we speak out against this. This is a time for us to stand up together and stand up for each other and for this institution. And not just right now. It is about: What credibility do we have as a body going forward? And I know, I get it. I am new here. I am one of the newer members here. I came here--I wanted to serve in this body because of what it stood for. I wanted to serve in this institution because I believe that this is an institution of incredible honor, integrity. And even at this challenging moment in this country's history, we need this body to be able to come together. So I call on all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to condemn this action, to stand united with one voice, standing up for ourselves. Otherwise, we will just cast ourselves to the margins of irrelevance in this Nation right now. What point is it for us to stand up and show up to work every day if this is the kind of treatment that can befall any of us in this day, right now, in this country? I am outraged, and I hope others are too. This is not a time to be silent. This is a time for us to be united and show the rest of the country what this institution means. Otherwise, we might as well go home. I, for one, want to fight for my colleague, fight for each other, fight for the Senate, and fight for our democracy. I yield the floor.

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the millions of Americans who rely on Medicaid for their caregivers and in support of those caregivers in whose arms we entrust those we love the most. This morning, I needed to rush up to my father as he took a bad fall. His leg, muscles atrophied by polio, won't heal and must be immobilized fully. My father has no capacity to be able to dress himself, no ability to care for himself, and I had a long and emotional conversation with his caregiver about caring for and tending to his wounds and about his limitations. I will be honest with you. It is hard leaving his side to drive straight here to the Capitol tonight for votes that could very well determine if aging seniors like my father will get the care they need. My amendment will ensure that caregivers are protected from efforts to gut and cut Medicaid. I could only be here voting today because a caregiver is there looking after my father right now. These caregivers deserve someone looking after them. I cannot--we cannot--abandon those who give so much to care for those whom we love. Let's pass this amendment and protect caregivers from these dangerous cuts. I yield back.

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

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. Madam President, I rise today to tell the stories of the nearly 2 million New Jerseyans who rely on Medicaid for their critical care. I do this because their care is at risk. I do this because the care of more than 72 million Americans across our country enrolled in Medicaid is at risk. They are at risk because Republicans in the House and the Senate have chosen to take away their care so that Elon Musk and the very richest Americans can pay a little less in taxes. That is the choice they have thrust upon the American people. It is a choice that I don't believe they truly understand, so I would like to take some of my time today on the floor to explain what happens when we choose Elon Musk's well-being over the people we have sworn to serve. To truly understand this, you need to understand that for tens of millions of Americans, Medicaid is their lifeline from the womb to their final years. In New Jersey, nearly one out of three births is covered by Medicaid. But even before that birth takes place, mothers receive prenatal care covered by Medicaid. That means that for millions of parents across the country, the first images they see of their child in those early ultrasounds are because of Medicaid. It means that prenatal vitamins that provide the folic acid necessary to ensure proper development are because of Medicaid. It means that if there is a complication in a pregnancy, those parents can focus on their health and the health of their unborn child, not whether or not they will be able to cover the costs of their care. That is because of Medicaid. So when Republicans are saying we need to cut Medicaid, remember that it is Elon Musk who wins and those expecting parents who lose. When those children are born into the world, tens of millions rely on Medicaid. Nationally, about 40 percent of children are enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP. In New Jersey, one-third of children--one in three kids in my State--are enrolled in Medicaid. As a father of a 7-year-old and a 9-year-old, I can tell you that the most important thing is knowing that your kids are healthy. There are a lot of things that are outside of your control as a parent. You can do everything right, but sometimes you just need help. Kids get sick, and having that assurance that they can get the care they need is an important thing. When you take away Medicaid, you are not just taking away care, you are taking away the peace of mind that parents deserve. You are taking away the ability for parents to look their kids in the eye and say: It is going to be OK. I wanted to share with you two stories that have stuck with me. I heard from Nicole, a mother from New Jersey who has a developmentally disabled son, Jordan. Jordan is 24. His mother said that a Medicaid cut would be ``catastrophic.'' She said that the care she receives from Medicaid is ``vitally important.'' That sense of importance and urgency I heard from Nicole I saw echoed from Jamie from Hazlet. Jamie's son David was born paralyzed, nonverbal, and he is relying on a feeding tube. Jamie told reporters that one of David's medications ``can cost up to $1,000 a month.'' She said that if Republicans are successful in cutting Medicaid, ``we would have to choose--are we going to eat? pay the bills? or keep him alive?'' She said, ``It is a life-or-death situation.'' So when Republicans are talking about cutting Medicaid to hand tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, the choice they are making is to leave people like Nicole and Jordan, like Jamie and David behind. At some point, our children grow up and leave, but even then, so many across this country rely on Medicaid for their basic care. In New Jersey, one in seven adults between the ages of 19 and 64 is covered by Medicaid. When you look at the choice ahead of us between care and tax cuts for the superrich, I want you to think about Caroline from Mount Holly. Caroline called my office asking that I oppose this budget plan. When she outlined her reason for not cutting Medicaid, she spoke in the clearest possible terms: I will die if there are cuts to Medicaid. Caroline is disabled. Her daughter takes care of her through the Managed Long-Term Services and Supports Program. She ended her message by saying: Please, I need help. A lot of us need your help. These are the people that need help, not Elon Musk, not the billionaires. It is people like Caroline from Hackettstown. Caroline called my office because her brother is on Medicaid. He is scheduled to get heart surgery in the next couple of months--something that is scary enough when you have the certainty of healthcare. But Caroline doesn't have that if her brother's Medicaid is cut. She said: I'm really scared for him. I'm really scared for my parents who are about to retire. . . . I'm scared for myself, someone who also has multiple health issues and is trying to keep down a full-time job despite it all. These are the people that need help. Our neighbors who sometimes need the most help are those who are disabled. In New Jersey, one out of every three working-age adults with a disability is on Medicaid. Just last month, I invited Kevin Nunez--a disabled New Jerseyan and an advocate for his community--down to the Capitol. Kevin relies on Medicaid for his care, his caregiver, his basic quality of life. I brought him to the Capitol because I wanted Donald Trump to have to face someone whose healthcare he was threatening to take away. But it wasn't just Kevin there at the Capitol; we saw his caregiver Edna there. The work she does every day is truly incredible. We should support our caregivers, should honor their service, and cutting the funding that allows them to do their job is not the way to do that. Kevin is 1 of more than 15.5 million people across America with a disability who are covered by Medicaid. He is 1 of approximately 4.5 million people who use Medicaid for home care workers like Edna. The choice we are facing is abandoning those Americans like Kevin and Edna, who just need basic care, or giving another tax cut to those at the very top. For me, that is not a choice. Finally, as we go through adulthood and age, Medicaid becomes more important than ever. Seniors across our Nation are relying on Medicaid for the care they need to live. Sixty percent of nursing home residents in New Jersey use Medicaid to pay for care. When seniors are on a fixed income, like so many of them are, Medicaid can be the difference between life or death. Annie, a teacher in New Jersey, called my office recently. Her mother is on Medicaid--71 years old, recently had hip surgery. She has no other income than her Social Security and asked that we do everything we can to make sure that her Medicaid isn't cut. As someone who is not just a father of two young kids but as a caretaker of an older parent, it weighs on me, and I understand the challenges that are there, knowing that you have to do everything you can to make sure the people you love have the care they need. Life is hard enough. Care is hard enough. The point of Medicaid, the point of government, is to make it a little easier, a little more bearable. So when Republicans come to the floor with a budget that threatens to cut Medicaid so they can give tax cuts and tax breaks to the ultrarich, the choice they are putting before us is making your lives worse and make their lives better. It is making your healthcare worse to make their bank accounts bigger. It is making your future more uncertain to make their futures brighter. That can't be an acceptable choice, and it is not one we have to make. We can reject this budget resolution and save Medicaid and save healthcare. We can reject this budget resolution and choose to support that expecting mother who just wants to give birth to a healthy child. We can reject this budget resolution and choose to support that child as they grow. We can reject this budget resolution and choose to support our neighbors who work hard but just need that little bit of help to stay healthy and achieve the American dream. Finally, we can reject this budget resolution and choose to support our seniors. We owe the best care to them in their golden years. This is the moment to show the 2 million New Jerseyans on Medicaid, the nearly 80 million Americans on Medicaid, and every other American across this country that we choose their well-being over the wealth and power of those who already have plenty. Let's reject this budget resolution and do the right thing for them. I yield the floor.

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. Thank you so much. Keep up your energy. I yield the floor.

Mr. KIM. Yes.

Mr. KIM. Yes.

Mr. KIM. What you raised is absolutely right, and it is front and center in everyone's mind. You know, when my parents immigrated here 50 years ago, they didn't know anybody in the entire Western Hemisphere of planet Earth. But America called them. It inspired them. I asked them once: What was it that drew you here? And they said that they felt that, here in America, they could guarantee that the family that they raised, that their kids--me and my sister--would have a better life and more opportunities than they did, and that was the sense of that generational progress that is made. But now, you know, I am standing here with a 7-year-old and a 9-year- old--I am hoping fast asleep right now--and I don't know if I can make that same promise to them right now, that I can guarantee them that they will have a better life and more opportunities. So, you know, there is that growing cynicism and pessimism about that American promise I talked to you about, and I just feel like there is an unraveling happening here, where we see this sense of concern, and it is being weaponized by some who create that sense of zero sum to push us away from this idea that we are a part of something bigger than all of us and that we can all lift each other up in that great American project. It is sad because, as we were getting to that 250th anniversary, you know, it should be a time when we rededicate ourselves to the American project--right?--like recommit ourselves to what the next 250 years will be. But we are entering it now with a sense of pessimism on that front. So, you know, I guess my question to you here is, how do we break out of that tailspin on that front?

Mr. KIM. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. KIM. That is right.

Mr. KIM. Twenty-one.

Mr. KIM. That would have been 2004. Twenty-one years.

Mr. KIM. Thank you, Senator Booker, and thank you for coming to the floor tonight and speaking up. I have a few questions for you. So why don't you catch your breath. I wanted to start by saying how proud I am of you to represent our great State of New Jersey, alongside each other. And it is not just me. I want to tell you--because I know you have been here in this Chamber nonstop for hours--but I want to tell you that people are paying attention, and they join me in thanking you in this moment. In fact, I saw a few posts I thought I would share. Stacy from Bayonne said on Facebook: I couldn't be prouder to be a life-long New Jerseyan than I am tonight. Keep it up. Get in that good trouble. Lead the way and hopefully others will follow. Janie in Princeton said: Thank you. Proud that you are my Senator and that you are bringing ``Big Jersey energy'' to DC tonight. Vicki in Ewing said: We are sending our strength to you. Medicare and Medicaid should not be touched. And someone on Reddit even said: I hope he wore the most comfortable and supportive shoes he could find. In your opening, you said something that resonated with me. You said: Our constituents are asking us to acknowledge that this is not normal, that this is a crisis. I can't tell you how important it is to internalize it. That is why we are here at this late hour in the U.S. Senate. That is why you are leading here to make the case to the American people that this is a crisis. That resonated with me because I hear this over and over again. I hear it from people all over our home State, whether at townhalls or other rooms that are packed with people saying this moment is not normal; this moment constitutes a crisis. I am glad you are speaking on the floor and said that because what you said isn't just Cory Booker saying that; it is that millions of New Jerseyans we represent are saying it. And you are lifting up their voice. It is not just you are saying that; it is that millions of Americans who see something fundamentally wrong, and they are angry about it. I have some questions for my colleague. But I want to add some context for this because I want to dig in a bit on why people are so angry at this moment and why what with we are seeing from Donald Trump and Elon Musk isn't in response to that anger; it is the cause of it. A common refrain in the townhalls that I held are that people feel like nothing is working for them. There is a promise, a uniquely American promise that is simply going unfulfilled for too many. That promise is simple: Your government will work for you; your economy will allow you to advance if you work hard and give your kids a better future; and your country will keep you safe by ensuring the world is stable and secure. Senator, you and I are here because we know that this promise is going unfulfilled. To say that the American promise is going unfulfilled would be a tragedy in its own right. It would be something that we as a Congress should put our entire focus into restoring. But the sad fact is that this isn't just about a promise unfulfilled; it is about a promise that has been hijacked. It is about a promise that has been distorted to work for those who have been paid to play to be denied for everyone else. Let's start with the promise that your government will work for you. This is the basis of our democratic Republic. We are public servants in that we serve the people. It is the people's priorities that we put first. It is their lives that we work to make better every day. It is their futures that we are endeavoring to brighten. But when the people look at Donald Trump and his administration, they don't see that. They see Elon Musk who donated nearly $300 million to buy his way into a seat in power. The world's richest man has been handed the keys to our government. And the same person who has been handed nearly $40 billion in your taxpayer dollars to prop up his corporations is now working to fire veterans from their jobs, make the Social Security Administration less responsive to seniors, and make it harder for your government to work for you. That is what we have seen in the collection of billionaires that buy their way to fulfill their own American promise--a government that works for them and only them; a government that keeps them rich and at a cost to your Medicaid, to your Social Security, to the food you put on the table; government where they pay and they benefit and if you can't, you are left behind. That is not the government our parents were promised. That is not the government we were promised. That is not the government we want to pass down to our kids. As Senator Booker mentioned, our Nation is in crisis. Bedrock commitments are being broken. That starts with the first American promise. We can rebuild and restore that promise by actually working to make our government work for the people. Where we see corruption, we must call it out and combat it. And the corrupting power of money in our politics is one example. And the extreme wealth of billionaires like Elon Musk is drowning out working Americans, and that must be addressed. And as we approach the 250th anniversary of the independence of our country, we have an opportunity to remind people that the promise of America is something bigger than ourselves. And that public service, not private enrichment for those at the very top but public service is core to what makes this country special. So let's talk about that second American promise. This is the promise of the American dream, that Rockwellian notion of the house and the white picket fence and the kids in the yard only works if you can pay for that house. It only works if you can afford childcare and healthcare for those kids. It only works if you can work hard and deliver something bigger and better than you are handed. And right now, that is not happening. While we are fighting to bring change to our economy to make life more affordable and the middle class more accessible, what we are seeing from Donald Trump and Elon Musk is another promise hijacked for those at the very top. Senator Booker, I want to just take a step back as I get into these questions here because you are talking about Social Security, talking about Medicaid, talking about so many of these other issues here. But in that broader context, what we have situated here is the recognition that we live in the time of the greatest inequality in our Nation's history. So it isn't just about these programs and how we rely on them, it is that we are seeing the wealth gap widening, and it is happening faster and faster. In many ways, I consider this to be the great fragility of America right now. We are the greatest, richest, most powerful country in the world but not for everybody. And what we see right now, it is not just about Social Security; it is not just about the checks, but as you mentioned, Social Security offices are closing, worry about customer service, people call on the phone lines. And it feels like efforts are on the way to try to sabotage our Social Security, our Medicare, our Medicaid, and then have people say: Hey, look, it is not working, and that is why we need to get rid of these things. And that sabotage is something people see right before their very eyes. I mean, you heard the Commerce Secretary talk about how seniors won't mind if there are late payments. He said those that complain are fraudsters, as you mentioned. That is directly trying to undermine people who are working hard over the course of their lives. I have to say, it is a great irony in many ways, this idea that the richest man in the world is criticizing the hard-earned savings of seniors that are just getting a little bit every single month for them to just try to get by, and then he calls it a Ponzi scheme. My father, as you mentioned, is one of those that depends on Social Security for his entire livelihood right now. I heard another person at a townhall describe the feeling that she has right now, and I think you can connect with it. She says it feels hard to breathe right now because there is so much anxiety in the American people. I am glad you are shining a light on this because people are scared and they are worried and they want to know what comes next. My question to you here is something that was actually shared by a constituent of both of ours talking about all the concerns of Social Security of this time. But I thought it was very poignant in pointing out that what we also need to put forward to the American people right now is a vision going forward of how to not just restore and protect this promise but how we take it to the next step. If we live in a time of the greatest amount of inequality, not just to think about how we hold on to a receding tide but how to try to put forward some vision that can try to inspire the same way that Social Security did and put forward generational change--I wanted to ask you that sense. Do you believe in that sense that right now, more than ever, as people are faced with this anxiety that is hard to breathe, that, yes, we will stand here on the floor of the Senate and do everything we humanly can to be able to protect what they have. But do you agree that we also have to put forward that positive vision of where do we take Social Security, where do we take Medicaid, Medicare; where do we take our economy to better work for everybody so we are not just trying to figure out how to better divide and hold on to the pennies that the billionaires are willing to share with the rest of us while they don't give us anything else to be able to move forward on. And how do we come up with a vision that tries to shrink that inequality and live in a society that is willing to share that wealth and recognize there is more than enough to go around? And that is not zero-sum and that we can be stronger together in that way. I would love to hear how you can paint that vision for the American people.

Mr. KIM. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today because there is nothing-- nothing--that keeps a parent up at night like the health of their child. It doesn't matter if you are a Democrat or a Republican, if you live in the reddest rural areas or the bluest cities. One of the things that binds us as Americans, as people, is that every parent looks at their kids and wants to know that they are doing everything that they can to keep them safe. And let me tell you, that is not an easy task. I am a father of a 7- year-old and a 9-year-old, two little boys, and I every day wonder, am I doing the right thing for them? Am I being the kind of father that they deserve? Am I looking out and being thoughtful about what they eat, about whether or not I am keeping up with their health, and that they are exercising? And like most families, I can tell you it is tough to know that you are always doing the best thing for your kids. But like most families, we do what we can. My wife and I, we try our very best. But we don't have all of the answers. I mean, how many parents out there, when your kid gets sick and it is too late in the night to find a way to call the doctor or the nurse, you are trying to figure out where to turn to for information? Where do we go when it is that we feel like we have reached the limits of our own personal knowledge and we need to find a place that we can trust? And that is what this is about. It is about knowing that there is someone you can trust when you feel like you don't know where else to turn, that someone can have your back and you can trust that they have your best interests at heart. When we think about our doctors, when we think about our nurses, our health professionals, when we think about those making decisions in this great Nation of over 330 million people about our healthcare, we want to trust those individuals, these people that are making these decisions. And I know for the people in New Jersey, over 9 million people there in the State of New Jersey, they are wondering who they can trust. We live in tough times. In fact, we live in the time of the greatest amount of distrust that we have ever seen in modern history of this country. And that is most pronounced, most clear when it comes to our health. And one of those people we need to trust the most in our country is the person who runs the Department of Health and Human Services. I rise today because I have met with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. I have questioned Mr. Kennedy in committee. I have read his statements and examined his record, and I want to say here on the floor of the Senate that he is not someone I can trust with my kids' health. And in good conscience, I cannot vote for him. If I cannot trust him with the health of my own kids, how can I ask the families of 9 million other New Jerseyans to go do it or for families across our country to trust this man? I have had the chance to be able to meet him, talk to him in person, ask him questions, that is more than most anyone in my own State is going to have a chance to talk to him. I took that as a deep responsibility to try to use that time and that opportunity to try to deduce whether or not this man rises to the level of trust that I think the people of New Jersey and this country deserve. And I have come to the conclusion that I cannot support Mr. Kennedy to lead an Agency in charge of our Nation's health. And he has too often diminished that trust in the very healthcare that he would be in charge of and too often has spread disinformation about the diseases and challenges and threats that we face. Now, what you will hear from his supporters is a story of an advocate for change. They will tell you that he is fighting against a broken system, that he simply wants to make America healthy. And, look, I think all of us, hopefully, can say that we want to make America healthy, that we care about the health of Americans across this Nation. And I don't think anyone in this Chamber would disagree that there are broken problems that we face when it comes to our healthcare, to our government, to so many aspects of our society. But, unfortunately, like most things coming out of this current administration, what we are seeing is corruption and conspiracy disguised as false promises of change. It is important that we take this moment to call it out and to expose it, to explain to the American people why this is a position--the Secretary of Health and Human Services is a position where trust is so important. Because if he is confirmed, Mr. Kennedy will have an incredible platform, well beyond the strong platform that he already has developed--a bully pulpit. But this would be an official platform of the United States, of our government, paid for by the taxpayers, to shape the health of my children and yours. Let's begin with the Agency he is nominated to lead. HHS employs more than 80,000 people across the United States and around the world. Their mission is simple: to enhance the health and well-being of all Americans. And to put that another way, their job is to make it easier for parents to sleep at night by making sure their kids can stay healthy. Now, I am not going to go over every single one of the 13 operating divisions of HHS, but let me name a few you have probably heard of. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, they are on the frontlines of preventing the next pandemic; the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, they operate Medicare, Medicaid; the Children's Health Insurance Program, otherwise known as CHIP; and the Health Insurance Marketplaces. All of these provide healthcare for more than 100 million Americans, including my mother and my father who are under Medicare. That is about one in three people under the services of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Then there is the Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA. You probably know them because when there is some sort of outbreak that impacts the food supply, they issue the recalls. But they do a lot of other stuff, too, from approving new medicines to countering bioterrorism. Now, those are three of the divisions you have heard of. Maybe you haven't heard of the National Institutes of Health, an Agency that sits at the cutting edge of medical research--not just in the Nation but around the world. Or the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, an Agency that does work to combat the real addiction and mental health crisis our country is facing. The Lakewood Community Service Corporation, Lakewood, NJ, received a $2.5 million grant to improve mental health care in one of our State's fastest growing services. Cape May County Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse received a $300,000 grant to tackle substance abuse issues in South Jersey, both important causes that my colleagues from both sides of the aisle can agree to support. And then, finally, there is the Administration for Children and Families, and whether you heard of it or not, you or someone you know probably is touched by it. It is the second largest Agency in HHS, and it is the Agency that manages temporary assistance for needy families: Head Start, childcare and foster care programs. I wanted to outline all of this because I want you to understand the enormity of the task ahead of the next HHS Secretary. This is not just someone who can walk in and just say: We need to be healthy again. This is someone who will be tasked with operating programs on a day-to-day basis that mean the very life and death of over a third of all Americans. So when I say that trust is important, it is not just a buzzword. Who do you trust with your health? Who do you trust with your children's health? Who do you trust with your parents' health, as they age and face challenges of physical and cognitive decline? Let's look at some of the things that show why we should not trust Mr. Kennedy. One of the first things that many parents have to deal with--vaccines. A lot of us have had to hold our kids through those vaccines. We talk to our pediatricians--people we trust--and they talk to us about the importance of making sure that our kids are protected. Mr. Kennedy has used his stature to push lawsuits that he personally stands to profit from--including over a common vaccine given to children. And throughout all of this, Mr. Kennedy has claimed that he is ``not anti-vaccine.'' While it is clear that we cannot trust him, what is even more clear is that his deception has had a real impact on the lives of people. Mr. Kennedy's push to sow distrust in Samoa in 2019 helped lead to a measles epidemic that claimed the lives of 83 people, mostly children under the age of 5. While Kennedy said in his hearing that ``We don't know what was killing them,'' the Samoan Director-General of Health, Dr. Alec Ekeroma, called his words ``a total fabrication.'' The doctor said that if Mr. Kennedy is confirmed, he would be ``a danger to us, a danger to everyone.'' That is not someone we can trust. In a speech on the Senate floor in the 1960s, then-Senator John F. Kennedy, said that ``the treatment of its older citizens is said by anthropologists to be one of the most basic tests of how civilized a society or nation has become.'' I would broaden that test to be our most vulnerable, our neighbors who are targeted simply because of who they are. And when Mr. Kennedy spreads false claims like the COVID-19 virus was engineered to spare Jewish Americans and Asians, he uses the trust that he has been given to divide and spread anti-Semitism and anti-Asian hate. And when Mr. Kennedy, in response to the questions asked of him by Members of this body, refused to acknowledge the importance of taking commonsense steps in our foster care system to protect trans youth, he uses the trust he has been given to divide and spread hate and fear. That is not someone we can trust. My reasons for opposing Mr. Kennedy's nomination don't just come from the concerns I have for my children; it comes from an understanding I have from my parents. A little over 50 years ago, my parents came to America from South Korea to start a better life. They did so by working to keep Americans healthy. My father earned his Ph.D. and became a genetic researcher trying to cure cancer and Alzheimer's. My mother worked as a nurse in hospital systems across New Jersey. They worked hard to earn the trust of people around them, their colleagues, their patients that they had worked on every single day, but also the trust that they had in the people around them for their own health. My father was a polio survivor; my mother struggled with Lyme disease. They have had their fair share of health struggles. And through them, I have seen a common denominator that our public health system only works when we have people working together with trust and that we the public, in turn, trust them. But then when I hear Mr. Kennedy say this about Lyme disease. He said: Another thing that keeps us from enjoying the outdoors and keeps us locked inside and the idea that this may have been, is highly likely to have been a military weapon, and we cannot say 100 percent for sure, but we do know that they were experimenting with tics there. Now, the American Lyme Disease Foundation wrote: Some claim that Lyme disease was introduced into the northeastern region of the U.S by a man-made strain that escaped from a high containment biological warfare lab on Plum Island. They said: However, there is ample evidence to indicate that both the Ixodes ticks and the bacteria causing Lyme disease were present in the U.S well before the Plum Island facility was ever established.'' According to a Washington Post article written by a Professor Sam Telford, ``It's an old conspiracy theory enjoying a resurgence with lots of sensational headlines and tweets. Even Congress has ordered that the Pentagon must reveal whether it weaponized ticks. And it's not true.'' When it came to the disease of polio that disabled my father since he was a baby, Mr. Kennedy had this to say about the vaccine that nearly eradicated polio from the face of the planet. He said the vaccine, for a period of time, may have led to cancer due to a contamination with a virus that ``killed many many many many many more people than polio ever did.'' So with the polio vaccine he said: ``Did it cause more deaths than it averted? I would say, I don't know.'' And he said this just a year and a half ago. A large study was published that concluded that the polio vaccine under concern was not associated with increased rates of cancer, and other studies showed that the virus of concern was killed by the same process used to inactivate the polio virus. And in that same podcast, Mr. Kennedy said: There is no vaccine that is safe and effective. Again, this was just a year and a half ago. Now he is coming to us and saying: I am all for the polio vaccine. What are the American people left to believe? Again, our health and our Nation is founded on trust. That is part of the compact we have as Americans for generations. We want trust for our families. As I said, I am a father of two little boys. All I want for them is to be healthy and happy. They are the reason that I am here in the U.S. Senate, to take actions to be able to give them the best type of lives, to give other kids and other grandkids the kind of lives they deserve. And I worry about the foods that they eat, and I support efforts to address ultraprocessed foods in America, to try to make sure we can have Americans eating healthy. But I also want someone who is not going to shoot from the hip and spread disinformation. Our healthcare is far from perfect, and we do need major reforms to get it in a place where it can better serve the American people. We do need massive changes in the way our healthcare, childcare, elder care, and nutrition systems are run, but not without trust. We need research--more and more research--to understand safety and to power the innovation that will come up with the cures and the medicines of the future. But, this week, we see efforts to undertake massive cuts at NIH, cuts that would set back the very research we need to keep improving our health. As I conclude here, these efforts to cut and slash our research at NIH and elsewhere would continue under the leadership of Mr. Kennedy. HHS Secretary is a big job. We can't just hand it to someone we can't trust--not for my kids or for my parents or for yours. I encourage my colleagues, again: Reject this nomination so that every parent in America can go to sleep having trust in a person tasked with ensuring that our children will be healthy in the morning. I yield the floor.

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. Thank you.

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today because we have a crisis of confidence in our government. It is a crisis that is being driven by the Trump administration with one goal in mind: to let the well-off and the well-connected play by their own set of rules while you, the American people, continue to scrape by. It is a crisis that puts us at a crossroads. Will we take the steps necessary to address the corruption and restore trust or will we break our institutions even further and usher in a golden age of corruption? In order to answer those questions, we need to have a real understanding of a few things. One, how deep is this crisis in confidence? Two, in what way is the Trump administration putting their thumb on the scale for the well-off and the well-connected? Three, how is that impacting the rest of us and how will it impact America's future? Four, and finally, how can we fight back? Now, let's start with the crisis that we are in. When I talk about this crisis in confidence, what we are talking about is the belief that your government is working for you; that it is working for the American people--all of its people--a belief that, no matter the challenge you face or the ambitions that you have, that your government has your best interests at heart. That is the fundamental credence of our democracy. It is of, by, and for the people. And that belief is always important. But when times are tough, it is even more critical than ever. Let's be clear: These are tough times. I don't think there is a single person in America that would disagree with that. We have challenges before us. We have challenges with the high cost of living and affordability problems. It is a top issue that I hear about in my home State of New Jersey. We have a lot of crises of confidence in this moment about whether or not we can step up as a nation and be able to rise through the challenges that we face. And the challenges we face are significant. We have to acknowledge that. Over the past couple of years, as we recover from a generationally defining pandemic, I have heard from so many families who just don't believe that they can get ahead. They don't believe or think that they will do better than their parents and that their kids won't do better than them. I think about that in my own family situation--my parents coming here, emigrating to this Nation 50 years ago. And I remember asking them why they did it. And my parents said to me just one simple line. They said: We did it because we felt that here in America, we could guarantee that the family that we raise--that you and your sister-- would have a better life and more opportunities than we do. That was it. It was that simple. They weren't driven by greed. They weren't trying to take it all for themselves, as if this was some zero-sum, survival of the fittest. It was a sense of America and a sense of the opportunity that it can bring for everyone, including two immigrants from South Korea who were born during the Korean war into poverty and came to this Nation. And now, as they get older, there are challenges that they face as being seniors, the elderly--the healthcare and other challenges that they face with their budget fixed. And now myself, as a father of a 7- year-old and 9-year-old, I wonder: What kind of America are my kids going to grow up in? I know it is not just my family that worries about this. When the costs of basic goods go up, it makes it harder to save for everybody. And when families can't save, it makes it harder to achieve that crown jewel of the American dream--owning a home, something that my family has struggled with over the years, something that so many other families are facing right now as we see the cost of owning a home skyrocket. It puts that dream even more out of reach. And for those that can't own, even the cost of rental prices are going through the roof, demoralizing people. I remember hearing from this young man, a recent college graduate, and he just came to me just feeling so deflated. He said: I don't think I am ever going to own a home. That is how he put it. I have to tell you, just hearing that from him, just how pessimistic he was, just how demoralized he was about his place in our society--but it wasn't just about his place. It was about this moment for this country and the fact that he doesn't see us moving in a trajectory where someone like himself and people in his generation are going to be able to have that opportunity and that chance that generations before had. So you throw in that rising cost of higher education that he is struggling with, trying to pay off the bills, trying to keep up with student debt, and you have that general sense that we are losing that sense that we are part of something bigger than all of us. It is easy to understand why people just don't think the system that should be working for them is working for them. That is the place that we are in right now--that in this moment we find ourselves living through the moment of the greatest amount of inequality in our Nation's history, even worse than the Robber Baron Age that we studied about in history books; that somehow we see just such extraordinary wealth but for just a few, whereas the vast majority of Americans are struggling paycheck to paycheck and won't be able to step up if they face some type of crisis, a car accident or something else that could just lead them into catastrophe. That lack of trust is very clear in the numbers that we see from the American people. A Pew study from last summer showed that public trust in the Federal Government is at approximately 22 percent. And in 2023, only 16 percent said the government always or most of the time is something that you can trust. According to Pew, that was among the lowest tally in nearly 70 years. That number was reflected in a survey conducted by the Partnership for Public Service in the spring of 2024. Their research shows that only 23 percent of Americans trust the Federal Government. That is down from 35 percent the year before. We are just seeing it go down and down. Only 15 percent think the government is transparent, down from 21 percent the year before. This erosion that we are continuing to see in our country and in the public trust has to be at top of line, because how can a government function, how can a democracy function, with that much distrust? Alarming in that group is trust among people age 18 to 34--that age group of that young man I told you about who had such pessimism about his future. And in that group, we saw trust decline by half of 30 percent to 15 percent. Now, you might think this is just maybe a red State problem. But let me tell you, it is a massive issue in my home State of New Jersey, as well. In May of 2023, a poll by Fairleigh Dickinson University showed that over 80 percent of New Jersey residents--that is over 80 percent-- believe that their State's politicians are corrupt. That shows you just such a devastating number, the distrust that is out there and how widespread it is. We certainly have had our challenges of late in New Jersey. When you see the corruption, when you hear about the news of indictments and convictions--I remember one time I went to a neighbor of mine, asked him what he thought about the state of corruption in New Jersey, and he just said: That is New Jersey. He threw up his hands. This sense of helplessness, this sense of apathy, the sense that that is just how things are now; there is nothing we can do about it--there are a variety of reasons why this is a case in New Jersey, but it all comes back to the same thing, a singular question: Are the people in your government working for you or are they working for themselves? Are they trying to lift up their own personal wealth or to look out for their friends or their associates or their families or for special interests? I always often felt like one of the most important questions you can get a sense from the people is this question of: Do your elected officials, do your government officials care about you? Because sometimes it just feels like we are in this moment in this country where we have this crisis of empathy right now; that we are losing touch with that idea that we are part of something bigger than all of us. We are having trouble. We are struggling to see the world through someone else's eyes and walk in their shoes. In this Nation of over 330 million people, how can we continue if we continue to only think about ourselves and lose sight of that which is around us? Obviously, this is all the more important in times like these when we need our government working to solve the problems that we face. As we said, we face significant challenges. So what happens when we have a government where the people aren't working in the public interests, when those that are charged by the people to take up the public common good are not following through? What happens when we have a government where those people working to protect the public interests are fired or pushed out or marginalized? Luckily for us, history may not repeat, but it certainly rhymes. The Founding Fathers established the Federal workforce to be one built on merit. It was something that they took quite seriously--so seriously, in fact, that during debate in the weeks after Washington's first inauguration, James Madison stated: Wanton removal of a meritorious officer is an impeachable offense. George Washington himself wrote that appointments into public service would be the most difficult and delicate part of his work. In the history of the Federal service, in a report published by the Office of Personnel Management, the evolution of this debate from one of merit first to one of political gain becomes very apparent. As political parties grew, so did the pendulum swing over retaliation and actions that further politicized public servant positions, but the dam broke just a generation after the founding of the Republic. The Tenure of Office Act of 1820--not exactly a household name--was one of the first dominoes to fall. It led to what was eventually called the spoils system. By limiting the terms of many officials to 4 years, in corresponding to the President, it basically meant that public servants would come in and out with the tides of the Presidency and not be based on need or qualifications--just a pendulum swing of partisanship--the qualification being that of loyalty rather than skill or merit. The impact of the spoils system became very apparent, which was of wholesale patronage and corruption and a rejection of the status quo that looks very familiar to what we see today. Senator Henry Clay, on the Senate floor, called it a ``detestable system''--a ``detestable system.'' George William Curtis, one of the leaders in the fight to reform the civil service, said that the spoils system ``presents a most ridiculous, revolting, and disheartening spectacle.'' He said that, through it, the United States seethes with intrigue and corruption.'' Over time, the pushback against the system and the damage it did to the U.S. Government and its people built a reform movement that eventually resulted in the passage and enactment of the Pendleton Act in 1883. In many ways, the Pendleton Act brought our public service back to its original roots--codifying it, protecting it--by calling for an open selection of government employees and creating a Civil Service Commission--our modern civil service--and it required that the applicants pass a civil service exam. The bill was the first domino of several to help to restore trust in government by ensuring that those who serve will serve the people and not themselves--will serve the people and not just some loyalty test. In so many ways, the battle that led to the passage of the Pendleton Act continues today and answers the first question I posed: How deep does our crisis and confidence in our government go? In short, it goes back to a friction we have seen for most of our history. It is a friction between those who want to use power for their gain--to enrich themselves and their party--at the expense of other Americans. On the other side are those who seek only to swear an oath to the Constitution and to deliver on the promise of making the next American generation more prosperous and secure. To have that sense of progress as a nation, which we know we cannot take for granted, we have to work for it. So, when you look at Donald Trump or look at Elon Musk, you are not seeing something new. You are not seeing the disruptors they tell you that they are. You are not seeing an innovator. You are seeing something that is very old, just another power-hungry politician--an elite figure--seeking to hoard power at the expense of real American families--in this moment right now, as I said, that is a moment of the greatest amount of inequality in our Nation's history--and doing that by attacking the very people who work for the people, and they are not beholden to the well-off and the well-connected. Another person leading the charge to bring us back to the golden age of corruption of the 1800s is a man named Russell Vought. Now, Russell Vought was born to make corruption safe again. As a staffer in the House and the Senate, he worked for Members of both Chambers who attacked and demeaned civil servants in order to get them out of the way and let big corporate interests through. He worked for nearly a decade at the Heritage Foundation, taking dark corporate money and translating it into a systematic takedown of the same protections those corporations were lobbying against. When the Trump administration came into office in 2017, Mr. Vought was one of the first in the building at the Office of Management and Budget, the OMB. Then, like now, Senators had serious concerns when he was nominated then for Deputy Director and, eventually, for Director of OMB. Now this brings me to my second question: In what ways is the Trump administration putting the thumb on the scale for the well-off and well-connected? Well, let's look at it. Let's look at Project 2025, Mr. Vought's guidebook for attacking the core of the very principles our Founders wrote into the Constitution. Our Founding Fathers wanted to ensure checks and balances. They wanted to make sure we didn't swap one monarch for another. Vought believes that the President has a right to stop funds that Congress has approved from getting to the places we approved them to go. That means that, even if your elected officials approve of money to go toward building a road or investing in a school in your community or trying to get your kids childcare, Russell Vought believes that Donald Trump should be able to just stop it from getting to them--just because. Now, I say ``Donald Trump'' because Russell Vought is a champion of something called the unitary executive theory. I know that may sound like a half-baked physics idea, but Vought believes that all of the power in the executive branch belongs to the President and to the President alone. Mr. Vought even said in an interview, just a few months ago, that there are ``no independent Agencies''--warping the power of the Presidency to supersede Congress and the independence of Agencies that have massive authorities--given to them, by the way, by Congress, to protect the American people. This is core in clearing the field for the well-off and the well-connected by warping that and trying to change the fundamental balance of our government across three branches. Finally, by weakening the ability to fund the work that they do and to operate independently, it is Mr. Vought's attacks on civil servants--the very positions put into place more than 140 years ago to stop rampant corruption and patronage--it is his attacks that threaten to take us back in time. In a speech last year, Mr. Vought said he wants civil servants to be ``traumatically affected.'' He said: When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work, because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. He went on to say: We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can't do all the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so. We want to put them-- our public servants-- in trauma. Trauma. He used that word ``trauma.'' I want you to think about that for a second. This is an American--an American--who is asking for our vote here in the U.S. Senate to be confirmed as a senior government official, as someone who will lead an incredibly important part of our executive branch, and be a top adviser to the President; an American who will take an oath to support and defend the Constitution; an American who is actively saying he wants to traumatize his fellow Americans--other Americans--who have also sworn that oath to our Constitution. Now, I may disagree with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, but I don't wish to traumatize them. I don't wish them harm. How is it that we have found ourselves in this place where Americans call and see other Americans as the enemy? I talk with Democrats and Republicans across New Jersey. They may have disagreements, but they don't want to traumatize each other. This is not who we are as Americans, but it is what Mr. Vought wants to inflict on the people who show up to work each and every day to serve you, the American people. These are people who are trying to serve you, not themselves, but they are being demonized; they are being attacked, disrespected. And for those he can't traumatize out of a job, he is going to try to change their status as employees of the Federal Government so that he can push them out. Maybe you have heard of something called Schedule F. If you haven't, let me put it into simple terms: Russell Vought wants to, basically, bring back the same policies that started the chain of events that led to the spoils system. He wants to make it so that civil servants have their protections removed, giving partisan leaders the ability to fire them and put in their own political staff. We are already hearing and seeing this. There are reports that those at the White House and elsewhere are asking civil servants--asking those in jobs or who are seeking jobs--who they voted for in the last election, about campaign donations, and about party affiliation rather than just their commitment to the Constitution. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle would say that a President should have the ability to appoint their own staff, and I have agreement with that in broad strokes, but there is a reason we have different kinds of government workers. It is because the government is meant to do the work of the people, not be completely bent to the will of a particular political party. I speak from personal experience. I was proud to be a civil servant. I believe I am actually one of only a handful of the Members of Congress who currently serves who worked as a civil servant. I worked under President Bush and President Obama. I served a nation, not a party or a specific President, and that is the way it should be. Frankly, the oath that I swore as a civil servant is the same as what I recite here in this Chamber, and we could all be better off if we would take the mindset and approach of our civil servants. If we just let President Trump fire civil servants and replace them with people like Mr. Vought or with people who Mr. Vought deems loyal enough to the President to bring on board, the protections our Founders envisioned to prevent the corrupting influence of power and the corrupting power of that influence will completely override any ability to make change for the rest of us, and we are seeing this in realtime right now. (Mr. CASSIDY assumed the Chair.) This leads me to my third question: What is the impact of this corruption and these attacks on our neighbors and our national security? The number of calls and emails and visits to my office I have gotten over the past weeks has been overwhelming. First of all, I want to thank everybody who has reached out to express their opinions and their concerns. We would be better off if we had that kind of consistent engagement from the American people, paying attention to the work that is being done in government and having their voices heard. And I want to thank my team for their service in being responsive to those concerns. Now, starting with a memo from OMB freezing Federal funding, there has been panic across New Jersey and, frankly, the country about the funds that we approve as Congress--funds that are your funds as taxpayers. And they have been taken away from you by the Trump administration. I want to share a couple examples of the notes I have gotten from people in my State who are being hurt by the systematic attempt to fire civil servants and strip away programs that help working families to clear the way for the Trump administration to let the well-off and the well-connected take control, as they get ready to plan for their big tax giveaway to the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations, taking that away from the rest of the American people. I got a letter from Julia, a community leader who runs an organization in central Jersey that helps kids and seniors and people just trying to get by. She said: The new Administration's ``pause on all activities related to obligation or disbursement'' of funds for federal grants to non-governmental organizations would have had an immediate and negative effect on the low-income, working folks we all serve across New Jersey. She went on to say: Children in Head Start and Early Head Start, quality child care and after school services improve their physical and cognitive development while their parents pursue employment and training. That these programs would struggle. The WIC Nutrition Program provides essential access to healthy foods for pregnant women and young children leading to lifelong health benefits. That this would be on the chopping block. Pregnant women in our maternal health programs are less likely to have preterm or low-birth weight deliveries, with immediate and sustained health benefits and cost savings. That that would be a detriment. Medicare navigation services for seniors on fixed, low incomes are helpful and enable them to live independently and longer. And that that is something they won't be able to count on. For every child raised by a kinship caregiver, our state saves thousands in foster care payments it would otherwise incur with public dollars. It matters that these programs are delivered by nonprofit organizations that provide a continuum of services that support economic activity and make our whole community more resilient. This is one organization helping tens of thousands in our State. And I want to share one quick figure that stuck out to me. Of the approximately $13 million in grants they received, they estimate an economic benefit to New Jersey of around $52 million saved. So for my colleagues not convinced by our attempts to feed children and provide healthcare to seniors, you might be interested to hear that providing these services is the fiscally responsible thing to do as well. Let's look at the other impacts these draconian cuts could have on New Jersey families. We should work to keep our communities safe. If these cuts persist, grants to law enforcement and homeland security activities will be cut off, putting us in danger. We should work to be prepared for disasters like wildfires and hurricanes. Public assistance and hazard mitigation grants from the Disaster Relief Fund help communities quickly respond to, recover from, and prepare for major disasters that might not go to the many communities that are struggling after severe natural disasters. As our neighbors in New Jersey continue to recover from storms from even more than a decade ago--as Superstorm Sandy shattered so many lives, continues to wreak havoc, and many of those families are still not back in their homes--our government should never abandon them. We should work to build the best infrastructure--roads and bridges and public transit and more--take it into the next generation with universal broadband and connectivity on so many fronts that are necessary for all families. We should be able to work together to build that infrastructure so that your families can get to work and your kids can get to school and our businesses can thrive. But that funding is at risk. We should work to combat the fentanyl crisis and the mental health crisis by investing in proven programs that save lives, programs that could be on the chopping block if these cuts persist. We should invest in lifesaving medical research so that this is the last generation that will have to suffer through cancer, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes. Cutting this funding means cutting clinical trials at NIH Clinical Centers all across the country. The American people deserve better than that. We should work to provide the best education for our next generation. As a father of a 7-year-old and a 9-year-old, I see every day the impacts a good education has on them. I myself am a public school kid from New Jersey, something that we are proud of in New Jersey, but knowing that we still have so much more work to do to make that available to everyone. This is a process we have to continue. You cannot take it for granted. Right now, Head Start programs that provide comprehensive early childhood education for more than 800,000 kids are being frozen. With teachers and staff not getting paid, programs may not be able to stay open. Childcare programs could also be next to close without funding being delivered. And our K-12 schools will lose critical funding from title I, IDEA, Impact Aid, and other programs that can keep their doors open and lights on in the middle of the school year. From healthcare to small business support, to protecting our veterans and providing support to those suffering through hunger, the examples of the kinds of impacts and the people impacted by these cuts are almost endless, and they are a reminder of who is on the losing side when corruption and corporate greed win out. And beyond the impacts on our communities, the impact on our national security is real. And these stories of Mr. Musk and his band of 20- somethings raiding government Agencies and making threats to workers isn't some example of brave tech disrupters innovating their way to efficiency and better results. In fact, what we are seeing from this administration is quite the opposite: stories of dangerous incompetence. Late yesterday, the New York Times reported that the White House ordered the CIA to send an unclassified email listing all the employees hired over the past 2 years. Many of these new employees were hired to help us deal with the rising challenges of China and Russia and of other threats that we face out there. Now, they are effectively being exposed, made vulnerable to our adversaries, because the Trump administration simply wants to traumatize public servants. We are doing the work of our adversaries for them. One example of this is the attacks that we see against USAID. And as I have seen what has unfolded this week at USAID, it actually reminded me of my first moments in public service. A little over 20 years ago, I started my very first day working for the U.S. Government. I remember walking up to the doors of the Ronald Reagan building because I was starting my first day at USAID. I had just graduated college, and I was proud to have a chance to serve this Nation and proud to serve at a place like USAID. And it was the public servants there that showed me what community meant, showed me that someone like me has every bit as much right to represent and to work and serve our country--because it was something I wasn't sure about when I first showed up to this town. I remember stepping out at Union Station and seeing the beautiful dome of the Capitol, and I was simultaneously inspired but also terrified. I felt imposter syndrome: Who am I to be able to represent and serve this country? I am a son of immigrants, from a family of political nobodies, and I thought serving this country, working in government wasn't for me. I worked alongside public servants at USAID who helped with the rehabilitation of ex-child soldiers in Uganda, others that worked on combating malaria and helping save millions of lives. I was working at USAID around the time of the Indian Ocean tsunami, if you remember that catastrophe, a 9.1-magnitude earthquake killing an estimated 240,000 people in 14 nations across two continents. And USAID stepped up, helping support those families living in dire conditions, having faced a catastrophe unlike anything we had seen in generations--but also building toward the future, creating early warning systems across the world. It was USAID that helped deliver that to countries all across this world to help better prepare for the next disaster. Later in my career, I worked at the White House National Security Council. I was working on helping coordinate the counter-ISIS fight about a decade ago. I remember one particular moment in August 2014 where we saw ISIS going and attacking a religious minority of a people called the Yazidi people. And the Yazidis were forced out from their communities. And they fled up on top of a mountain called Sinjar Mountain, tried to take refuge there, while they were surrounded by ISIS terrorists who were hell-bent on committing genocide and a mass atrocity. And we in the U.S. Government were trying to figure out: What can we do? What can we do to try to help save these people, tens of thousands of people, trapped on a mountain, deep in enemy territory on the other side of the world? Can we help them with humanitarian airdrops? Is there a way we can build a humanitarian corridor off that mountain? Are there ways in which we can try to protect them from being annihilated? And you want to know who the first Americans were that went there under dangerous circumstances, deep in enemy territory? It was a USAID DART team, a disaster assistance response team, there alongside our military, that helped the President of the United States make decisions in the Situation Room about what to do next, about whether or not we were going to decide to protect these people or not. And the President, based off of the information provided by USAID, made the decision to conduct humanitarian airdrops and be able to provide overflight coverage and be able to provide support and security to those people. And we were able to get them off that mountain, and it was one of the finest moments I had ever seen in government. On those days, I saw the best of us, and I saw a government that can inspire. We see USAID working on disease eradication, on agriculture, global health, humanitarian aid and economic growth, food security, clean water; helping with the eradication of smallpox; saving countless lives through simple oral rehydration therapies--things like that--that have had immeasurable, countless benefits. It was a legacy that excited me when I walked up on my first day at work as a recent college grad. And then, just this past Monday, I walked through those same doors at the Reagan building yet again, only to find it empty, apart from a security guard who I went up to, and he told me that he had instructions to bar and prevent any USAID employee from entering the building that day, to bar public servants from going to the office to do the work that they are entrusted by the American people to do. It was just despicable, the demonization of public servants. Now, let's remember why USAID exists. American global leadership has always been hand in hand with our foreign assistance, from the Marshall Plan forward, under both Democrats and Republicans. Kennedy, in 1961, said: The program requires a highly professional skilled service, attracting substantial numbers of high caliber men and women capable of sensitive dealing with other governments, and with a deep understanding of the process of economic development. He went on to say: In the face of these weaknesses and inadequacies-- Of the previous system-- it is proper that we draw back and ask with candor a fundamental question: Is a foreign aid program really necessary? The answer is that there is no escaping our obligations: our moral obligations as a wise leader and good neighbor in the interdependent community of free nations. And he said: To fail to meet those obligations now would be disastrous; and in the long run, more expensive. For the widespread poverty and chaos lead to a collapse of existing political and social structures which would inevitably invite the advance of totalitarianism into every weak and unstable area. Thus our own security would be endangered and our own prosperity imperiled. So Kennedy went on and called for an effort to--he said, ``unified administration and operation--a single agency in Washington and the field, equipped with a flexible set of tools.'' And this was going to be drawing upon ``the most competent and dedicated career servants now in the field, and attracting the highest quality from every part of the nation.'' He went on to say that he wanted to ensure that this was separate from our military assistance, for instance, because, he said, ``our program of aid to social and economic development must be seen on its own merits, and judged in the light of its vital and distinctive contribution to our basic security needs.'' He was clear in saying this was a bipartisan legacy, one that had ``moved forward under the leadership of two great Presidents--Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower--and drawn its support from forward- looking members of both political parties in the Congress and throughout the nation.'' He said: It's about American global leadership. Now, there is a reason why the USAID headquarters is at the Reagan Building. Reagan continued that emphasis on development and humanitarian aid. He said: The ultimate importance to the United States of our security and development programs cannot be exaggerated. Here is another quote that is actually quite apt for this moment. He said: You know the excuses: We can't afford foreign aid anymore, or we're wasting money pouring it into these poor countries, or we can't buy friends--other countries just take the money and dislike us for giving it. Well, all these excuses are just that, excuses. Reagan said: [T]hey're dead wrong. Now we have a Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, saying USAID takes taxpayer funds and ``spends it as a global charity irrespective of whether it is in the national interest or not the national interest.'' But do you know who else said that the work of USAID isn't charity, like Kennedy, like Reagan? It was Marco Rubio just a few years ago. ``Foreign aid is not charity,'' he said. ``We must make sure it is well spent but it is less than 1 percent of budget and critical to our national security.'' Rubio went on to say: We don't have to give foreign aid, we do so because it furthers our national interest. That's why we give foreign aid. He said: Anyone who tells you that we can slash foreign aid and that will bring us balance [to our budget] is lying to you. Foreign aid is less than 1 percent of our budget. It's just not true. Look, there can always be space to review our foreign assistance. I worked in these organizations. I know there are places that we can try to fine-tune, make more efficient, make more effective. If there are programs that Congress and Members of Congress have questions about, that is ripe for our oversight role. But to undermine USAID as a whole is flat wrong. We see this with Secretary Rubio's first trip this past weekend. He went to Panama and complained about Panama accepting support from China through the Belt and Road Initiative. Yet he then goes on to help Trump and Musk gut USAID--a critical tool that we have to counter Chinese influence. It very much exposes that this ``America First'' foreign policy really means ``America Only.'' If we continue down this path, we will find ourselves alone. Over the years of our global power, our strategic advantage has always been in building coalitions. In this dangerous global environment, this ``America First'' approach leaves us distracted from the real threats and challenges. This is about American global leadership. I think about my own family. My parents were born during the Korean war. They grew up--the very first Americans they ever met were American servicemembers and other Americans that were there to try to help Korea rebuild. It wasn't just America's resolve in the war; it was about what happened afterwards in terms of helping provide assistance, Americans taking action to feed kids like my parents. As I said earlier, 50 years ago, my parents decided to come to America. They knew nobody here--not a single person. They didn't know anybody in the entire Western Hemisphere of planet Earth, but my parents moved here to America because America meant something to them. It is because they met the best of us--Americans abroad, willing to work in dangerous places, in tough circumstances, wanting to try to live out the values of our country. We learn it is not just the GDP of our Nation that makes us a leader; it is the projection of our values, and ultimately it is our people. Now we are pulling back our foreign assistance. We are closing the door to immigrants like my parents. This is unfortunately a moment of American withdrawal. That is not what the American people want. They wanted a government that was focused on them instead of billionaires and the biggest corporations, but they understand the importance of American leadership. When I talk to leaders and officials in other countries--I remember there was one situation where I talked to one, and he said something to me that really just stuck in my mind. He said: I just want you to know, when I talk to other leaders around the world, when we talk about America--this official I was talking to--we ask ourselves a question: Is America a reliable partner? He asked that question knowing full well what the answer is, and we know what the answer is, which is we are not the reliable partner we should be. This isn't just about USAID. We know USAID--that these attacks are only just the beginning. It is the canary in the coal mine. Next, it will be the Department of Education or Justice or FBI or elsewhere, schedule F, an effort to kill the civil service, return to the spoils systems of 200 years ago, and it goes back to Russell Vought. I want to emphasize that quote I said earlier because it is worth emphasizing in this moment. He said: We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can't do all the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so. We want to put them in trauma. When you listen to those words, doesn't that sound like exactly what happened over the last week? I get these phone calls and texts from people at USAID, people that I worked with, texting me and telling me ``Things are very grave,'' talking about how disrespected they feel. It saddens me greatly to think that Trump and Musk and Mr. Vought and others are relishing in that anxiety, fear, and pain that they are purposefully--purposefully--trying to create. In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Vought said Trump ``has to move executively as fast and as aggressively as possible with a radical constitutional perspective to be able to dismantle that bureaucracy and their power centers.'' Now, why do you think they need to move so fast? It is because when you want to grab as much power as you can, you want to do it before the American people understand and see what is happening. They feed off the apathy and the helplessness. They want people to be disengaged. They are intentionally using terms like ``shock and awe''--a term of war that we had used, and now they are using that against the American people. I have been saying this line a lot lately where I say: I believe that the opposite of democracy is apathy. We have to stay engaged. There is a massive division in our country, no doubt about that. It is not just between Democrats and Republicans; it is between those who are engaged and those who aren't. And these actions are built to paralyze you with anger, fueled by disinformation and distraction to make you disengage, but don't let them. So what comes next? All we have to do is look at Mr. Vought's past statements to know exactly what is coming. He said: What we're trying to do is identify the pockets of independence and seize them. When he was talking about the Federal Reserve, he went on to say: It's very hard to square the Fed's independence with the Constitution. That quote of his led me to ask him directly in a confirmation hearing if he believed that the President has the right to set interest rates in our country, and Mr. Vought refused to answer. He couldn't answer something as simple as that. The answer should be very easy. It should be, clearly no. I talked to a number of leaders at the Fed recently, and they really emphasize the longstanding bipartisan agreement that we do not want someone approaching critical decisions about fiscal stability in America based off of what is best for the next election for that leader. We don't want to see that kind of politicization. The goal always needs to be towards the stability of our economy and the responsibility towards growth and prosperity. Vought--he just believes in power and not just any kind of power. He believes in an all-powerful President--something our Founding Fathers specifically avoided. We don't want a monarch. We have coequal branches of government. But is that what the American people have seen since January 20? No. We have seen blatant power grabs, illegal actions, disregard of laws passed by Congress, chaos. But, remember, as you see this, chaos is their plan. It is Trump's plan. It is Mr. Vought's plan. It is the reason why they are going after public servants, and it is the same reason that happened 200 years ago, because public service is about serving the people, while corruption, we see, is about serving themselves. Public service was the answer to countering corruption in the 1800s, and it is my belief that it is the answer to the current threat to our democracy. When you see these attacks on public servants, when you see what is unfolding before our eyes, that is not the golden age that Trump tried to talk about in his inaugural address. It is not the ``Make America Great Again'' slogan that he has been using. It goes back to another phrase that he used over the campaign where he talked about ``the enemy from within''--those three words, ``the enemy from within.'' That is what this is all about. Painting our public servants who swear an oath to protect our Constitution as the enemy. Earlier, I talked about my parents coming to the United States 50 years ago. Now my family--we think about the next 50 years. I am now a parent of a 7-year-old and a 9-year-old, two little boys. I will be honest with you, I worry about what kind of America my boys are going to grow up in. What will it look like? What will this country look like when they are my age? So that is why I am here. That is why I stand here on the floor of the Senate. I am here because I refuse to believe that my kids and their generation are doomed to grow up in a broken America. I still believe in the America that inspired my parents 50 years ago to travel halfway around the world, and I know we are not the only family out there that believes in this. There is a hunger in this country for reform and change. People don't want to see the status quo, but that doesn't mean they want to hand over our country to corruption, hand it over to patronage, hand it over for another generation of the worst inequality our Nation has ever seen, where every day it gets worse. As I mentioned before, we just took on and fought against machine politics in New Jersey. I heard it straight from the people; they don't want to see that kind of rise of broken machine politics across our Nation. Corruption is the quickest way to take the strongest, most powerful nation in the world and send it into decline. In just a little over a year, we will have our 250th anniversary as a nation. And as I close here, I want us to reflect on that--250 years. I hope we can commit, as a nation, to have that more than just about fireworks; that we use that as a moment to try to rededicate ourselves to the mission of this country, to the purpose of this Nation, and why it began. After the January 6 riots, the way I framed it is I said I was going to dedicate the rest of my life to try to solve one singular question, which is: How do we heal this country? I believe the answer to that question is ``service.'' That we need a new ``ask not what your country can do for you'' moment, a reminder that we are part of something bigger than all of us. Instead of attacking public servants, we should be promoting and encouraging them. And I hope on our 250th anniversary, we rededicate ourselves to this project, build a national service program, invest in civics education. We need to reject divisiveness that is infecting our Nation and restore a sense of trust. We start by rejecting this dangerous nomination to do just that. I yield the floor.

Mr. KIM

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

Mr. KIM

Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today to try to make some sense of it all. Why are we seeing nothing but chaos coming from the White House? Why are people feeling a sense of fear and confusion? Why should Americans be paying attention to any of this? I want to start by saying to the American people: You are not alone in feeling overwhelmed by what is going on right now. Just yesterday, my office received more than 700 calls asking questions about the Trump administration's unconstitutional and brazen decision to take money away from them, to freeze programs that help people in every corner of our State and country. That translates to a call every 2 minutes. I am going to share some of the stories of concern that I received yesterday, but before I do, I want to try to explain what exactly is going on. On Monday, the Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget sent a memo ordering Federal Agencies to ``temporarily pause all activities related to obligations or disbursements of all federal financial assistance.'' I know that sounds complicated, so let me put it another way. The Trump administration said that taxpayer money going to help people across the country was stopped. That is money that you have paid through your taxes that goes to do important things. It helps provide meals to seniors. It keeps roofs over people's heads. It helps combat the fentanyl crisis. It helps get veterans healthcare. It keeps childcare programs open and schools funded. It helps small businesses get back onto their feet after disasters. That is just a small example of what the Trump administration attempted to take away from you. And let's be clear: This is your money, and they tried to take it away. What happened next was they got caught, and the backlash was fast. The outrage was real. Their actions were stopped last night when a judge issued an injunction and questioned the constitutionality of the administration's actions. Then today, in the span of an hour, the Trump administration rescinded their directive, only to contradict that with a tweet from the White House Press Secretary: This is NOT a rescission of the federal funding freeze. It is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. Why? To end any confusion created by the court's injunction. It goes on to say: The President's EO's-- Executive order-- on federal funding remain in full force and effect, and will be rigorously implemented.'' In short, the first time we tried to take away your money, it was probably unconstitutional, but we are going to keep trying in different ways until we get it right. If this feels like your head is spinning, I get it. We have seen nothing but mass confusion and chaos for the past week and a half since Donald Trump reentered the White House. It is not governance; it is whiplash. If you are watching me on C-SPAN or catching a clip on social media, there is one thing I want you to take away: The chaos is just a smoke screen for corruption. It is quite clear. They want to take away your money and give it right to the billionaire donors and corporate interests. The Trump administration isn't taking this money away from you because they are serious about making government more effective or efficient. They are not doing this because they want to help more people and target our resources where they can do the most good. They are doing this because they are getting ready to gut programs you rely on every day and use that money for another round of tax cuts for those at the very top. They are doing this because the big corporate interests want to dismantle the public servants who work every day to make sure that your water is clean, that your kids get a good education, and that your parents are able to safely get to their doctor's appointments. We should not lose sight of what is at stake here. We shouldn't get wrapped into the noise and confusion and chaos that the White House throws at us because behind that chaos, there are real victims of this corruption. There are real lives on the line when people are left behind. Let me share just a few stories. I heard from a lot of seniors and people who support seniors about their fears about what this means. Yesterday morning, I got an email from someone who helps operate senior living facilities in Edison, NJ. They said the freeze was ``obviously alarming'' for those ``who rely on federal funding to help people with disabilities become more independent.'' One of my staff received an email from a leader of senior services organizations in Hackensack and Jersey City who said: Those in most need of services in New Jersey will lose all support. Another staff received a message from Frank in Toms River. Frank said: I am paralyzed and use Ocean Ride to get to all my doctors appointments. . . . I am unable to travel in a regular vehicle and without the significant discount of Ocean Ride, I could not afford to get to the doctor. Ocean Ride is essential to my daily life. Now, you may never have heard of Ocean Ride, but for people like Frank, it is their lifeline. These actions by the Trump administration to take away money could force Ocean Ride to close their doors. It is not just our seniors who lose out in this corruption and chaos; it is our kids. I got a call from Kelly, a nurse from Parsippany. I work with children who need food from free school programs, babies who need WIC, children who are bullied in school, children with disabilities. She told me that the Trump administration should ``quit playing games with politics.'' I heard the same thing from Manny from Bergen County, a public school teacher who said that he had ``students that benefit directly from programs'' that are on the chopping block. Manny said that this moment makes it hard to look at his 3\1/2\-year-old and think about the future. It is a feeling that so many of us have right now. I heard from Susan from Hudson County who works in a nonprofit that helps the homeless. She said in a call to our office yesterday: Our funds have been frozen. We are not going to be able to serve our clients or our staff. This is going to have a significant impact, not only with my agency, but the entire community of those we serve. I am sharing these stories with you because it is important to remember that the impact of the decisions made at the White House go beyond the feeling of hopelessness and helplessness. If the White House continues down this path, those at the very top--the well-off and the well-connected--will get their tax cuts and whatever else they want. They will get it at the expense of a senior who will have to miss a doctor's appointment because their ride support program has been cut. They will get it at the expense of a young kid whose aftercare was cut or free school lunch was eliminated. And they will get it at the expense of the person who just needs a helping hand to put a roof over their head. Mr. President, this isn't just about ending this chaos; it is about protecting our neighbors, our communities, and our families. We know this fight is not over. The White House was very clear about that today. This was just the beginning. We have seen these freezes for infrastructure spending that could impact big projects like the Gateway Tunnel and small projects like paving the road you drive on to take your kids to school. These freezes could make America less competitive on a global stage by cutting research for AI and other next-generation technologies. In a week where we are seeing China make gains, we can't take our own foot off the gas. And these freezes could stop critical research into diseases that impact Americans across the country. We should be supercharging our efforts to cure Alzheimer's and cancer, not cutting them. Meanwhile, we have seen nearly 20 inspectors general fired from government Agencies, trying to hide what is happening. The American people want more accountability, not less. And making it harder for watchdogs to call out bad behavior could result in a golden age of corruption. But when it comes to standing up against attempts to take away your healthcare, your childcare, your eldercare, the basic protections that your government provides because you pay into it, we will be with you every step of the way to fight back. This is just the beginning. We hear your concerns, your frustrations, your anger. Your voice still matters. Your story stills matters. And Democrats in this Chamber will lead the way. But together, we will push back and make sure that it is the people's priorities that win the day. Mr. President, I ask the American people to see the chaos for what it is: a smoke screen to benefit the ultrawealthy. And although I know this chaos is unnerving and it is frightening, the American people can rest assured that we will fight this chaos and focus on what matters most here: protecting you from the blatant corruption that is the administration's attempt to take money from our working families and give handouts to those at the very top. Let's get to work. I yield the floor.