we'll start with you. >> yeah, i think, again, i will assert that ai tools and techniques are one. tools and techniques that need to be applied with critical judgment by humans, consistently across any c-2 system. two, they're already being used both in the hardware and software aspects of nc3 systems. three, i think that this is a multi-factor optimization challenge that definitionally is challenging, but also, it is not the case that the same ai tools and techniques need to be used across the entire spectrum of that kill chain and that engagement scenario. different ai and ml techniques used earlier versus later. i think that later when you get into the actual kind of counterstrike or employment decision making, ai becomes less effective and less

appropriate. certainly on the side of automation. i think it is heavily weighted earlier in use in planning, in characterization and identification so that it's more profits intensive upfront. >> we're going to leave this to honor our 45-year commitment to covering congress. the u.s. senate is coming in for more work on cabinet nom nathss f all the debate time is use, the vote for pete hegseth 9 p.m. eastern time tonight. live coverage on c-span2. ... the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order.

the chaplain, dr. black, will open the senate with prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. holy god, who calls out to us, help us to listen. may we hear your voice in the beauties of the earth and the glories of the skies. whisper your messages in the glory of a sunrise and the splendor of a sunset. remind us of your sovereignty in the orderly transition of the seasons. speak, lord, for we wait to hear your voice. speak to our senators.

teach them your plans and priorities; show them your paths. remind them of the power of unfettered faith, hope, and love, as you awaken their sympathy for those who live without joy. we pray in your holy name. amen. the president pro tempore: will you please join me in the recitation of the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the provision ordered, morning business is closed. under the provision ordered, the senate will resume consideration of the following nominations, which the -- which the clock will report. -- will the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of defense. peter hegseth to be secretary. mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from from iowa is recognized. mr. grassley: today is the 52nd annual march for life, right here in the nation's capital. folks from all over the nation and world are in washington to

offer joyful witness to the beauty and dignity of every human person. they will march in the cold in solidarity with babies in the womb. they will march in solidarity with mothers who deserve better than abortion, mothers who deserve love, support, and encouragement. they will march with the hope that the day is coming when all people will see babies as a blessing -- as the blessing they are, the day when abortion is unthinkable. the signs the march ers carry reveal the hearts of each one, a popular sign each year reads,

quote-unquote, love them both. the pro-life movement's desires to affirm and restore the bond between mother and child. this sacred bond exists even before a baby is born. so i say thank you to the pro-life march ers. i say thank you for your thankful example of what it means to be pro-life. god bless you. i would yield. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

mr. thune: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized. mr. thune: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, over the next couple of days, the senate will consider two more of the president's nominees, chr chrkristi noem to be secretary of homeland security. christie brings both experience and experience to her new role. one of the biggest challenges facing the department of homeland security right now is securing our nation's border. four years of record-breaking, illegal immigration at our southern border has left our country vulnerable to a whole host of security concerns, from terrorist entries to cross-border criminal activity like drug trafficking. fixing this crisis and restoring respect for the rule of law is one of president trump and

republicans' top priorities. it's going to require a decisive and committed leader at the department of homeland security. i believe kristi has everything it takes to undertake this task. we're also considering the nomination of pete hegseth to be secretary of defense, a veteran of the army national guard who served tours in iraq and afghanistan. mr. hegseth will bring a warrior's perspective to the role of defense secretary and will provide much-needed fresh air at the pentagon. gone will be the days of woke distractions. the pentagon's focus will be on war fighting. mr. hegseth will concentrate on restoring america's strength and repairing the deficiencies in our readiness. as our first president said, to be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace, end quote. and in a world that has grown increasingly unstable over the past few years, our priority has

to be ensuring that the united states military is prepared to meet and defeat any threat. i will continue to ensure that the senate works as quickly as possible to get president trump's team in place. mr. president, before i close, i also want to mention the march for life which will be held today in washington, d.c. tens of thousands of americans will flood the streets of washington to witness the goodness and value of every human life. the march for life is just one small facet of the pro-life movement, but it is a key facet because we need this public witness. abortion happens behind closed doors and so it can be all too easy to forget that it's happening, to forget that every day in this country babies are being killed by abortion. the pro-abortion guttmacher institute reports that there were more than one million abortions in 2023 alone. one million. that's a lot of lives lost.

that's a lot of love lost. and we need to be reminded of this. and so i'm tremendously grateful for the tens of thousands of marchers in washington, d.c., today who are here to remind us of the terrible cost of abortion and of the infinite value and worth of every human being. i'm looking forward to addressing the march for life in person later today, and i want to give a special shout tout those who have traveled from south dakota to be here in washington. and to all pro-lifers, those here in washington today and those around the country, i want to say thank you. there's no greater work than standing up for those who cannot stand up and defend themselves. and i'm grateful for everything you do for moms and for their babies. mr. president, i yield the floor. and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

>> like many of my colleagues, i am left mr. hegseth hearing last week with a number of unanswered concerns about his qualifications and ability to serve and role as secretary of defense. every single nominee for secretary of defense from both democrats and republican administrations have met with me and other members on both sides of the aisle on the committee before the confirmation hearings. and the a voter for every of

those nominees, both democrats and republican administrations, secretary panetta, secretary handel, carter, mattis, esper and austin. i did know was agree with their views or policy but i thought they all have the qualifications and the temperament to be the secretary of defense. so i supported their nominations. but mr. hegseth chose not to meet with me or any other senate democrats except the ranking member, jack reed. and he broke with strong long-standing tradition to ensure our work on national security remains free from partisanship. that's the important point. we are stronger as senators, as congress, as a nation if we are acting together. the committee unfortunately was not afforded the opportunity to ask a number of questions, and

so there are a number of questions about his abuse particularly regarding foreign policy and military policy that we did not get an answer to. i have become the ranking member on the foreign relations committee and so i'm very concerned about the role of the united states in the world. i think the american people expect transparency regarding his ability to stand by our allies and partners to uphold international agreements, to abide by rules of engagement, and the bottom line, support the many women in the military in a way that not only keeps us safe but protects them as well. the almost 3,000,000 many women who served who serve our nation in uniform deserve a secretary of defense will not needlessly throw them in harm's way or seek to divide them with partisan politics.

i would like to address a few issues now that we're not able to get to at the hearing because we were not able to ask more than one round of questions. i i want to start with the role that our alliances and our allies and partners play in our own national security. i believe and we have seen it many times from the start of this nation that we're stronger and safer when we lay together with our allies. we are fortunate because we strong allies and partners. we don't see that come from vladimir putin, from president xi in china. we don't see it from the north koreans or the iranians. but the united states have strong allies who can stand with us. the most important security agreement with at any time in our nation's history is nato.

it is a critical indispensable part of our national security, and yet the presidency nominee for secretary of defense wrote in his book american crusade that nato is, quote, a relic, and, quote, that it should be scrapped. now, since his nomination mr. hegseth has tried to walk back his opposition to one of our key international alliances to nato but an advanced policy questions for the committee he calls nato a quote vital u.s. interest in defending europe and american interest from russia and vladimir putin. now, the sudden reversal is well, because i think it's very important our secretary of defense understand how critical nato is that it stronger now than it was in the last anytime in the last since it was formed probably. we number 32 members of nato.

but mr. hegseth's in love with her conversion to understand the importance of our allies and partners raises questions about what he really believes. we asked questions for the record about nato and we didn't get much of response. now, if i had the opportunity i would also brought up ukraine and mr. hegseth's head spinning contradictions on this matter. just as americans nationals could interests are not to be trifled with, neither should be our commitment to defending democracy and the international world order. and any inconsistency in that committee commitment we start that again because this is really important. any inconsistency in our commitment to support our allies

and partners, to support democracy around the world, to support the international world order, that is going to be seen and exploited by our adversaries. so again i am puzzled about how i should think about mr. hegseth's contradictory positions on a variety of national security and foreign policy issues. for example, he was critical of the biden administration as have many of us on both sides of the aisle been in this chamber, for not moving fast enough to aid ukraine. but then he questioned the wisdom of sending any u.s. assistance to ukraine at all. in 2022 mr. hegseth called vladimir putin, quote, a war criminal and called for faster use a to ukraine. now he says the idea of rushing, russia launching a nuclear war is quote overinflated, and plays down the severity of the

conflict as merely putin's, and this is again i'm quoting mr. hegseth, give me my shit back war. well, i don't our nato allies, those in the baltics in poland and eastern europe think about vladimir putin to nuclear ambitions as overinflated. they know the threat he poses to their countries in the world. and to be flippant about the threat of nuclear war i think is beneath the office of the secretary of defense, will have to engage with our partners on a regular basis. now i agree with president trump that the american people want to see a resolution to this year's long war. i'm sure that's true of the ukrainians as well but mr. hegseth has not either in his hearing nor in response to the questions that we submitted to him for the record expanded on

what the department of defense's role should be with respect to ukraine. even though we've already invested $66 billion in military assistance, and again i think it's very important that we stand by our allies ukraine because of the message it sends, not just to the russians and vladimir putin, but because of the message it sends to try night in china, to the rain is coming to north koreans, to anyone who is in at this rate of the united states. if you think were going to walk away from our allies, the good everything they can to divide us. now, on afghanistan mr. hegseth has also been inconsistent on his use of the president foreign policy. actually he's been inconsistent in general on the president foreign policy. in the lead up to the 2016 election, if you hegseth was

highly critical of been candidate trump's foreign policy stances particularly q and afghanistan. mr. hegseth called mr. trump who was a candidate at the time, and i quote, all bluster, very little substance, and again quoting, and armchair tough guy. he criticized then candidate trump in 2015 for advocating for the withdrawal of forces from afghanistan but then he took the criticism back. he sharply criticized the 2021 afghanistan withdrawal, asked did i call but he failed to publicly comment on president trump's 2020 deal with the taliban which is what set the date certain for withdrawal in 2021 that in the biden administration was actually tied to. now, i agree, i agree that withdrawal was not what i wanted

to see. i didn't support it. but they were terms that president trump and his first term set with the taliban, terms that i thought gave away the store to the taliban because there were no concessions from them on what we were to get from the united states. the government of afghanistan was not at the table when the terms were negotiated, and now we are seeing the fallout from that. and then know that no one is watching for gaps in u.s. national security policy more closely than president xi and the peoples republic of china. now mr. hegseth identifies china as our peer competitors come something i think all of us on the armed services committee and probably everyone in this chamber agree with. but if mr. hegseth is so concerned about china then he should realize that nothing will

encourage president xi is aggression more than seeing america abandon our allies and partners. mr. hegseth sees china's ambitions as, quote, a state of complete. yet he doesn't seem to recognize that his own inconsistencies on all these foreign policy positions could contribute to this. the question i would like mr. hegseth to attempt to answer is what message would seem to our adversaries that the u.s. ceases its support not just for ukraine but for the international rules and norms that underpin the global order. now, i'm also concerned about that with respect to the conduct of conflict. in his book, the war on warriors, mr. hegseth argued, again unquoted, our boys should not fight by rules written by dignified men in mahogany rooms 80 years ago. america should fight by its own

rules, end quote. the rules he's talking about by the geneva convention which established their minimum protections against violence, torture, and inhumane treatments. and they don't just protect those people we are fighting on the battlefield. they protect american soldiers. during his hearing mr. hegseth double down to say, quote, restrictive rules of engagement have made it more difficult to defeat our enemies. and that he would be his priority, quote, that lawyers are not getting in the way. well, , unfortunately, and dangerously, this appears to be one of the few issues that mr. hegseth is consistent on. he has a documented history of supporting individuals who have violated military and international law by committing war crimes. these are individuals who were

turned in not by our enemies but by members of their own units who were convicted of crimes by our own military jury come individuals from mr. hegseth lobbied to get pardoned. i don't think we can afford to entrust the safety and success of our men and women in uniform to a man who would himself disregard the laws of armed conflict and leave american credibility and moral authority in tatters on the world stage. while i'm bracing officers convicted of war crimes, mr. hegseth has stated it is his intent to review all general officers currently serving in the department of defense. and when asked if you would remove the current chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, mr. hegseth responded on the record that, quote, all senior officers will be reviewed.

so let's just think about what that means. subjecting our general officers and our military that is not politicize to a political litmus test is not only unprecedented, it is dangerous. it will convey to the american public that the leadership is political. one of the most important roles of the secretary of defense is to seek out and consider open, honest, and direct military advice from the senior officers in charge of our forces. i don't know how mr. hegseth expects to receive open and honest advice from his commanders when he's advocating for a purge of anyone who disagrees with him. i'm also deeply troubled by the idea that mr. hegseth would act as a yes man himself, putting his own personal political

interests above the well-being of our military men and women. mr. hegseth confirmation hearing when asked what he would do if he received orders from resident trump that he knew to be illegal or unconstitutional, mr. hegseth wouldn't give a straight answer. all figured he was denied that president trump was capable of giving an illegal order. and just for the record to be clear in his first term president trump did give an illegal order that then secretary esper refused to follow. and for that, secretary esper was fired by the president. so, mr. president, i am very concern that mr. hegseth lack of consistency and the moral clarity to lead the most combat credible military in the world.

and i am very disappointed that this body will put a nominee on the floor without the due process of advice and consent that the position of the secretary of defense deserves. our men and women in uniform deserve better. and, therefore, for the first time since i was elected to represent the people of new hampshire in the united states senate i plan to vote against this nominee for secretary of defense. thank you. i yield the floor. >> the senator from rhode island is recognized. >> thank you, mr. president. first i want to commend senator shaheen for a typically thoughtful and compelling speech concerning the proposed nomination of mr. hegseth to be

secretary of defense. i will follow by rising to express my opposition to mr. pete hegseth nomination to be secretary of defense. mr. hegseth is the ninth defense secretary nominee that i've considered as a member of the armed services committee. i voted in favor of all of his predecessors including those from the first trump administration. some former sectors and i disagreed politically, there was always an understanding that partisanship has no place when it comes to providing for men and women in uniform. indeed, the weight of this position, secretary of defense, is enormous. the secretary is responsible for leading a department of 31 half million service members and and civilians. an annual budget of nearly $900 billion.

and hundreds of thousands of aircraft, ships, subways, compact vehicles, satellites and our nuclear arsenal. they also play a palpable with allies, partisan adversary having to meet, communicate and coordinate with a whole range of individuals from many different ethnic groups, many different religious groups. that's part of the role of secretary of defense. at a minimum former secretary of defense about the experience, wisdom and character to do that job. mr. hegseth, however, is simply not qualified to meet the overwhelming demands to be secretary of defense. last week the armed service committee held a nomination hearing for mr. hegseth. during the hearing by college

and i raise a number of concerning reports about it, a variety of sources, including his own writings implicate in with disregarding the laws of war, financial mismanagement, racist and sexist remarks about men and women in uniform, alcohol abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment, and other troubling issues. instead of addressing these reports, many of which are documented and on the record, he dodged and deferred. he did not attempt to alleviate the fears that my colleagues and i have that there is material and appendages in his personal history that could be used by adversaries to try to influence him come to try to deflect him him his sworn obligations to the united states. and, frankly, to embarrass him

as secretary of defense. these reports are unlike anything we have seen for a nominee of this importance. and if they are confirmed that undermine his ability to be an effective leader. as i've said for months, it is critical the fbi and the trump transition team carried out exhaustive background investigation on mr. hegseth. in that regard i must say that i am truly disappointed by the investigation process. before mr. hegseth's hearing i was briefed by a transition team on the findings of the background check. i was alarmed that investigators had neglected to contact critical witnesses and whistleblowers, and urge them to reopen the investigation. during my experience on the armed services committee it is unprecedented that the fbi has returned to my office to more

times as recently as last night to provide additional information on the nominee. frankly, i still do not believe the background investigation is complete. last week after the hearing i was made aware of that an individual with disturbing information about mr. hegseth has been interviewed by the fbi in december as part of the background investigation. however, their testimony was not adequately included in the briefing provided by the trump transition team. as such, i asked this individual to recount to me directly the testimony that she had provided to the fbi. i was disturbed by what i received. earlier this week the armed services committee received a sworn affidavit from mr. hegseth's former sister-in-law that alleges specific incidents of mr. hegseth's alcohol abuse,

threatening and abusive behavior toward his second wife, and i repeated pattern of offensive public misconduct. the affidavit was signed and sworn under penalty of perjury and it is been made available to all search widget reviewt we do. i will share a few examples from her sworn testimony which she gave the fbi investigators. once while drunk in uniform, which is a violation of military law, mr. hegseth was so inebriated that his brother had to carry out of a minneapolis strip club. this occurred during a drill weekend with the minnesota national guard. the fbi was also told that his second wife had an escape plan that involved texting a safe or to her friends and family to urgently request help with the putting herself in more danger.

this escape plan was executed on at least one occasion. on at least one occasion his second wife hid in her closet out of fear. and many detailed examples the fbi was told that mr. hegseth's rightly became so drunk that he passed out, vomited, and had to be carried out a family events in public settings come sometimes shouting sexually and racist offensive comments. my point is this. we know that pete hegseth former assistant testified to the fbi about his history of abuse, alcoholism and disgraceful public behavior. however, we know now that her testimony was not adequately included in the trump transition trump transition team background exam. this begs the question, what else is missing from the fbi

reported? dissent is not considering a low level appointee right now. we are advising and consent of the nominee for secretary of defense, and we cannot risk installing a leader who may have history that it it's exploitable by our adversaries. nor can we risk confirming a secretary of defense who has shown that he is incapable of being responsible, accountable, and law-abiding 24 hours a day seven days a week as that job requires. in addition to mr. hegseth's troubling personal conduct, i also have grave concerns about actions he would take as secretary of defense. during his nomination hearing asked mr. hegseth about disturbing efforts underway within the department of defense to intimidate military personnel and families, and reports that the trump administration may implement a so-called purge

board, to screen senior military officers for fitness to lead. this raises a chilling possibility that the trump administration may fire officers who were deemed to have the wrong political views. i believe the tuesday firing of the u.s. coast guard commandant the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, a few days ago, i think you were in the chair and i was here, we saw the minority leader stand at that podium and pledge to cooperate with republicans when nominees were highly qualified and bipartisan. it took less than 72 hours for the minority leader to violate that pledge. senate democrats seem to be back to their old, tired habits of obstructing and opposing. look at the confirmation process

we finished yesterday for the central intelligence agency mr. ratcliffe. he was given a ringing endorsement. director ratcliffe is qualified for the job, a serious guy. he's got the background. he said i've got confidence he'll do a good job. yet, senator schumer held up the confirmation process for two solid days. despite the delay, the senate overwhelmingly confirmed this highly qualified director, director ratcliffe, by a vote of 74-25. 21 democrats voted in favor of his confirmation, yet a two-day delay. i want every american to know what's happening here in the senate. the far-left members of the democrat caucus are intentionally delaying the confirmation of president trump's national security team. it's not advice and consent. it's the democrats' playbook for

trying to deny president trump his cabinet. the senate is preparing to vote this weekend on more high-qualified nominees. one of them is south dakota governor kristi noem. governor noem is a nominee to be secretary of homeland security. she will secure the border. in the first few days of the trump administration illegal encounters dropped nearly 35% compared to the final three days of the biden administration. nearly 4,000 illegal immigrants tried to cross in president biden's final days in office. under president trump, the numbers plummeted, and they will continue to plummet. the impact of the trump policies is real. this is only the beginning. working with kristi noem, the senate is going to secure the border. governor noem understands what's needed to tackle the border crisis. as she said in her hearing, she

will ensure our border patrol agents and our immigrations and customs enforcement group have all the tools, the resources, and the support that they need to carry out their mission efficiently and effectively. as governor, she sent national guard troops to help in texas. she's going to be aggressive in her mission to stop this flood of illegal immigrants. i believe she is an excellent and well-qualified choice. after a thorough vetting process, governor noem received bipartisan support in the homeland security committee. there are 15 members of the committee. 13 voted in favor of her. only 2 opposed. that's overwhelming and bipartisan. senator gary peters of michigan, the lead democratic on the homeland security committee, he voted yes.

will senator schumer needlessly slow down a confirmation vote that his lead democrat supports just to obstruct president trump? when it comes to confirming governor noem, there's no time to waste. few agencies are more important to this nation, to our safety and to our security than the department of homeland security. any delay denies our country a homeland security secretary at a time when open borders endanger every american in this country today. potential risk to their safety as well as their security. here in the senate, senate republicans are working around the clock to confirm qualified nominees like kristi noem, like scott bessent for treasury, like sean duffy. we will be in the senate voting as long as it takes. how long it takes in the senate is up to the democrats to decide. our committees are approving additional nominees on a

bipartisan basis and at a rapid clip. we need to confirm them on the senate floor without delay. that's what republicans intend to do. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

>> mr. hegseth, if confirmed, will not improve our military but destabilized it and weaken the institution. further, during his hearing mr. hegseth failed to convince me and many of my colleagues that he's capable of running any organization remotely as complex as the department of defense. mr. hegseth has been ahead of two separate veterans organizations, from 2008-2010 he led the organization veterans for freedom which had an annual budget of less than $10 million. each year he was in charge, outlays exceed revenues until the organization verge on bankruptcy and had to be merged with another group. from 2011-2016, hegseth ran the organization concerned veterans for america. during each of those five years,

tax records show the organization spent more than it raised. if this is how mr. hegseth manages organizations with a comparatively small staff and budget, how can anyone have confidence that he will be able to effectively manage an organization with hundreds of multibillion and billion dollar contracts? that with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: well, mr. president, yesterday 51 republican senators voted to advance one of the most erratic, unqualified and unfit cabinet nominees we have ever seen in modern times. pete hegseth is possibly just a few hours away from becoming the next secretary of defense, overseeing the greatest military in the world. he has neither the character, the experience, or the judgment required by the job.

if there is one word that should never describe a secretary of defense in this important position, it is erratic. but that is the one word that describes mr. hegseth best. before we vote today, i hope my republican colleagues think carefully one last time about the risks to the american people, and particularly to the men and women in our armed forces, of confirming somebody like mr. hegseth. i hope my republican colleagues understand the danger of entrusting our military to someone whose background has not p been fully vetted. we know much of his past remains uninvestigated. we know mr. hegseth refused to meet with democrats on the armed services committee, save for the ranking member. and how can that be? it's such an important job and he's afraid to meet with democrats on the committee?

he's going to have much tougher add remember series than that, in places like china and north korea and iran. how could he avoid that? we know that new allegations keep coming up, as recently as last night, compounding the word erratic when it describes his behavior. this is not the way to vet a nominee. -- in such an important position as secretary of defense. when you're the one responsible for leading our armed forces, erratic behavior isn't just a character flaw; it could mean the difference between entering or avoiding military conflict, between life and death for you are a troops. we all want what's best for our troops. we all know that voting for secretary of defense is one of the most important votes we're going to take all year. it mystifies me that of all the people president trump could have nominated as secretary of defense, he picked someone as flawed, as deeply flawed, as

mr. hegseth. is pete hegseth really the best we have to lead the greatest military in the world? is this man, with a history of excessive drinking, really the guy you want on the other end of the phone at 2:00 a.m. in a crisis? -- in control of the nuclear codes? is this man with a mile-long list of allegations of degrading and abusing and harassing women the one we want leading men and women into battle? is this man, who failed to manage the finances of veterans nonprofit groups, who drove his organizations into debt to the point where he could not even pay creditors, the person we want in charge of the pentagon's budget? i want this last point to sink in -- dod is a colossal organization. it has a workforce of 3 million people, an annual budget of over $850 billion. is pete hegseth really the person we want overseeing an

organization as complex as dod? a man who couldn't even manage the finances of a small nonprofit. and yet they pick him! it's unbelievable. and he was pressured to resign of these small nonprofits, and now he's supposed to run the department of defense with it's millions of people under his jurisdiction and billions and billions of dollars? the odds are not low that he'd mismanage the pentagon's budget, if he mismanaged small organizations. worst of all, his erratic behavior could rear its ugly head because we know when people who have a history of erratic behavior go into high-pressure situations, it often makes them more, not less, erratic. i refuse to believe that pete hegseth is the best the republicans are come up with for secretary of defense. there are surely other individuals, plenty of others,

the president could nominate, that would be conservative voices. we would disagree with their views, but at least we'd have to admit they're qualified. i can think of some republican senators who would certainly make a much stronger candidate than mr. hegseth. i hope my republican colleagues think carefully today about the consequences of this vote. i hope they do the right thing and recognize there are much, much, much better choices for secretary of defense than hegseth. the correct of the senate, i think the credibility of the republican majority, is on the line with today's vote. -- the credibility of the senate. the well-being of off troops is on the line with today's vote. the very security of the american people, of our kids and family and neighbors and friends is on the line with today's vote. in short, we should not, cannot, must not elevate someone as

erratic as hegseth to secretary of defense. we can and must -- must -- do better. i urge my colleagues to vote no. finally had i want to turn briefly to the subject of mr. vought. no nominee is more threatening, more antithetical to the needs of working people than this godfather of the ultra right. russell vought is is the godfather of the ultra right, chief cook and bottle washer of project 2025. when americans voted for donald trump, they were very clear they wanted inflation to go down. they want more affordable prescription drugs. they do not want project 2025 running the show. but that's precisely what will happen if vought becomes director of omb. if you're one of the tens of billions who benefits from social security, medicare, medicaid, russell vought is a nightmare scenario.

if you want lower drug prices, you can forget about it if vought is run rpg the show at omb. if you wanting lower energy costs, if you want the u.s. to stand up to china, if you want america to create better clean jobs, russell vought is very bad news. but if you're part of the ultra rich in this country, if you are an oil executive, russell vought is your golden ticket. if there's any golden age coming under donald trump, russell vought proves it is only a golden age for those at the very top. for anybody else, donald trump and russell vought say you're on your own. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> the lives of thousands and thousands of men and women in uniform, the security of our nation, and indeed the world, is at stake. i hope we will all take time to reflect on whether we are ready to confirm mr. hegseth to be secretary of defense. i will personally urge my colleagues to vote against the nominee. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. >> the center for mississippi. >> in a few moments the senate will vote on the confirmation of our next cia director, and

community following the will be a vote on cloture on the nomination of mr. peter hegseth, nominee for secretary of defense. i'm going to vote yes for cloture and i expect that the majority of our senators will do so. three months ago 77 million americans voted for change in the united states, and they sent president trump back to the white house. it was a decisive victory and a clear mandate to focus his nation of prosperity and peace. that work begins at the pentagon where we must return to a policy of peace through strength. we are facing the most complex and dangerous pete hegseth is just not qualified to be in charge of the department of defense. he would oversee almost three

million employees around the world and an annual budget of over $800 billion, but his only management experience to date is running two very small veterans organizations with, let's just say, mixed results. even if he had done extraordinarily well in that job, you do not put a person in charge of a small shop suddenly in charge of three million employees. he ran organizations with just a few dozen employees and continuee little budgets and -- and tiny little budgets and none of them were like the defense department in size and scale. so on what basis are we supposed to trust that pete hegseth can manage not just the largest employer in the country but one of the largest employers on the planet? much like the rest of donald trump's cabinet, the main criteria for hegseth's

nomination was his loyalty to donald trump. and i'm not saying loyalty to the president is some sort of disqualifier. he want your cabinet to be loyal. but it can't be the only thing. you also have to be good at this. and it's not like you couldn't have found a magaworld person who was a three-star who are a four-star or someone who had run a big enterprise or been a governor or done big things and run complex organizations. that's what this is. this is not about woke or foreign policy. this is about, gosh, this is a big job and to the extent that the united states senate is in the personnel business, right, to provide our advice and then our consent to a president providing us with a nominee, it's very hard to get to yes on someone who's just never run anything particularly large or complicated. in 2017 -- and this is i had

main qualification -- he says i think donald trump is the final defensive line for america, and as trump ran for reelection, he said that there would be a national divorce in democrats won and that the military and the police will be forced to make a choice and, yes, there will be some form of civil war. this is the guy we want to run the defense department who a couple years ago suggested if democrats win, there might be a civil war. it's not just that hegseth is a trump acolyte getting a plum job in it the -- a plumb job in the administration, leading the department of defense is not just a bureaucratic exercise day after day, month after month you are issuing billions of dollars in contracts and making decisions that are not at all obvious, and supercomplex and sensitive.

there are trade-offs and compromises, and you got to know how, as they say, the building works. and so your knowledge and your experience really matter here, which is why it was so alarming that he wasn't able to name a single member of asean when asked by my colleague, senator tammy duckworth at his confirmation hearing. that's pretty basic stuff. asean which stands for the association of southeast asian nations is an important strategy in the indo-pacific. these are key partners the defense secretary directly engages with, but hegseth didn't know the first thing about them and named a bumping -- a bunch of countries that don't even belong to the organization. later when he was asked by senator slotkin whether he would carry out an illegal order from donald trump, he refused to give a straight answer. there are a lot of close calls,

but that is not had a close call. no, i would not carry out an illegal order. no the united states military is not in existence for the purpose of carrying out orders against united states citizens exercising their constitutional rights. leading our armed forces is not a part-time gig. the pentagon is not a cable news set where you can roll up on a saturday and clever things. you can't improv your way out of global conflicts. the people who lace up and go into battle deserve better than that. they deserve someone who understands the world and all of its complexities and recognizes the weight of their decisions, especially when the chips are down. and pete hegseth is not that person. i urge my colleagues to do the right thing and vote no on his confirmation. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

[background sounds] >> hello, everybody. thank you. thank you. north carolina, horrible thing that is been allowed to fester. we're going to get it cleaned up. should've been done months ago from hurricane that occurred almost four months ago. north carolina has been treated very badly so we're stopping there and we're going to then go to los angeles and take a look at a fire that could been put out if they let the water flow but they didn't let the water flow. and they still haven't for whatever reason. i think we're good have a very desperate i think many of you are going with us. if you like to ride on the plane we would love to give it to you.

[inaudible question] i don't know. is he going? is he going? i don't know. i. ..

our vice president is there representing us very well. other than being a little cold -- [inaudible] >> i just signed a partisan and we release 23 people having to do with pro-life and they will be released shortly. >> i like her very much. [inaudible]

[inaudible]

two more of the nominees. former house member in south dakota bringing experience and commitment to her role. one of the biggest challenges right now securing our nation's border. four years of record-breaking immigration has left our country vulnerable to a host of security concerns criminal activity like

drug trafficking restoring respect for the rule of law is one of the top priorities. recurrent decisive and committed leader of the department of homeland security. everything it takes to undertake this. there considering the nomination of pete hegseth secretary of defense veteran of the army national guard who served tours in iraq and afghanistan will bring a warriors perspective to the rule and much needed at the pentagon. pentagon's focus will be on or fight. preparing deficiencies in readiness prepared for work is one of the means of preserving

and unstable in the past years. our priority has to be ensuring the u.s. military is prepared to meet and defeat any threat and continue to ensure the senate works as quickly as possible to get trump steam in place. i want to mention march for life in washington d.c. tens of thousands of americans from across the country will flood the street of washington to witness the goodness and value of every human life. march for life is just one small facet but a key facet because need this witness. portion happens behind closed doors so it can be easy to forget everyday in this country babies are being killed by abortion.

1 million, that's a lot of lives. a lot of love lost and we need to be reminded of this. i'm grateful for the tens of thousands of mergers and today here to remind us terrible not to give a special shout out to those who have trouble self order to be here and to all pro-life was here in washington and around the country, i want to say thank you. there's no greater work city of to those who cannot sing the defend themselves. i'm grateful for everything you do for moms and their babies.

the yield were and just the absence.

and we are talking about a.i. infrastructure investment

announced. before we talk about it, sides executive order developing artificial intelligence free from ideological bias. >> in terms for the state office, he did work a.i. yesterday replaced it with a smaller simpler biden order but. what he said his older think the biden executive order to do federal agencies need to go back and look at them and decide whether they conform with terms priorities which are economic competitive. >> the biden executive order now revoked says it was meant to

curb government use of a.i. tools unfairly discriminate based on race, gender or disability or medical diagnosis. permission wrongful arrest black men and what we expect will happen now. >> i think a lot of these tools will there's not a lot of hard to not. there's a lot of anecdotes that we haven't seen a ton of hard data. at the end of the day is a wide variety at state and federal level that protect against discrimination of all kinds.

will the the effect will be that dramatic. >> mr. trump is talking about a.i. dominance, how does that executive order paves the way for a.i. dominance in the united states? >> it's much more the start i would say, it gives various officials about 180 to come up with policies to ensure dominance. in addition, the trump administration put a priority on energy production which will be very important and for that reason, the trump administration will prioritize environments permitting section of

infrastructure and i think that will be important for american a.i. dominance. >> let's talk about infrastructure but an announcement of a partnership investing 500 billion a.i. >> this is called stargate. a company, its own new adventure, no public dollars going into it, no federal or state taxpayer money going in. instead, a collaboration between open a.i. chat gpt, oracle, a data center software company. an investment fund the united arab emirate and they are together and collaborate technical partners to build data centers across the united states. the largest most investigated

and expensive data centers needed to run the most advanced a.i. >> this is already underway. it's already happened the first data center is already under construction. so what is new now? >> a commitment or goal up to $100 billion in the next year end essentially as much as 500 billion over the next several years by these companies on data centers. even before they were announced of the infrastructure buildout in the united states is one of the most largest industrial so that should give a sense of economic opportunity.

>> when you talk about the infrastructure, we are talking data centers that house processors run a.i. models describe a data center, how big is it in one of the issues surrounding energy and water? >> a.i. data center is different and the main reason entirely filled graphics processing unit. these are computers made by nvidia, one of the most valuable reason the world is for a.i. these are power-hungry, more energy intensive and they need to be networked together tightly so they can data among one

another as quickly as possible. across the data center so remarkable industrial facilities, the largest in peter's humans ever built by far and that is what they hope to produce. >> if you like to join, we are talking about a.i., a.i. infrastructure, energy required if you'd like to join our conversation, give a call. independent and 48002 he said the infrastructure is using fund no taxpayer money going in so

what is the u.s. government getting involved for? >> a data center might have taken mega he wants. the data center here could take as many as four or five giga watts energy just fundamentally different. you asked about water. to build the data centers and energy, natural gas facility solar panel and it could be clear fusion plant, federal permitting so the role here

going to be primarily regulatory pathways so they don't litigation which is something we've seen for the past decade. >> elon musk has back on this announcement must clashes over a.i. data project, why is that? what is the concern? >> elon musk has a long history of open a.i. the operator of the and cofounder of open a.i. and wanted open a.i. to remain under

his control of the i think. there was a calling out that he left the company and started his own called x a.i. which is his company so there is a history of that blood. in this specific case, also a lawsuit. he's doing open a.i. for a variety of things but on this specific instance, he claimed they don't have past spending 500 billion and at the end of the day i can't validate that you and. we don't know exactly what they have that but will involved are critical people given what i

expect, i don't think they have 500 billion i think there's a path to raise that money. >> communities pushing back. i understand they are important but i don't want them in my neighborhood. where can you put them? >> it can be a tough. once they are told multibillion-dollar data center might only have 100 or 200 employees because you don't need that many people. economic value but it's not like a fauci with thousands of job

will always push back, they take up a lot of energy ... properly managed in a very aggressive way, the reality is this will drive up energy costs so it is important to build the energy so that that does not happen. some of these facilities, especially the places where you train, those don't need to be close to population centers, those can be out in the desert. >> but then you need water. >> you can recycle all of the

water. as long as you have the energy in a path to get water, and built in the areas. they might be even better and that's with the water is for as they run very hot. >> let's talk to call as an independent line. >> i've got two questions. the first is, half of the partners in the project in japan and already arabia, i don't see a public benefit that redounds to the united states. my second question, the same as my first question. what is this doing for the united states of america? why should the u.s. government

invest in this? millions of jobs for the 200 or so jobs running a data center, it seems ridiculous. the investors are the% warning. >> let's get a response. >> it's worth pointing out the federal government is not investing taxpayer dollars in this project. there are foreign investors. at the end of the day american companies will need to destruction and they will run a.i. and i think they will be america could be a situation the country builds large facilities

no control. privacy so to that end in the capital wants to invest in this. the caller mentioned saudi arabia, plans to invest 600 billion and the u.s. over the next four years a call with president trump, any level of foreign investment? >> only important needs that manage these data centers is

data centers very important. saudi arabia in particular facilities are not there will be future in which there important military president emeritus rifle or hockey. i levels of security are extremely important towards the regulate and they will be the ones manage one.

>> from 76 euros very typical of a.i. were worried about railroads in the 1800s but and i a.i. yesterday for the first time. i can hold a camera up near an object and it will tell me. it is real, i can hear the prescription it is used any longer and just from yesterday

it's opened up the world i've been in for 20 years. >> i think there are going to be profound innovations that come as a result a.i. together. all of these are miraculous. a lot of things will change and they will probably be some change but the strong christian.

>> are there any regulations you would support? what guardrails you want to see on a.i.? >> the first thing worth noting is a.i. technology by all of us. it's mind-boggling and a.i. is regulated by a lot of things so there is that. i've written a report about keepsakes submitted.

and bring people and. i am supportive of his francie efforts release we are building we can see the shape of but information developing, how are you testing these parts was

security provisions do you have researchers like myself can attribute and make the plans better over time so i am in favor of work like that. >> we understand the benefits and are going to have another computers and our home.

i think a.i. is going to be a good thing and who are they looking out for? >> the seriousness and some degree of caution. the question about regulation and where you have to be careful is it can go too far. it's not the only concern. the other concern is regulation causes the industry to centralize because they can comply with regulation so only the biggest people can survive

and as a result centration of power privacy, they are all made worse by regulation so it's not that we shouldn't do regulation, we should be extremely careful and knowledgeable on the way things have gone wrong. >> this is john in houston texas. >> i have a question. this will affect a lot of folks especially college graduates want more money for investors

and last year elon musk was worried and now he's worked to. do think the cones away the cones? like the good will outweigh the bad in the long run but you are not well, there will be jobs that just go away which has happened. a computer used to be a person who did not in the automated that. the computer made a lot more jobs and people spend their entire day doing jobs and computers that would have been inconceivable 100 years ago so i

think somethings will be automated but i don't expect a.i., the desire as humans in the workforce and a.i. automate 75% my job, the other 25% will fill my time and there will be new things i can do with a.i. we probably don't even have words for today and i'll make a lot more money and so will everyone else because we will be a lot more productive and that's how we increase prosperity over time will. >> i want to thank you for coming on the show to discuss a.i. it's interesting how we can tap into stargate.

the first meter like studied by nasa so how do we get in contact with sam calling to start the process? >> i can't help you there but open a.i. does have a form on the website of people interested in providing infrastructure to talk to open a.i. i encourage people to do that because there's no way -- this will be a whole of country effort so geographic

distribution i'm all in favor of. >> talk to deborah. >> i've heard these can be extremely noisy. what are your thoughts about that? since we have to have power and you are talking nuclear power, i don't think that want that in my neighborhood, would you? >> i used to live in new york city. 25% of our power came from a nuclear power plant a few miles up the hudson river. it's heavily regulated in america and probably in my view, over regulated. it's much safer than coal or

natural gas in terms of documented evidence. in terms of data center noise, it's a great question. they can be noisy, large. i don't think there louder, i think there are other facilities that have been louder. i wouldn't suggest one of these data centers next to someone's house but we have a big country and a lot of land so i think there's room for all of us. >> thank you for joining us.

derek defense. status of the court spirits commitment role. record-breaking immigration of our country vulnerable and cross-border criminal activity like drug trafficking.

the strong respect for the rule of law is a top priority. i believe chrissy is everything has. considering the nomination of pete hegseth veteran of the army national guard will bring a warriors perspective to the role of secretary and provide much-needed pressure at the pentagon. gone will be the days of destruction. concentrate on restoring american strength. as our first president said, to be prepared for work is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

clarity has to be ensuring u.s. military is prepared to meet and defeat any threat. i will continue to ensure that it works to get trump team in place. mark for life and d.c. tens of thousands of americans from across the country will hold the streets to witness goodness and value. one small facet of movement in the key facet because we need this witness. it can be too easy to forget every day this country, babies are being killed. 1 million abortions in 2023

alone. that's a lot of lives and we need to be reminded so i'm grateful for the tens of thousands of mergers here to remind us of terrible cost of abortion and the value and worth of every human being. a special shout out to those who traveled from south dakota to be here in washington and all pro-lifers want to say thank you. no greater work and standing up for those who cannot stand up and defend themselves. i'm grateful for moms and their babies.

>> mr. president, yesterday 51 senate republicans wanted to advance one of the most erratic, a qualified unfit nobody's nominees seen in modern times. except as a few hours away from the next secretary of defense focusing the greatest military in the world he has neither the character, experience or judgment required by the job. if there's one word that should never describe the secretary of defense, this important position, it is erratic but that is the one word that describes invest. i hope my republican colleagues carefully one last time, about the risk to the american people and meant and women and armed

forces of confirming somebody like mr. hanks as. i hope my republican colleagues understand the danger of entrusting our military of someone who's back on has not been fully vetted. we know to meet with democrats on the armed services committee. how can it be? he will have pepper adversaries than that in places like china and russia and iran and north korea. how could he avoid that? new allegations keep coming up as recently as last by compounding the word erratic. this is not the weight to let a nominee and an important

position. when you are the one responsible for leading armed forces, such as the character flaw, it can mean the difference between entering or avoiding military conflict. life and death for our troops. we all walk with best for our troops. we know for voting is one of the most important votes we will take all your. it mystifies me of all the people president trump could have nominated, he picked someone as part, deeply flawed as mr. hexa. is he really the best we have? this man with a history of excessive drinking, is he really good guy you want on the phone at 2:00 a.m. in a crisis? is this man with a mile-long list of allegations integrating and harassing women data, is

this man failed to manage finances? he could not even pay creditors. i want this to sink in. a workforce of 3 million people, annual budget of $850 billion. is he really the person we were overseeing? they pick him and his pressure to resign and now supposed to run the department of defense?

the odds are not below that he mismanaged the budget. erratic behavior. people with a history of erratic behavior. i refuse to believe he's the best republicans can come up with. there are plenty of others he could nominate. we have to admit there qualified. some senators. i hope my republican colleagues carefully this is right thing

the credibility of the republican majorities will be the world the american people always will minds cannot and must elevate defense. i can't and will do better. and will turn the boat no nominees medical working people in this godfather is will

americans voted for donald trump to go down want more affordable lesions. they do is walk 25 running though that is decidedly one. tens of millions social security and medicare and medicaid, a nightmare scenario. if you want lower drug prices, forget about it her. if you want lower energy costs instead up to china, if you want to america have better jobs, it's very bad news but if you're part of ultra rich. russell is your ticket. if there's any golden age

russell proves it's only for those of the very top. for everyone else to donald trump boat, you're on your own. >> a few days ago you were the chair and i was here, we saw the minority leader pledged to cooperate with republicans for nominees are highly qualified bipartisan minority leader such as obstructing those. look at the publishing process in the central intelligence agency. an arizona, the senate intelligence committee, it being

endorsement and is qualified for the job the background will get better tumor of the confirmation of this were two solid days. the site the delay, confirmed this highly qualified of 74 -- 25. twenty-one democrats voted in favor yet it is a delight. i want every market to know what's happening. far left members of the democrat party are delaying the national security team. trying to deny trump's cabinet. preparing to vote this weekend in a highly qualified family.

only listed on. the nominee is secretary of homeland security, she will hear the border. the first three days of the trump administration, illegal encounters dropped nearly 35% compared to the final three days in the biden administration. nearly 4000 illegals went across in biden's final days of office. all will and it continues to plummet. the disease will and this is beginning. being sent will secure the order and understand what's needed to tackle the border crisis and she said in her hearing she will sure border patrol agents and customs enforcement group have the tools and resources and support they need to carry out

there mission is governor, she send out in the order. she's going to be aggressive about her vision to stop the flood of illegal immigrants. maybe you and qualified choice will. the only 30 will 15 voted in favor the democrat : security. senator schumer had a confirmation vote in democrat supports. when it comes to confirming

government, there is no time to waste. the colorado homeland security and denies our country is secretary and open borders for americans in this country today. here in the senate, senate republicans work round-the-clock to confirm nominees. we will be in the senate voting as long as it takes. how long it takes is up for the democrats to decide. additional nominees, bipartisan basis. we need to confirm on the senate floor without delay and that's what republicans intend to do.

i yield to the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. >> pete hegseth qualified to be in charge of the department of defense. government employees around the world, over $800 billion but is only experienced today to very small veterans and organizations with let's just say mixed results even if he had been extraordinarily well in the job : you do not put the person in charge, suddenly in charge of 3 million employees. ionization with a few dozen employees and none of them were

that skill. it's not just the largest employer in the country one of the largest on the planet. it can't be the only thing. you also have to be good at this and it's not like you couldn't have found a model world person three or four star for someone with the big enterprise or someone who had been a governor or had done big things and demonstrated complex organizations.

the nominee and it's hard get to someone who's never run anything particularly large or complicated. they one and military and police will be forced. there will be some form of work. years ago suggesting if democrats win, there might be a civil war. the administration, there is plenty of that happening. no real understanding of the job

he be doing leading the department of the defense day and day out, month after month issuing billions of dollars in making decisions not at all obvious and super complex and sensitive, trade-offs and compromises into got to know how building works so your knowledge and experience really matters which is why it's so alarming which is why he wasn't able to single-member. the basic stuff in the association -- s. murray: mr. pr the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i realize some republicans were hoping that we would cut this process short,

but i have no problem coming to the floor and having a lengthy discussion about mr. hegseth's nomination to be defense secretary. i am eager to talk about it. the only person who doesn't seem to walk to talk about the hegseth nomination is actually mr. hegseth himself. because, mr. president, i have been trying for weeks to schedule a meeting with mr. hegseth prior to his confirmation vote. i genuinely want a chance to ask him directly about my concerns with his character and fitness, yes, but also about the serious challenges facing our nation, whether it's competition with china or aggression from russia. as vice chair of the senate appropriations committee, i help write the bill that funds the department of defense -- defense department every year and that bill only passes with bipartisan

support. i don't think it's asking a lot to be able to meet with the person nominated to lead that department. i've had the opportunity to meet with ten of president trump's nominees, and i look forward to meeting with more before they are confirmed by the senate. conducting these meetings is the absolutely bare minimum given the role of each senator and the constituents they represent. but, mr. hegseth refused to meet with me and has refused to meet with many of my democratic colleagues. i think most americans would agree, you shouldn't get the job if you decide you can skip the job interview. every nominee should be willing to meet with senators regardless of their party to answer basic questions about how they would approach their role if confirmed. it's honestly beneath the dignity of the role he aspires to for mr. hegseth to refuse to meet one-on-one with most democrats. what is he afraid of?

are the questions we have to ask really that hard? i mean if mr. hegseth is afraid of me, how is he going to stand up to china? meeting with members on both sides isn't just some formality. if you are confirmed, it is part of the job. so this is a serious concern, and one of the many concerns i have now with mr. hegseth's qualifications, his positions, and his character. let's be perfectly clear about the stakes here. we are talking about who we will put in command of the most powerful military in the world. there's nothing on mr. hegseth's resume that remotely suggests he has the experience for that role. i have deep appreciation for his service to our country. i do. but let's not kid ourselves here. i don't see how being a fox tv host perhaps you to lead three

million servicemembers and civilians. i don't see how bankrupting a veterans nonprofit through wasteful spending qualifies you to manage a budget of nearly $900 billion. moreover, we really, truly have no sense of what his understanding of military policy is or what his strategic priorities would be. now, thanks to senator duckworth, we know he is someone who can't name a single country in asean. i mean that ignorance is alarming. senators only had seven minutes during his confirmation hearing to ask questions, many asked the questions we knew our republican colleagues would not regarding hegseth's questionable character and fitness, important questions, absolutely. but because we had to spend so

much time understanding whether he could do this job at the basic level, we had precious little time to ask him how he would do his job. how would pete hegseth ensure that our servicemembers and their families have the resources they need at home and abroad? how does he plan to reduce costs and development times for key military capabilities that are critical to our national security? how would he invest in our defense industrial basin public shipyard like the one in my home state of washington? how does he view the pacing threat in the indo-pacific and how would he work with our partners and allies to prepare for a potential conflict? does he have any thoughts on that at all? this is just not a serious candidate who has thoughtful positions on the challenges we face. you know what wogs he is serious

about? what he has stated over and over again. and i quote, i'm straight up just staying we should -- saying we should not have women in combat roles. he said that last november. we need moms, but not in the military in combat positions. that is infuriating and i don't have to try hard to make how -- marriage how that condescending attitude will go over with him. and after denigrating women in the role in the military that does not square with reality, mr. hegseth's remarks on this is -- he i think we should a secretary of defense who is firmly against war crimes. not one who has spoken in favor of torture like waterboarding,

in favor of people convicted of war crimes and questioned whether we should follow the gentlemen nooef aif conventions. and let's not forget in addition to having no real qualifications and many alarming positions, mr. hegseth also has many red flags that raise serious concerns about his character and his conduct. there's the report that he and his management team pursued women on his staff. there is the report that he took his employees to that strip club and got drunk. there's the report that he got drunk in uniform and had to be carried out of a strip club. there is the report that he chanted kill all muslims while he was drunk. and beyond reporting, there are the police records backing up the account of a woman who told a nurse she may have been drugged and then raped by pete hegseth. now, we couldn't hear from that

woman because mr. hegseth has reached a financial settlement and he has threatened to sue her for speaking out. and he did not disclose it when he was vetted. but there are other people we have now heard from. we know his mother once wrote to her son directly criticizing him as an abuser of women. we know his former sister-in-law in a signed affidavit has shared she saw mr. hegseth drink to excess and understood his ex-wife feared for her safety with whim. we know that same ex-wife told the fbi, quote, he drinks more than he doesn't. that is an awful lot of smoke for us to be ignoring the fire. there is absolutely no world where someone who has a history of running up debts at nonprofits should be responsible for overseeing half of our

discretionary spending. there is no world where someone with a history of failing to address his irresponsible alcohol use should be given one of the most stressful jobs imaginable and making life and death decisions on a daily and hourly bases. there is no world where we should have a predator running the department of defense that is responsible for the well-being of millions of women and men in uniform. i don't get how that is complicated. mr. president, let me just end on this. there is no world where the person in charge of our military should see his fellow americans ask the enemy, but mr. hegseth has made clear that is his view. regarding democrats and republicans, he has written, quote, the other side, the left is not our friend. we are not esteemed colleagues

nor mere political opponents. we are foes, either we win or they win, we agree on nothing else. that is an especially dark view of our country. our military uniforms do not say democrat, they do not say republican. they just don't. mr. president, you cannot be an effective commander if your people don't trust you, but how are troops supposed to trust you to keep them safe in combat if you think half the nation is -- how are muslim servicemembers to trust you if you think their religion is a threat to our country? how are women servicemembers supposed to trust you if you think they should be at home. i don't have an answer to that. maybe mr. hegseth doesn't either. maybe that's why he won't meet with me. then again, maybe it's because he thinks i'm his foe, i'm a

democrat or maybe he thinks i don't have a say in the military because i'm a woman. mr. president, i do have a say. and i say someone like mr. hegseth is grossly unqualified to take on one of the most important jobs in the world and i will be voting against him. and i urge my republican colleagues to seriously consider the message it will send to confirm someone for secretary of defense who has failed time and again to meet the most basic standards of conduct our women and men in uniform are required to live up to. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. quorum call:

republican of arkansas and chair of the natural resources committee. welcome to the program. >> good morning. good to be with you. >> you are the chair of the natural resources committee. talk about your priorities in this congress and your goals. >> we got a lot of work to do in this congress. if you look at the jurisdiction of the natural resources committee a lot of that is energy and minerals so energy production and mining are going to be a huge part of the work we do. we also have jurisdiction over federal lands and forestry, over fisheries. we also have indian and internal affairs we've got a full workload not to mention california water and wildlife and fisheries. lots of things will be on our plate but we had a good run last congress. we got a lot of bills passed and signed into law.

we got the explorer act which is the countries first outdoor recreation bill. this is a large bipartisan bill that was so popular the past out of committee unanimously. it passed out of the house unanimously and it passed the senate unanimously. president biden signed into law. we're excited about at the recreation and access to public land and meeting the majority needs of her country. >> host: you are the only licensed forrester in congress. i would ask about wildfires in california but what does it mean to be a licensed forrester? >> i study forrester in graduate school and there is a licensing process to take exam and continued education of what to keep a license to practice for street. i did ingenuity from an undergraduate work and i'm a professional engineer and i been able to keep those licenses up to speed while i'm here in congress but it's kind of neat. last, i was only licensed

professional engineer in the only forrester in congress. i did nowise they they say licensed. just dealed forrester, the only person who study forrester in congress. >> host: talk about your views of the california wildfires and noting president trump has departed the white house and will be serving -- surveying damage in california later today. >> guest: it's devastating if anybody has paid attention to the news. it's heartbreaking to see over 15,000 homes destroyed, 28 lives lost and last count $250 billion of estimated damage. it's tough conditions out there. i spent time in southern california, was out there in october flying over what was called the airport fire. he did make near as much news because it didn't burn near as many homes but you have that kenyans with what water cat

but it's really chaparral and scrubby oak trees and brush. it gets very dry and you get these strong winds that come through. when the fires start they are almost impossible to put out. fire traveling uphill is, it's when it burns the hottest. if you think of a match and you strike it and hold it straight up, the flame is not very big but if you point that flame downward turning up the matchstick, burn your finger pretty quickly. that's what happens when the fires are going up the slope. when you look at the whole situation there are things we can do. we know what happens when you get this dry fuel and wind and fires. a lot of people living in was called wildland-urban e and swear the forest meets the neighborhoods are those of the we really need to focus on to

prevent the loss of life and property. the act has provisions that we can create these defensible zones between the forest and the neighborhoods. >> host: i do want to ask about that bill but going back to the wildfires, the mayor of los angeles and the governor of california have come under criticism for their response to the wildfires. you think that is appropriate? >> guest: there's always going to be criticism of public officials when you have disasters like this. some is appropriate and in s probably not. when you look at the type of fire that they had, sure it started in the caney. there that could been done to mitigate the situation so the fire didn't get his bat. once these fires get into the neighborhoods, we think of it as a wildfire but it's really

multiple house fires and are trying to fight these house fires with conventional firefighting equipment and they simply didn't have enough water or equipment or people there. and where does that blame fall? i guess it has to come back on the public officials because it's their job to provide fire protection services and make sure the systems are up to speed and can handle whatever comes after them. when we think of a forest on fire you think of tankers dropping water and dropping fire retardant and people parachuting out and fighting the fires. you've got a combination of that going on. instead of blaming everyone we need to look at it and figure out what we can do better to prevent these disasters going forward. >> host: do you believe climate change is increasing the frequency of wildfires and the intensity of wildfires? >> guest: that's a question i get asked a lot.

we certainly see times we have dry conditions, hotter conditions. we also see there are different places across the country that are expressing the same conditions and intensity and number of fires are not increasing in these places. so regardless if it's climate change causing it or if it's weather conditions or poor management we select ask the question, what of going to do about it? if we know the climate is warming of these conditions are going to get worse, the science of for street tells us how to manage these lands so that we have the proper amount of vegetation on the land. the big problem is we're getting these overstock fuel loads, and when the fires happen they are just catastrophic and you can't put them out. they are so hot that they burn the organic matter out of the

soil sometimes and you can't even get trees to grow back. it's an environmental travesty because we know forest fires put more carbon in the atmosphere but they also when you denude the lamp like that and the rains come along which the eventual in california we will see tremendous soil erosion and mudslides and water quality issues. so by keeping are forced healthy and attack it as all kinds of public safety features and environmental benefits. >> host: if you'd like to join a conversation with congressman westerman, you can do so on our lines by party, democrats 202-748-8000. republicans 202-748-8001 and independence 202-748-8002. you can start calling in. the republican of arkansas. you were talking to us about the fix our forests act ask the pas the house. but that on the screen to give us more information about what that does and what you expect to

haen in the senate. >> guest: first off this is a very bipartisan bill. i worked on with my colleague democrat scott peters from san diego area. scott was an environmental lawyer and he and i been talking about forest health for several years now. we first wrote a bill called the save our sequoias act because we lost 20% of the joint sequoias on on the planet due to wildfire. when you look at the sites of what's happened it was because we have mismanaged those groves. scott and i worked together. we got a lot of democratic cosponsors and passed this bill out of the house last fall but we couldn't get any movement in the senate. in light of these horrendous fires we decided we can't stop and we got the bill back up and passed it out of house yesterday with even more democratic cosponsors and more democrat votes. the house has spoken. we need to get the senate off

dead center to take this bill and passed it as soon as possible so that president trump can sign it. so we can start doing the work. it's going to take decades to get these areas back where they need to be. we've seen the loss of 15,000 homes. if you look across the country there are 44 million homes in the same condition in this wildland-urban interface with his catastrophic wildfires could break out. there's a ton of work to do. we should've been doing just decades ago but we need to get this bill passed so can happen sooner. >> host: switching over to energy, president trump has declared a national energy emergency. he's expected to roll back regulations, promote more leasing on federal lands for drilling. what do you think is the practical impact of those actions? >> guest: we need more energy is the practical impact and when he reliable and affordable energy and we need the cleanest energy possible.

the u.s. is really good at producing clean affordable and reliable energy. if you just look at the numbers we're seeing a growth in electrical consumption by about three times per year. used to be half of percent growth per year notes 1.5% and is projected to grow even more. that electricity has to come from somewhere. there's been a lot of wind and solar built but there is no way wind and solar can meet the growing demands of our country. i think the president is looking at an all-of-the-above energy approach, , and i'm all for tha. we have a whole other issue with ai in data centers and the race i'm getting to asi, the super intelligence. we are in a race with china on that, and china is not only back on energy development. they built 40 gigawatts of coal

power plants last year. if you put that in perspective that's a big coal-fired plant in the week and they're not even turning some of them on. i believe they're building these plants so they can have the energy available when they get to the next iteration of ai. >> host: you mentioned we need more energy i do want to read to you a call from the natural resources, natural resources defense council attorney who says quote, there is a bit of hypocrisy and declaring a domestic energy emergency while we flight international markets with fossil fuels. we are the world's number one exporter of oil and gas a we haven't energy emergency? what is is based on? what your reaction to that? >> guest: that's a shortsighted comment that's put out there to probably get some clickbait on a website. that's to look at the whole energy picture. i talked about the growing demand for electricity. we are shutting coal plants down and we need to be creating more

baseload energy. i all for clean energy but we can't build nuclear power plants here. it takes forever to get permits to build facilities. and also we need to be exporting more energy because our allies around the world wanted. when we are not exporting energy, that demand is being filled by countries like russia and iran and others that are not our friend. if you look at the two wars going on in ukraine and with hamas and israel, russia is funding their side of the war in ukraine office energy receipts, and iran is funding these terrorist organizations off of energy receipts. it's not only energy security and dominance that is also national security when you look at the global energy picture. the demand for energy globally is going up exponentially. >> host: you mentioned

competition with china. ask about the electric vehicles. do you support the president's proposal to in the ev mandate, and also the eb tax rebate for those that by the fees that are manufactured in this country? >> guest: absolutely. if you look at the science on that if we could convert every internal combustion engine in the united states to an easy overnight it would have less than 1% impact on greenhouse gas emissions. i like evs, fun to drive, great technology but the technology should stand on its own. we shouldn't be picking winners and losers and putting this false i get it's going to save the world if anybody tries an easy. when number simply don't add up. the u.s. produces about 13% of the world's world greenhouse gas emissions but only 27% of that come from all of transportation and 57% of that comes from

light-duty trucks and passenger vehicles. you do the math and you are down to around 2% of global greenhouse gas emissions are coming from u.s. light-duty trucks and passenger vehicles. then about 40% of our electricity comes from non-greenhouse gas emitting sources. so again if you could make every car and easy overnight you've only decrease global greenhouse gas emissions less than 1%. it's a huge cost and inconvenience that is being put on the american consumer claiming to have these great climate benefits when really t doesn't. that one person doesn't include the embedded carbon that it takes to do all the mining and build the components they going to an ev. i'm all for ev technology, just let it stand on its own and don't require government mandate or government subsidies to make it work. >> host: let's talk to callers. a republican canton north

carolina good morning. >> caller: good morning. thank you for your time. my heart goes out to the people in california, but here in western north carolina we are still suffering. i want to thank president trump on the promises scinded. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, it's been four days, seems like it's been longer than that, but four days since president trump took the oath of office as the 47th president of the united states. we've seen a flurry of activity since that time which you would expect from president trump. he's been waiting for that day for some time now and worked really hard to get there. but from securing our borders to securing protections for women

in sports, it's abundantly clear that president trump is not letting any dust gather under his feet. i'm particularly pleased to see him dismantling the biden-harris administration's dei regime throughout the federal government. some people may be asking well, why would the president waste his time on that, what could be wrong with having a diverse work force? well, the truth is while dei or diversity equity and inclusion may sound like a benign or nice thing, the dystopian reality is there's nothing inclusive about dei programming. on the contrary, it's quite divisive. dei initiativings do the exact opposite of what they purport to do, and they fly directly in the face of everything that america

stands for. on monday of this week, we celebrated martin luther king jr.'s birthday, and what was perhaps dr. king's most famous speech, the "i have a dream" speech, he said, i have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but, rather, by the content of their character. to me, that's the ideal. at the heart of the civil rights movement was a desire for everyone, regardless of race or gender, to compete on a level, merit-based playing field. what's so misguided about these dei initiatives is that they do the exact opposite of what martin luther king jr. spoke about. instead of judging people on the content of their character, the

dei regime would have us assign points to people based on charact char characteristics like skin schcolor. these are immutable characteristics, not something any of us can scroll. so it is -- can control. so it is profoundly unfair to decide that one person in a job candidate pool gets more weight put on their application because of something that was an accident of their birth. i think most people would, if they understand what dei is all about, would agree that this amounts to appear fair hiring -- an unfair hiring practice. it treats people differently based on gender or the color of their skin or some other immutable characteristics. but president trump's order does not just affect hiring.

it also directs agency heads to eliminate dei practices in grants and contracts as well. i think this would be a great opportunity for the department on government efficiency to take a look at it as well as there is a lot of room to eliminate waste and inefficiency in federal grants and contracts. according to the government accounting office, gao, the federal government spent $759 billion on federal contracts in 2023, which represents roughly 12.5% of federal government spending for that fiscal year. a significant number of these contracts are for the department of defense, with billions of dollars and our national security on the line, it is critical that these contracts are awarded to contractors on

merit, not based on some dei-centered criteria. so we owe it to the taxpayers to be sloking the best -- selecting the best and the brightest and the most effective people for a job, not picking the consulting firm that simply -- that's simply racked up with the most dei points. one of the requirements in dei federal contracts is that they create an incentive structure for these divisive practices to bleed into the corporate world. this goes all the way back to then-president richard nixon, who implemented affirmative action requirements for private companies that contract with the federal government. since that time, there have even been instances of companies committing outright fraud in order to qualify for contracts that were prioritized for minority-owned businesses by

claiming that an employee is a 51% owner in order to qualify for a minority-owned statistic us a and, thus, get perch schuss treatment. -- get perch -- get preference shall treatment. some are claiming it is a reversal of the progress we made in the civil rights era, but nothing could be farther from the truth. but what we have to keep in mind is the reforms of the civil rights area were directed at what we were going on at that time. of course, these practices of racial discrimination were so widespread during at that time, this was far from our finest moments as a nation. and i'm thankful, thankful, that our country has been able to move forward from that era, and

i applaud the men and women who went to great lengths and risked everything to help us turn the page on that chapter as a country. but today with the rights granted to everybody regardless of race, color or creed by law, we have a different situation where the law and the policies that were intended to end racial discrimination have evolved into the modern dei apparatus creating a new kind of discrimination, something we sought to avoid but which has now crept back into our country. so the policies that were enacted to address one problem back during the civil rights era have been turned on their head, not to accomplish the original purpose but to do something entirely different, which is to enact preferences based on race,

gender, and other immutable characteristics. in fact, while the civil rights act was being debated right here on the senate floor, one of its architects, senator humphrey, expressed direct opposition to what is now part of the dei bureaucracy. he said, if the senator can find in title 7 any language that provides that an employer will have to hire based on the percentage or quota related to race, icle or, religion, or national origin, i will start eating the pages one after another because it's not there. so i think it's fair to say that president trump p's actions earlier this week are not a reversal of the progress we've made since the civil rights movement. they are better understood as the righting of the ship, back

to what congress and the nation intended to accomplish, a nation where all people have a chance to succeed or fail based on their merit and not on race. so this the action by president trump, rather than reversing progress, is a return to the ideal that the use of america have -- should have always stood for but, unfortunately, did not, which is that the equal dignity and equal treatment of every american under the law. that's our goal, and i'll glad to see president trump has returned us toss that original -- returned us to that original idea since the civil rights era rather than to somehow paper over this effort to treat people differently based on their race, gender, ors other characteristics. mr. president, i yield the

floor. and i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: >> this is home to me. but without a family today, we got the west family. this is their house, so they are here today to show the president just a little bit of the damage and the problems that the people of western north carolina are facing. so mr. president, thank you for what you've done for western

north carolina. thank you for coming again to see. thank you. your son came with us twice. and so they've taken a real interest in this isn't a politician come again is looking for votes. this is a man who wants to do something to want to see some changes who wants to make, make life better for you. so thank you, and melania thank you so much for coming. it's an honor to have you here with us. so mr. president, please. >> thank you. thanks. good man. he's done a great job, fantastic job and we've come to north carolina with a simple message for all the people of this region who were hit so hard by hurricane helene, and that message is very simple. you are not forgotten any longer. you were treated very badly by the previous administration at i hear after a few days of the

administration we're going to california, los angeles. they got hit hard as you know. a lot of that could've been prevented i think if they had water, which they have plenty but they didn't use it. what i'm going there, but they were set up to go there. what about north carolina? they said, what -- i have to stop the first but i'm stopping in north carolina. we made a stop at a few very good. you are represented by some great people, great congressmen are with us and we're going to get involved with them. michael watley is here who is ahead of the republican party, worked with lara trump to take us through a tremendous victory. as the media says one of the most consequential presidential elections ever. they say in 129 years, whatever that may mean. of what ever it is it was a great election we had and we wonder state all three times we won your state. and all three primaries we won

your state so we won it six times i guess. it's a great place and wanted to come here and before went anywhere frankly and campaign, i promised i'd come back to western north carolina to help the people and today here him to deliver on that promise and with a lot of things in mind and we're getting the army corps of engineers, engineers all set. you need your riverbanks expert you need a lot of roads fixed number going to get it done in rapid time and i've asked susie and all of my people to start calling up, get the core ready and they are going to get ready to go. i don't know what it is, i don't know what took so long for the other administration remember i wasn't here for the first four months or three months whatever it may be so we can only start as of essentially one or two days ago and we've made a lot of progress over the last couple of days. we're going to get you the resources you need and the support you deserve and we will be at your side through every

step of the rebuilding, and no american is going to be left behind. the people that i just met are so great. and the people that owned the house, the houses going to be very beautiful in a little while. and who knows if franklin decides maybe he'll rip it out and build him a new one. sometimes you can do that just as easily but we're going to take care of the people. i want to thank our great first lady for coming today. she would you want to view. she said no, i want to go. she sees what happened and she felt very badly and she wanted to go, and we have been going out together to los angeles that you wanted her to be in north carolina. he saw what happened. she has a feeling like i do for north carolina. so thanks as well to her great gentlemen, franklin graham, and his father billy graham. used to go with my father to yankee stadium and places and watch his father preach. and he was some preacher. where is -- you got good stock. you come from the ultimate

genes, i can tell you. and he was he was really some. franklin has done so much and his father is looking down at him right now i guarantee for a long time he's been looking down on franklin sang i'm very proud of you son. he really is because what franklin is done with america first was incredible. he told me it's been great. but the fema people sort of left you a hot and dry but we are going to change it around. you're not happy with fema. as well as all of the representatives, your great represented here, chuck. where is chuck? where wears chuck? chuck. kenmore, thank you, tim. great job, both of you guys. virginia foxx, a power. she is a power that one. don't ever have her as your enemy. it's that good. it's not healthy. sad harrigan. good job, pat.

these guys were just here, just put in and are doing a fantastic job. addison, thank you very much, great. mark harris. thank you, mark. thank you, mark. brad. thank you, brad. rick murphy. fantastic guide my friend for a long time now, right? and rnc chairman michael watley hubley as a sith brought brought us to a great victory with lara, the chairman of the party, the whole republican -- i took i took michael watley from north carolina because he did the best job and put them in charge of everything and the job they did together was incredible. last september hurricane helene became one of the deadliest natural disasters in modern american history. more than 30 inches which is lethal. unleashing unprecedented devastation throughout western north carolina. and many of the states as you know what you got hit the hardest. the highest responsibility and deepest obligation of the

american government is to protect its people, and that's never truer than in times of emergency like this. unfortunately our government failed you but it wasn't the trump government. it was the government run by biden. one day, what a terrible situation. but our government failed. people north carolina in this horrible crisis. for two months even today some north carolinians can't take a hot water shower. they can't drink water. they don't know where to get it. they have to, it's delivered to them i somewhere, some go out and they just some of find some. it's been four months since the storm landfill is a 180 roads remain close and in ruins. earlier this month the biden administration kick 2000 displaced north carolinians out of their temporary housing into freezing 20° weather. i don't know how they did that one because it was cold.

even while wider governmed shelter and housing for illegal aliens from all over the world. but under the trump administration the days of betrayal and neglect are over. they are over. as i said in my inaugural address we restored the integrity, competency in loyalty of the american government. and i think i said most of it in the inaugural address. we said a lot of things but one of the groups of people i i ws thinking about is you in north carolina. a lot of that was in reference to you and what you've had to suffer. i'm pleased to announce that under our leadership the federal government will be searching housing solutions to this state that go beyond mere temporary hotel stays that ended up being very short term. the government wouldn't do it any longer which is ridiculous. we will marshal all available resources and bring back pot of water and make your water and

infrastructure dramatically more reliable very quickly today also be signing an executive order slashing all redtape and bureaucratic barriers and permits to ensure the rapid reconstruction of the roads here in western north carolina. we're going to go through a permitting process that's called no permitting, just get it done. that's the way they built the many years ago i guarantee you. we will get them back very quickly. we will begin to work fund, fundamentally changing terminating or overhauling fema. fema has been a disaster no matter where they are. we are honored to be joined by several families affected by the vicious storm. like to ask each of them to share their story. christine kim west, you can come forward. remote index, jack c mitchell and thomas bright and finally the right family come on up and maybe say a few words. please, thank you. very much.

>> whenever it started we started moving our vehicles to the top of the road and by the time we got the vehicles moved the water had already hit our ankles in the house. and so i grabbed my purse and my little pug dog, and my husband grabbed dog food and put in a trash bag and by the time we got out into the driveway it was already waist deep and there was sticks and that kind of thing. i didn't think i was going to make it but we did make it out. we made it to the top of the road and we were kind of stuck there for hours because we couldn't get out in of the ways because it was flooded all the way around. it took us hours and we sat

there and finally receded enough to where we could actually get out. was probably close to midnight and i started like five, 6:00 in the morning. we just lost everything that we had. didn't even have a brush for like three days. >> would you like to say something to the beautiful baby? >> so when the hurricane storms hit north carolina, hit our home, my daughter, wife and i were actually out-of-town but, unfortunately, my dad was still home and my mother was staying at our house with our animals. and by, the waters got so high that it actually lifted between that and the tornadoes came through, micro versus what they

been calling them, and went through this open house i grew up in and crashed into are born. took away his business, took away all of our tools and tractors and everything needed to keep the farmer going. i mother was trapped in the house and there was no way to escape as the water got so high. the only thing she do was write it out and wait until the waters came down. so we've been doing a little bit about link with her insurance in fema. we did have proper insurance with flood insurance and homeowners insurance. but since we had proper insurance fema has not been able to assist us with a whole lot of things. and again we have been having some issues we're trying to get some payout for insurance in a timely manner. we had to do mold mitigation on her home which is extremely expensive before the structural engineer even came out in order to get our flood payout.

to me that was not really acceptable. [inaudible] >> not, not so much. you know, again -- [inaudible] >> i'm hoping so. we need some assistance with that. we reached out to an attorney. north carolina farm bureau. [inaudible] >> that's what were after here. [inaudible] >> different insurance company, and they're all difficult? >> eifert different stories from others. a lot of folks -- [inaudible] >> eifert some good instances of even on pure themselves but my case, they sent out a third-party adjuster immediately. they wound up firing that third-party adjuster. he gave us a quote from much higher estimate than what we received and then he got let go.

he got fired. so then they brought in another third-party adjuster to come in and lowball a spirit we've not received any kind of -- the flood insurance, there was a roof leak in the home and the inspectors found the adjuster. >> that contribute to us losing some of our personal property as it comes in the third story for the second story with a flood, well above the floodwaters. they neglected us for -- [inaudible] >> yes. she's right here. so we -- yeah, we made it. [inaudible] >> that's right. >> did you think you're going to make it? you didn't think so? >> no. started to pray. [inaudible] >> big pontoon.

>> i i was next door to the houe and my son was out of town so when he came in to charlotte to my sisters, he called about two in the morning. because that midnight the water was still in the stream, in the banks. so when he called, the water was coming up so i started moving vehicles up to about 5:30 in the morning. she was in the house and i pulled up to the steps and i said, hop on the fender and i'll get you out. he built a beach house on stilts five times higher than the flood zone. she said, he said i'll be okay.

i'm staying with the dogs. so i went to higher ground with some vehicles, hers included, and the water covered everything. i had always seen, ran both of my place so i got my blind and best dog and valuables and took up off the side of a hill behind my house. and then was heading to the cemetery back there because i knew it was open because there was trees falling, uprooting. it was raining -- [inaudible] >> no. no, i've been through floods all my life around here. never -- yep. house destroyed. >> appreciate you.

>> anybody else? you guys okay? >> all right. was some trees falling in our house which are house is, goes back four generations, 80 years and never came close to flooding. we woke up trees about 4:30 or five and morning under house sits back off the road and the water, we set flooding and like nothing like we saw. i posted of adl's we moved five vehicles as far up, lawnmowers and everything else, and a water started coming in the house. got up to about ankle high. we have a loft. i got up and that and try to gather what you might want come which was totally random. made it to the loft and started getting up to about our hips. i built a little makeshift ladder and we got up on our roof. we spent four hours on the roof.

i had a little baggie. i took notes on my cell phone to my two kids in my two grandkids, and something to identify me in case we were lost them. [inaudible] >> no. we were freezing. we didn't think we're going to make it at all. our house was 25 feet underwate underwater. no, we were watching houses, trailers, bodies coming by. we live in the azalea road area of east ashford. we watched our garage floor by. but we got to a point where it crested about four feet up on the roof. we took about three or four hours before we get everything in reverse and got out to higher ground. i got out higher ground up to a subway and got over to her daughters house where when she saw i didn't have her, she lost

it or i said she's okay, she is alive. try to make our way back in there and gather things the best we could. found a body right away. we had about eight bodies in it. the first two weeks locator we were lucky we were not one of them. but like other people, no insurance on flood insurance so had to depend on fema. they did what they could do and, of course, it's not enough. yeah, , not crazy but again were thankful to be alive it is a long haul -- [inaudible] >> staying in a camper. as you noticed i'm a big guy. i don't sleep very well in a camper. very grateful the green center coming through with one and -- [inaudible] >> it looks like a beach now, sand. [inaudible] >> yeah. working with -- its 80 years,

four generations. [inaudible] >> no, the house is a bear. they came in and my did it but everything in it was completely destroyed. it's tough. i think were at a point in asheville people is forgot about asheville, and everything has stopped, you know. thank you. appreciate that. >> i'm a pastor of the church right down the road. we had only purchased in may, and it's a big church. we are a small congregation and i had people say what he going to do with this big building? and i said only god knows. and we had our dedication and the storm came the next week. and the outpouring of people, my son brought the first load of

supplies, and from there i stayed there for about three months. i slept on the floor for about three weeks because the need was so great. the people were so devastated. i said i want to be here for them. they were coming in just day and night so there's really no need for me to go home. but we have people from kentucky, tennessee, texas, indiana, oklahoma, people from all over. we've not received any help like from the government or anything. but i said lord, if you want us to do that, people -- >> so they came from all over? >> all over the states. [inaudible] >> the locals and the people that new us. before the week was over, our church was so packed with supplies we couldn't even come we couldn't even walk.

.. you don't realize it's not the big things in life. but the little things knowing god the trees sound like the article that didn't really

matter it's the people want to be there for. >> thank you, president. >> north carolina it wasn't really hard to his estate with her. and what the bows and bridges look like.

as of the landside. we drove as far as he could to get to me. there's no way i can do not she had no clothes on.

she was blue, she been in the waters would who went through was aware a lot of family members there. there were people everywhere to protect loved ones. our church and sound booth space and when he went anywhere he they want there's like 33 homes sold.

i've interviewed my neighbor's property. as i am. we have ireland low emergency. you can't get those big trucks. for months ago they us december 27. if you must send me a letter the sense in my receipt and they will send me the money. it has a lousy dollars is and that he. the mayor will. we can't exit ourselves. as far as house repairs, i'm still pending roads and bridges.

client is laying down on their like it card it had that paper and paper sliding down i have five neighbors around me that completely lost everything. i have damage to my house and on appeal entitled. i'm embarrassed to say i need help. still alive sometimes. you look around and see neighbors that are gone. the letter and we don't understand things going on.

several her neighbor and get our communities back. i appreciate you. >> my son is great. but then there -- the only thing we could do is go up to the church, the first church up there and get will be. >> thank you very much, everybody. we are going to be working with

congress and they are going to do a job. we'll get it done and fema is ready. they were really told to do the job. i guess biden was thinking about other things but they were hold but they did it with the best administration did i want to wish all will leave it. i've never seen anything like it. it is an honor to meet with the people behind me congressional delegation and the other politicians in the area. it is an honor to have michael huawei at my side he happens to

come from a place of north carolina it says michael, fix it. [laughter] so good luck. okay. thank you all very much. >> it's one of the things you hear. >> we want to bring in locally so the state takes care of his problems and bring it down to the level. and numbers of people did a great job. one that didn't do a great job was government. it did no job. good question.

we go local, it will work much better in this is not the only example. if it was up to me, it ended right now and let the state take care of the problem. role he wants it a very capable guy. no matter how good michael is, not going to work with have done an amazing job. great woman, a very powerful woman they are going to do a

great job. supply what they need and we will get it because you need notes. we are talking about bridges and roads. thank you all very much. [inaudible] [inaudible]

[background noises] [background noises] [background noises]

amount of work to do. lots of things will be on our plate. we follow out of bills. they explore act which is the first recreation will so popular

it passed out of committee and adolescent senate unanimously recreation public land and hating the growing needs of our country. >> you are the only forrester congress. i want to ask about the wildfires in california but what does that mean to be a licensed forrester? >> i've studied forestry and graduate school and the licensing process to take the exam continuing education if you want to keep it alive. i also did engineering for undergraduate minimum national engineer and have been able to keep licenses up to speed while in congress. last congress and the only work.

congress. simply the only forrester in congress. >> talk about your views of the wildfires and trump the part of the white house will serve in california later today. >> obviously devastating. it is heartbreaking to see 15000 homes destroyed, 28 i've lost. $50 billion estimated damage. very tough conditions an excellent time in socal in october, what was called the airport fire and it didn't burn as near as many homes.

it is very dry and strong wind comes through. when fires start, they are almost impossible to put out. fire traveling appeal whatever is the hottest you take a match and strike it great big but and friends of your credit quickly and that's happens you look at the whole situation, there are things we can do we know what happens with fuel and wind and fire and a lot of people living in the interface where the forest the neighborhood in those areas are where we need to focus on to prevent the loss of lives

and property. there are provisions in it will be zones between the four the neighborhood. >> i do want to ask you about the forest will but going back to the wildfires, the mayor of los angeles and governor of california come under criticism from their response to the wildfires. she think it is appropriate? >> there's always going to be criticism when you have disasters like this. it sounds appropriate and some is probably not. it started in the canyon and that could have been done to mitigate the situation so wasn't so bad but once they got into the neighborhoods and you think of it as a wildfire but it's really multiple house fires and they are trying to bite them

with conventional firefighting equipment, they simply didn't have enough water or equipment or people and where does that fall x it has to come back on the public officials because it's their job to provide services and make sure they are up to speed and can handle whatever comes at the. water and dropping fire retardant. a combination of blaming everyone, we need to figure out what we can do better. do you believe climate change is increasing frequency of wildfires and intensity of wildfires. >> that's a question that asked a lot we have times drive and

heart conditions but we also see different places across the country and the intensity and number of fires are not increasing in these places so regardless of limit change causing it or weather conditions or poor management, we sought to ask, what are we going to do about it? we know climate is warming and the conditions are worse that tells us how to manage the lands we have proper amount of vegetation on the land.

and it is all kinds of public safety features and environmental benefits. the acts that passed the house, i'll put it up o the screen.

look at scott peters of the san diego area. we have been talking for several years now we first got the saving support that 20% of the jobs due to wildfire. work together, we got a lot cosponsors and pass the bill out of the house can't stop thought the bill back of e lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moran: mr. president, thank you. for the entire time i've been a

member of the un-senate i've had a prif -- of the united states senate, i've had the privilege of having on my team a kansan who invests his time, energy, passion and givers his hearts for helping kansans and amer americans. ed to york has worn many hats in my office. he was a district are nottive, a -- representative, caseworker, videographer and advisor. todd and i first met when he was completing his degree at kansas state university and he be became -- i needed help, and he helped me in 2010 on my senate campaign. as a result, as being a recentlies graduate from kansas stale university, tyler was open to new opportunities, and got the job driving me across kansas. during a two-hour drive on i-70 from manhattan to the airport, it became apparent to me this young man was someone i wanted on my team, and i've benefited from his service every day.

at least in this instance, i was right about him. tyler work joined -- tyler york joined my newly formed team in washington, d.c. doing both constituent services and legislative work. a kansan through and through, after a few years in washington, d.c., like many, tyler decided to continue his work as a district representative to get back home to kansas. tyler quickly became intergrafted, became a part -- integrated, became a part and familiar with the communities in south central kansas. whether meeting with local leaders or assisting kansans with problems they're having with the federal government, you could always count on tyler to be diligently working with a smile on his face to solve a problem. to help people. to get things done. through his time assisting folks with federal issues, doing what we all here call casework, tyler became our go-to guy for issues related to many things, including the united states post office and ro, and as -- and as

many of my colleagues know, we've had lots of casework involving the challenges of the united states post office getting the mail delivered. ready, willing, and able, he stepped up to every task. tyler worked especially in rural areas to improve the consistency and quality of postal service. his work on this issue and others certainly did not go unnoticed, and i'd like to share some of the comments i received from community leaders once they learned that tyler was moving on. la lavona duvall, the president and ceo of the finney county economic corporation shared, we so appreciated tyler toric's role -- tyler york. he recognized our region was growing and we had needs that differed from many other places in kansas. a native of our region, he created the southwest kansas office. tile der a great job providing connectively between our region and washington, d.c., and we

will ever, forever be grateful for tyler's leadership in representing us, for our needs at the federal level. we wish tyler the best in his future endeavors. steve diers, former president of the garden city chamber, tyler's dedication to kansas was always evident. he was response every to our needs, always prompt and available, and he worked his tail off to ensure our voices were heard. our questions were answered and our needs met. megan barfield, president of the great bend chamber of commerce, i've had the privilege of knowing tyler five-plus years. now, during my time as the great bend chamber executive. he presented himself as an engaged and truly genuine person i know. i had little experience coming into my role, and i could always call on tyler and trust him with whatever questions or direction i needed. great bend and barton county thank you and will miss you, tyler. much of tyler's most important

work happened during times of hardship and adversity. in march of 2017, a wildfire burned across western kansas, stirred up by high winds and fuelled by dry prairie grasses. it burned more than 450,000 acres, farms, ranches, businesses, homes, lost to the fires. this fire occurred in around ashland, kansas in the county that is tyler's hometown and home county, and it was the main, one of the main victims of that fire. so, his hometown, his neighbors, the people he grew up with were in jeopardy. it was a devastating time for the community, but they had a great ally in tyler. they knew him and they trusted him. in the weeks following the fire, tyler worked nonstop connecting first responders, landowners, local leaders with federal emergency resources. he kept me informed and updated

on the situation on the ground and helped create legislation to change the way that the federal government delivers aid to help pay for fencing around the loss of cattle. that legislation became law and made a significant difference, then and continuing. he took great care of the people of ashland, not just because it was his job but because he truly, truly cared about them. tyler's help also extended beyond the borders of kansas, to the country of afghanistan. following the u.s. military's abrupt withdrawal from afghanistan in 2021, we began receiving calls. as i recall, we received more than a thousand inquiries from kansas asking what i, we could do to help people stranded in afgha afghanistan, people who helped our soldiers, our interpreters, people who had a religion different than what the taliban's beliefs are, a

thousand-plus kansans said we need your help to get somebody out of afghanistan that we know. tyler quickly became personally invested in these cases. this was a very difficult time for all of us, and tyler working day and night, making phone calls, contacting embassies, he was one of those individuals who took the people's problems, which in this case were life and death, to heart. it was a difficult time for tyler and for our office, as he wanted to have success in getting every individual that he learned about out of afghanistan. he helped rescue 23 people, including children, from kabul, afghanistan, in 2021. one set of kansans tyler helped was the family of u.s. army veteran fatima jakori.

she said, tyler, your work truly embodies the american spirit, helping others see the vision of the american dream by building ties with community members, listening to kansans and working tirelessly for americans. he was one of the -- it was one of the most uncertain times in history. tyler acted to ensure all kansans were heard, welcomed, and supported. words cannot express the gratitude for tyler, the compass pointing at the direction to be a great american and a greater man. tyler became friends of those people he helped. those he helped escape from afghanistan. he became part of their families. i know that this job often took tyler on the road around -- driving around kansas and missing valuable time with his family, particularly his wife alicia. i want to express my gratitude to his family for supporting him in his work and being gracious

when he had to miss dinner or an important event because he was pulled away to work. tyler spent his entire career on capitol hill in my office. for that i would like to express my gratefulness to him. while i'm saddened that his time working for me has concluded, i'm thankful to have had the opportunity to work with him, beside him over the last 14 years. he kept good stats on the work that he did. it's quite impressive. 4,491 meetings, it,053 organizations, families, individuals he usaied, reports or memos drafted, 105 counties visited. that's every county in kansas. 11 years of working to pass legislation to reform the post office. three new usda programs developed as a direct result of the 2017 fires in clark county. in the next phase of his career, tyler will still be helping kansans as an executive officer with the wichita officers

building association, supporting home builders, customers and regional industry in south central kansas. tyler, your invaluable experience, joyful attitude, your constant drive to improve not only yourself but those around you, and i include me as being improved by your presence in my personal and professional life, you are and will be dearly missed. i wish you all the best in your future endeavors. and i look forward to hearing of your continued service to our state and its people. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire ms. hassan: thank you, mr. president. i want to extend my thanks to my colleague from kansas for sharing that wonderful reflection on tyler's exceptional work for the people of kansas and for the people of the united states. we are blessed to have wonderful people to work with in this job. mr. president, i rise right now,

today, for the purpose of joining my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in opposing mr. hegseth's nomination as secretary of defense. i appreciate mr. hegseth's military service indeed when evaluating his nomination, his service was what i appreciated most about his background. but unfortunately, it's clear that mr. hegseth does not have the skills, experience, record, or character to lead a department that has a budget of more than $800 billion, and is the largest employer of men and women in our country and is tasked with safeguarding our nation's security and freedom. we take pride as americans in the fact that our military is the very best. the standard of excellence and professionalism set by the men and women of our armed forces is

central to our military success and to our country's success. this high standard of competency and character of both unmatched ability and uncommon virtue is why america's armed forces command the respect of our friends, the fear of our foes, and the abiding faith of freedom-loving people everywhere. america boasts the greatest fighting force in the history of the world. the heroes who serve in our armed forces deserve a leader who is worthy of that greatness. and mr. hegseth is plainly not up to that task. like many of my colleagues, i have concerns regarding mr. hegseth's character, the documented accusations about his excessive and uncontrolled drinking, his sexual harassment,

sexual assault, and now accusations of being abusive to his ex-wife. it is ironic that mr. hegseth and some of my colleagues have dismissed these concerns as partisan because sadly, if this wasn't a partisan confirmation process, for example, if my republican colleagues were considering hiring mr. hegseth to join their staffs, we would all agree that these accusations would immediately be disqualifying. mr. hegseth dismisses these multiple accusations from disparate people as, quote, a coordinated smear campaign, closed quote. i don't think the concerns of his former colleagues, friends, and family should be quickly dismissed as smears. and many other of the nominees who are being considered by this

body aren't facing similar accusation, even though there are people who vehemently oppose their confirmation, which begs the question of why mr. hegseth continues to face multiple similar accusations from different sources. but for a moment, let's do as mr. hegseth asks and put aside these accusations. let us say for a moment that those who occupy the highest positions in public life shouldn't be above reproach, though indeed they should. let us say that our servicemembers do not deserve a leader whose strength of character matches their own, though i believe they do. and let us say for a moment that character does not count, though

indeed it surely always does. let us in short ignore everything that mr. hegseth demanded that we ignore in his hearing. even if we did that, i would submit that based on experience alone, mr. hegseth is plainly unqualified for the job as secretary of defense. the secretary of defense is responsible for a budget of more than $800 billion and responsible for 3.4 million employees who serve on every continent across the globe. to lead the defense department is a daunting task that requires leadership and managerial skills of the highest order. however, mr. hegseth's managerial experience begins and ends with his leadership at two small nonprofits. and his tenure at both resulted

in concerns about his financial mismanagement at their helm. if mr. hegseth could not and did not effectively manage organizations with around a hundred employees, surely no one can actually believe that he's ready to manage one of 3.4 million people. we live in a dangerous and uncertain world. iran and its proxies continue to menace our forces in the middle east. vladimir putin is on the march in europe. north korea persists in testing our allies and testing its missiles. and china, china looks for the conquerer's gaze toward taiwan. to my republican colleagues, i understand that you wish to support president trump, but presidents are sometimes wrong. we are talking about our

nation's vital security. we are considering the confirmation of the person who will be entrusted to marshall our resources as the enemy approaches, attacks our cyber defenses, or invades an ally. it matters, it matters that we have the right person in this job. it matters that we get this one right. surely there is someone in this great country, a brill -- country of brilliant and brave people of all political stripes who is more capable, who has the experience and character necessary to forge under pressure the judgment take will -- that will keep us safe and free. this is america. we have the finest fighting force ever assembled. we have more strength and power than any fighting force has had in human history.

and in the past, when we have looked for leaders of our armed force, we have searched for our country's best and brightest, the most gifted minds of america's boardrooms, the brightest stars to come out of west point, the most revered public servants to serve in these halls. we did not need then nor do we need now to turn to the green rooms of cable tv networks for the secretary of defense. tomorrow marks the 80th anniversary of the battle of the bulge, a campaign in which my father served. in freezing temperatures, outnumbered and often undersupplied, our forces held the line against hitler's onslaught. our soldiers won because they were brave. they won because they were

skilled. and they won because they were well led. surely the armed forces of the united states of america, the victors of the arden, of gettysburg and midway and the thousands places in between and since, surely they need a leader who they can have full faith in. surely america's best deserves the best. governments' most important task is to keep america safe, secure, and free. it is a complex, fast moving and evolving challenge. it is a job that at times presents its occupant, the secretary of defense, no good or easy options. it is in short a deadly, serious job where both success and failure have enormous

ramifications. it's a job that depends on experience and character, the prerequisites for good judgment like no other. no senator should vote for someone who they can only hope will learn on the job, not for the secretary of defense. no senator should vote for a nominee on the hope that he will display more personal discipline once he gets the job. there are strong, experienced, and able members of the president's party whose views align with his, who could be exceptional leaders of the department of defense. mr. hegseth is not one of them. i urge my colleagues to reject this nominee. and i yield the floor.

observed in combat in the last five years. women and men, i'm sure they've served with women whether they

are military police officers for pilots or analysts women on the front lines as well and anything other than skill their service. women serving congress and combat units a long time medics or mechanics will talking specifically women ground combat roles or artillerymen or special forces. ten years ago that wasn't the case. those walz were open up to get it that is. >> these are decisions mentoring chief will have the prerogative is not indicated whether or not

they would have access to roles. i would say of importance to him and. once i jump to carry the weight of the machine gun so whether it's a man or woman they have to the same high standard and they have been eroded. quotas were gender orders the focus on something other readiness. not whether they have access.

>> in these jobs, there is physical demand. an old hillary felt was almost 100 pounds and the bravo machine gun weighs almost 50 pounds. average weight, body armor over 100 pounds. nothing you can do can contain any of those. automatic or growing pilot.

>> let me read a quote here from an army officer. artificially of salt when they are on the battlefield. each job has objective standards to which all soldiers should be held regardless of gender. it was not to ensure women and men will have equal likelihood of meeting the standards. i assume the army officer. >> absolutely. the standards need to be the same and hide set of people closest to the problems that the understanding of what is required for that job. that's the feedback we should get worse is no other

prerogatives to talk about removing politics ideological or political to those, nothing other than the execution. >> for the record, those captain grace, first e-mail will graduate. he said they need to be gender neutral and i is the man is in fact very high. the current fitness test is a minimal 2-mile run of miles. although reports no i'm putting it in". it's not running. it may be jogging at best. let's move on. the got a big audience you.

liberal of you. custom, during the biden administration from our to give you a chance to respond. the first one for q-tip of the zionist. i'm not really sure why that's a bad thing. i'm a christian and an zionist. jewish people deserve a homeland in the holy land you consider yourself a christian zionist. >> i am a christian robustly support the state of israel defense the way america comes alongside. >> it is a protester, a chinese woman is because of high assume

support that as well. >> destroying and killing last number of hamas. >> twenty years of genocide, i assume think they were winning genocide let's i do not, our troops the best they could with what they had. the outcome the same on that but it doesn't put a stain on what they did in uniform. >> thank you. a letter by samara are not mr. hicks is senator will.

>> thank you. i do want to thank you for your service and willingness to serve as its capacity. i have concern because they are so hurtful currently serving in the literary. harmful morale. if you are saying women serving in the military, i'm going to read the quote because the quotes is also comparable. you to change how you see women to do the job well and i don't know if you're capable of that so i want to pass on these issues. you answer the question, you believe the military is able to

serve without limitation? all of these circumstances active duty members and currently in trade. members of military serving but degrade them and say but not in the military so center cotton you differentiate -- cut. mr. murphy: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor to join my colleagues in expressing grave lam over the choice of pete hegseth to run the department of defense. it is not hyperbole to say that we have never seen a candidate, at least in modern times, to lead our soldiers and our troops

who is as dangerously and woefully unqualified as pete hegseth. i think everybody understands his primary qualification. he was on tv during the weekends when donald trump would watch fox news, period, stop. because as we have learned more about pete hegseth, his history of sexual misconduct, his history of public drunkenness, his history of financial mismanagement, it appears as if there must be thousands of other people who were easily more qualified. but i want to talk today about

his qualifications, his views that he's made known on television, that he has expressed to the committee about how he would do the job. i think his history of personal misconduct in and of itself is, thus, qualifying. it is just an embarrassment to the country, at a moment when we want to win more friends and allies. it's just the wrong match for a department that oversees the moral and professional development of young men and women to have somebody like that, with that kind of history, leading the agency. but it is also important the views that he has expressed on how he would run the department of defense because i fear he will trunk into the grounds. first let me talk about --

because you fear he will run it into the ground. first let me talk about the politicization of the department of defense. listen, i don't like the fact that all across government the design seems to be that if you don't agree with president trump's political ideas, that if you don't pledge loyalty to president trump, you don't have any future in the federal government. that's not how we've ever run the federal government. yes, we've always had a class of political appointees. yes, you want the people at the very top of each department to be broadly aligned with your view of the world. but this administration, most recently by reclassifying thousands of employees in the federal government to make them political, to make them immediately fireable, is a fundamental rewrite of the way that we traditionally view government. we want civil servants, people

whose oath, whose loyalty is to the american public, is to the constitution, is to the law, not simply to a political party or to a political ideology. kash patel has made it very clear, he doesn't want anybody in the department of justice who doesn't line up with his particular political view of the world. and pete hegseth seems to be of the same mind. he seems to be proposing, creating a department of defense that abandons its core values and its traditional review processes in favor of a new culture of paranoia and mistrust amidst unexplained firings for even being perceived as having the wrong political leanings.

now, this didn't happen inside the department of defense, but it's the highest profile firing in the national security chain of command. on monday on trump's first day in office, he fired the head of the coast guard, commandant linda fagan, without explanation. beyond annan must statements to the -- beyond anonymous statements to the press about vague concerns about fagan's approach to programs aimed at improving diversity or opportunity within the coast guard. many of us have had the opportunity to work with admiral fagan. she is a straight shooter. she improved morale at the coast. she has vigorously defended our

shores. she has helped increase readiness. there is nothing political, there was nothing political about linda fagan and her career of service to this country, to become the first woman to lead the covid guard. and -- to lead the coast guard. and yet she was fired on monday without explanation, except for these anonymously sourced, vague concerns about her focus on trying to bring more women into the coast guard and more cadets of collar. -- of color. and it seems to serve a very clear end to make everybody wonder what that line is. nobody knows the line that linda fagan crossed. but now that it's blurred, everybody is going to hunker down, buckle down, do nothing at

all that may arise the suspicions of the white house. and it seems to me that that's exactly what's going to happen at the department of defense. he has promised to fire top-end military leaders who are engaged in his nebulous war on woke. so if you care about making sure that you've got troops from different backgrounds and different parts of the country, maybe that's a war on woke. if you promote a woman 0, maybe that's a war on woke. if you care about making sure that your troops don't engage in unethical conduct, maybe that's a war on woke. if you contract with a local business that