Gary Peters

Mr. PETERS

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss a subject that transcends partisanship and political parties, and that is our growing national debt. Nearly 230 years ago, President George Washington issued his Farewell Address. It is a speech full of advice and wisdom that this country still looks to today for guidance. But lost within that address is an often-overlooked warning--a warning against the accumulation of debt. Specifically, our first President cautioned the newfound American public that our government should avoid ``the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned.'' In other words, President Washington warned us against kicking the can down the road and pushing off a burden that he said ``we ourselves ought to bear.'' So today I ask, has our country heeded these words of warning? Let's take a look. As of this morning, the national debt totaled $36.7 trillion. To put that into perspective, that is more than triple the amount of debt from when I first came into office in 2009. And to get your head around it, if you break that number down per American, it translates to more than $107,000 in debt for each and every person in our country. By 2029, the debt held by the United States as a percentage of our economy is expected to be higher than at any point in the entire history of our Nation. Within the next decade, the United States will spend more annually to pay down the interest--just the interest--on our debt alone than we do on anything else except Social Security. So in answer to the question ``Have we listened to President George Washington's warning?'' I think the answer is very clear: No, we haven't. The American people may be asking: Well, what does this matter to me? How does this impact my life, my future? They may ask: If it truly mattered, why are not more people--not only here in Washington, DC, but across the country--talking about the issue? If it truly mattered, if this truly mattered, having this massive debt, why did Republicans in Congress just pass a bill that will increase our debt by trillions in additional dollars? Point blank, I think the majority of Americans just want to know: Why should I care? Mr. President, I am here to tell every American and all of my colleagues here in Congress that we must take this seriously because the national debt is an issue that impacts the daily life of every single person in our country. For one, the higher our national debt grows, the greater the likelihood that interest rates will also increase. Higher interest rates mean the cost of everything--from mortgages, to student loans, to car payments--will become even more expensive for hard-working Americans. The larger our debt becomes, the more money we must dedicate to paying it off, and that often means fewer resources that we can invest back into our communities, whether it is to upgrade infrastructure, to improve our schools, or to support economic development in our communities. It means fewer resources for critical programs that support early childhood education, boost workforce development, expand access to quality, affordable housing, and more-- things that actually benefit every person in this country. So the moral of the story is, as debt grows, life becomes more expensive for all Americans. And at a time when the price of gas, groceries, housing, and everyday needs is already too high, the American people simply cannot afford this added cost. Our growing debt also presents real threats to our national security. If we face another major emergency like a pandemic or a global financial crisis, there is serious concern that we may be too hamstrung by our debt to respond effectively. This fact should concern every American. As we work to address this issue in a tangible way, we need to make sure we understand the full scope of how our growing national debt threatens our national security. That is why just last week, I helped introduce bipartisan legislation that would require administration officials to look at these national security concerns and explain--explain--to the American people how our ballooning debt impacts our ability to keep them safe in an emerging crisis. But despite these things, Congress has, unfortunately, time and time again, chosen to add to the problem instead of being part of the solution. So consider this: In every Presidential administration since President George W. Bush, at least $5 trillion has been added to the national debt. Since 2002, which was the first year we experienced a deficit following 4 years of a budget surplus, the United States has incurred 20 of the largest deficits in our entire Nation's history. This is an important fact. The two largest deficits came out of the Trump administration--the Trump administration, the two largest deficits this country has ever faced. This means that the imbalance between our revenues and spending has been at an alltime high. And just last month, my Republican colleagues took this problem and supercharged it when they passed their reckless so-called One Big Beautiful Bill. It should have been called the ``One Big Deficit Bill.'' The bill that President Trump signed into law on the Fourth of July will kick millions of people off their healthcare and make it harder for families to put food on their table by cutting food assistance. All the while, they added $3.5 trillion to the national debt. Basically, my Republican colleagues betrayed working families and mortgaged our Nation's economic future all to give the wealthiest Americans a tax break. Instead of putting us on a sustainable fiscal path, this bill has kicked the can down the road once again. Our fiscal house is on fire. Yet, year after year, Washington chooses to add a little more gasoline. Despite the grave situation we face, I do have some good news. We still have time to turn this around. There are ways to get our fiscal house back in order and stave off potential crises. But it is going to take cooperation from all of us. Instead of the political gamesmanship and polarization that has taken root in our democracy, this situation will require everyone--everyone-- rowing in the same direction. Congress will have to come together in a bipartisan manner to find commonsense measures that strategically address our Nation's debt while investing in economic growth and hard- working, middle-class families. At the root of this effort is correcting the ever-present imbalance between revenue and spending. This opportunity to restore fiscal discipline is why I plan to come to the floor on a regular basis to discuss this dire situation posed by the national debt--from looking at how we got here to highlighting the everyday impacts our debt has on everyday Americans to underscoring the impending crisis that is in store if we don't change course. And we must do it quickly. It is not farfetched to say that we are at an inflection point in our Nation's history and that the futures of our children and our grandchildren are, indeed, at stake. We have all played a part in the deterioration of our fiscal health, and it is time--it is, in fact, past time--that we all play an important part in restoring it. I yield the floor.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, today, we are debating President Trump's disastrous proposal to cut more than $9 billion in funding that Congress has already approved for local public broadcasting and foreign assistance. Not only is this bill harmful to communities in Michigan, as well as all across the country, but it also risks undermining a key part of our democratic process. President Trump and his crony--Budget Director Russ Vought--are trying to undercut the voice of everyday Americans in our government through this process. Americans sent us here to represent them and to act in their best interest. That is why our Constitution gives Congress--not the President--the sole power to make laws, including the power of the purse. And that is why lawmakers routinely come together to decide, on a bipartisan basis, how to allocate Federal funding in a way that best serves the people who live in our States. I am proud to take part in that important process as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. And I am proud that my Democratic and Republican colleagues in the committee are working hard to advance commonsense, bipartisan funding bills that will meet the needs of all of our communities. But Donald Trump wants to throw these bills out the window so he can pick which communities win and which communities lose when it comes to Federal resources. Funding laws are still laws, and Congress passed these laws with bipartisan support to direct resources to these programs. No President gets unilateral say on how any law is implemented, and no President gets to overrule Congress's bipartisan laws. But the legislation pending before the Senate today would open up a slippery slope that would undercut Congress's authority, rob our communities of important resources, and ultimately erode the voice of the American people who elect their Members of Congress to make these decisions in their best interests. We have to put our foot down because we know it will not stop here. Today it is funding for local public media, but tomorrow it could be funding for infectious disease research, public education, or weather forecasting--all on the chopping block. They have made it pretty clear that folks just want to cut rather than leading our government in a way that makes our constituents' lives better. We saw it at the beginning of this year, when the administration froze funds that Congress passed into law to support local infrastructure upgrades, cancer research, childcare programs, opioid addiction centers, and so many more. Just a few weeks ago, the administration froze a ton of funding that Congress passed for summer school and afterschool programs. And again with the ``Big Bad Bill'' that our Republican colleagues just passed, President Trump signed into law a bill that gutted funding for critical resources like Medicaid and SNAP, ripping healthcare and food assistance from millions of Americans, all to cover the cost for their massive tax cut for billionaires. And, now today, Republicans are trying to bypass once again bipartisan laws--laws that many of them voted for themselves--so they can rubberstamp another round of President Trump's harmful cuts. Let's take a look at the harm that these cuts will do. Take the proposed elimination of funding for public broadcasting. This would eliminate the single most important source of funding for local radio and TV stations that focus on providing high-quality, community- centered content. When local public media stations from Grand Rapids to Marquette see a huge chunk of their budget eliminated by this bill, they will, at a minimum, be forced to let people go. These are Michiganders who are just trying to keep their friends and neighbors informed on what is happening in their local communities. Families will no longer have 24/7 access to Michigan's Learning Channel, which provides educational math and literacy content for children all across my State. But the biggest harm that these funding cuts will have on our communities is the impact to emergency response and public safety. Many of Michigan's public TV and radio stations are responsible for broadcasting emergency alerts during national disasters like tornadoes, wildfires, or severe flooding. When catastrophic ice storms swept through northern Michigan earlier this year, it was local radio stations that literally saved lives by broadcasting emergency warnings to folks after commercial towers went down. These alerts are critical, particularly in rural communities where these local public stations are often the only ones available to reach people during an emergency. WNMU out of Marquette is the only source of emergency alert services for over 250,000 residents in Michigan's Upper Peninsula. This singular station covers an area larger than Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Delaware combined. If Republicans pass this disastrous bill, those communities will be left in the dark when the next emergency strikes. Local public media also plays an important role in supporting national security and law enforcement efforts. In the Thumb region, Delta College Public Media hosts transmitters for the FBI and the Coast Guard to ensure that they can effectively communicate during emergency situations. Eliminating funding for that partnership, as this bill would do, is quite literally putting American lives and the homeland at risk. And don't get me wrong. I am all for reducing waste and making sure that we are spending taxpayer dollars efficiently, but gutting funding for local stations that communities rely on to keep their families safe is to cut corners that is absolutely detrimental to public safety. So when President Trump--and his cronies like Russ Vought--say that this bill targets government fraud, waste, and abuse--something that I have spent my entire life fighting against--we know that it is just not true. Don't forget, they just passed a bill that is going to add $3 trillion to the deficit. They don't care about balancing the budget or limiting waste. They want to cut services that American families depend on so they can afford a bigger tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. In addition to local broadcasting, this bill also will upend bipartisan investments in foreign assistance that Congress made earlier this year to maintain our global leadership and protect U.S. national security interests. While foreign assistance represents less than 1 percent of the Federal Government, it provides critical benefits to our Nation. These strategic investments help save American lives, reinforce our global leadership, and support economic growth here in our country. Foreign assistance helps protect global stability and prevent conflict that is more costly for us in the long run. But this bill undermines those strategic goals by compromising programs that have long received bipartisan support. Funding for programs like Feed the Future and efforts to counter Russian and Chinese influence have been cut in this bill. These programs just don't support communities abroad, they actually stimulate local businesses and economies right here at home. Feed the Future, which is a part of the U.S. Agency for International Development, supports local farmers by purchasing their products and distributing them to people in need around the globe. If Republicans pass this bill, those farmers will lose. Feed the Future also partners with universities and colleges across the United States to operate innovation labs that draw on their expertise to tackle the world's biggest challenges to food security. Institutions like Michigan State University conduct cutting-edge agricultural research to help farmers grow better products that support Americans. These partnerships also provide training opportunities for the next generation of researchers to help maintain America's competitiveness. If this bill passes, MSU will lose. But Michigan State University is not alone. Institutions across the country in States like Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, North Carolina, and many more will also have their vital research projects canceled. Foreign assistance is designed to prevent the need for more costly interventions down the line. This bill will undo the success of past generations of Americans and damage our geopolitical standing, all to save just a fraction of our Nation's annual budget while doing serious damage to American leadership across the globe. But the bigger picture here is that Republicans are allowing Donald Trump to bypass Congress and the bipartisan laws that we pass right here. Every year Congress tirelessly negotiates bipartisan funding bills, and each side makes compromises. But if one party can simply rip up those bipartisan funding agreements by enacting one-sided decisions like what my Republican colleagues are going to be doing here, the appropriations process will simply break down. How can we be assured that these bipartisan agreements are being made in good faith if Republicans are just going to turn their backs on them just a few months later? How can we be sure that the funding laws we pass will help all of our communities succeed if our Republican colleagues will simply let President Trump pick who wins and who loses when it comes to Federal support? President Trump's Budget Director Russ Vought has already made it clear that he won't stop with this rescission effort. He just opened the door to undercutting the bipartisan funding laws that Congress passed, and there is no telling where he and President Trump will stop if they succeed here. Congress is meant to be an independent branch of the government from the Presidency, with our own unique powers. Making decisions about how the Federal Government should allocate its resources is one of those powers that belongs solely to Congress under the U.S. Constitution. What we do today will either reaffirm that Congress makes the laws, or it will show how quickly our Republican colleagues will roll over and rubberstamp whatever Donald Trump wants, no matter--no matter--what harm it will do to the people that they represent. I urge my colleagues to oppose this harmful bill.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Sanders Candy as they celebrate 150 years of confectionery arts in the State of Michigan. Since 1875, Sanders has touched the hearts and taste buds of Michiganders through their delicious, handcrafted treats, a staple of special occasions, and gift giving across the State of Michigan. It is a privilege to recognize such a significant milestone for a Detroit institution. Frederick Sanders Schmidt opened his first candy shop with a ``passionate dream and a borrowed barrel of sugar'' on June 17, 1875, on the corner of Woodward and Gratiot Avenue. Visitors were dazzled to find a breathtaking variety of sweet treats, such as chocolates, caramels, cakes, and pies. The company expanded at a rapid pace across southeast Michigan, opening new locations like the aptly named ``Palace of Sweets,'' known for its ornate and spacious interior and wide array of confections, including new desserts like their iconic bumpy cake. Over its 150 years, Sanders has gone through many changes, but their values and innovative spirit have never wavered. To accommodate increased demand, their factory became one of the first in Detroit to install an electric motor, a novel technology at the time, and hired a then unknown mechanic named Henry Ford to service it when it inevitably broke down. They were also recognized as an early pioneer in carryout services and the use of dry ice for safe food storage. In recent years, the company has continued this innovative spirit by altering their business strategy to adapt to changing consumer habits, including expanding their online presence and offering delivery directly to customers' homes. In 2021, they launched the Second Nature Brands Innovation Center at their factory in Clinton Township as part of a new initiative to expand research and development. Visitors to the Innovation Center meet the artisans behind Sanders' treats and indulge in the creation of new desserts. Today, Sanders continues to delight customers at their locations in Rochester and Clinton Township and beyond. On Mackinac Island, their vast selection of fudge is a vital part of what makes the location so memorable to visitors from around the world. And their expansion into national supermarket chains means that customers no longer need to live here in Michigan to enjoy the treats that have delighted Michiganders for now 150 years. Given their renowned history and their legacy of innovation and excellence, I ask you to join me in recognizing Sanders as they celebrate their 150th anniversary. Since their founding, they have grown from a small Detroit candy shop to a Michigan icon, and I wish them all the best as they continue to satisfy the sweeter tastes of customers all around the country.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the widely irresponsible legislation that is before us now. Although our colleagues are calling it the Big Beautiful Bill, this bill would instead be a betrayal to our economic future, hard-working American families, and some of our most vulnerable seniors, children, and people with disabilities. This bill will blow up our national debt, kick millions of people off of their healthcare, and take food off of families' tables, while cutting food assistance. And for what? What are our colleagues mortgaging our country's future for? What are they slashing healthcare and food assistance to pay for? Well, they are doing it for tax cuts for billionaires. So before my colleagues rush to pass this irresponsible, reckless legislation, let's take a moment to go through exactly how much harm this bill will actually cause and hear from the people in my State who will suffer if this bill becomes law. To start, this bill will blow up the national debt. Since President George Washington gave his Farewell Address, our Nation's leaders have warned against the dangers of accumulating a national debt. Fifteen years ago, ADM Mike Mullen, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated: The most significant threat to our national security is our debt. The national debt is at an alltime high--$36.2 trillion. And just in the last 16 years, it has tripled. Our annual deficits frequently exceed $1.5 trillion, including a record $3.1 trillion deficit in fiscal year 2020 during the Trump administration. Unfortunately, these are the first of many grave financial milestones that we face. Within the next decade, our country will spend more on servicing the debt than we do on any other Federal account outside of Social Security. Our fiscal house is basically on fire, but if our Republican colleagues jam through this bill, it is not going to pour water on that fire, it is going to pour gasoline on those flames. Democrats have tried to make efforts to pay down that debt in recent years. In fact, under the Inflation Reduction Act--a law that this bill attempts to actually gut--we reduced the deficit in that bill by nearly $250 billion. In 2023, we passed the bipartisan Fiscal Responsibility Act, which responsibly addressed the debt ceiling and had the potential to reduce deficits by up to $1.5 trillion. But, unfortunately, the bill before us basically wipes all of that away. I have always said that I am open to making smart cuts to spending, but those cuts should be matched with increases in revenue. Doing so would put us back on a sustainable financial path. Our Republican colleagues are doing the exact opposite. They are making drastic cuts to revenue, and according to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, the tax provisions in this bill alone would decrease revenues by $4.2 trillion and add--yes, add--$3 trillion to our national debt. This is a recipe for disaster. If we face another emergency like a pandemic or global financial crisis, we will be too hamstrung by our debt to respond effectively. We are on the brink of a financial disaster, and passing this bill could push us over that edge--all so my Republican colleagues can cut taxes for billionaires. At the same time, our Republican colleagues are not making smart, sensible spending cuts to cover the costs of those billionaire tax cuts. Instead, they are gutting healthcare for millions of Americans, including hundreds of thousands of Michiganders. It is reckless, and it is wrong. Medicaid is a lifeline for people in every single community across this country. It ensures that millions of Michiganders and Americans can have access to quality, affordable healthcare. Right now, folks across my home State of Michigan are scared--are scared about what this bill will mean for their families. I have heard from thousands of my constituents from every corner of the State of Michigan on how these cuts are going to hurt them. So today, I just want to tell you, through my constituents' stories, just how detrimental this bill will be for most Americans. Take Isaac from Lansing for example, who says Medicaid is the only lifeline he has to pay for the medicine that literally--literally-- keeps him alive. We have also seen how more and more Michiganders and people all across our Nation have shouldered the burden of serving as a primary caregiver for an aging parent. It is the ultimate gift that we can give to the people who have raised us. But the cost of critical nursing home and assisted living care continues to rise. Medicaid has become an essential way for our aging seniors to pay for the care they need. Take Gwen from Grand Rapids, who says that she wouldn't be able to pay for an assisted living facility for her grandmother without Medicaid. Many of us know someone or maybe even love someone who lives with a disability. Thanks to Medicaid, people with disabilities can get the care that allows them to live healthy and independent lives. That is the case for Wanda from Westland, who takes medication for an eye condition. Without Medicaid, she would not be able to afford her medication, and she could actually go blind. As too many of us know from personal experiences or from friends and loved ones, our country is facing a mental health crisis. Medicaid has become a saving grace for those who desperately need mental healthcare but simply cannot afford it. Take Allen from Fort Gratiot, who says that losing Medicaid would feel like losing the life he has been given back through mental health care through Medicaid. Under this bill, rural communities will be especially impacted by cuts to Medicaid. In some counties in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, there is only one healthcare provider, meaning some Michiganders will have to travel up to 50 miles to get routine or emergency care. Medicaid helps keep these hospitals open. If this bill passes, people in these rural communities are going to be cut off from basic health services. Medicaid also plays an essential role in making sure that children across Michigan get the care they need. I heard from Gladys, a mother from Flint, who says that Medicaid is the only reason her kids can get their asthma medication or have regular health checkups. Expecting mothers also reached out to share their concerns. While she is busy preparing to welcome a newborn baby into the world, Chelsea from Fennville is now afraid that she will lose her access to both pre- and postnatal care under this absolutely disastrous bill. I simply can't understand how my Republican colleagues would leave thousands--thousands--of people across Michigan without the care they need, all so they can give a tax break to billionaires. On top of that, my Republican colleagues are also proposing deep, harmful cuts to food assistance delivered through SNAP. SNAP serves as an absolute lifeline for millions of Americans, including children, seniors, people with disabilities, and working families. So, simply put, if this bill is passed, it will mean people in Michigan and all across our country will go hungry. They will not be able to put food on the table, while billionaires pay less taxes. That is just wrong. But it also makes no economic sense, either. Every dollar in SNAP benefits generates more than $1.50 in economic activities. This supports local grocery stores, farmers all across our country, and the entire food supply chain. So on top of jeopardizing families' ability to put food on the table, to feed their children, these proposed SNAP cuts would also hurt businesses and jobs, particularly in rural America and in low-income areas. This bill produces the most amount of pain for the least amount of gain of any legislation I can remember in all the years I have had the privilege of serving here in the Senate. I can't believe that we are standing here debating this reckless, irresponsible bill. The harm this bill will do to the American people and to the people in my State of Michigan who are counting on Medicaid for healthcare and on food assistance to help feed their families is absolutely reprehensible. The damage this bill will do to our Nation's economic security is not only reckless, it is unconscionable. This is not what our constituents want us to be focused on. They want us to help make their lives better. But instead of focusing on that, here we are on the brink of passing a bill so irresponsible that it will destroy our country's economic health, harm millions of Americans--all so a handful of billionaires, the wealthiest of the wealthy, can have another tax break. I will never support such a reckless and catastrophic plan. I yield the floor.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled rollcall vote be called immediately.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. PETERS

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

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the legacy and mission of the New Bethel Missionary Baptist Church, as they celebrate 100 years of fellowship and service to the greater Pontiac community. The New Bethel Missionary Baptist Church was founded in Pontiac, MI, in 1925. Established with the mission of empowering its members and the wider community, since its earliest days, it has served as a beacon, bringing together its congregants, local leaders, and other key community stakeholders to strengthen the spiritual fabric and build the resilience of Pontiac. A century later, its mark on the greater Pontiac area is indelible and most acutely felt in the countless residents whose lives have been lifted up by its endeavors. In 1992, the church opened the New Bethel Outreach Shelter, providing a safe, welcoming environment to vulnerable women and children. Since its opening, the shelter has stood as a barrier against housing insecurity for thousands in the Pontiac area. The church has also worked to combat food insecurity, establishing a food pantry in 1985 that serves low-income families within the greater Pontiac area. And this year, the church intends to continue its social ministry by opening a community garden for the benefit of its congregation and the wider public. New Bethel's own Rev. Keyon Payton established the Institute for Trauma and Economic Justice, a nonprofit which aims ``to create a supply and demand economy of positive experiences'' by combating cycles of trauma in the underserved communities. His example has since inspired other churches across Michigan to institute similar initiatives. While serving the Pontiac community, New Bethel has also continued its spiritual mission to spread the gospel across generations and has focused on bringing young people of faith into its congregation. Every summer, the church's Camp Hosanna provides a welcoming space for elementary school-aged children to learn and grow, offering a forum where they can pursue their spiritual growth and academic excellence in tandem. New Bethel is also investing in Pontiac's future through the creation of an education scholarship fund. These efforts are making education more accessible to future generations, which is the key to our community's enduring prosperity. The impact of New Bethel Missionary Baptist Church on the Pontiac community and Oakland County as a whole is immeasurable and readily apparent in the lives of those who have benefited from both the fellowship of its congregation and the breadth of its charitable works. Throughout its century-long history, the leadership and congregation of New Bethel have demonstrated their faith through compassion, stewardship, and grace which has strengthened the fabric of our community. I ask you to join me in recognizing the New Bethel Missionary Baptist Church as they celebrate their centennial anniversary.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor an accomplished and highly regarded leader CDR Christopher Pace chief of the U.S. Coast Guard's Great Lakes Oil Spill Center of Expertise. Commander Pace has made an immeasurable impact on the Great Lakes region and the many residents and visitors who rely on its waters, and it is a privilege to recognize him here today and celebrate his impact in light of his upcoming departure from the center and new posting in the Philippines. Commander Pace's time with the U.S. Coast Guard began in 2009, where he was first stationed in Honolulu, HI, as the vessel boarding and security team leader for U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu. From there, he was stationed in Chesapeake, VA, eventually becoming the command center chief for the U.S. Coast Guard District 5 Command Center. Most recently, Commander Pace served as the chief of response for U.S Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit Savannah, where he directed all ports, waterways, and coastal security response missions for two economic and military strategic ports. The capsizing of the GOLDEN RAY, the largest maritime salvage incident in U.S. history, was a notable response overseen by Commander Pace while in Savannah. Commander Pace came to the Great Lakes Oil Spill Center of Expertise when it was established in 2022, serving as the center's first commanding officer. The center was established by Congress to fill a gap in oil spill research, specifically in fresh and icy water as it pertains to the Great Lakes. Under his leadership, the center launched the service's first open call for research proposals, establishing a process that provided $7.5 million in funding to over 50 projects during his 3-year command. To date, the projects funded through this mechanism have addressed frontline operational needs, including submerged oil detection, unconventional oil behavior under ice, and standardized response guides and training. His efforts also ensured regional responders were provided critical tools, including the fielding of 18 uncrewed systems, 19,000 feet of containment boom, and three oil recovery systems, strengthening Coast Guard response infrastructure across 6,700 miles of Great Lakes shoreline. I am eternally grateful for all the hard work that he has contributed to the Great Lakes Oil Spill Center of Expertise. Commander I cannot understate the impact that CDR Christopher Pace has had on the health and safety of the Great Lakes region. As the first U.S. Coast Guard chief for the Great Lakes Oil Spill Center of Expertise, Commander Pace's strategic vision and dedication to excellence have defined the center's identity and established its place as a leader in freshwater oil spill research, development, and training. Though his leadership at the Great Lakes Oil Spill Center of Expertise will be sorely missed, his legacy will most certainly endure and continue to inspire. I know he will continue to serve our country in the highest regard as he embarks on his next adventure in the Philippines.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor a dedicated public servant, advocate for education, fair housing, conservation and equity, and longtime community leader from Flint, MI: Honorable Floyd E. Clack, who passed away on April 3, 2025, at the age of 84. Mr. Clack touched countless lives as a champion for the city of Flint and his community at large. It is a privilege and a sorrow both to recognize him here today and celebrate his life's work and many achievements. Born in 1940, Mr. Clack spent his childhood in Houston, TX, before relocating to Michigan, where he went on to earn a master of arts in education from Eastern Michigan University. Embracing his love for education, he served as a social studies teacher at Flint Northern High School and later as a guidance counselor in the school district. In 1979, Mr. Clack began his career as a politician with a successful campaign leading to his election to the Flint City Council, where he served until 1992. He was then elected to the Michigan House of Representatives, where he served until 1996, due to term limits. He then returned to his local community, continuing his elected service on the Genesee County Board of Commissioners from 1996 to 2004. Finally in 2005, he was appointed by then-Governor Granholm to the Eastern Michigan University Board of Regents, where he served until his retirement in 2014. His enduring service to the Flint community included his presidency of the Flint Chapter of the NAACP, membership in the Urban League of Flint, Free & Accepted Masons, Lions Club, both the American and Michigan Corrections Association, and Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc. These organizations further embodied Mr. Clack's dedicated story of service and advocacy of equality, equity, and the power of quality education. Mr. Clack was not afraid to speak truth to power. In 1980, he called for the resignation of the Flint police chief after the fatal shooting of William Taylor, Jr., an unarmed teenager, by an active-duty police officer. His response also called for the hiring and promotion of more Black officers, a call that in the decades which followed has become reality on the city's police force, which has diversified through officer hiring and several appointments of Black police chiefs including the current chief serving today. Throughout his lifetime, Mr. Clack was recognized for his leadership, advocacy, and education efforts; this included honors from the Concerned Pastors Association, an inductee of the Greater Flint Afro- American Hall of Fame, by the Michigan Education Association, and the Lions Club. The impacts of Mr. Clack's work will long be remembered by the Flint community through the stories of his service and landmarks he advocated for, including a push to rename the downtown Flint bus station in honor of Rosa Parks, which helped lead to the creation of a bronze statute honoring the civil rights pioneer at the facilities entrance that remains today. The Hon. Floyd E. Clack not only served but also inspired others to step up for the city of Flint and the State of Michigan. His wife Brenda also served in the Michigan House. I ask you to join me, Floyd's family, his friends, and everyone he inspired in recognizing and celebrating his life and numerous accomplishments. I hope that each of us can find some comfort in the precious moments and memories that were shared with him.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to Eric Ueland's nomination to be Deputy Director for Management at the Office of Management and Budget. Congress charged the Deputy Director for Management with improving the performance, integrity, accountability, and transparency of the whole of government. This role is responsible for managing the personnel who work for the government, what the Federal Government purchases, and how the Federal Government manages its money. Given his record and views, I have serious concerns about how Eric Ueland will carry out these responsibilities. First, I am concerned by his willingness to break the law, especially when it comes to Congress's power of the purse. He supports the administration's efforts to illegally withhold funding that Congress has passed into law. Mr. Ueland currently serves as the Acting Chief of Staff at the Office of Management and Budget, and he has helped freeze Federal funds and grants and loans across the government--illegal actions that shut off resources for police departments, hospitals, and workforce development agencies. Like all of my colleagues in Congress, I swore an oath to uphold and follow the law set forth in our Constitution, which affirms that Congress--and Congress alone--is responsible for deciding how Federal funds are spent, not the President or members of his administration. Eric Ueland has also been a staunch supporter of recklessly and indiscriminately shutting down Agencies and laying off employees, with no regard for how these actions might harm the government's ability to protect our national security or provide vital services to the American people. He refused to commit to even analyzing the impact that mass firings have had on the effectiveness of the Federal workforce, let alone acknowledging the harm government services will experience as a result of these actions. Finally, Eric Ueland has made it clear that he will ignore conflicts of interest in the government's policy and contracting decisions, letting those in charge of government use it as a tool to enrich themselves. As Elon Musk is pushing Agencies to purchase services that his own companies provide and shutting down Agencies that are investigating his companies, Eric Ueland told me that he was unable to see any conflicts of interest raised by Elon Musk's influence on government decisions. Government should make decisions in the interests of the people and not in the interests of conflicted billionaire donors to the President like Elon Musk. If Eric Ueland is confirmed, I am concerned that he will defy our duly passed laws and our Constitution to continue President Trump and Elon Musk's assault on the Federal Government. Because of this, I oppose Eric Ueland's nomination, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled vote start immediately.

Mr. PETERS

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

Mr. PETERS

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

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, on so-called ``Liberation Day'' this week, President Trump imposed sweeping tariffs on all of our trading partners--the size, the scope, and the impact of which have not been seen for nearly 100 years. The last time our Nation imposed tariffs of this magnitude, it was when Republicans passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in the 1930s. And when they did that, it crashed our economy and drove the United States further into the Great Depression. It was a history lesson that should never be repeated. Let me say that again. It was a history lesson that should never be repeated. But, yesterday, Donald Trump imposed far-reaching tariffs at a rate higher than Smoot-Hawley, higher than it was then with those catastrophic consequences. The history is clear. This strategy does not work and can have absolutely catastrophic consequences. It is no surprise the President's tariff announcement sent shock waves through our economy, dropping markets to their lowest level since the COVID pandemic in 2020. Just yesterday, the Dow Jones Average dropped more than 1,600 point--a 4-percent decline. The S&P 500 companies lost a combined--this is a big number--$2.4 trillion in value. And as Wall Street opened today, we are, unfortunately, seeing the market continue to plummet--as I speak right now, another $2 trillion lost. That is quite a record for the President, to lose Americans $4 trillion in 2 days. That has never been done before. That is a record. Let's just get this straight. During his first administration, we know Donald Trump grossly mismanaged the pandemic and tanked our economy then, and it took years for the markets to recover. Now, to kick off his second administration, he is playing poker with Americans' livelihoods, with Americans' retirement savings, and with Americans' hard-earned incomes. It is clear what this means to the average American. It means that when you go to buy things like eggs and clothing and new appliances for your home, they are going to cost more. You will notice that when you go to the store. It is going to be very real. You will have less money in your pocket, and it is because of Donald Trump. He owns this-- because of Donald Trump. If you are thinking about retiring soon, you have seen--in the last couple of days, if you look--your 401(k) and your IRA retirement funds decimated, and it is because of Donald Trump. There are folks out there right now who are being forced to have real, hard conversations about whether they can even retire as they had planned, or are they going to need to keep working a little longer. And, let's be clear, it is because of Donald Trump. But, you know, he didn't have to do this. In fact, some of you know Jim Cramer, a leading voice in financial markets. In response to Trump's decisions, he said: I struggle for what the president's game plan is because if you wanted to make the market crash, I think you would go with this . . . plan. He said: It should not be in our country's interest to have the market crash. That is not a hot take, to me. That is just plain old common sense. So what happened? Well, on Wednesday, the country experienced a national sales tax day. In the coming days, weeks, and months, the impact of the President's national sales tax will be devastating. And it won't be our competitors who are footing the bill. It will be the American people who pay the tax on their groceries, their gas, and all the other goods that they buy. For instance, take the price of a new home. Building a new house requires everything from lumber to steel, to concrete, light fixtures, ceiling fans, and appliances. And thanks to the President's all-out trade war, imports of every single one of those products will be subject to the national sales tax that Americans will pay--that Americans will pay. As a result, the price of a new home has been estimated to increase up to $20,000. Buying a home is already challenging enough for most folks. Putting that additional cost on American families is simply unacceptable. It is not just homes. Gas, vehicles, groceries, household appliances--all will become more expensive because of Donald Trump. Remember, when you see higher prices at the store, as you go to the store in the next few weeks and months, and you say, ``Whoa, this price is up,'' it is because of Donald Trump. He owns this. In fact, it has been estimated that the Republican national sales tax will cost the average family more than $5,000 per year. This national sales tax won't miraculously improve trade relationships or bring jobs home. It will only make it harder for hard- working Americans who are trying to create a better life for themselves and for their children. In fact--and this statement is shocking, but it is true--Donald Trump is actually prepared to plunge this country into a recession, one that could cost up to 400,000 jobs. And he said it. Just yesterday, because of Donald Trump's tax plan, JPMorgan raised the odds of the United States heading into a recession to 60 percent, and it is likely to go up as things continue. But, again, what does Donald Trump have to say about all of this? He said he doesn't care. Look it up. It is clear. He said it. I can honestly say, I do not think I have ever, ever heard an American President say they don't care if we go into a recession. I have never heard an American President say they don't care if American families and small businesses are hurt because of their policies. I don't think any President in history has ever said that, not just those whom I have experienced in my life. What makes it worse is that while Americans bear the brunt of this new sales tax, the White House and Republicans here in Congress are actively working right now to give a big tax break to billionaires--not everyday working people, billionaires. They are going to be increasing the taxes on everybody through this national sales tax. And they plan to do it, among other things, by cutting things like essential healthcare that Americans rely on each and every day. I will say--I will step back here. There are instances where tariffs can make sense. Tariffs are--if they are strategic, if they are targeted, they can be useful tools in bringing back American jobs. Certainly, they can be used to combat unfair trading practices used by adversaries like China, and I support those types of tariffs. For example, last year, I supported the 100-percent tariff we imposed on Chinese electric vehicles. We know the Chinese Government is actively working to undermine our national security and our economic success. And companies backed by the Chinese Communist Party are flooding the global marketplace with artificially cheap vehicles that are, really, actually capable of stealing Americans' personal data, committing espionage, and even manipulating folks on the road while they are driving. It makes sense to raise tariffs on those technologies because they do, indeed, present a real national security threat to Americans, and they could impact in an incredibly negative way our auto industry. When it comes to protecting the future of our auto industry and cementing Michigan's leadership in automotive innovation, there is no question that I support taking strong action to bring auto manufacturing jobs back to the United States, to secure a better trade deal for our auto industry, and to make sure that we have a level playing field for American workers and businesses to succeed. But these on-again, off-again, across-the-board tariffs--this isn't a real plan. This is chaos, and it will not help us to achieve any of our long-term goals. For tariffs to work, they have to be a part of a comprehensive strategy that actually supports American workers and businesses. They can't just be haphazardly dumped on our trade allies like Canada, whose goods and products actually help us grow our manufacturing sector, create more jobs in America, and remain the greatest economy in the world. Take our auto industry, for example, the lifeblood of my State and the foundation of American manufacturing. The trade relationship between Michigan and Canada is so integrated that car components cross the U.S.-Canada border up to eight times before they are actually installed in final assembly. In fact, if Michigan were a country, we would be one of Canada's largest trading partners in the world. Going after Canada will be devastating for Michigan businesses that work hand in glove with our closest trade ally to the north to grow their companies and to create jobs here at home. If President Trump is serious--if he is serious, big question, if he is serious--about leveling the playing field and bringing auto manufacturing jobs back to the United States, here is a playbook that he could actually follow: One, we need to pursue targeted tariffs on our adversaries, like China and our biggest overseas competitors, to ensure that more cars that are sold in America are built here in America. Two, we need to renegotiate any trade deals that aren't favorable to American businesses and workers--something that offers far, far more certainty than sporadic tariffs. Specifically, we need to take a look at USMCA, where we have a real chance to address some of the shortcomings and outdated policies of our current trade landscape. Because while USMCA brought back some manufacturing jobs and some job opportunities, it is far from perfect. China, unfortunately, has found ways to take advantage of the agreement's preferred treatment of goods by locating facilities in Mexico. And labor standards, particularly in Mexico, certainly need to be a whole lot stronger. We will have an opportunity to renegotiate this agreement next summer, at times that the current administration actually agreed to when it negotiated this deal in President Trump's first term, and we need to seize--we need to seize--that opportunity. But with these tariffs looming like a black cloud over some of our most crucial relationships, I am concerned that we will be coming to the negotiating table with one hand tied behind our back. Let's be clear. We should look to pursue those types of renegotiations throughout all of our trade agreements to ensure they are advantageous to American businesses and workers. Three, we must aggressively enforce the trade laws that we already have on the books. We need to double down on our efforts to deter trade cheats like China, which requires providing more resources for our Federal trade Agencies, not indiscriminately firing Federal workers. Doing so will allow us to counteract countries that try to evade tariffs, dump their products into our markets, and engage in transshipment. And finally, if President Trump is serious about protecting auto jobs here in the United States, he needs to end his attacks on the Inflation Reduction Act, plain and simple. Right now, Republicans are proposing a budget that will repeal incentives in the IRA like the advanced manufacturing tax credit and the electric vehicle tax credit, both of which have already--they have already--created thousands of new auto and battery manufacturing jobs right here in America. To me, that is absolutely unthinkable, to end this. Why would you want to put an end to something that has proven to be successful at creating economic growth and good-paying manufacturing jobs in our country? It makes no sense. The President needs to put his money where his mouth is and end this tariff charade. The stakes are just too high for American families, for our workers, and for our economy to get this wrong. Madam President, I urge all of my colleagues to say no to the national sales tax, and instead, let's liberate some common sense and work together to make this country stronger. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. PETERS

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

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, I rise today in opposition to Congressman Bishop's nomination to be the Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget. The Office of Management and Budget, or OMB, is responsible for a range of critical functions, from developing and executing the Federal budget to improving Agency performance and reviewing regulations. Given his record and views, I have serious concerns about how Congressman Bishop will help lead this important office. First of all, I am concerned by his willingness to break the law, especially when it comes to Congress's power of the purse. He supports the administration's efforts to illegally withhold funding that Congress has passed into law. Like all of my colleagues in Congress, I swore an oath to uphold and follow the laws set forth in our Constitution, which affirms that Congress--and Congress alone--is responsible for deciding how Federal funds are spent, not the President or members of his administration. The administration's actions so far to freeze congressionally approved funds have already rocked communities all across my home State of Michigan, as well as across the entire Nation. These communities count on the funds appropriated by Congress to upgrade their roads and bridges and pay their police and first responders. If confirmed, Congressman Bishop will only be a rubberstamp for Donald Trump and Director Vought's flagrant disregard for the spending laws passed by Congress. Congressman Bishop has also been a staunch supporter of mass layoffs within the Federal workforce that undermine our government's ability to provide vital services to the American people. Our nonpartisan civil servants play vital roles in protecting our national security, caring for our veterans, and ensuring the safety of our transportation system. If we allow the Trump administration to indiscriminately fire these nonpartisan experts and replace them with their political cronies, they will only put our Nation and our people at risk. Finally, I am alarmed by his complete disregard for the law when it comes to whistleblower protections. As a Member of Congress, he revealed the name of a whistleblower--in direct violation of the law-- and jeopardized the safety of that individual and their family. We simply cannot trust anyone who is willing to break the law to retaliate against a whistleblower exposing wrongdoing to help such a critical Agency within the Federal Government. And if Congressman Bishop is confirmed, I am concerned that he will defy our duly passed laws and our Constitution to continue President Trump, Elon Musk, and Director Vought's assault on the Federal Government and the critical services that it provides all Americans. Because of this, I oppose Congressman Bishop's nomination, and I would urge my colleagues to do the same. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. PETERS

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

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum call with respect to the Feinberg nomination.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in opposition to the mass termination of veterans that is taking place all across our Federal Government. I was proud to serve more than a decade in the U.S. Navy Reserve, where I rose to the rank of lieutenant commander. During this time, I had the absolute privilege to work with some of the most patriotic, hard-working, and inspiring individuals that I have ever met. I know firsthand that veterans are a vital source of talent to our workforce. So let's just think for a moment. Let's just think about the qualities that make a valuable employee: leadership, work ethic, problem-solving abilities, and of course, integrity. These are not just abstract qualities; they are tangible assets that veterans bring to our businesses, our communities, and to our government. They are qualities that drive innovation. They boost productivity and foster a culture of excellence. Employing our Nation's veterans when they transition to civilian life is not just a responsibility; it is a smart business decision. That is why the Federal Government has long taken advantage of this absolutely remarkable talent pool. Veterans now make up roughly 30 percent of our Federal workforce--or more than 640,000 veterans in the civil service--and I rise today to express my absolute outrage over the indiscriminate firings of nearly 6,000 of these veterans--from the VA to the Defense Department to the Department of the Treasury. At the VA, where veterans' input is particularly critical to shaping policies that support our Nation's robust veteran population, Elon Musk and DOGE have fired more than 600 veteran employees. They are part of more than 2,400 individuals fired all across the VA. I have heard from numerous veterans and VA workers in Michigan who are absolutely devastated and confused by why this administration would turn their back on them like this. My staff met with a veteran who has worked for the VA in Michigan for nearly 30 years. Last year, they were moved to a new role within the VA and promoted--promoted--to supervisor shortly thereafter. And no surprise because they had never received less than an excellent performance review over 30 years. But because they were relatively new to that specific role, they were swept up in the widespread firings, both within the VA and across government, of all probationary employees. They were one of many veterans fired abruptly, without cause, without reason. In another case, a veteran with 8 years of Active Duty service in the Air Force was fired from the VA in Michigan after receiving an ``outstanding'' performance review. His probationary period was set to expire last week, just 12 days after he was let go. These cuts are not based on fact. They are not based on logic. They are just cruel. And our country will not be better off. As a result of these mass layoffs, Americans can expect longer wait times to receive important documents like passports and Social Security benefits, fewer food safety inspections, and higher risks during air travel. These are Americans who put their lives on the line to defend this country. They took up a job to continue to serve the people of this country. They represent the very best of our Nation, and we need them in our Federal workforce. I am calling today on the administration to reinstate these veteran employees immediately.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to Linda McMahon's nomination to serve as the Secretary of the Department of Education. All across America, from small towns like Grand Marais to cities like Grand Rapids, public schools serve as the bedrock of our communities. As a product of Michigan public schools, the son of a public schoolteacher, and having watched my own three children attend public schools, I know firsthand the importance of public education. Education is the cornerstone of academic achievement, career development, and lifelong learning in our society. A strong public education system is critical to not only our Nation's economy but community safety, social mobility, and the health of our democracy. We need a Secretary of Education who values and respects public education and the millions of teachers and faculty who support the system. We need a Secretary of Education who will support critical funding streams like Head Start for early education, IDEA for students with disabilities, and the school meal program that ensures that no student--no student--goes to class hungry. That is why we cannot allow Mrs. McMahon to run our Department of Education. Instead of working to protect funding for the programs that support our students, improve classrooms, and help recruit the hard- working teachers that we so desperately need today, Mrs. McMahon has made it clear that she has, well, other priorities. During her committee hearing, she blatantly supported efforts to dismantle our education system, including taking funding away from our public schools and using it to make investments in private schools. Mrs. McMahon and others have tried to sell this as ``school choice,'' but we know--we know--that it is basically a voucher program that will ultimately give private schools the ability to hand pick students and close their doors to everyone else. Private schools have no requirement to serve students with disabilities, students with mental health needs, or homeless students. We have already seen private school voucher programs fail in States that have actually implemented them, like Louisiana--Louisiana, where students who accepted vouchers experienced significant declines in their academic performance, worse than the learning loss caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and Hurricane Katrina. So-called school choice does not meet the needs of our students, and American voters overwhelmingly agree. A 2024 poll found that less than a quarter of Americans support increasing funding for school vouchers. Meanwhile, 68 percent of Americans want to boost public school funding to better support teachers and give our opportunities and children the education and career opportunities that they certainly deserve. Under Mrs. McMahon's plan, we would be letting private schools decide who is educated and who is not. But, unfortunately, we know that these private institutions will always prioritize their bottom line, and the needs of students and families will be second. If confirmed as Secretary of Education, the quality of our American education will certainly decline, and our children will ultimately suffer the consequences. I would urge my colleagues to vote no on Mrs. McMahon's nomination.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I appreciate my colleague's commitment to empowering the legislative branch of government. We have worked together on a bill to rein in Presidential abuse of emergency powers. I hope we can get that across the finish line sometime this Congress. Unfortunately, I am concerned that this amendment sets up a complex and arguably unconstitutional legislative scheme to get rid of regulations and undermine the bicameral legislative process. Under the regulatory approval scheme that this amendment tees up, one Chamber of Congress could effectively nullify the law previously passed by the whole of Congress simply by not approving a rule of implementation. This amendment also undermines Agencies' ability to implement key environmental health and safety laws, endangering the American people. If Congress wants to repeal a law, we should repeal the law, not create some new arcane process to sabotage implementation. I welcome the opportunity to work with colleagues to pass legislation to strengthen the power of Congress, including to ensure that the President cannot tear up bipartisan funding bills enacted by Congress. But I urge my colleagues to reject this potentially unconstitutional and dangerous deregulatory amendment.