“I am honoring Senator Lindsey Graham, who recently died. He was my close friend and a major leader in American and world politics.”

“Mr. President, I rise this afternoon to pay tribute to an outstanding U.S. Senator and a dear friend, Senator Lindsey Graham. When my husband first woke me with the news that Lindsey had died the night before, I couldn’t believe it. I said to him: That can’t possibly be true. I thought it was some tasteless internet hoax or a false report. Not Lindsey. Not our Lindsey. But sadly, it was true, although I still find it so hard to accept. I can only imagine how difficult this unexpected loss must be for his beloved sister Darline and the other members of his family. Often when we think of a Senator, we ask: Did he or she make a difference? Did he or she have an impact on events here at home or abroad? Was the person a consequential Senator? With Lindsey, the answer clearly was the resounding yes. Lindsey was a leader not only in national policy but also in shaping international events. How telling it is that the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of Ukraine both made the long voyage to attend his memorial service yesterday at the National Cathedral. Whether he was leading a congressional trip to Israel in the wake of the October 7 massacre to demonstrate America’s solidarity with Israel or his many trips to Ukraine to show the Senate’s unwavering opposition to Russia’s unprovoked invasion, Lindsey time and again demonstrated strong, effective leadership. He was truly a player on the world stage. And for me, Lindsey was also a close friend. Along with Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman, I traveled four times with Lindsey to Afghanistan and Iraq. Believe me, on those long military trips, you get to know your colleagues very well. Lindsey’s unsurpassed sense of humor, his self-deprecating wit, and his storytelling ability made serving with him delightful, and I always learned so much when I traveled with him as well. I keep thinking that John McCain and Joe Lieberman--both treasured friends and colleagues of mine--were there waiting to greet what they called the third amigo when Lindsey Graham entered the heavenly gates, and I tried to take some comfort in knowing that the three of them are now reunited. Yesterday, we celebrated the life of this extraordinary Senator. Lindsey’s life on Earth ended far too soon, but his legacy will endure forever. I suggest the absence of a quorum.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Signal 34 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“I am blocking the Senator from Connecticut's bill for veterans because his plan to pay for it does not follow the law. Instead, I want the Senate to pass my bill. It helps millions of veterans and their families, and it actually has a legal way to pay for it.”

“Madam President, reserving the right to object, it saddens me that we are here because I wish we were here with a vote on the Senate floor to pass the Major Richard Star Act and other pieces of legislation that are so important to veterans, their families, and their caregivers across the country. The Senator from Connecticut outlined all the things that he says his amendment to this legislation would do and be supported by, but the reality is, the Senator from Connecticut has tried time and time again to pass legislation similar to that, never to succeed. Earlier this year, I was on the Senate floor at my seat here, standing here telling folks that maybe for once we will quit sponsoring pieces of legislation that benefit veterans but never get to the point in which they are actually passed. And I committed myself to finding a way in which passage of the legislation could occur, not just remarks on the Senate floor or in committee or in gatherings of veterans or speaking to our constituents at home of our support. In most instances, this would be the Major Richard Star Act, which has nearly every Member of the Senate as a cosponsor and many Members of the House of Representatives as cosponsors. But that has been the case for 6 years. I was looking for a path that would result in a result. At the heart of the debate today are those tens of millions of servicemembers, veterans and caregivers, survivors and family members, and VA employees who would benefit by the legislation that I have introduced--the legislation that the Senator from Connecticut is offering to accept with some amendments. These men and women have been waiting years--years--for the lifesaving benefits this bill would provide. What we will decide today will determine whether they can access the mental health treatments they desperately need, whether they can put food on the table and pay their bills on time, whether they are able to remarry after the loss of their servicemember or veteran spouse without sacrificing benefits they need to support their families, and much more. The point of that sentence or few sentences is that this is a comprehensive piece of legislation that begins with the Richard Star Act--the one that I said was sponsored by most Members of Congress but never sees the outcome those veterans and military retirees deserve. The stakes in this debate are high. I think the legislation we are talking about--perhaps debating about--is one of the most consequential pieces of legislation that will affect veterans, their family members, caregivers, and others certainly in my time as chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs and perhaps my time in the U.S. Senate. I have been a member of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee 14 years in the House and now 15 years in the Senate. I have devoted effort, time, and attention to making sure we do right by those who serve our country. I appreciate my colleague Senator Blumenthal--in fact, our shared determination, our dedication to the Richard Star Act. He has tried, as I understand by his words, eight times offering a unanimous consent, and each time, that effort has been unsuccessful. Occasionally, I get complimented for effort. I appreciate compliments at any stage of what we are doing here, but what we really ought to be interested in is getting results--not results for a compliment but results because it makes such a difference in so many veterans’ lives. Today, the Senator from Connecticut--it is another example of his attempt to pass legislation--usually without an offset but today using an alternative offset. I respect his goal, but once again, as of July 22, the Congressional Budget Office has again confirmed to the committee that a rescission of unobligated funds to the Department of Defense in H.R. 1 does not offset mandatory spending and therefore does not qualify under the requirements of law to the Senate--excuse me--the requirements of law as the Senate does its work but as the House and Congress are obligated to abide by. This plan does not meet the needs of the moment, and it will result in the failure by Congress once again to deliver to America’s heroes. There is a simple choice before us: We can either keep repeating failed efforts that result in no progress delivering for veterans and military families or we can step up and provide leadership needed to finally get them the help they need and deserve--action and results. We want action that has results. This is why shortly after this conversation, this discussion between the Senator from Connecticut and I, I will be asking for a unanimous consent agreement myself to pass the legislation with an offset that the Congressional Budget Office has determined to be a viable offset. The Take Care of America’s Veterans Act would expand benefits and healthcare to millions of veterans and their families, caregivers, and survivors across our Nation. It combines 60--I think our committee, the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, deservedly has the reputation of working in a bipartisan way to get results. We combined, in our efforts to get the Richard Star Act, other pieces of legislation that are hugely important to the veteran community--60 pieces of bipartisan legislation chosen in this process of putting this package together for their sponsorship and support by Democrats and Republicans. This is not a partisan effort; this is a desire, an effort to accomplish something that would benefit all of us who have made efforts to support our veterans and to make certain that we do it in a way that gets 60 votes in the U.S. Senate. That includes the Major Richard Star Act, of which the Senator from Connecticut has been a longtime advocate. That is to address a longstanding injustice--something that is totally wrong--by allowing medically retired, combat-disabled veterans--they are not allowed to receive both benefits. This would allow medically retired, combat- disabled veterans to receive both disability compensation from the VA and their earned retirement pay from the DOD. The Senator from Connecticut talks about our committee and the committee that he serves on as well, the Armed Services Committee. The Armed Services Committee has jurisdiction, but there are so many veterans that have consequences from the current law that we decided--I decided it was time for us to step forward and find a path forward. This legislation, in addition to the underlying Richard Star Act, includes the Love Lives on Act. That allows surviving spouses of fallen servicemembers and veterans to remarry without losing the benefits they need to support their families. It includes the Veterans’ ACCESS Act to make it easier for veterans to get lifesaving treatment--and particularly mental health capabilities--and expands access to high-quality care in VA medical facilities and in the community as well. Those of us from rural places understand the value of that community care, and in today’s time of challenges with our veterans’ mental health and suicide prevention efforts, that community care becomes even more important. Quick access is critical. It also includes the Sharri Briley and Eric Edmundson Veterans Benefits Expansion Act to increase compensation benefits for veterans with severe service-connected disabilities and their families. There are dozens of other bills--bipartisan bills sponsored and led by Republicans and led by Democratic Members of the Senate--that are included in the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act to make certain the VA is equipped with the right resources, staff, facilities, and authorities to provide the support servicemembers, veterans, and their families need. The question we generally are arguing about is the pay-for. Again, the law requires that. To pay for these improvements, this bill would codify elements of a rule that the VA proposed 4 years ago in the Biden administration, in 2022. The VA indicated then and now that it plans to change how the Department evaluates claims for service-connected disability ratings for sleep apnea and tinnitus. VA officials testified before the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs in January that the Department is moving forward, and VA officials confirmed that again just several weeks ago. The reason this is important is that that means there are going to be changes that the VA is authorized to make in these two arenas in providing benefits to veterans. The VA in the Biden administration--and apparently agreed to in the Trump administration--found there were ways to improve--they are required by law to evaluate the benefits they provide veterans, and if changes are appropriate because of medicine or science or changes in treatment, the VA can modify those benefits to reflect current science and medicine. The VA is going to do that. The offset is the fact that when the VA does that, it saves money. When the VA does that, however, it will be considered paying down the debt. I don’t know how it can be a radical idea or an unfair idea that if we are going to take the money out of the VA for those two circumstances--the VA is going to do that--why don’t we capture a significant portion of that and actually use that money to provide benefits to veterans? It is not like we are taking something away. The VA is going to alter the formula in their normal course of business, and we are capturing the savings in part--we are capturing part of the savings to actually use it to help other veterans, their families, and their caregivers. Once the Department finalizes the rule, the savings associated from that change in the rule will be lost. It will no longer serve as an offset for anything; it will just go into the General Treasury. It will be a lost opportunity for us to reinvest those funds in the long overdue improvements included in the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act. My colleague has stated that ``the costs of war include caring for our veterans.’’ I share that sentiment. Military service is a family service. The cost of war also includes caring for spouses and children and caregivers and survivors. The Take Care of America’s Veterans Act would do that and more. So we had the opportunity to use something that is going to happen. We had the opportunity--we have the opportunity to make sure it is used to benefit veterans. The idea that we are taking a benefit away from someone is also false. This is prospective. After the rule changes, that is when we have the opportunity to make certain that we are still caring for our veterans. We are not taking anything away from any veteran that receives benefits today. In fact, there is a grace period in which veterans can continue to apply for these benefits after this legislation becomes law. We are not taking anything away; we are using money that the VA says is no longer going to be spent and spending that money in a different way for veterans, often including the same veterans that receive those disability payments. This legislation is strongly supported by many military and veterans organizations, including the Wounded Warrior Project, the Military Officers Association of America, Vietnam Veterans of America, AMVETS, the Tragedy Assistance Program--or TAPS--for Survivors, the Elizabeth Dole Foundation, the Veterans Justice Alliance, the National Defense Committee, the Military Coalition, and Mission Roll Call. It is also supported by the American Legion--the largest veteran service organization in the country--and by Medal of Honor recipients Britt Slabinski and Earl Plumlee, the president and vice president of the Medal of Honor Society. It is also supported by Richard Star’s brother, who has been an advocate for the Richard Star legislation since the beginning of this issue’s arrival and certainly since the passing of his brother and his interest in making sure that his brother is honored. These organizations know the challenges facing the military and veteran community. They know firsthand the high cost of continued inaction by Congress, the cycle of delaying veterans, caregivers, and survivors from receiving earned benefits. It is not a perfect analogy, but I remember my own mother lobbying me because she was a ``Notch Baby’’ in the Social Security system. If you were born in a certain set of years, your benefits were less than the people before you and the people after you. My mom accused me of--Congress--maybe she wasn’t accusing me personally--but accused Congress of just waiting until she died before making the change. I want to make sure that we do not lose another veteran, another servicemember. I want to make sure we get a result and we get a result fast. When I introduced this legislation, my assumption was that we could accomplish this--even in the Senate and the House in this difficult world we work in--that this legislation could be passed by Congress and signed by the President, this legislation that is supported by the White House. We could get this legislation done in the miracle of a month. I didn’t anticipate the opposition that has arisen. I have indicated to the Senator--the ranking member of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs--an interest in working together to resolve differences, and we will work to do that. But doing what we have done--what has been done time and time again-- of a UC request that has no result is unsatisfactory to me and unsatisfactory to the veterans and the veterans organizations I just listed. I am tired of waiting. Don’t wait until our veterans are no longer living before you do something to protect their benefits and resolve an injustice that has gone on far too long. The cycle of delaying veterans, caregivers, and survivors from receiving their earned benefits must end and must end now. And with that, I object. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). The objection is heard. The Senator from Connecticut.”

“I object to this request. Instead, I am asking the Senate to immediately pass my bill to help veterans. Under current rules, money saved by the Department of Veterans Affairs goes back to the general government fund instead of paying for benefits our veterans need.”

“Mr. President, I object. I indicated my objection. Mr. President, I have described the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act in my remarks following the unanimous consent request by the Senator from Connecticut. But, again, I would highlight that these are changes that are going to be made under normal statutory law by rules at the Department of Veterans Affairs. And the end result is that the money, when saved, will be--the reductions and the savings that occur will accrue to the General Treasury, as compared to the benefits that we want to provide to the veterans in this country. Notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to immediate consideration of Calendar No. 433, S. 4744. I ask unanimous consent that the Moran substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.”

“I will keep working to make sure veterans get their benefits. I want the Department of Veterans Affairs to do its job based on medicine and science, as it promised two weeks ago.”

“Mr. President, I look forward to continuing to work to make sure the veterans receive the benefits they are entitled to and to make certain that the VA does its job in a medical- and science-based manner and would await for the VA to accomplish that, which they indicated as recently as 2 weeks ago they were going to do.”

“I want us to find a real way to pass this bill for veterans. Lawmakers have spent years making promises without a realistic way to pay for it under the law. We need to actually fix this problem instead of offering plans that cannot pass.”

“Mr. President, the rulemaking process that was initiated in the Biden administration in 2022 has continued on the VA’s list of work and has never been withdrawn and continues to be considered. And as I indicated now for the third time--indicated by the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs--the Department--that it will be implemented. I just know that repeating the same political talking points without a realistic alternative has prevented these bills--and particularly the Richard Star Act--from passing for years. It has been too easy for us to put our name on the legislation and never see it accomplished. We can tell our veterans we are supporting them, we are working for them--I want a path forward that actually demonstrates that we are able to accomplish the elimination of this injustice and the support for veterans who desperately need our attention. Our veterans should not have to--they know the cost of war. They should not have to wait for us any longer. And, again, the offer that the Senator from Connecticut indicated, it is the same kind of UC request with something as was--that doesn’t result in a result because it is not an offset that satisfies the law. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schmitt). The Senator from Indiana.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →

“I want Congress to pass the SHIPS Act. China is hiding weapons on cargo ships that enter our ports, and America does not build enough ships of its own. This bill gives tax breaks and cuts rules to help us build more American cargo ships.”

“Mr. President, Americans are aware that many of the products we buy and sell in this country are manufactured in China, but fewer may know that most of the Chinese goods come across the ocean and into our ports on Chinese ships--whether they are flying the Chinese flag, whether they are owned or operated by Chinese companies, or are even built in Chinese shipyards. But what may come as a shock is that those same ships could also carry deadly weapons. That is right. Hidden among the shipping containers carrying appliances, clothing, and household goods, might well be missile launchers and drone launching systems. Arriving undetected, they could target our cities, destroy our infrastructure, and kill our citizens. This is a possibility American leaders must prepare for now. Naval analysts confirm that China is retrofitting cargo ships with deadly weapons: long-range strike and surface-to-air missiles, drone launching systems, and radar and tracking systems. A large percentage of these vessels coming in and out of our ports are owned and operated by firms with direct ties to the Chinese Communist Party. What if one of these ships arrived in one of America’s largest ports? Now, the best case scenario is our intelligence community would detect the weapons, enabling the Coast Guard to intercept and seize the Chinese ship. That is the best case scenario. But there is a far more alarming possibility: An armed Chinese cargo carrier slips in, undetected, and it launches devastating attacks on the port, destroying vital infrastructure and killing hundreds, and possibly many, many more. The Port of Houston is, for example, one of the largest by tonnage in our country. It is home to the world’s largest petrochemical complex and a quarter of America’s oil refining capacity. The explosions caused by a Chinese attack on the port would send clouds of carcinogens into the air and over nearby communities. Meanwhile, America’s energy supply would be devastated, causing painful shortages and draining the economy of millions of dollars a day. A similar disaster could play out at any of our other major ports-- Los Angeles, for example, our hub for transpacific trade; or Hampton Roads, VA, the east coast’s deepest harbor and home to the world’s largest naval base. Now, neither of these situations is inevitable if we cut our reliance on Chinese vessels and we decide to make American ships again. You see, the United States was once home to the world’s largest commercial fleet, numbering 4,000 ships. Today, we manufacture only a handful of commercial vessels each year. China can build over a thousand. In total, the United States has fewer than 100 ocean-going commercial vessels; while China, they have nearly 6,000, the largest fleet in the world. Letting our maritime industrial base continue to rust is a great risk. It doesn’t just give China control over global supply chains and levers to constrain America’s policy options; it presents the Chinese Communist Party opportunities every day to sneak weapons into our cities. We have a choice. We can do nothing and invite a potential economic and national security disaster, or we can rebuild our fleet. We can end our dependence on Chinese ships, and we can open up a new era of American ship building. I choose the latter. I choose restoring American maritime dominance. The SHIPS for America Act is the best way to accomplish this. The bill will encourage the construction of new ships and shipyards through tax incentives. It will deliver deregulation and permitting reform to reduce costs and speed the delivery of new vessels. It also will modernize training programs at our maritime academies and recruit a new generation of mariners. And the SHIPS Act will establish a maritime security trust fund to finance these programs, plus an expansion of the U.S.-flagged international fleet to 250 ships by the mid-2030s. Now, we have a strong champion in President Trump, whose Maritime Action Plan is consistent with this bill. China is retrofitting its commercial ships into covert warships. The evidence is clear. So too is the risk of allowing these vessels to dominate global trade and fill our ports because we have no ships of our own. But we have a plan to protect our ports and people, to build and launch a new fleet manned by American mariners, flying the Stars and Stripes. And Congress should pass the SHIPS Act without delay. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 1 of 100

  Only 1% of this speech directly addressed the bill under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Most Americans do not trust Congress because members can trade stocks using inside information. I want the Senate to pass my bill to stop this. It bans members of Congress from buying individual stocks, and it makes them give a seven-day notice before selling stocks they already own. Democrats blocked this bill earlier, but I am asking them to help pass it now so we can rebuild trust.”

“Mr. President, integrity--integrity inspires confidence. We have a problem here in the Senate and in the House: 80 percent of Americans believe we do a poor job of keeping our financial interests separate from the insider information that we have. People don’t have the confidence in us, and that leads to an approval rating of 15 percent for Congress. But we can help restore integrity, and therefore confidence-- confidence in the Senate, confidence in the House, confidence in our institutions. We can do that with a bill that I have introduced called the Stop Insider Trading Act. Now, it is well known that Members of this body and the House have bought individual stocks. In fact, we have seen that people will post on social media the stock trades of the former Speaker of the House and trade off of her trades. In fact, as crazy as it sounds, that has become a legitimate investment strategy because it makes money. And that undermines the confidence people have in our institutions. We have disclosure laws, which is how people can see those trades and make them. But it is not enough for the integrity of the institution. We need to make the rules stronger. We need to stop people from being able to buy individual stocks in the Senate and in the House. We need my Stop Insider Trading Act because that is exactly what it does. It says that, if you get elected to the House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate, you can no longer buy stock. Trading on insider information will become impossible because you won’t be able to make that purchase. Now, we also want to make sure that if, say, you come from a successful business, we don’t want to penalize you. We are not going to force you to sell your stock of your company. But we are going to say that you have to give notice, 7 days at least, to let people know if you are going to sell any positions you own. Remember, you can’t buy any more. But if you have some already and you want to sell them, you have to give 7 days’ notice. And that will address the issue of, for example, when we had a member of the Intelligence Committee sell about a million and a half dollars’ worth of stock right before the COVID pandemic selloff of the stock market. Even the perception of impropriety undermines the integrity, and therefore the confidence the people have. So let’s stop it altogether. Let’s ban people’s ability to use insider information to buy stocks and make sure, if they are going to sell any, that they have got to tell everybody well in advance so that Americans and the market can know. My bill also has real teeth in it. It is a $2,000 fine or 10 percent of the proceeds. Let’s say you sell a million dollars in stock, and you didn’t tell the market ahead of time, like you were supposed to. You didn’t follow that 7-day rule. It is a $100,000 penalty--a 10-percent penalty. So either $2,000 or 10 percent, whichever is bigger, plus you have to give up all your profits. That is a penalty with teeth that will get the attention of Members here on Capitol Hill. It is time that we restore the integrity and the confidence in this body when it comes to inside information. We, because of our position, have access to this, but we should not benefit from it. This is supposed to be public service. No one should come here seeking a profit. And yet, on Monday night, some of my colleagues tried to pass a unanimous consent, passing the Stop Insider Trader Act that the House of Representatives passed, and Democrats blocked it. Democrats blocked my Stop Insider Trading Act, which would have helped restore confidence in this body. It is time that we got the Democrats on board, that we get this passed. It passed in the House with Democrat support. And 13 Democrats and 2 Democratic cosponsors are on the Stop Insider Trading Act in the House, which the House was able to pass. They have sent it here for the U.S. Senate--for us--to do our job. I call on my Democratic colleagues--my colleagues across the aisle: Please, get on board. We need to restore faith in the institution. A 15-percent approval rating is terrible. We need to restore the integrity. We need to restore the confidence. My Stop Insider Trading Act does just that. I encourage all of my colleagues to get on board this commonsense proposal to be able to restore integrity and confidence in the U.S. Senate and prevent insider trading from getting between us and the American people. I yield the floor.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →

“Social Security is running out of money, and politicians are afraid to talk about it. The money people pay in is spent immediately instead of being saved or invested. We need to stop taxing Social Security benefits. We should let Americans invest their retirement money in the stock market instead of letting the government waste it.”

“Mr. President, I want to talk about a subject people just love to talk about. I have come to the floor to talk about a big scam in our country. It is happening in broad daylight before our very eyes. Politicians here in Washington know what is going on, but they refuse to speak about it. They are too worried about getting reelected in most cases, and they think telling the truth about the scam will hurt their chances of staying in power. Well, here is the sad truth: For decades now, the American people have paid into Social Security each month without having any idea if they will ever see a cent of the money they put in. Since being signed into law in 1935 by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, our great President, Americans’ money has been going in the front door of the Federal Government and then going right out the back door. Your dollar doesn’t grow, and it doesn’t come back to you or your children. It is a big, gigantic, blown-up Ponzi scheme, and the last time I looked, people who do Ponzi schemes usually go to jail. Every American is forced to participate in it. You have no choice. You don’t have a say in the matter. Whether you are 17 or 67, more than 6 percent of your paycheck is taken out by the Federal Government to pay for Social Security--your so-called retirement. That might not seem like a lot, but to millions of Americans struggling to live paycheck to paycheck, that 6 percent is a huge sacrifice. Americans have been paying into this program for years, only to see a fraction of what they have been promised. It really makes you wonder how this government-approved Ponzi scheme is legal. The truth is that this ``retirement savings’’ program is 100 percent broke. It is absolutely broke, just like our Federal Government--$40 trillion in debt. The Social Security trust fund is projected to run out of its reserve money in 2032--just a few years from now. You know, when these funds are depleted, senior citizens could see a cut in their monthly check up to 22 to 25 percent of their benefits. On average, that is $500 a month. You know, if the Federal Government were to try to save the program, it would most likely mean that your taxes would skyrocket. Mr. President, 38 percent of mandatory spending within the Federal budget annually goes toward the failing Social Security Program. Yes, the money you send up here, 38 percent a year goes to Social Security-- not the money that you already sent because, guess what, it has been sent and it has been spent and scammed out of our system. It is not there. In other words, almost $1.6 trillion every year of your taxpayer dollars is being spent on a program that is currently scheduled to go bankrupt in 6 years. So basically, the money you send up here has been spent and now is nowhere to be found. The Social Security Program is the single largest program we are wasting our tax dollars on--the biggest. It is a mind-boggling program to say the least, but don’t worry, it gets worse. After decades of having Social Security taken out, millions of Americans have to pay taxes when they go to collect their Social Security. Yep, you heard exactly right. After you pay taxes and you put it in there for savings for many years and you get it back, guess what--you have to pay taxes on it now because our former President and former Senator, Mr. Joe Biden, when he was a Senator in 1983, got the great idea of, let’s tax Social Security. What a scam. Depending on which tax bracket you are in, between 50 percent to 85 percent of your benefits can be taxed by the Federal Government. Last year, I introduced the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act to stop the unjust double tax on Social Security benefits. Thankfully, the One Big Beautiful Bill included senior deductions that significantly reduce Federal taxes for the majority of retirees. Thank goodness. In a day and age where the cost of living is skyrocketing, our seniors should not experience a second tax on their Social Security when they have already paid tax on that money. If we must keep this outdated program, the least we can do is to ensure that senior citizens don’t get slapped with a double tax. Despite what millions of Americans have been tricked into believing, it turns out that paying into Social Security does not entitle you to a fixed pot of money. Everybody thinks: We are going to pay in, and I am going to get a lot of money in the end. The sad reality is that many Americans won’t see a cent of the money that they paid into Social Security. Basically, Social Security is just, folks, another tax--a tax on both employees and employers since most companies have to match the 6 percent that their employees are forced to pay out of their paychecks. Yeah, they double the tax. This is socialism. It is highway robbery. And for the last 60 years, we have known this program was going under, but no one up here has been willing to fix it. In fact, Social Security is known as the third rail of politics that no one up here is allowed to talk about. Don’t talk about Social Security because we don’t have a solution, and we might lose our jobs. In fact, Social Security is known as that third rail because nobody will touch it. It is taboo to talk about Social Security. But my question is: Why? Why is that? We work for the people. We work for the taxpayers. We have known this program was going bankrupt for years. It has been a disaster since day one. When millions of Americans are going to reach retirement age soon, we had better look out. They are expecting to get their money. They are expecting to get the money that they paid into Social Security for years. They are going to get screwed over with nothing left, and this is going to be a serious problem. The Social Security scam doesn’t stop there. As you know, Joe Biden welcomed tens of millions of illegals into this country with open arms. They said that our borders are closed. Yep, after they let 20 million people in that shouldn’t be here. These aren’t nice people either, most of them. Many of them are rapists, murderers, drug lords, and gang members. Well, it turns out, the Biden administration and Alejandro Mayorkas, our great Homeland Security Director, they weren’t just letting these illegals into our country without vetting them; they were handing them Social Security and Medicaid benefits as they were coming into the door. Welcome to the United States of America. We are broke, but we are going to give you money. We are going to give you a Social Security number. It is no wonder we are broke. While millions of Americans will never see the Social Security benefits that they worked hard to pay into throughout their career, illegals, they are getting money. They are getting rich off the money that Joe Biden said that they could have. It is disgusting, but it is not surprising. This is our Federal Government. So why aren’t we allowed to talk about it? It is almost like the system was set up to fail from the get-go. I caught a lot of flak when I brought this up in a hearing just a few years ago. What is this guy talking about? We are going to get Social Security. Yep. If you believe that, I got beach land I will sell you out in Arizona. If every single American had invested the money that they are forced to pay in Social Security each month into a stock--if they had done that, they would have gotten 10 times the money that they put in, if it was just invested in the stock market. But do you know where it was invested in? Most people don’t know this. Your money, when it comes here, is put into Treasury bonds that have very low returns--very, very low--not even close to anything that you would ever invest in yourself. That is where your money goes. Don’t be naive. The reason Social Security is invested in bonds is because it is being used to basically prop up the Federal Government. We are broke. We don’t have any money. Please send more. Can we raise the Social Security tax and just tell them they are going to get more money at the end? Folks, it is a scam. If this money had been invested in the stock market, again, you would have had 10 to 15 times more money. It is embarrassing, but apparently we are not supposed to bring that up. To his credit, President George Bush tried to save Social Security in 2000. He tried to privatize a lot of this money. If we had just done that--if this body in here would have just said: OK, we know we screwed it up for 40 years. Let’s go ahead and do it. Let’s get out of this jam. They didn’t want any part of it because they wanted to steal the rest of the money, and that is exactly what is going on. He suggested that younger workers divert their portion--young workers divert their portion--to a money market account that would pay for theirs in the future and ours today, those of us that are close to the Social Security. But, of course, the DC swamp up here, they shut that down fast: Let’s don’t talk about Social Security. It is taboo. It is a dang shame. The program might not be on the verge of bankruptcy today if they had just invested part of the young people’s money into the market. But you have to remember, the government relies on your money for their slush fund. The Federal Government stopped working in your best interest a long, long time ago. The average taxpayer earning the median wage is paying approximately $3,500 to $4,500 annually into the Social Security Program. Over a 40-year work period, that is around $140,000 to $180,000. That could have gone toward a 401(k), and you would have had money to retire on. People would be seeing much greater returns. We had better start figuring this out, folks. We had better start figuring it out. This group up here, a lot of them say: I am going to be gone. I won’t have to worry about it. Somebody is going to pay the price. It won’t be long until people will be coming right around this building going: Where is my money? Do you remember January 6? Yep. January 6 was a pretty bad day. I was here. I sat right over there. It was my very first day here. I was thinking: What a disaster I have gotten into. Well, if you start telling people, ``You are not getting your Social Security money,’’ it is going to get ugly. And I don’t blame them--not one bit. We are $40 trillion in debt. There is no sign of it slowing down. The bottom line is we need to get bureaucrats and politicians out of this mess, stop the Social Security scam, let people really know what is going on, and give the money back to the people. We need to make sure Americans get what they were promised, or we need to come up with an alternative solution that would allow Americans to make their own retirement investments. Give them their money, or let’s put it in a money market account. The stock market is booming. It is far past time Washington, DC, starts working for the people that we are supposed to represent. What a thought. That is mind- boggling, isn’t it? Why would we do that? We work for ourselves up here. We don’t work for the people. It is ridiculous. It is a scam. Not for special interests. Not for career politicians entrenched in bureaucracy or for Washington elite pet projects. Instead of spending money we don’t have on things we don’t need, why don’t we put the money back into the American people’s pockets and tell them the damn truth: We stole your money, but we are going to try to get your money back. Not only is it in America’s best interest to do this; it is the right thing to do. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). The Senator from Delaware.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →

“First, I am honoring Brad Fisher, an Indiana police officer who was killed in the line of duty today. Second, the Senate must fully fund our military and pass a bill to stop noncitizens from voting. China is building up its military and trying to interfere in our country and our elections. We must make sure only American citizens can vote.”

“Mr. President, before I begin my remarks today, I must say that with a heavy heart I am grieving today for town marshal Brad Fisher, a 25-year law enforcement veteran who was tragically killed today in the line of duty in Indiana. Marshal Fisher was assisting other officers in stopping a fleeing suspect when the suspect hit Marshal Fisher and ultimately killed him. I am praying for Marshal Fisher, for his family, everyone in the town of Lynn, IN, and Randolph County. What a devastating loss, a tragic loss. May he rest in peace. And may we always remember the sacrifice that all of our men and women of law enforcement make when they keep us safe. I just want to take a minute and remember him. Mr. President, President Trump recently confirmed what many of us already knew: that foreign adversaries like China are working daily to interfere in our elections and our democratic society. China especially seeks America’s decline in hopes that they can establish a world order that runs through the Chinese Communist Party, and we must do everything possible that we can to stop them from doing that. Historically, when countries have held that kind of ambition, they have started big, catastrophic wars. It should come as no surprise that the People’s Liberation Army is undertaking the largest peacetime military buildup in human history. That is why it is incumbent upon this body to fully fund our military--including President Trump’s $1.5 trillion defense budget request that he has made of this body--so that we can deter exactly that kind of conflict. It is outrageous that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle-- the Democrats--are holding up this bipartisan NDAA and budget request to fund our military when our military desperately needs our support. Yet, even if we successfully deter a hot conflict, we could still lose in other ways. That is because every day the CCP is waging economic and political warfare against us. The CCP is trying to nurture dependency, exploit our divisions, cause us to question the justness of our cause, and erode our democracy. This political warfare campaign is not confined to the shadows. In many cases, it operates out in the open. Just take a look at Neville Roy Singham. Singham is a 72-year-old American tech mogul who sold his company and immediately fled to China. From his Shanghai office--which he shares with a CCP propaganda outlet--whose avowed mission, by the way, is ``to tell China’s story well’’--Singham began funding a complex network of leftwing NGOs and nonprofits that advance the interests of the Chinese Communist Party. Take a look at some of the radical organizations on this chart that he supports through the billions of dollars that he made selling his tech company to a Chinese Communist Party business. This is all a matter of public record. Even the New York Times has marveled at the hundreds of millions of dollars that Singham-linked groups have funneled to radical nonprofits that ``mix progressive advocacy with Chinese Government talking points.’’ Take one example that you and I know well--CODEPINK--you know, the radical organization that chases many of us around the hallways--around this building and our office buildings. You see, CODEPINK used to condemn CCP human rights abuses. But after Singham started lavishly funding the group--and then, by the way, he married its cofounder--CODEPINK stopped criticizing the Chinese Government and started defending it. In fact, in recent years, CODEPINK has even provided cover for the CCP’s shocking genocide in Xinjiang. Meanwhile, a newer Singham nonprofit called No Cold War is entirely dedicated to advocacy designed to ensure America is defenseless against the CCP’s economic, military, and political warfare. But the Singham network is not limited to China-specific advocacy. Singham groups advance a wide variety of causes that are united only by their hatred of America, our allies, and the rule of law. From anti-ICE boycotts, violence against law enforcement, rioting, obstruction, and support for Hamas’ attempted genocide of Jews in Israel, Singham groups and their members advance division, chaos, and hatred. All of this advances CCP interests and poisons our society. Thankfully, under President Trump’s leadership, the Department of Justice is now investigating this and whether Singham has been fueling this lawlessness in violation of U.S. law. It has been a long time coming. At the same time, the State Department under Secretary Rubio is leading from the front in identifying leftwing violence and building an international coalition to confront it. It should come as no surprise that, as the CCP seeks to interfere in our society, it also seeks to interfere in our elections. As President Trump disclosed before the American people in a prime-time address earlier this month, China perpetrated the largest known compromise of United States voter information in history: stealing the personal data of over 220 million Americans in the 2020 election. The President also exposed ongoing vulnerabilities when it comes to America’s elections, and thank God he did that. As one newly declassified intelligence assessment found: Our adversaries are actively coming for our elections, and if that is not enough to sound the alarm--what you just heard from President Trump in his prime-time press conference and what I just shared with you--I don’t know what else is. All Americans--especially my colleagues in this body--should be outraged by this vulnerability. We know that our adversaries like the CCP seek to do us harm and yet we stand by and often do nothing about it. Our inaction has no excuse. We need to safeguard our democracy, and we need to do it right now. If this Chamber does anything at all this year, it must ensure that American elections are for Americans only--now and always. That is precisely why we have got to pass the SAVE America Act, and we have to pass it now, ASAP. In the face of the CCP’s coordinated campaign, we need more election integrity--not less. We need to ensure that all votes in American elections come from Americans--not illegal aliens or foreign manipulation. And by the way, it is not only because of our international adversaries that we need to pass the SAVE America Act. Just last week, a huge story hardly got any notice in the mainstream media. But the new Democrat Governor of New Jersey--a former colleague of mine in the House--she announced that 6,600 noncitizens were ``accidentally added to the New Jersey voter rolls.’’ That is a hell of an accident. But not only that, she also told us that nearly 400 of those voters, who were accidentally placed on their voter rolls, actually voted in the last two elections in New Jersey. Some of my colleagues keep saying that stories like this are a figment of our imagination. It doesn’t really happen. Illegals don’t vote in American elections. The Democratic Governor of New Jersey just told us it did happen. They keep saying that these stories are just, I suppose, ``accidents’’ or ``software glitches’’ is what the Governor called it. The fact of the matter is that these stories keep happening, and we need to do everything that we can to put an end to it. It destroys trust in our elections when Americans read about stories like that. If we have to cancel the August recess to pass the SAVE America Act, so be it. Let’s do it. Protecting our elections from fraud and international interference is a lot more important to me than vacation time. Our adversaries--like the Chinese Communist Party--will stop at nothing to distract, divide, disrupt, and destroy America. Their campaign is not confined to election day. Election day is our last line of defense. Americans must always be free to reject the CCP and its values, while choosing a path that embraces the timeless truths that have always been at America’s core. The day that the CCP chooses the outcome of our elections will be the day that it won. And by then, it will be way too late to correct course and pass a commonsense bill like the SAVE America Act. We cannot wait for that day. I urge all of my colleagues to wake up. It is time to pass the SAVE America Act to save our elections, protect our country, save America. It is fundamentally important. I yield the floor.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Speech on a bill

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.

  See full analysis →