that can lead and inspire our troops from the most senior officers to the youngest enlisted men and women. mr. hegseth has belittled women in the military. he has attacked people who live their lives differently than he would prefer. he has stood with those who violate the law rather than those who keep the peace. and he has no experience running a large enterprise. his experience running small enterpr enterprises was a terrible failure. we need a secretary of defense with the management experience to rebuild and reshape our national security for the challenges of the present and the future. as our assistance to partners in the wars in ukraine and the middle east have shown, we need to bring about urgent reerments if we are -- reforms, if we are to produce the platforms, weapons, and ammunition necessary to supply our partners with the tools that they need to fight and win. so long as our enemies test the

dearness of our beliefs with fire and steel, we must ensure that our military remains the best equipped, best prepared fighting force in the world. this requires investment in our manufacturing sector and the defense acquisition process. anything less is not an arsenal of democracy or freedom's forge. it is a failure of our duty to defend ourselves and our allies. which is to say nothing of the need to develop new technologies and new operational concepts, tapping into the best innovative minds across the country. let's face it -- the united states is on the brink of losing its overwhelming technological edge. bringing it back will require reshaping the pentagon to include new participants ready to disrupt some of our hide bound bureaucrat is expensive processes. new innovators including many

from california. partners that embrace new technology and are more nimble to meet today's challenges. there is simply nothing in mr. hegseth's background or his performance to demonstrate that he has the necessary understanding or ability to make these changes. general matthew ridgeway was one of the greatest military minds of the 20th century. his service spanned decades and continents. and after the end of his service as supreme commander for the allied powers, he was recruited to join the wise men, a group of retired diplomats, politicians and generals who assembled time to time to give their advice to president lyndon johnson. he knew then, as we know today, what makes effective leadership in both war and peace. on the front lines and on the home front. he said that there is far more to professional fitness than

knowledge and skill in the technology and tools of war. these, the officer must have. but the final test of his ability is not in what he knows, but in what he is. there is no substitute, he said, for those innate qualities which we generally refer to as character. my fellow senators, put aside the nominee's lack of knowledge and lack of experience to prepare him for a role of this magnitude. we must also consider this nominee's absence of character becoming of a secretary of defense. you heard it in his confirmation hearings. you heard it described by my colleagues today. you've seen it on television, read about it in the materials that we have been provided that demonstrates mr. hegseth's unfitness for this office. character matters. it does.

it still does. and no amount of tough talk on tv or bromides about a warrior spirit can make up for a distinct lack of character. general omar bradley, the first ever chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the longest serving active duty servicemember in the history of the united states armed forces, wrote to the infantry school quarterly in april of 1953. he said that leadership in a democratic army means fairness, not harshness; understanding, not weakness; justice, not license; humaneness, not intolerance; generosity, not selfishness; pride, not egotism. think about those qualities. think about whether the nominee we consider today resembles even

just one of them. certainly not generosity. certainly not humanity. certainly not understanding. certainly not. i understand that politics can be complicated, but there is nothing complicated about this. our servicemembers are watching. there are p families who fear that their loved ones may be sent to battle are watching. our adversaries are watching. there is an inscription down the hall that says it plainly, what we should consider in this moment. our government conceived in freedom and purchased with blood can be preserved only by constant vigilance. constant vigilance. the vote before us today is about mr. hegseth, but it is also about all of us. what do we stand for? are we being vigilant in the

defense of our country? this candidate is not qualified. this candidate is not experienced. this candidate lacks judgment. this candidate lacks the character we need to lead this department at a time of great national peril. he is simply the wrong one for the job. i urge a no vote, and i yield back. mr. schiff: madam president, i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

[background sounds] [background sounds] [background sounds]

[background sounds]

hello everybody. we have the congress in charge and we will do a lot of work and get the army corps of engineers are here and it's perfect progress. they left them high and dry and now we will be taking a little tour with some of the people from the area. appreciate the governor coming up in meeting me. i appreciate that very much and will be talking. we want to get the problem fixed.

it's like you got hit by a bomb. >> most importantly thank you for being here thank you from all of us that all the folks in altadena that were decimated. we will need your support and we will need your help. you are there for us during covid and i won't forget that and i know we will be able to work together. >> we have got to get it done. there've been a number of lives that have been affected and been affected in a lot of real estate has been affected. we can almost say this is like the second world war. nothing like this has ever happened. we will get a perfectly fixed. again we will be talking a little bit later. >> appreciate it mr. president. thank you.

>> how do you plan to -- >> we are looking to get something completed. and when you get it completed you work together. we are going to get it completed and they will receive federal help. we are going to take care of things. e i have all the confidence in the world that we will work that out. thank you, thank you. >> thank you very much, thank you. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

quorum call:

i come to the floor today to discuss the president's qualifications of his colleague mr. pete hegseth. i left mr. hegseth hearing last week that the number of unanswered questions and some real concerns about his qualifications and ability to serve in the role of secretary of defense. every single member from republican to democratic administrations has met with me and other members on both sides of the aisle on the committee before their confirmation hearing. i voted for every one of those nominees both democrats and republican administrations secretaries panetta hagel carter mattis esper and often. i didn't always agree with their views or their policies but i thought they all had the qualifications and the temperament to be the secretary of defense so i supported their

nomination. mr. hegseth chose not to meet with me or any other senate democrats except the ranking member zach reid and he broke with strong long-standing traditions to ensure that our work on national security remains free from partisanship and i think 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 rounds of questions and so there are a number of questions about his views particularly regarding foreign-policy and military policies that we did not get an answer to. i have become the ranking member on the foreign relations committee so i'm very concerned about the role of the united states and the world.

i think the american people expect transparency regarding mr. hegseth's ability to stand by our allies and partners so pulled international agreements, to abide by rules of engagement and the bottom line support the men and women in the military in a way that not only keeps us safe. protects them as well. the almost 3 million men and women who served our nation in uniform deserve the secretary of defense who will not needlessly throw them in harm's way for state to divide them with partisan politics. so i'd like to address a few issues now that we were not able to get to at the hearing because we were not able to ask more than one round of questions. i want to start with the role that our alliances and our allies and partners play in our own national security grade i believe and we have seen it many

times from the start of this nation that we are stronger and safer when we lead together with our allies and we are fortunate because we have strong allies and partners. we don't see them coming from vladimir putin, from xi in china and we don't see it from the north koreans or the iranians but the united states has a strong ally who will stand with us. the most important security agreement we have have had i think any time in our nations history as nato. it's a critical indispensable part of our national security and yet the president's nominee for secretary of defense wrote in his book american crusade, that nato is quote a relic end 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 in advance pollack -- posed the question for the committee he calls nato a vital u.s. interest in defending america and america's interest from russia and vladimir putin for this sudden reversal is welcomed because i think it's very important that our secretary of defense understand how critical nato is in its stronger now than it was in the any time in the last since it was formed probably. we now have 32 members of nato. mr. hegseth's 11th hour conversion in understanding 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 her response. now if i had the opportunity of would have also brought up ukraine and mr. hegseth's head contradictions on this matter. just as america's national security interests are not to be traveled with neither should be our commitment to defending democracy and the international world order. any inconsistency in that commitment let me start that again because this is really important. any inconsistency in our commitment to support our allies and partners and to support democracy around the world and to support the international world order that is going to be seen and exploited by her adversaries. so again i'm puzzled about how i should think about mr. hegseth's contradictory positions on a variety of security and

foreign-policy issues. for example he was critical of the biden administration and had many of us on both sides of the aisle 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 usat ukraine and now he says the idea of rushing -- russia launching a nuclear war is quote overinflated and plays down the severity of the conflict is merely prudence, and this is again i'm quoting mr. hegseth give me my ship back war. i don't think that our nato allies those in the baltic poland and eastern europe think about vladimir putin's nuclear

ambitions is overinflated. they know the threat he poses to the country in the world and to be 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, the american people want to see a resolution to this years long war. i'm sure that's true of the ukrainians as well. mr. hegseth is not in his hearing nor in response to the questions we submitted to him for the record expanded on what the department of defense is role should be with respect to ukraine. even though we have art $66 billion in military assistance and again i think it's very important that we stand by our allies in ukraine because of the message it sends not just to the rations and

vladimir putin. because of the message it sends to xi in china to the iranians to the north koreans to anyone who is an adversary of united states. if they think we are going to going to walk away from our allies, they are going to do everything they can to divide us. now on afghanistan mr. hegseth has also been inconsistent on his views 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 mr. hegseth was highly critical of then candidate trump's foreign-policy standards particularly on iraq and afghanistan. mr. hegseth called mr. trump who was a candidate that time and i quote all bluster very little substance and again quoting an armchair tough guy.

he criticized then candidate trump's in 2015 are advocating for the withdrawal of forces in afghanistan but then he took the criticism back. he sharply criticized the 2021 afghanistan withdrawal as did i but he failed to publicly comment on president trump's 2020 deal with the taliban which is what set a date certain for withdrawal in 2021 and the biden administration was actually lied to. i agree, i agree that was -- that withdrawal was not what i wanted to see. i didn't support it. there were terms of president trump in 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 in the terms were negotiated and now we are seeing the fallout of that. i know that no one is watching the u.s. national security policy more closely than president xi and the peoples republic of china. mr. hegseth identifies china is our peer competitor something i think all of us on the armed services committee and probably everyone in this chamber agree with. if mr. hegseth is so concerned about china they should realize that nothing will encourage president xi's aggression more than seeing america abandon our allies and partners. mr. hegseth looks at china's ambitions is quote a fait accompli and get it doesn't seem to recognize his own inconsistencies on all these foreign-policy positions could contribute to this.

a question i would like for mr. hegseth to attempt to answer is what message would that send to our adversaries if usc says that support not just to ukraine but for the international rules and norms that underpin the global order. i'm also concerned about that with respect to the conduct of the conflict. in his book the war on warriors, mr. hegseth argued and again i'm quoting, our boys should not fight by rules written by dignified man in mahogany rooms 80 years ago. america should fight its own rules end quote. the rules that he's talking about are the geneva convention which established minimum protections against violent torture and treatment and they don't just protect those people who were fighting on the battlefield, they protect american soldiers.

during his hearings mr. hegseth doubled down to say quote restrictive rules of engagement have made it more difficult to defeat our enemies and it would be his priority that lawyers are getting in the way. unfortunately this appears to be one of the few issues 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 and not by our enemies but by members of their own unit who were convicted of crimes by her own military jury individuals for whom 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 america and credibility and moral authority in tatters on the world stage. while embracing officers convicted of war crimes mr. hegseth has stated it's his intent to review all general officers who currently serves in the department of defense. when asked if he'd removed the joint chiefs of staff mr. hegseth responded on the record quote all senior officers will be reviewed. so, let's just think about what that means. subjecting our general officers and their military that is not politicized to a political litmus test not only unprecedented it's dangerous. you will convey to the american

public their leadership is political one of the most important roles that the secretary of defense to speak out and consider open, honest and direct military advice from senior officers in charge. i don't know how mr. hegseth expects to receive open in honest advice from his commanders when he's advocating for a purge of anyone who disagrees with him. the most the deeply troubled by the idea that mr. hegseth would put his own personal political interests and the well-being of our military -- mr. hegseth's confirmation hearing when asked what he would do if he received orders from president trump that he knew to be illegal or unconstitutional mr. hegseth wouldn't give a straight answer. all he could do was deny that

president trump was capable of giving an illegal order. .. on that credible military and in theworld. i am very disappointed would put a nominee would advise and consent of the secretary of defense deserves. our men and women deserve better first time since elected trips

at the people of new hampshire i plan to vote against this nominee i think you yield the floor. >> the senator from rhode island is recognized. >> thank you, mr. president but 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 of bret i will follow-up by rising to express my opposition to mr. pete hegseth to be secretary of defense. mr. hegseth is the ninth defense secretary nominee that i have considered as a member of the armed services committee.

i voted in favor of all of his predecessors including those in the first trump administration. some former secretaries and i have disagreed politically there was always an understanding that partisanship has no place when it comes to providing for our men and women in uniform. indeed, the weights of this position, the secretary of defense, is enormous secretary is responsive for leading a department of three and half million service members and civilians. annual budget of nearly $900 billion. hundreds of thousands of aircraft, ship, sudbury, satellites and our neutral arsenal. they also play a powerful role with allies, partners and adversaries having to meet, communicate and coordinate with a whole range of individuals for

ethnic groups, many different religious groups. that is part of the role of the secretary of defense. a bare minimum former secretary of defense has had the experience, wisdom and character to do that job. mr. hegseth is simply not qualified to meet the overwhelming demands to be secretary of defense. last week the armed services committee held a nomination hearing for mr. hegseth. during the hearing my colleagues at night raise a number of concerning reports about it. a variety of sources including his own writings implicate him 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 there is material and a patent abuse in his personal history that could be used by adversaries to try to influence him. to try to deflect them from a sworn obligation of duties 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. they are confirmed they would undermine his ability to be an effective leader. as i have said for months, it is critical the fbi and the trump transition team carry out

exhaustive background investigation on mr. hegseth. in that regard i must say i'm extremely 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 investigators had neglected to contact critical witnesses and whistleblowers. i urge them to reopen the investigation. during my expense of the armed services committee it is all an impressive dented the fbi has returned to my office two 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 an individual disturbing information about mr. hegseth has been interviewed by

the fbi in december as part of the background investigation. their testimony was not adequately included in the briefing by the transition team. i asked to recount to me directly directly which should provide to the fbi. i was disturbed by what i received. the armed services committee received a sworn affidavit from pete hegseth's former sister-in-law that alleges specific incidents of mr. hegseth alcohol abuse, threatening and abusive behavior toward his second wife, and a repeater pattern of public misconduct. the affidavit was signed and sworn under penalty of perjury. has an available to all senators to review. and i hope that you do.

i will share a few examples from her for sworn testimony she gave to fbi investigators. once, while drunk in uniform, which is a violation of military law, mr. hegseth was so inebriated his brother had to carry him out of a minneapolis strip club. this occurred during a jural weekend with the minnesota national guard. the fbi was also told mr. hegseth second wife had an escape plan that involved texting a safe word to friends and family to urgently request help without 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. many details examples the fbi was told that mr. hegseth became so drunk he passed out, vomited

and had to be carried out of family events in public settings sometimes shouting sexually and racist offensive comments. my point is this. we know that pete hegseth's former assistant testified to the fbi but his history of abuse, alcoholism, disgraceful public behavior. however, we know now her testimony was not adequately included in the trump transition team background to the senate. this begs the question, what else is missing from the fbi report? the senate is not considered a low level appointee right now. we are advising and consenting on the nominee for secretary of defense. we cannot risk installing a leader you may have a history that is exploitable by our adversaries. nor complete 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 is that job requires. in addition to mr. hegseth's personal conduct i have great concerns about actions he was take a secretary of defense. during his nomination hearing i asked mr. hegseth is within the department of defense to intimidate military personnel and their families report the trump administration may implement a so-called purge board to squeeze senior military officers for quote unfitness to lead. this raises a chilling possibility the trump administration may file who may deem to have the wrong political views. i believe the tuesday firing of

the u.s. coast guard commandant admiral linda fagan, who by all objective accounts wasn't admirable leader proves the purge is underway. unfortunately mr. hegseth would not categorically condemn those during his hearing. instead talked about meritocracy and restoring accountability within it senior ranks of the military if the senate confirms mr. hegseth this week, who will be fired at the department of defense next week? i doubt very seriously it's based upon merit or anything else other than a political agenda. that would be the beginning of the unraveling of the core element of our military. it is not political to serve either party nor person. it protects and defends the

constitution of the united states. and if we lose that we are at a loss, something that i think is the key to our success. not only as a military force but as a nation. despite mr. hegseth's comment the united states military is one of the finest meritocracy's in the world. every member of the military's in their position because of their ability. they are chosen by boards of other senior officers who evaluate their performance. look closely at what they have done. and rendered their best opinion of the capability that person to move on and assume a particular job. every member of the military is in their position because of their ability. there is always a possibility you need to count on the person

next to you to save your life there is no other choice but meritocracy and value. there is no other choice we must and make other than to pick someone who is focus, whose heart, whose spirit is to protect their fellow soldiers, sailors, spaceman, not to exploit them. to make a judgment about their colleagues not based on political affiliations, but on the fact they are a coal soldier, sailor, airman. i see a dangerous, dangerous point at which we will divert from this historic and compelling approach and become a political organization.

we have seen happen in other places around the world. the military's are undermined and subjected by political leaders that have a pull particular point of view and passion. they become essentially not an army, but an extension of the political aspirations of the great leader. we cannot see that here in america. our present service members can and should be confident that high work, skill and they will be successful in military career. that is the key criteria. this very meritocracy would prevent a person like mr. hegseth rising higher in the ranks of the military. the totality of his own writings and conduct would disqualify any service member from holding any

leadership positions in the military. much less being confirmed as a secretary of defense. if there was evidence that serving officer in the military uniform and eight strip club if there was evidence a senior military officer was engaged in sexual relations while married to another woman having just fostered a child from another woman, i can guarantee you that officers career would end swiftly. either by resignation or by court-martial. moreover, our service members since the birth of this country could afford and years ago, taken an oath to the constitution. their mission is to protect the country in all of its citizens. the ideals this country was founded upon what should endure

no matter who is president or what political party is in power. mr. hegseth's idea of meritocracy however seems to be service members should pledge fealty to a president who will be in power for only four years. in the idea of a party that only half of this nation supports. there is no faster way to undermine the morale of our nation's military. the support of the nation citizens for it then to inject politics into the system. mr. hegseth, if confirmed, will not improve our military but destabilize and weaken the institution. further during his hearing mr. hegseth failed to convince me and many of my colleagues he's capable of running any organization remotely as complex

as a department of defense. mr. hegseth's been the head of two separate veterans organizations in 2008 through 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 exceeded revenue before the organization verged on bankruptcy 2011 until 2016 mr. hegseth sax regulars to show the organization spent more than it raised. if this is how mr. hegseth manages organization with a comparatively small staff and budget, how can anyone million

billion-dollar contracts. literally drive the economy of many parts of the country. if confirmed, mr. hegseth will be the leader of millions of men and women of every race, religion, and political belief. he can only be an effective leader of an effective fighting force he has respect to those who believe in the trust he supports them. unfortunately mr. hegseth has shown disdain outright hostility for many. he has said diversity is not our strength through on a recent podcast he set them straight up language not have limiting combat roles. mr. hegseth has also read the other side, the left is not our friends.

we are frozen. without the spirit of the military forces. as a young officer in the 1970s the u.s. military was rife with racial tension. women were prohibited from serving and most roles for gay servicemen or band we were light on our national graph to fill our ranks. the soldiers i served with were proud to do so. it was certainly not the nation's most capable military by any standard. we have made great progress since then. it's fully integrated. every race, religion is accepted. women serve and all combat roles. sexual orientation is irrelevant to service all volunteer force

visibly reflects the nation it protects. let's more diverse than has ever been. more importantly, is more lethal that it has ever been. this is not a coincidence. this diversity and nonpartisanship is the bedrock of our military power. but mr. hegseth seeks to destroy that. one strength of the u.s. military which has made us respected around the world is the adherence to the rule of law clear standards on the battlefield to protect civilians and prisoners with humanity. if confirmed turn your mother the have advocated for the

reinstitution of interrogation methods like waterboarding, that is been designed as torture and hasn't belittled the advice and counsel of a judge advocate general while on deployment. in his book, the war on warriors he wrote quote should we follow the geneva conventions? if our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily and asked to sacrifice more lives so international tribunals feel better about themselves, aren't we just better off winning our wars according to our own rules? how can our military personnel trust each other the partners and alleys that we need in this dangerous world across the united states in such rules and conventions are tossed aside? what a bounty this would give

our adversaries. how would we have the moral authority to criticize that vietnamese for example who tortured pilots like our her colleague john mccain. a single waterboarding is perfectly fine. we wouldn't. in fact i think our pilots would be very much concerned if they felt and if they went down behind enemy lines, they would be just brutalized, tortured, et cetera. and we do not even have a moral objection to it. finally, my top priorities in a state senator has always been national security. and my colleagues i hope notice.

partisan whims on all of the political spotlights. i want to do right by men and women in uniform. i refuse to compromise or cut corners on the issues. the greatest privilege i've had in my life is to lead soldiers. to understand and respect them. to do my best by example and leadership so that they would have confidence in their best interest was my sole interest. that is not what i heard from mr. hegseth. thus out he is going to bring to the department of defense. process is important for nomination of the sort. mr. hegseth would choose to make it in my democratic colleagues in the committee. an unprecedented act. a signal that he's not trying to

be a nonpartisan secretary. he is in fact going to be very partisan. again, injecting politics into the department of defense. but clearly denied a second round of questioning although we needed. and i should point out historically with three rounds of questioning. when secretary carter was here we had two rounds of questioning. so the precedent was strongly in favor. we have essentially been denied the kind of access that would reveal more of mr. hegseth's qualities, conduct, and thoughts. that is not appropriate.

and, as i said previously the fbi background check was inadequate. again the first time i've ever had a background check supplemented by additional addendum's to the background check. that is not the way i experienced this. so i would hope my colleagues are better off ask themselves is this individual have the character and the confidence and the composure to be secretary of defense? i am frankly not convinced and stunned with the lack of scrutiny which too many of my colleagues are using to consider this nomination. that lives the security of our nation and indeed the world is at stake.

i hope we will all take time to reflect whether we are ready to confirm mr. hegseth to be secretary of defense. i would personally urge my colleagues to vote against his nominee without mr. president yield the floor. quick senator from mississippi. >> in a few moments from the senate will vote on the confirmation of our next cia director. immediately following a vote on cloture of the domination of pete hegseth nominee for secretary of defense i'm going to vote yes for cloture and i expect a majority of our senators will do so. three months ago 77 million

americans voted for change in the united states. they sent president trump back to the white house. it's a decisive victory. a clear mandate to focus on transparency and peace. it begins at the pentagon. we return to a policy of peace through strength. the most complex and dangerous global security environments since world war ii. will shape the direction for the remainder of the 21st century could be led by the united states, a future which would lead to freedom and prosperity for all americans in the absence of armed conflict. or it could be led by the chinese communist party is working against us. it's a dictator xi jinping uses military force and economic coercion to try to reshape the

world order it with the help of his junior partner kim john noonan of north korea. at the same time the desperate vladimir putin remains intent on territorial expansion. iran, hamas, hezbollah, houthi, and they're like continue to attack israel and the united states and isis remains set on killing americans every day, every day. unfortunately the biden administration wasted precious time and significant resources pursuing divisive social policies at dod. for instance we spent months arguing with the administration of whether the defense department should pay for hormone therapies. or puberty blockers for minors out of taxpayer dollars. 71% of americans oppose that policy.

including more than half of democrats. so i'm glad are going to abandon that type of policy i could go on, let me now turn to focusing with the broken shipbuilding industrial base to fix we have a budgeting system to update and we have got an audit to finish for the first time in decades. and we have a resourcing problem that needs attention. on his way out the door secretary austin now tells us waiting to spend a lot more on national security. well, thank you secretary austin. it is an admission for years to late mr. president. we are's following-falling

behind our adversaries into many ways. so, president trump seeks to reverse this trend and bring much needed change the pentagon. and he has chosen a man to lead the pentagon. his choice to spearhead these efforts is pete hegseth a retired major and combat veteran in the army national guard. admittedly, this nomination is unconventional. the nominee himself is unconventional just like that new york developer who wrote down the escalator in 2015 to announce his candidacy for president. that may be what makes mr. hegseth a good choice. he is not beholden to the status quo and he is open to new ideas. he is intent and readiness and shouldn't we all be?

his experience in the line of fire and his service member advocacy make at least one thing clear, pete hegseth put the men and women of our military at first. >> last week the committee convened to consider mr. pete hegseth's nomination in less than four hours news has many interest audience of the committee, the united states senate as a whole, and the american people. i think the american people like what they saw an anointed and shortage of us why president trump chose him to be the next secretary of defense. first of all, he articulated a

clear vision of the pentagon. and i think it's clear to anybody listen to that he will bring energy and fresh ideas to shake of the department stagnant bureaucracy. he will restart because relentlessly focus on the militaries court mission, to detour conflicts and if necessary, to win a war. mr. pete hegseth, committed to bringing a swift and to the corrosive social policies deserve to divide our service members rather than unite them. and as a pointed out earlier to the american people are behind him, in this regard overwhelmingly. he currently stated that we need to change the pentagon does business and he will resort culture of accountability by cutting red tape, incentivizing animation and rebuilding the industrial base any will tackle

the artist systemic problems that plague the pentagon prayed challenges the previous secretaries have proven it unable to fix. in the mentioned it that audit. i sincerely believe will get an audit done under his oversight. and importantly, he agreed that maintaining the inadequate biden area of the defense budget levels would be dangerous to our national security. and we hear as i said, the outgoing secretary admitting everything. in his testimony before committee, mr. pete hegseth, said this pretty mellow special interest is the war fighter predict deterring wars that call upon winning wars by ensuring warriors never enter a fair fight. we let them when.

in them we bring them home. will put major i'm confident that pete hegseth supported by a team of experienced officials will do exactly that pete and his family had endured numerous mayors and falseness stories that supported the outpouring of support this nominee has received. pete hegseth has devoted his career to fighting for his fellow soldiers and his fellow soldiers men and women, are now speaking out on his behalf. the past few months that host of flight officer cited up about her, enthusiastically, commending mr. pete hegseth and i think these generals and admirals were doing so pretty in the armed services committee has

received letters from female soldiers who support pete. we received the messages from those who served alongside of him on the battlefield including a statement through bella bonner statement who backs pete hegseth to the hilt. these men and women uniformly adopt for pete hegseth leadership, tenacity, and passion for supporting the war fighter predict on the date of his hearing, 100 navy seals marsh from the vietnam veterans memorial to the senate office building. they marched it together, that the distant and distant this they rose pete hegseth fellow soldiers 75 in solidarity for the entire four hour-long hearing. these patriotic americans were willing to step forward and declare their support for

mr. pete hegseth publicly. in stark contrast to my dad, to the anonymous attacks we heard about. mr. president, this critical moment for national security, i believe we have the right man for the job and here's my colleagues, to continue in the support of mr. pete hegseth nomination to be our next secretary of defense.

background sounds

background sounds

background sounds background sounds

background sounds background sounds

background sounds

background sounds

background sounds # # quorum call:

background soubackground sounds

>> think bodies given the resources to be able to help and a lot of people have helped, and not just the market verse but there's been different volunteers that have come to us to north carolina base tennessee to help pretty i grew up this

was my backyard and i grew up about 8 miles or so from here. and with a high school a mile down the road and this is home to me but we have a family today the west family and this is their house and so we are here today to show the president just a little bit of the damage and the problems that the people of western north carolina facing so mr. president, thank you for what you have done for western north carolina and thank you for coming again to see and thank you for your son don jr. who came with us twice and so, you taken a real interest and this is in a politician coming out here looking for boots, this is a man who want to do something

see some changes make life better for you and so, thank you and your wife and thank you is an honor to have you here with us and so mr. president please see night thank you. trump: good amenities done a fantastic job and we have come to north carolina with a simple message for all the people of this region who were hit so hard by hurricane helene and the message is very simple, you are not forgotten any longer, you're treated badly by the previous administration i'm here for a few days of the administration and we are going to california, los angeles, the got hit hard as you know. a lot of that could've been prevented if they had water which had plenty of they didn't use it pretty but i'm going there i know we set up to go there but what about north carolina.

they said well i said i have to stop at first stopping in north carolina so we made the stop i feel very good he represented by some great people. great congressman with us i'm not going to get involved with him and michael watley is here is the head of the republican party and he works with lara trump take us through a tremendous victory. as of you said, with the most consequential presidential elections ever. they saved 129 years whatever that may mean, but whatever it is it was a great election that we get and move on your state all three times we when you're stated all three primary. chris: your state is one in six times i guess mr. congressman. and it has a mike tyson wanted to come here and before i went anywhere frankly the campaign promise to that i would come back western carolina date of the people in here i am ready to deliver that promise made a lot

of things might getting the core the army corps of engineers all set need to riverbanks fixed about roads fixing going to get it done. in rapid it time that i've asked for suzie wells, and only by people to start a call to get the core ready going to get ready to go. i don't know why took so long other administration remember, i was not here for the first three or four months so we can only start as essentially one or two days ago we made a lot of progress over the last couple of days; understand that we are going to get you the resources you need the support that you deserve and will be at your side through every step of the rebuilding and no american will be left behind it created the people that i just met are so right pretty people that on the house, it will be beautiful in a little while and he knows, franklin decides little bit down and build new one because

sometimes you do that just as easily but we will take care of that people think of right first lady for coming today and she really wanted to be here and she said i want to go. you know she sees what happened. she felt very badly and she wanted to go. we been going out together to los angeles but she wanted to be in north carolina and she saw what happened, she is a like i do for carolina. so thanks as well to great gentlemen franklin graham that his father, billy graham nice ago with my father to the yankee stadium in places, the watches father preach. some preacher. you got good stops, you come from the ultimate jeans i can tell you. but he was really something in franklin though hasn't so much much in his father's looking down on him right now and is been looking for a long time saying, i'm very proud of you son come he really is because

you know what franklin is dead the samaritans versus incredible it will be just this america's first testing great, but the fema people sort of let you hydride want to change that around and we are not happy with fema as well as all of the representatives here you have great representative and worse, who's here someplace where his truck pretty and chuck and tim more. jim thank you, great job to both of you guys in virginia fox, power, she is a power that one without ever her is your enemy, not good, not healthy. at harrigan, good job that in patterson mikell, these guys are just here just putting and doing a fantastic job in edison thank you very much, and mark harris, thank you mark thank you mark and brad not, thank you brad and greg murphy, and test he got my

for a long time now. the rnc chairman michael watley who really as i said for this agree victory with laura, the chairman of the party and the whole republican and i took michael watley from north carolina because he did the best job and putting it charge of everything. the job they did together wasn't incredible in september helene became one of the deadliest natural disaster in modern american history of the rain fell roasted far more than 30 inches which is lethal. unleashing unprecedented devastation throughout western north carolina and many other states as you know you hit the hardest in the highest responsibility obligation of the american government is to protect its people in this never more true than in times of emergency like this and on for player government failed you read was on the trump government is the government run by biden. what a terrible situation better

government failed rated people carolina and is horrible crisis in first two months that water even today, carolinians cannot take a hot water shower and they cannot drink the water and they don't know where to get it and they have tables delivered to them by wiley just going to somehow find some. i spent four months and still hundred and 80 wrote still remain closed and in ruins and earlier this month biden and ministration kicked 2000 displaced carolinians out of their temporary housing and freezing 20 degrees weather and i don't know how they did that one because it was cold. even lawyer government provided shelter and housing for illegally lands from all over the world, but that the trump administration, the days of betrayal and neglect are over. they are over. he said in my inaugural address,

we recently competency and integrity and loyalty of the american government and i think i said most of in the inaugural address pretty recent a lot of things one of the groups of people that i was thinking about is you in north carolina. a lot of that was in reference to you and what you've had to suffer through pleased to announce that our leadership federal government researching housing solutions to the state that go beyond their temporary into temporary hotel season ended up being very sure determining overnight when i do it any longer which is ridiculous and marshall, all available resources to bring back potable water and making water and infrastructure to radically more reliable quickly and today also be signing an executive order, slashing all red tape and bureaucratic barriers and permits to ensure the rapid reconstruction of the roads here in western carolina will go through a permitting process that is called no

permitting just get it done this waiting know that many years ago i guarantee you that we will get them back weekly. we will begin the work fundamentally changing terminating or overhauling fema and they have been a disaster no matter where they are honored to be doing today quickly bite several families affected by the vicious storm and i would like to ask each of them to share their story, ms. tim listening can come forward about the nixon jackie mitchell and thomas gary bright, and finally the right family and coming up that it few words please and thank you very much. >> come on in here. background sounds >> whenever started, we started moving our vehicles to top of the road. 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. my husband to grad the dog food and put it in a trash bag and the time that we got to the driveway is already waist deep. in the sticks and that kind of thing and again i do not think that i would make it we did make it out. we made it to the top of the road and we were there for hours because we did not get out any other way because it was flooded all of the week around. it takes hours we sat there and finally, he receded enough to where we could actually get out this probably close to midnight and it started was like five or 6:00 o'clock started the morning. we just lost everything. i think we had. did not even have the brush for

like three days. >> thank you. >> would you like to say something with that beautiful baby. >> and yes and so the hurricane storms hit north carolina and how 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. in the water got so high that it actually lifted between and the tornado came through, the microbursts what they call them, and look at his home in the house that i grew up in and crashed into a barn and took away his business and took away all of the tools contractors everything needed to keep the farm going. my mother was trapped in the house.

there was no to his way to escape because a lot of us only thing that she could do was to write out a way for the waters to come down. and so we have been doing badly with their insurance and fema we did have proper insurance with flood insurance and homeowners insurances week proper insurance, theme is not been able to assist us with whole lot of things. and again, we been having some issues trying to get some payout for the insurance in a timely manner we had to do mold mitigation which is extremely well before the structural engineering even came out in order to get a flood payout enemy that was not really acceptable. and. [inaudible]. and also much and again. [inaudible]. i'm hoping so and we need some

assistance. we did reach out to an attorney north carolina farm bureau. yes. that is what we are after here. >> insurance company. >> did you have flood insurance. [inaudible]. >> under different stories and a lot of folks will some good instances of even farm bureau but in my case, you know they sent out third-party adjuster immediately and wound up firing that adjuster he give us a quote for much higher more than we received many outlets go and he got fired soon they brought another third-party adjuster to come and lowball us with not received any kind of a mother flood insurance is our problem mary insurance and so there the

inspectors found in the adjusters families and that contributed to us losing some of her personal property because it came on the second-story living space. with the well above the flood waters. and so, they neglected us. and yes and she's right here she is safe. so yes, we made it. >> how scared were you you think you would make it and he did nothing so. >> we prayed. >> you were sort of about your house became a boat. >> a big pond to. background sounds >> i was next door to the house. my son was out of town so we came in to charlotte to my

sisters because about 2:00 o'clock in the morning because midnight still in the banks. so when he called, the water was coming up and so i started to move vehicles up to about 530 in the morning. she was in the house and a bullet to the simpson i said, i found the fender and i will get you out and he built a beach house on stilts. five times higher than the flood water line. she said well i will be okay so i'm staying with about that so when to higher ground vehicles verse included and the water covered everything and i don't really seen it coming on both sides of my place so i got my

blind and deaf dog in a bag of valuables, and it took up off the side of the hill behind my house. and was having to the cemetery back there because i knew that it is open because the trees falling right uprooting and it was raining. now i've been through blood come up all my life around here. house destroyed. appreciate you and thanks to mix anybody else and are you okay. >> okay and that day the morning began, trees were falling into her house in our houses goes back for generations, haiti years never came close flooding

we woke up about 430 or five in the morning and are house says back off of the road hand you know we had flooding is such but nothing like we saw and most everybody else remote five vehicles as far up the lawnmowers and everything else the weather started to come in the house and headed to about ankle high and we have a lot better than that gathered what you might want which was totally random and would've made it to the loft it would into her hips and build a makeshift ladder which i have the roof and we spent four hours on the roof had a little bag and notes for my cell phone my two kids my two grandkids and to identify me. >> did you think you would make it. >> will we did it well for

houses 25 feet underwater read we are watching houses and trailers and bodies coming by. and we lived. we watched our garage flow by. we know we got to point where it crashed about 4 feet up on the roof into the three or four hours to kind of do everything in reverse pretty and got out and tie around and i get out her brown and got over i did not have my daughter, she's okay she's all right we try to make their way back in their gather things as best we could. found the body right away it was about eight bodies in the first two weeks we were lucky that we were not one of them and we were

blessed like other people, no insurance on know with flood insurance we had to depend upon fema and they did what they could do and of course it's not enough. but again were thankful to be alive but it is that long-haul and we are staying in a camper have never been as you know i'm a big guy and i don't live in campers very well. the first night we spent a camper, very grateful for the going center coming through with one. we still yes was family land looks like a beach now sand. yes. and samaritans purse working with them and it's 80 years, four generations printed houses there we found it they came it but everything in it was completely destroyed. it is tough and i think were at a point where people is forgotten about it and

everything is stopped. thank you. >> my church the right down the road we had only purchased in may and it's a big church were small congregation i people sable when he going to do with this big building pretty i said only knows said we had our dedication storm came next week and the outpouring of people myn first load of supplies and from there, i sit there for about three months and i slept on the floor for about three weeks because the need was so great. and the people were so good and i said i want to be here, for

them and they were coming in and salute there was really no need for me to go home but we had people from kentucky, tennessee, texas, indiana, oklahoma, people from all over and we've not received any help from the government or anything but he said lord if you want us to do that, the people came from all over the state. sue met fema did nothing. >> no. >> the locals and the people that visit will be for the week was overcome up our church so packed with supplies that we could not even walk even in the sanctuary was up to the platform of things halls and rooms we just now beginning to get a little bit straightened out predict facilities and how long will you be here and i said i'm going to be here for the winter and even on if possible because when you meet people that's been

through this struggle, the little lady come up i sit can we do anything special for you and she said i don't want to be selfish to have a cup of coffee. i handed her that coffee and she was there in tears and she said you don't realize how important to the little things so the big things in life that we have, but it is the little things and knowing that god is our source going to man i don't have a lot of things. i'd had about 20 trees down in my yard but that did not really matter it doesn't matter because the needs of the people is what i want to be there for and god is good he is very good my daughter now she and her house is really bad shape. this is our will we appreciate

you so much. >> i live out in the fairview area north carolina add near the back cave area. our area was a very heart of absalom. we take care i believe this 98 years old she was out with ourselves i set just a with her make sure that she is okay. in the got up the next morning my first thought was only get to that road. so as i was making it down to the road and the bridge, there was no road and bridge and so we are, like a little island can't access the main road or anything. and then fire department came by the next day and said that they were evacuating me my neighbor because of the landslide is going to come. they told me to get my stuff and

get ready loves getting my stuff getting ready, there is nothing the door so i thought it was the firemen went to the door and there. >> twenty-one year olds son his name is nathan and he had driven as far as he could to get to me like 5 miles and took him really long time together he said, grab a bag we've got to go i said son there's no way that i can hike out of here and he said well we have to go. and so, we started hiking out the night so one of my neighbors who she had no clothes on and her skin was chopped up. she was blue and she had been in the waters and wish when i don't know. that's all i can say was just horrific but then my son to announce, we went through where

this place called craig town there were a lot of family members there the past away 11 of them. there were people everywhere looking for them that love the ones there were dead bodies. maybe they'll see things you do not want to see. so anyway got through all of that. i stayed at our church the sound with my husband i we just sat in the sound booth for a couple of us did not have power anything for about two months out of there then we have went back and i've been with fema's estate within our our communities there's like 32 homes that we do not have rotor a bridge driving through the neighbors property. and you went to ems nice look, my concern is that we have a fire or an emergency out here, you will not get to us, you can't get those big trucks and severe and i called and called

and talking about i said this happened on september 27, 4 months ago in for us today it is still september 27th, we have not had help. so when i talk to fema and i six leaned right the bridge in a similar letter that tells me to basically fix it and send them my receipt they will refund me the money. honestly the bridge itself is probably going to be 300,000 of water could be close to that also because you have have the community has to have big boulders prodded. another rich community we cannot fix it ourselves a pretty and you know, as far as like house repairs, i'm still pending and i cannot get money from pete and he mentally fix the roads and bridges and sit in my proof that is fixed and everything. and is been a nightmare and i totally feel like we have been forgotten and if it not been

part of our american citizens stepped up to help us, i don't know what we would've done. i5 neighbors around me who completely lost everything. and you know danish in my house and i feel like i don't feel entitled and i'm embarrassed to say that i need help pretty because in some answers even that survivor's guilt is with their calling, feel guilty to be alive sometimes in the ground and you neighbors that regard. we need help and ever the letter to send to congress and i do not understand what is going on that if we can't get fema help, then we you guys help us and you step up and be your fellow citizens and we step up and be of neighbors this into something come help us get our community back. i could go on. it's just heartbreaking. i appreciate you.

>> my son is great, he really is. and i don't know. been there until because the only thing that we could do there is no way to get out you go back to the church the first that was up there 3 miles my son is great. >> again thank you very much everybody's move would be here working with our congressman congresswoman and they're going to do a job michael whatley will be here, and much in charge. he will get it done fema's ready to rock •-ellipsis the job. because they were told to do the job by biden just like they were thinking about other things.

i think were not all but they did there, the best administration did to north carolina, that is a disgrace so i just wanted to wish you all well and i was here right after the event and i cannot believe it and i've never seen anything like seen a lot of bad things printed but have never seen anything like it. has an honor to be the people behind me and it's an honor to be with the congressional delegation some of the other politicians in the area. it is an honor to have michael watley have my side because maybe we would not be standing here is present if it was not for him and laura laura trumper unbelievable that's the republican party and it happens to come from a place called north carolina and i said michael, fix this. [laughter] so good luck. good luck and will supply what you need you know that okay thank you and thank you all very much.

>> is been so many locals to step up. trump: yes that is one of the things you here. >> incentive going to fema. trump: that is what we want to do bring it in locally so the state takes care of the problem and then can bring it down to a local level, like samaritan's purse had franklin because you know that is one of the better examples of numbers of people who did a great job groups that in a great job in organizations and when the did not do a good job with the government and they did a bad job that in many ways they did no job. they were not even available so good question and the answer is that we got local and i think it will work much better if you miss a very expensive organization that really doesn't work out well. and this is not the only example. and it was up me right now i did it right now and just let the

state to cure the problem you can always have problems with the state is florida hurricane of florida take care of it don't need fema to come in. >> @of human. trump: yes a very important role any role that he wants pretty is a capable guy michael watley very capable guy and he friends and he works with these guys keep them elected right there to do a good job know better how good michael is coming won't work they've done an amazing job and they've been great upgrade congressman here and women by the way great woman. powerful woman. and they're going to do a great job though do it together and that work together we will supply what they need as they needed we will coordinate that we will immediately get the army corps michael because you need roads built were talking with the bridge and roseanne thinks

it's going to get them built okay and thank you all very much thank you very much. background sounds background sounds background soubackground sounds background sounds

background sounds

sometimes referred to as women in combat, and i think the phrase something of a misnomer, many members of this committee, and served in combat in the last 25 years including women and men answer is meant served with women whether they were military police officers, they were pilots or whether they were intelligence and you certain i said you served it with women who are the frontlines as well

with those women, anything other than skilled and brave and honorable in their service. >> there was some of the best soldiers i work with. >> have been serving for a long time maybe combat unions like infantry battalions longtime minerals like medex mechanics or have you talking about here specifically, is women in combat roles and jobs are like in treatment or children and/or special forces braided over ten years ago that was not the case under secretary panetta those roles are open to women to serve in. president trump indicated it all the plans to resend or alter guidance. >> you're printed to point out senator from these of the decisions that the commander in chief will have the prerogative to make and it's not indicated to me that he is plans to change to whether or not women would have access to these roles in however, i would point out that ensuring that standards are

equal in height, is of importance to him great importance to me because in those combat roles about what is true is a weight of the backpack is in change in the rate of 240 problem machine-gun you might have to carry does not change so whether is a mentoring woman, they have to meet the same high standards in any place come over those things have been eroded it or courses criteria has been changed to, in order to meet quotas, racial quotas or gender quotas, that when you focus on something other than readiness standards meritocracy and so that's the kind of regular that i'm talking about whether the women have access to grand combat. >> thank you nice big change yes you point out, any specific jobs, there are physical demands. >> we expect our analysts in our

mechanics to be physically fit the military is different when you're in entergy they are still just mentioned if you think me point out and artillery is almost 100 pounds and think about ways are up 50 pounds in the into 40 problem machine-gun tripod ways almost 50 pounds and the average waste of a full kit mo water combo, body armor for soldiers over 100 pounds and nothing you can do can change any of those things that's physical reality. >> we had your senator and i would say the requirements to handle those things in ground combat unit is far standards, can look different and those of a minute great drone pilot so something has to be same standard soroptimist standards to maximize efficacy of that particular thanks suet when we read a quote here from arm and one army officer while it may be difficult for a 120 . woman to lift or drag tour 50 pounds of

the army can artificially self-limited that responsibility makes existing battlefield the entire purpose of any gender-neutral test suite noise to reality each shop has objective physical sanders to which all soldiers should be held regardless of gender and intent was not to ensure that women and men will have an equal likelihood to meet the standards and i assume his testimony that you agree with that. >> this interesting to be the same thing to be high any to be set by the people closest to the problem set and closest to the understanding what is required by that job commanders many officers who understand reality for the face, that is feedback we should get was to be enshrined and enforced another set of political prerogatives about removing politics, ideological or prerogative should contribute to those determination and nothing other than the execution of the

mission. >> and for the record that officer captain kristin army first female infantry officer with the first female ranger school graduates the need to be generally neutral and objective high because the demand are in fact high in the current physical fitness test of the army has a minimum 2-mile run the 22 miles run. and with the reporters who knelt benefiting rhonda near post because 22 miles at two models is not running a baby jogging probably walking fast so let's move on. we have 22 minutes. we've a big financier patriotic supporters of you pete hegseth seem to be liberal critics and i know that it's only liberal critics who have district at

hearing and as my custom, during the biden administration, give you a chance to respond. i think the first one accused you of being a christian and not really sure what that is predict but not christian and the jewish people deserve a homeland and the into holy land since the dawn of history do you consider yourself a. >> will i support christian support is americans have ever by the way, the chinese communist front these days and said you support israel's war in gaza and i support israel's potential war in gaza and i assume like you do as well don't you. >> will i do and i support israel destroying and killing

every last member of him. >> in the third said something about 20 years i assumed worse in iraq and afghanistan and genocide cemented do not and as you know they do best the good thing out in the outcomes, tragically the outcomes the biden administration but it does not with those minimum it did in uniform so well. >> with mr. pete hegseth in iraq without objection, that would be entered and senator the bread. >> thank you mr. chairman thank you mr. pete hegseth i do want

to thank you for your service i don't think you for your willingness to serve in this passing. and i have many concerns about your record legally public statements and because they are so hurtful to the men and women it were currently serving the u.s. military. harmful to morale and harmful to good order and discipline if you are saying that women should not be serving the military military and i'm going to read you your quote about because it was themselves are terrible and you will have to change how you see women to do this job well and i don't know if you're capable of that someone presents issues because she said it so well. so first of all, with any and of these other circumstances, you immigrated active-duty service

members that may have hundreds and hundreds women who currently in the retreat and lethal members of military serving the infantry that you degrade them and you say, we need mom, but not in the military especially combat units. so specific to think senator cottam is giving you only up to diff between different types of combat and specifically, a secretary the exclusion for female service members, knowing full well you hundreds of women doing that job right now in the standard, your 2-mile run tom, that is about the army combat fitness test and not the requirement to have an mos 11 bravo which is infantry at the south requirements tonight, people serving in industry, then admitted women gender-neutral that they are very difficult,

they have not been reduced in any way in our combat units are infantry is lethal and so please explain specifically because you will be in charge for $3m personnel and it is a big job when you make these things i get it that you are not secretary of defense and an i get that you on tv and helping a different job, but most recently, you said this november of 2024 full well that you might've been named as secretary of defense, so please explain these types of statements because their brutal and they are mean to disrespect minute women are willing to die for this country. will senator appreciate your comments i would point out that i never disparaged women's serving military. i respect every single female servicemember that is put on the uniform past and present printed

my critiques sent recently in the past and from personal experience, have been instances where i have seen standards lowered and you mentioned 11 open bravo, and mls, pleases and units. in the book has been referenced multiple times the war on for years and i spent months talking to active duty members service members minute women low-grade heartbreaks of combat arms and combat arms and what each and every one of them fully as it weighs direct and indirect and overt and subtle, standards have been changed inside infantry training using ranger school, infantry battalions to ensure. >> emmy-winning sample please give me an example i get your making a lifesaver. >> the quotas have a certain number of people about infantry spirit just as limited. [inaudible].

>> commander do not have to have a quota for women in the infantry that does not exist to be does not exist in your statements are creating the impression that these exist because they do not and they are not quotas, we want the bus lethal force but i'm telling you about having been here for 15 years and listening to testimonies about men and women in combat and type of operations were successful, and afghanistan and iraqi, women it is essential for many those units with ranger units within to find where the terrorists are hiding afghanistan, or in iraq if they had a woman in the unit, they could go in and talk to the limited in the villages that were on the terrace i where the weapons hiding and get crucial information to make sure that we can win that battle. you cannot denigrate women in general in your statements they do that you don't want to limit in the military especially combat the terrible statement. so please, do not deny could you make the statements that you have we take the responsibility

of status seriously and we will work with you and i will equally district that you would not meet with me before this hearing we could've cover all of this before you came here so i could get to the 15 other questions i want to get to. so the women give them great and also denigrated members of the lgbtq community did you know that when they were in place, we lost so many crucial come over thousand critical areas we lost 10 percent of all our foreign language speakers because they were political policies and you set in your statement that you want politics and the dot and everything is that in politics and i don't want women i don't want mom's what's wrong with her mom by the way, your babies here therefore no longer able to be lethal pretty basically say the women after they have children can ever serve in the military and combat role. is a silly thing to say. for the position that you are aspiring to an end great lgbtq service members, is a mistake

and if you are a sharpshooter, is lethal regardless of what your gender id identity is in your so please know this, to be a true statement, so you say that it was a political thank you say it and divide us social engineering. i don't know why having somebody have publicly say or not publicly say, who they love is social engineering i think having the policy the first place is highly problematic and as you said in your statement, you agree that anybody should be able to serve in the military if they need to standard for me to standard. >> as the president that boy don't disagree with the overturn of this. >> right because i don't want to thinking can't serve if you're a mom to be to get in the lastly, can't serve if your left is the statements you said about people who have viewed differently than you, they were the enemies,

reducing the 50 percent of the deity if they hold liberal views leftist views because our not welcome in the military are you saying that. >> senator, volunteered to deploy to afghanistan under democrat president barack obama also volunteered to guard the inauguration joe biden but was denied the opportunity to serve exams identified as extremist by my own unit christian tattoo. >> thank you very much sooner children, you held up a document and referred to it during a questioning would you like that entered into the record. >> will delete it. >> without objection that would be submitted at the point of your crushing and it would like to enter it into the record a letter of support from retired air force col. melissa cunningham the col. supports this or pete hegseth mentions its warrior combat effectiveness

and retaining terry training standards so without objection both of those will be submitted not now recognized the next senator. >> thank you mr. chairman personal good morning and would like to thank you for your service to our nation in uniform and also your work on behalf of your fellow veterans and for your willingness to enter into this public service. think the presence of so many veterans who have showed up to support you speaks volumes and also to recognize your family service and sacrifice and you know it's well is anyone that it's not just the man that interesting but the entire family who also groups their way through the process as well. and i appreciated the power with you and your wife jennifer this last month i think that we had an excellent conversation and i appreciate your statement in your answers to the advanced policy questions and especially

your desire to bring a renewed focus on war fighting back to the pentagon. they also respect and i appreciate my friends and colleagues senator jill wright and some of her questions and another she had a number of them and there you had an opportunity to respond very briefly with renee other responses that you would like to make clarifications that you would like to make before i move on to my question. >> senator think you very much for the opportunity for the question i would also acknowledge that you are mentioning female engagement teams which have shown a great deal of success on the battlefield. and universally acknowledged as such. and i have been and iraqi homes where the language and gender barrier was real the ability to have some help the process, would be a massive images success and i recognize that reality and also recognize that him engagement teams excited to

see seal team greenbrae team meeting different standards also which is okay because the duty positions involved in that job as far as politics, senator is been the joy of my life to lead with men and women in military outfits and when you're in combat and training, a lot of happen in your story relies the people you're sitting with sugar political ideas or they don't find out this republicans and impress libertarians and into entered into bits everything in between. none of that matters. never mattered and how i let the men and women and how i interacted with him what missions we undertook the politics has nothing to do with the battlefield which is why president trump has asked me to say let's make sure that all of that comes out. this is about war fighting capability setting standards high making sure that we give our men and women everything

they need to be successful on the battlefield so politics can play no part in the forget as we always have scenic and appreciate you making that very clear one of the year is that we want to do our best is to provide for the equipment technical capabilities of it no young man or woman enters into a battle has and has a fair fight and they always have the advantage it is of the types of questions to get into right now i want to start by saying sometimes it gets into the beach but i think it is critical mr. pete hegseth so from what i have heard from 24 senior deity officials hearings last two years, putting the secretary of defense, every service chief any combat thing that matters is it sharing the portion of the spectrum and this is in the recent know but i'm going to ask it to get on the record so the 3.1 to 3.5 gigahertz man have

extremely serious consequences. and very cost effective when the war fighting capabilities and affected apartment of the navy alone is estimated relocating sums two different part of the spectrum band would cost them $250 million and that is just for the destroyers and defenders are close to the radars and if confirmed, what will you do to make sure that the department of defense can maintain yes access to use and to be able to maneuver within the electro magnetic spectrum at home and abroad, would you be willing to literally go to them out with the interagency to protect the fire fighter requirements the use of spectrum civic center think you for the question my job in part will be to go to the mat when necessary for the things i believe that are in absolute requirement for the department of defense and the

minute you and women in uniform a doubt about that in this particular case is far spectrum i look forward as i said before, getting a full class because this issue has come up a number of times in the meetings and is critically important with help our find her skin vacate across all services. some going a classified briefing immediately about what that would impact the spectrum. if you were to allow the other companies to because of her. >> china without the half ability to use it for this spectrum. >> absolutely right and so i will go into with towards ensuring that we have the capabilities we needed no distracting went that. >> thank you in your best policy questions, you recognize the cooperative approach right china russia and north korea run the world and his you point out, my anyone after good be an opportunity for others to get u.s. on multiple fronts along the continuum of the conflict as

we discussed in my office once it but we want to make sure it every advantage of the united states can give them requires resources and three forms in a given the growing financial multi theater conflict involving near peer adversaries, which steps would you take the department defense to simultaneously sustain operations across multiple regions while maintaining readiness and deterrence global unit just have to make notes and i want to make it clear, we've language in this year's fiscal year 2025 national defense authorization act calling for review the operation plan and i just want to make sure that you were aware that the people have the chances are good to have to different battlegrounds at the same time. civic center so i believe that the country incredibly fortunate to have a new commander-in-chief

and donald trump who do the strategic approaches taken with allies against those has reviewed the wars and determined to do the same that is our chief job today for and prevent wars my job should be confirmed as the secretary of defense is to ensure we have the right prioritization of access and strategy and the tools in the toolbox necessary and the point possible sphere for president trump to wield if necessary as a last resort. sue president trump of the home i think will go a long way in making sure that our enemies not there's a new sheriff in town. >> thank you. >> thank you very much senator blumenthal. >> thank you. background sounds mr. grassley: i'm going to

support pete hegseth to be secretary of defense. in the process of doing that, i'm going to refer generally to some of the things that i spoke about, problems that the department of defense -- at the department of defense when mr. hegseth was in my office for these personal interviews that all nominees tend to do before their consideration on the floor of the senate. one of those subjects was my oversight work of the department of defense. i've been conducting rigorous oversight at the department of defense, along with other defense departments, since i became a member of congress. this has led me to sound the alarm time and again about the

lack of internal controls, price gouging and mismanagement of the taxpayer dollars. if confirmed, pete hegseth, president trump's secretary of defense nominee, will be the 16th secretary of defense to lead the department during my tenure in this chamber. when i met with mr. hegseth, i told him what i told all cabinet nominees that i meet with. when asked if you will respond to letters from members of congress, instead of saying yes, you ought to say maybe so you won't be made a liar later when you don't answer those letters. because, as we all know here in the senate, there's not a nominee that comes before any committee in the united states

senate that doesn't firmly promise to answer all of our letters or come and testify or take our phone calls. so everyone says yes when seeking confirmation and most don't respond when they get into office. mr. hegseth said yes to the answer to that question in committee. he kind of laughed when i said in my office that you ought to say maybe, but he said, i get the message. mr. hegseth and i also discussed the need for the department of defense to conduct an independent audit and update financial systems to make the independent audit being certified as a real possibility. you know, the department of defense is the only agency of the federal government that can't get a certified audit, and

they've been mandated to have one for more than a decade, maybe even two decades. and they tried to produce it and the smallest of the military -- the u.s. manners, they tried -- marines, they tried to work with that one first of all and to see if they could get a certified audit, and they went through that and somehow they did get certified. i asked for government accountability office to check on the legitimacy of that certification and the general government accountability office said that it was not a

legitimate certification. after a couple of speeches on the floor of the united states senate about eight, ten years ago, we finally got them to admit that it was a hoax that they were saying they were getting a certified audit. so this is a big problem for a long period of time, mr. president, and i hope mr. hegseth can get do the bottom of it and get a clean audit because the lack of a clean audit at the department of defense has -- dense -- i will give you a couple of example manies. mr. hegseth examples. mr. hegseth said that he would get the department on a proper financial footing. he also committed to ensuring protections of whistleblowers who speak out against instances of fraud, waste, and abuse that have bb unre -- have been

unrestrained within the department. we spoke about that issue because for every nominee that comes to my office -- wanting confirmation, i say to them, you know, whether you've got a department of a few00 -- a few hundred or a few 10,000 or a bigger department of more people, big or little, you can't know what's going on in that department as far as listening to whistleblowers. and whistleblowers -- i consider them very dedicated to their job, very patriotic people. they just want the government to do what the government is supposed to do under the law or spend the money the way it's supposed to be spent. so they seeing is wrong, they

come forward, and -- and, you know, maybe sometimes they accomplish a lot by coming forward, but sometimes they're so frustrated that they come to us members of the senate. in my particular case, chuck grassley. about 90% of the 35 investigations i've got going on somewhere in the executive branch of government, 90% of them come -- are instituted by information whistleblowers give me. so i tell these nominees, you don't know what's going on. you ought to listen to whistleblowers. and it isn't just the case of a nominee listening to a whistleblower, it's the case of a nominee having a culture within their department that will encourage middle management to listen to whistleblowers.

and that's particularly a problem in the defense department, with but we -- department, but we find too many whistleblowers ruin themselves professionally, they're treated like a skunk at a picnic at their department. i could tell you a lot of stories where they've been missed used just because they came forward with information that the government wasn't following the laws. and i know you can tell from what i just said, i've been a long-time advocate for whistleblowers and continue to work to ensure that they're protected when they rightfully speak out about the wrongdoings within our government. so, as you can tell from my conversation with you, my colleagues, i expect mr. hegseth to stay true to his words.

that he's going to listen to whistleblowers and get the fiscal management, financial management system of the department of defense turned around. finally, as we should thank anybody who serves in the military, but particularly mr. hegseth, for his service to our country and the military. all the brave men and women who serve our nation in uniform deserve our gratitude and respect. now, i told you that i would give you a couple of examples. one of them of financial mismanagement, or not following the law. so one is a janet milo, about six months ago pleaded guilty in a texas court. can you believe this? stealing $106 million over a

period of five years as a defense department employee. now, the problem there is that i'm trying to get information from the defense department in one of my investigations. how could an employee of the department of defense over a period of five years get away with $106 million? i've read some place it was $112 million, but whether it's $106 million or $112 million, what difference does it make? it makes a difference because even $1 is stealing from the taxpayer. if he stole $5, she would still be a free person. what's wrong with the financial system of the defense

department? they can't keep track of $106 million being stolen. so i'm trying to get an answer to that and i don't have an answer to it. and that's why i'm going to suggest that the inspector general at the department of defense ought to be fired. another one is what we call in washington the jet eye, a program that the defense department wanted to establish, called the joint enterprise defense initiative. there were people in the defense department that had a conflict of interest because they had a relationship with amazon. amazon wanted that -- that contract. they didn't recuse themselves, and finally today i got a response on my investigation

that started five years ago on that. maybe i got it because i talked to pete hegseth about it. maybe i got it because finally after five years they could finally give me an answer of i haven't read that answer so i don't know what the result is. actually, it doesn't matter what they tell us because this whole joint enterprise defense initiative and these contracts, there was so much competition among a couple wanting that besides amazon, that it was given a brand-new start on negotiations, and i don't even know where they are in those negotiations at this point. but those are two examples of things that are really wrong with the way the department of defense is run. not just under biden but

presidents both democrats and republican over a period of time. hopefully mr. hegseth can straighten that out. 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.

will you support women to heaven, will's? >> senator first of all thank you for your services we discussed and my answer is yes exactly the way you caveat, yes women will have access to combat roles given the standards remain we will have a review to ensure the standards have not been eroded . in any one of these cases that will be one of the first exuded the pentagon reviewing on a gender-neutral way ensuring readiness and the talker see his front and center. it would be the privilege of a if confirmed to be the secretary of defense for all men and women in uniform who fight so heroic they have so many other options they decide to put the right hand up for our country and it would be an honor to be able to lead them.

>> very briefly will live less than a minute left but we discussed this in my office a priority of mine has been combating sexual assault in the military in making sure all our service members are treated with dignity and respect. this is been so important, senator gillibrand and i have worked on this and we were able to get changes made to the uniform code of military justice to make sure that we have improvements in how we address the tragic and life altering issues of rape, sexual assaults. it will demand time and attention from the pentagon under your watch if you are confirmed. as secretary of defense will you appoint a senior level official dedicated to sexual assault prevention and response. >> as we discussed, yes i will.

>> my time has expired, thank you for your answers. >> senator geraldo. >> thank you, mr. chairman. pete hegseth, welcome. i am focused on you to serve in your character and temperament and your overall qualifications to do the job and i appreciate the comments of drinking member read and his concerns regarding your nomination because i share those concerns. as part of my responsibility as a member of the committee to ensure the fitness of all nominees to come before any of the committee on which i sit i asked the following two initial questions. first century were a legal adult have you ever made unwanted request for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? >> no senator. >> have you ever face discipline are entered into just settlement relating to this kind of conduct?

>> senator i was falsely accused in october of 2017. it was fully investigated and i was completely clear. >> i don't think completely cleared is accurate but the fact is that your own lawyer said you entered into an nda with the person who accused you of raping her to make sure she did not file a complaint, moving on. as secretary you will be in charge of maintaining good order and discipline by enforcing the uniform of military justice ucmj and envision to the sexual assault allegation, the answer to my question should've been yes. i have read multiple reports of irregularly being drunk at work including by people who worked with you at fox news. you know that being drunk at work is prohibited for service

members under the ucmj? >> senator those are multiple fossil anonymous reports peddled by nbc news that are directly victory to the dozens of men and women on the fox news channel who i work with and came on record. >> in your opening statement you commit to holding leaders accountable at all levels, that include you of course. frankly as secretary you will be on the job 24/7. you recently promised some of my republican colleagues that you stop drinking and won't drink if confirmed, correct? >> absolutely. >> will you resign as secretary of defense if you drink on the job? which is a 24/7 position. >> i have made this commitment. >> will you resign as secretary of defense. >> i made the commitment on the many women i'm serving because it's the most important

appointment. >> you're not answering my questions are going to move on while you made that commitment you will not commit to resigning a future, job. as secretary of defense you will swear to the consultation and not an oath to any man, woman or president, correct? >> senator on multiple occasions including as a lieutenant i sworn an oath to the constitution and i'm proud to do so, yes, ma'am. >> june of 2020 then president trump directed former secretary of defense mark esper to shoot protesters in the legs and downtown d.c. in order secretary esper refused to comply with, would you carry out such an order from president trump. >> senator i was in the washington, d.c. national guard unit in lafayette square during the riots on behalf of my country. >> would you shoot them in the leg. >> i've seen them get injured

from rioters set the church on fire. >> that sounds that you will comply with such an order. >> you will shoot protesters and the like. moving on. president-elect has attacked our allies in recent weeks refusing to rule out military force to take over greenland in the panama canal and those threatening to make it a the 51st date. would you carry out an order from president trump to seize greenland and territory of our nato ally of denmark? by force or would you comply with an order to take over the panama canal. >> senator i will emphasize that president trump receive 77 million votes to be the lawful commander. >> were not second about the election. my question is would you use our military to take over greenland or an ally of denmark. >> one of the things that

president trump is so good at is never strategically tipping his hand. i would never in this public forum give one way or another to direct what order the president gives to be in any content. >> that sounds you are contemplating carrying out such an order to basically invade greenland. and take over the panama canal. >> current dod policy allows service members to add eligible dependents to be reimbursed for travel associated with non- covered reproductive health care including abortions. will you maintain the commonsense policy? >> senator i have always been personally pro-life, no president trump has as well as we will review all policies but our standard whatever the president wants on this particular issue i will take a look at. >> at the president tells you. >> they will not be maintained, you will not enable our service members to seek reproductive care? >> i believe the federal government. >> i'm not hearing answer to my

question. i just want to know other areas of serious concern is president trump saying he wants to use the military to help with deportations which will cost billions of dollars and what that will do to our country is very concerning. pete hegseth, i have noticed a disturbing pattern you previously made a series of inflammatory statements about women in combat lgbtq service members, muslim americans and democrats, since your nomination at harvard you have walked those back on tv and interviews and most recently in your opening statements. you are no longer on "fox & friends" pete hegseth. if confirmed your words, actions and decisions will have real impacts on national security and our service members live there are close to 3 million personnel

in the department of defense, 900 billion-dollar budget. i hardly think you are prepared to do the job. >> senator, thank you. >> that was not a question mr. pete hegseth. >> thank you mr. rado senator. >> think you are a congratulation on your nomination and thank you and your family for your service and sacrifice. >> thank you, senator. the most important question you will receive all day in 1935 before the congress the father of the united states air force general billy mitchell was testifying about a certain place in the world and he said i believe in the future whoever holds this place will control the world. this location is the most strategic place in the world, what place was billy mitchell talking about and let me give you a hint, it was not

greenland. >> i believe he was talking about the great state of alaska. >> he was talking about the great state of alaska. if confirmed will you commit to come with me to the great state of alaska and me are warriors on the front lines every day. >> senator i have, as i mentioned in the past i did a brief training exercise at fort wainwright in the previous part of my military life i look forward to returning. >> great. i will say we are on the front lines with authoritarian aggression in alaska, the last two years we've had chinese and russian naval taskforces joint strategic bomber taskforces and after his election president trump put on an extensive statement on alaska which included the following statement. we will ensure alaska get even more defense investments as we fully rebuild our military especially as russia and china are making menacing moves in the

pacific. pete had checked, it confirmed will you work with me, this committee and incoming commander-in-chief on continuing to build up our military asset and infrastructure and alaska to re-establish in the arctic and indo pacific. >> if confirmed it would be a pleasure to work alongside you in this entire committee to recognize the very real threat in the indo pacific. the very real way even the past couple weeks that russia has attempted to probe and push in and around alaska in the shipping lanes through the arctic. there are many ways in which alaska is significant and with the shift toward a necessary shift toward indo pay cal alaska by necessity will play an important role in that. >> thank you. i very much appreciate your focus on legality and war fighting we desperately need it. i would provide a few examples

of the biden woke military which is not focused on readiness or lethality and i want to get your comments on that. nobody wants an extremist or racist in our military but what are the most disgraceful and shameful things i have seen over the past four years as a senator on this committee in the marine corps reserve officer was on day one divided a administration played a false and insulting narrative letter military was chock-full of racist and violent extremist, this reached a pinnacle in this committee when biden undersecretary policy a number three guy at the pentagon testified that one of his top goals would be ending violent extremism and systemic racism within the ranks of the military. he had no data on this, the media loved it fan the flames, wrote baloney stories on this false narrative. disappointedly some of my

colleagues on the other side of the aisle reinforce this ridiculouse narrative one even suggesting almost 10% pensed with -- dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to urge my colleagues to carefully consider their vote on the nomination of mr. pete hegseth for secretary of defense. the senate is now in the process of voting on many members of president trump's new cabinet who will determine policies that will affect the lives of every american. however, i would argue that the position of the secretary of defense is unique. it requires the highest quality of leadership, the ability to make on-the-spot life-or-death decisions, excellent diplomatic skills, and character beyond reproach. there is no question that president trump has a right to select his cabinet, but his

defense secretary should be someone who is capable, without question, to meet the demands of the job and the expectations of those he will lead. they should have the knowledge and experience to manage one of the most complex organizations in the world, and they should be willing to admit what they do not know and assemble a team who will help them carry on. in his hearing before the senate armed services committee last week, and in his writings and comments, mr. hegseth has not proven that he is qualified to be secretary of defense. he has been questioned about allegations of significant personal misconduct, including alcohol abuse, infidelity, sexual harassment and abuse, and toxic work environments. he refused to really address or take ownership of these alleg allegations. as a result, he leaves himself open to having his personal

history subject to exploitation by adversaries, which is the last thing we need for the leader of the most powerful military in the world. if confirmed, mr. hegseth would be giving orders to men and women of every race, religion, and sexual orientation. his orders may result in these men and women risking and prapping losing their lives -- perhaps losing their lives. these men and women must trust that the secretary of defense giving those orders respects and supports them. instead, mr. hegseth has disparaged military personnel with racist and sex ex-im comments -- sexist comments. he has derided diversity in the ranks and openly opposed women in combat roles. how can we expect our military to overcome recruiting challenges, maintain retention, and remain the most ready and lethal fighting force in the world if they do not have

respect for their leader? who would want to follow the orders of someone who belist them? -- belittles them? for better or worse, the industry and workforce that supports the pentagon is enormous, complicated and a huge factor in our nation's economy, as well as national security. mismanaging it can cost fortunes in our taxpayers' investments, the american economy, and workers' lives. it has been wildly -- widely documented that the extent of mr. hegseth's management experience was running two small veterans organizations, both of which he drove to the verge of bankruptcy and had to be relieved from his leadership roles. he has refused to acknowledge this, and he does not seem to have learned from the experience. do we want to risk an organization with a $900 billion

annual budget to such a nominee? another keystone of the united states military is that it is entirely professional, unlike many other nations' armies. the united states military is held in such high esteem around the world because we follow the rule of law and the geneva conventions. our military is not like those of russia, iran, or north korea, whose soldiers terrorize and kill civilians, pillage villages and torture captives. when the u.s. military arrives, our enemies should be afraid, you but civilians should be relieved, because we hold our servicemembers to the highest standards. it -- in his writing, mr. hegseth showed nothing but disdain for the rule of law and the men and women who attempt to keep our military personnel disciplined. he wants the u.s. to, quote, fight by our own rules. do we want the u.s. military to fight like the russian military,

that is destroying ukraine? or the chinese, or houthis, who show no regard for international law? do we want to vote for a nominee who will tear down 250 years of honorable service by the men and women of our u.s. forces? i hope not. as i hope my colleagues know, my top priority has always been national security, and i have tried to avoid partisanship. i don't think it has a place in that mission. i will always pick up the phone and call whoever holds a position of secretary of defense and seek opportunities to work with them to strengthen and support our military. whoever they may be, i hope they comport themselves with wisdom, composure, and character that this awesome responsibility demands. our military men and women

inin -- indeed the american people, deserve nothing less from the secretaries of defense. the question i have is this -- is pete hegseth truly the best we have to offer? i do not believe so. i urge my colleagues to vote against this nominee. and with that, mr. president, i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

mr. wicker: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: i suggest the quorum call be dismissed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wicker: mr. president, i agree with my friend from rhode island, the distinguished

ranking member of the committee, that this is something senators need to think very carefully about. and i would remind my friend and my fellow senators and my fellow americans that the voters of the united states spoke very strongly and very firmly and overwhelmingly on the first tuesday of november for change, and over 75,000 americans voted for change, not only domestically which we're seeing fulfilled even in the first week of this term, but also on the international scene. the united states needs to return to a position of strength, and through that strength and through that military might we can assure

peace for a generation. so, i think one of the things that over 75 million americans spoke for on election day was peace through strength. the president has made his choice, and he's putting his team together to strengthen our military and to get us ready, and the person he's chosen to lead the defense department is pete hegseth. the more i have seen of this young man over the time that we've had a chance to visit and over the time that he's been questioned, and actually put through a number of trials, the more impressed i am with his character and with his ability to withstand the slings and arrows that we see in politics and in government today.

pete hegseth is ready to put forward the program of president donald trump, and he has satisfied me that he will be a change agent in the department of defense and that he's the person we need. he's the president's choice, and we owe it to this commander in chief to put him in this position, unless he's not qualified for the office. he's a major -- mr. hegseth is a retired major from the army national guard. he's had multiple combat tours of duty, and then he's come back and he's had some struggles, he's had some ptsd. and there are thousands and thousands of his comrades who

have experienced the same thing, experienced problems after they came back, but he's overcome those. and those thousands of young officers and people who've been in combat for the united states are watching the united states senate tonight, even so, and they're watching to see whether we've listened to the dreams and to the plans and to the hopes of this young man as the next secretary of defense. i agree with my friend. we should look carefully. but once we look carefully, i think we will decide that this president, who's had this man dacht -- this mandate, is entitled to this remarkable young man as his secretary of defense. i'm going to vote for him early and enthusiastically, and i urge

my colleagues to do the same. and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: all postcloture time has expired. the question occurs on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. to. vote: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin. mr. banks. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. he knows it is rare for a nominee to come to the capital for his own confirmation will

it's a simple majority closely divided chamber nothing is simple were expecting republican senator susan collins of maine and lisa murkowski to vote no leader voted in favor in the nomination previously was speculation about another pairth republicans mitch mcconnell in north carolina thom tillis have indicated how the vote even though both voted to advance pete hegseth nomination earlier this week reportedly this afternoon senator tillis had additional questions for the nominee and pete hegseth was attempting to answer them with the spokesperson for the nominee saying all additional questions have been asked and answered this policy or bruising clinic committee confirmation hearing earlier this month which you can watch in its entirety online on a website at c-span.org. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo.

mr. cruz. mr. curtis. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mr. gallego. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty.

ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mr. husted. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. justice. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. kim. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. markey.

mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. mccormick. mr. merkley. mrs. moody. mr. moran. mr. moreno. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. ms. rosen. mr. rounds.

mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schiff. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. mr. sheehy. ms. slotkin. ms. smith. mr. sullivan. mr. thune. mr. tillis.

mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. senators voting in the affirmative -- banks, barasso, blackburn, budd, daines, ernst, fischer, graham, hagerty, hyde-smith, johnson, justice, kennedy, lee, lummis, marshall,

mccormick, moreno, mullin, ricketts, rounds, scott of florida, sullivan, thune, tuberville, wicker, and young. ms. hassan, no. mr. blumenthal -- ms. slotkin. senators voting in the negative -- mr. husted, aye. senators voting in the negative -- baldwin, blumenthal, collins, coons, cortez masto, duckworth, durbin, hassan, kaine, kelly, kim, lujan, merkley, murray, padilla, reed, schatz, schiff, slotkin, and wyden. mr. crapo, aye. mr. cotton, aye. mrs. moody, aye.

mr. cornyn, aye. ms. murkowski, no. mr. warner, no. the clerk: ms. alsobrooks, no.

the clerk: mrs. capito, aye. the clerk: mr. ossoff, no.

the clerk: mr. sanders, no. mr. risch, aye. the clerk: mr. curtis, aye. mr. sheehy, aye. mr. cramer, aye.

ms. warren, no. ms. hirono, no. the clerk: ms. rosen, no. mr. schumer, no. mr. whitehouse, no.

the clerk: mr. murphy, no.

mr. hawley, aye. the clerk: mr. king, no.

mr. heinrich, no. mr. warnock, no.

the clerk: ms. cantwell, no. ms. blunt rochester, no. ms. klobuchar, no. mr. gallego, no. mrs. britt, aye. mr. lankford, aye.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, no. mr. peters, no. mr. markey, no. mr. bennet, no.

mr. schmitt, aye. mr. booker, no. mr. cruz, aye. mr. grassley, aye.

the clerk: mr. boozman, aye. the clerk: mr. welch, no. mr. paul, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no. mr. hoeven, aye. the clerk: ms. smith, no. mr. cassidy, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, aye.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, no.

the clerk: mr. fetterman, no. the clerk: mr. moran, aye.

the clerk: mr. tillis, aye. mrs. gillibrand, no. the clerk: mrs. shaheen, no.

vote:

in the confirmation we finished yesterday with intelligence agency john ratcliffe, mark kelly of arizona, democrat on the senate intelligence committee gave director ratcliffe a ringing endorsement director ratcliffe is qualified for the job, serious guy he has the background, he's got confidence will do a good job senator schumer held up confirmation with two solid days. despite the delay the senate overwhelming the confirmed the highly qualified director by

74-2521 democrats voted in favor of the confirmation the two day delay i want every american to know what's happening in the senate the format to left members of the democratic caucus are intentionally delaying the confirmation of president trump national security team is not advice and consent to visit democrats playbook trying to deny president trump his cabinet sentence preparing to vote this weekend on more i qualified nominees one is south dakota governor kristi noem governor nelms nominee to be secretary of homeland security, she will secure the border in the first three days of the trump administration illegal encounters dropped nearly 35% compared to the final three days of the biden administration, nearly 4000 illegal immigrants

trying to cross and president biden's final days in office under president trump the numbers plummeted and they will continue to plummet. the impact of the trump policy is real this is only the beginning. working with kristi noem the senate will secure the border, governor noam understands what is needed to tackle the border crisis. as she said in her hearing she will ensure our border patrol agents in her immigration 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 said south dakota national guard troops now secure the border. governor national guard troops to help in texas. she is going to be aggressive in your mission to stop the flood of illegal immigrants. i believe she is an excellent

and well-qualified choice. after a thorough vetting process governor noam received bipartisan sports elements to get a commission. the first 15 members of the committee 13 voted in favor of them as overwhelming and bipartisan. senator gary peters of michigan is the lead democrat of the homeland security committee he voted yes, senator schumer needlessly slow down a confirmation vote that is lead democrat supports. just obstruct president trump. when it comes to confirming governor noam there is no time to waste. a few agencies are more important to the nation and her safety and her security in the department of homeland security. any delay denies our country a homeland security secretary at a time when open borders in danger every american in this country today.

potential risks 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 and like treasure in sean duffy we will be in the senate voting as long as it takes and how long it takes in the senate is up to the democrats to decide. our committees with the nominees on a bipartisan basis in 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. >> i rise to talk about the pending matter of the pete hegseth nomination secretary of defense. before i get into the bulk of my comments i want to save my own record in terms of vote for the

secretary of defense is a member armed services committee. this a administration before the presidential administration that i've been part of i was elected with the second obama administration and served in the first trump administration than the biden administration and now the second trump administration. my track record as an armed service committee member and member of this body i voted for every secretary of defense nomination before the body, focusing on the trump nominees president trump nominated general mattis to be secretary of defense. i voted for him in committee and on the floor and he received a 98 - 1 vote with one extension when he was before us in 2017. secretary mattis served during a portion of president trump's term then step down and president trump nominated mark esper who was the secretary of the army to succeed general

mattis. the a administration nominee paid me the honor of asking if i would introduce them before the armed services committee and i did. he is a virginian i work with secretary esper when he was army secretary on military housing issues and he had been responsive and professional so i said sure you're president trump nominee but i will introduce you before the committee, secretary esper was approved in the committee i think unanimously in the vote on the floor for secretary esper was 98 - 2. i bring that up just to say it is not my desire or norm to stand on the floor to speak in opposition to a nominee for secretary of defense. to speak in opposition to a nominee by president trump for secretary of defense. i spoke the other day probably

two days ago about why i am opposing pete hegseth to be secretary of defense. what i want to focus on today is his claim because i know my colleagues have been on the floor all day long explaining their own reasons for opposition of pete hegseth but i want to drill down on what pete hegseth is saying about the allegations that folks are making against him. this was pretty apparent in the committee hearing a week ago tuesday. it is been consistent sense. it was most clear and a recitation that he had back and forth with senator kelly of arizona, senator kelly asked him, again asking simple questions, here's an event that someone says you participated in, true or false? and again, and again, and again, what pete hegseth said was

anonymous mears. he did not say false because if you say false to something you have done it took the verge on perjury. he did not say true because if you say true to these allegations it could be disqualifying. so it was a very interesting let me wear again and again, and again, senator kelly said here's an event true or false anonymous mears, it was a very, very sophisticated way of not answering the question and even as i examine pete hegseth about marital infidelity and sexual assault allegations alleged against him to make a payout to the complainant about allegation of spousal abuse again and again, what he said was anonymous mears, what i want to do with my time today since i

laid on my bill of particulars of i am not supporting his nomination, i want to focus on this, the claims that have been made against pete hegseth are not anonymous and they're not spheres. they're not anonymous and they're not smears. let me start with not anonymous. to begin with many of the claims are claims that have been admitted by pete hegseth. so let's start with the man himself, he admitted serial infidelity in both of his first two marriages. he told me at the committee hearing he took the oath of fidelity to his wife betty admitted to serial infidelity that's not a relevant factor when analyzing a 70 takes an oath to become secretary of

defense is able to carry out the role. pete hegseth has submitted as recently as yesterday that he made a payout to somebody who charged him with a sexual assault there was an incident in monterey in september of 2017 that led to a criminal sexual assault complaint in a criminal investigation and it did not lead to criminal charges but it did lead to a civil charge in the settlement and a payout in the nondisclosure agreement, he admitted to all that he claims it was a consensual event, the victim claims it was a sexual assault but the fact of the interaction and the fact that it was cheating on an existing life and the mother of a newborn child, he admitted all of that. it's not an anonymous claim when pete hegseth has admitted to this.

second is not anonymous what pete hegseth mother wrote to him. pete hegseth was in the middle of a very contentious divorce from his second wife samantha. in 2018. he received the most extraordinary e-mail from his mother, this is not anonymous and i want to read the e-mail. it's an extraordinary bit of tough love from a mom to a son. son, i have tried to keep quiet the vice president: the vice president: all right. are there any senators in the chamber who wish to vote or change a vote?

if not, on this vote, the yeas are 50 and the nays are 50, the senate being equally divided, the the vice president: votes in the affirmative and the nomination is confirmed. the vice president votes in the affirmative and the nomination is confirmed. the vice president: the vice president: the majority leader. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that with respect to the hegseth nomination, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. further, that the mandatory quorum call with respect to the noem nomination be waived. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection.

the clerk will report the motion to in -- invoke cloture. the clerk: the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on debate on the nomination of kristi noem, of south dakota, to be secretary of homeland security. the vice president: by unanimous consent, the mandatory worker has been waived -- the mandatory quorum call has been waived. is it the sense of the senate that the debate on kristi noem of south dakota, to be secretary of homeland security, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

>> governor known you are now recognized for your opening statement. >> good morning german policymaking member peters and the distinguished members of this committee i'm honored to appear before all of you today as a nominee for the secretary of homeland security i want to thank president-elect donaldjtrump for his confidence in his leadership and the people of south dakota for the fantastic support throughout my time in public service. i would also like to express my sincere gratitude to senator cramer he's been an invaluable resource to me throughout this process and given me much wisdom as well as insight into the thought and the procedure of the senate in this body. i would also like to express my gratitude to senator thune the majority leader of the sistine body is but a divisor to me for

many years as well as a friend and am so grateful for the generative support of these two men in their willingness to be here this morning to speak on my behalf and introduced me to a wd grandmother a farmer, rancher, business person. i served in the state legislature in congress for eight years and also governor. i spent my entire life in rural america. i understand what it means to work hard every single day and to build a better future for your kids and all of our community. i come before you today with a deep sense of responsibility and humility is a nominee to lead the department of homeland security and also a commitment to the more than 330 americans who we will work together to serve and keep safe and secure in our homes and in their communities. before i proceed i want to introduce my husband brian he was here with me today, he is my

constant 24/7 reminder of our dedication to public service. if not a solo effort or done alone he's been a rock by my side and i appreciate all of the love over so many years. i am grateful he is here with me today. securing the homeland is at the into serious sacred trust that must be pursued and never taken for granted. being safe within our borders here and america is critical and you americans feel less safe than they have fallen decades. for the first time in 30 years more than 40% of americans are afraid to walk alone at night within a mile of their homes president-elect trump is going to change that. i've seen firsthand the challenges and opportunities facing our great nation. in the 20 years since the department of public security was formed the nature of the threats to our homeland has grown and they have evolved, this department was created in response to the failures of the governor and government that led to the september 2001 terrorist

attack that reality is not lost on me especially stronger and freer. i focused every day on making the best decisions not just for right now but for generations to come. i have overseen the state budget of $7 billion in the state employee workforce of more than 13000 including more than 7000 that report directly to the governor. i adjust important issues likecl cybersecurity, human trafficking drug interdiction and now natural disasters the same challenges that are facing so manyyn of you and the people tht you resent back home. i secured our state and supported the rule of law. if confirmed as the eighth secretary that is the same approach that i will take to lead the department of homeland

security. as we face the evolving threats of the toy for century the mission and the success is worker call the number we must be vigilant and proactive and innovative to protect the homeland the challenges in front of us are extremely significant and we must secure our borders against illegal trafficking and immigration we must safeguard her critical infrastructure to make sure were protected against cyber attacks and respond to natural disasters and also terrorism, i firmly believe we can meet those challenges with results with collaboration and state partners and senators i want your input border security must remain a top priority as a nation we have the right and the responsibility to secure our borders against those that would do us harm and we must create a fair and lawful immigration system that is efficient and effective and it reflects our values. president trump was elected with a clear mandate he needs to

achieve the mission, two thirds of american support his immigration and border policy including the majority of the standing americans, was the first covenant is the national guard troops were southern border when texas asked for help and they were being overwhelmed by an unprecedented order crisis. if confirmed as secretary i will ensure our exceptional extraordinary border patrol agents have all the tools and resources in the support that they need to carry out their mission effectively, the same is true to the outstanding minute women, they are responsible for apprehending detaining and deporting illegal immigrants. in getting criminal aliens off of our streets and out of the country will hope american communities be safer again. to bravery and the dedication of the border patrol and ice are unmatched i will restore dignity to their work the rising threat

of cyber attacks and demands without most attention in the article infrastructure from energy to financial institution is under constant attack by foreign adversary and criminal actors as secretary i will prioritize a comprehensive government approach to cybersecurity. in fact in the coming days we have to plan bigger and think faster and smarter i fully acknowledge the people in washington, d.c. do not have all the answers and therefore i will leverage private partnerships and advanced cutting-edge state-of-the-art technology to protect her nation digital landscape. and i will have a proven track record of doing this in south dakota to back me up. i helped make dakota state university a global leader in cybersecurity education because we recognize the need to address the emerging threat. i will take a proactive approach if given the opportunity to serve as secretary. president-elect trump has been a

tremendous branch of law enforcement over the years and i will do the same in my role as secretary. as governor i work closely with law enforcement to make south dakota safer i've seen hundreds of state troopers and the south dakota highway patrol and on several occasions i have contained groups of law enforcement across the state to address policies that will make her people safer. in fact some in this country were attacking law enforcement and defunding them we took the opposite approach in south dakota. we recruited law enforcement officers to move to south dakota estate that respects their service in their sacrifice. and we revamped our law enforcement training to provide the first ever state led tribal focus law enforcement training academy. i'm very proud of the work that we've done in cooperation with our tribe to help make their community more safe. and we must remain vigilant against terrorism and others who wish to do us harm to our country into our great people.

i will ensure that our intelligence and law enforcement agencies are working together hand-in-hand in their fully equipped to detect, prevent and respond to threat from radical ideology and foreign adversaries. this requires resources, coordination and collaboration across all levels of government. once again i will seek your wisdom and input into the months ahead for the sake of the people that would both represent we've got to get this right. i recognize homeland security is not just about prevention but it's also about resilience when disaster strikes as we know they will the department of homeland security must be ready to respond swiftie and efficiently and effectively to protect the lives and the property of americans. as governor i worked with fema in response to a dozen natural disasters in south dakota they have included historic floods, tornadoes blizzards, wildfires, a durational and a global

pandemic. as secretary i will enhance our emergency preparedness and strengthen fema's capabilities. we will ensure no community is left behind in lifesaving services like electricity and water are quickly restored. as secretary i will oversee the secret service agency in serious needba of reform we all saw the threats to president-elect trump last year in the consequences of failure i should never happen again and i, worked closely with my own gubernatorial protective detail in unfamiliar with what works and does not work. i will bring the experience towards strengthening the secret service once again. i am committed to working with this committee with congress and the dedicated men and women of the department of homeland security to fulfill our mission and together we can ensure the united states remains the beacon of freedom safety and security for generations to come. thank you for the opportunity and the honor to appear before

you today and thank you for the meeting in the time that you took in your office to discuss the department and what we can do in the future to make the american homeland much more secure i look forward to your questions and hope to earn your trust and hopefully also your vote as we embark on this critical work together. without mr. chairman i yield back. >> thank you, governor no we will now proceed to question, each member will have seven minutes and we will have a vote that will start at 10:00 a.m. but we will continue the hearing and key people in line as you go to vote we will keep the hearing moving. i want to be clear from the outset that we will not tolerate any disruptions the capital police have been asked to escort anyone immediately from the room if they disrupt the hearing. this is a standard question we ask of all nominees. governor no do you agree without reservation to comply with any request or summons to appear and testify before any duly committee of congress if you are

come from? >> yes

>> i've assured senator as well that our focus is there to make sure it's staffed appropriately.

this is critical to supporting the department's northern border security missions and addressing the evolving threats and quick question if con if i wered to do u>> senator, this is a grave

concern for our country as we all agree the number one threat is the southern border. since joe biden has been president, we've seen 382 individuals that have come over that border on the terrorist watch list. the federal government and department of homeland security is prepared to help him protect that seventh keep people safe while they're there.

382 terrorists are known terrific rihannas that have come over our border and that mandate is for the american people to secure the boarder and we need to focus on domestic terrorism and home grown. home grown terrorism is on the rise and more and more incidents of people that are u.s. citizens that have become radicalized and knowing when people are leaving the country and coming back and changes to their behaviors and why it was created and authorities that congress and

the senate has given them. my hope is that governor landry and his staff and his people and getting support for the nomination and quickly and address the threats that we currently face and make sure that we don't have any repeats of the day that we saw just starting it year andthe

information as well? >> senator the mission of cisa, a cybersecurity and infrastructure agency, the mission is to hunt and harden and find the bad actor asks work with local and state infrastructure, critical infrastructure entities to help them be prepared for such cyber attacks and that nay can make sure they're hardening their systems to protect them in the future recognizing the vulnerables they have. cissa has gotten far off mission and being pro paired for the

cyber attacks and it was a campaign of espionage by the prc in china against the telecoms where large amount of datas was stolen and taken and>> thank you. >> thank you.

>> senator, you'll do a great job and you bring that expertise to the table. and so i just went to the campaign to get reelected and talk about in the importance of transparency and accountability in government and how you're going to bring that to the table?

the threats and agencies and departments and going for failures and addressing them and fixing it and secret service is one of the perfect examples and they need leadership that there's two license plates that the secret service is attached and necessary for them getting charged with in getting that skill set and training and that's been compromised by not having enough people there and being staffed and resourced federal government not answering

the questions from public and going with a straight answer out of president trump, they felt reassure that had somebody recognized this we'll understand take a large job and duty to fulfill for the person people expecttous do by securing the border and making sure our nation is a nation with boarders or we're no nation at all and felt that we are making sure that those criminal actors perpetuating violence in the communities and in our cities and towns and states are removed from the country and there's consequences for breaking the law in the country again. when americans break the law, there's consequences and not allow them continue to go forward and commit rape and murderses and other laws that

endanger our society so we've had over

13,000 jeer state seeing effects of the open boarder and policy -- nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of homeland security, chrissi noem of south dakota to be secretary.

mr. padilla: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from california. mr. padilla: thank you, mr. president. colleagues, i rise today to

address the nomination of governor kristi noem to serve as united states secretary of homeland security. i think we all agree that there's very few jobs more important to the safety and security of american lives than that of secretary of homeland sec security. created in 2002, in the wake of the terrorist attacks on 9/11, the dhs, the department and the secretary and the offices and agencies under its purview are responsible for some critical things, including our national security, working to protect us against terrorism. dhs implements our nation's immigration policy. dhs directs disaster responses to states and territories across

the country. and of course, they're responsible for cybersecurity and election security. it's a role that i believe requires complete and total commitment to the safety of the american people above all else. above politics, above personal ambition, and above loyalty to one man or movement. because, for whoever is secretary, american lives are literally on the line. unfortunately, in the months and years prior to governor noem's nomination, and certainly over the course of her nomination process, it's become clear to me that she is not fit for the job. time and again she has demonstrated her loyalty lies

more with president trump than it does with the american p people, and it's my belief that when pressed you cannot count on a potential secretary noem to make decisions that are in the best interest of the people and to the values that we hold as a nation over doing the president's bidding. so, today, i'm going to take a few minutes to explain my thinking, both to the nominee and to the nation, about why i believe she's unfit to help a department of this -- to hold a department of this importance. to begin with, leading dhs is so much more than about providing fodder for fox news. in recent weeks, the people in my home state of california have seen just how vital this department and its agencies can be.

as of today, multiple wildfires across southern california have burnlt over -- burnt over 55,000 acres, they've destroyed more than 16,000 structures, and they've taken the lives of at least 28 californians. even as firefighters continue to fight massive blazes, like the palisades and the eaton fires that have raged for weeks, red flag conditions persist, and new fires continue to ignite. northwest of los angeles, for example, the hughes fire grew to more than 10,000 acres in just two days. but while the fight still rages on, we know that in the months and years to come, los angeles will rebuild. but we're going to need the rest of the country to support

los angeles in its recovery, just as los angeles has always been there for the rest of the country. this is now los angeles' time of need, and we're going to need all of you. we're going to need federal disaster aid, and it will require a nonpartisan effort from fema, whether it's wildfires in los angeles, hurricanes in florida, louisiana, the carolinas, or ice storms in texas, mother nature does not distinguish between red states and blue states, and neither should our disaster response efforts. yet even as we speak, president trump is floating reckless ideas like eliminating fema, suggesting that states take care of their own problems.

president trump wants to impose conditions on aid to california while thousands of families have lost their homes and businesses. in a situation like this, when lives are on the line, we need a dhs secretary who will do right for all americans. we need a dhs secretary who will speak truth to power. but based on her testimony before this body, i don't believe governor noem is capable or willing to do that. so, yes, southern california has a long road back to rebuilding our communities. as i said, we're going to need all hands on deck. which brings me to my next point, immigrants in los angeles will no doubt be critical in the

rebuilding of our communities. over 40% of construction workers in california are immigrants. but more than that, our national economy relies on immigrants too. let me remind us, folks, that during president trump's first term his administration, the trump administration, designated workers in the health care, food and agriculture, education, public works, and other sectors as essential workers during the pandemic. and those sectors include millions of immigrants, both documented and undocumented. that's right, colleagues, undocumented immigrants are, and have been for a long time, a critical part of our health care

workforce, of our hospitality industry, of our tourism seconder, of our transportation systems, and they make up around 42% of our agricultural workforce. think about that the next time you're in the produce section of your grocery store. if tomorrow president trump could snap his fingers and deport all undocumented immigrants from this country, as he has threatened to do, our annual gdp would drop by 6.8%. so let's be clear, do the math, mass deportations would lead to mass inflation. businesses would shutter. crops would rot in the fields.

prices would rise for all americans. even in the face of political headwinds, we need a dhs secretary who will tell the tr truth, and not just to the president but to the american people, to tell the truth about how the vast majority of undocumented immigrants are not violent criminals, but they're critical to our economy. instead, during her confirmation hearing, governor noem repeatedly made false claims about undocumented immigrants -- immigrants. she denied the well-documented existence of family separations that occurred during the first trump administration. we can agree or disagree on

policy, but don't lie about the facts. because if a nominee can lie about a fact just to curry favor with president trump how can we trust him or her to tell the truth to the american people during a crisis? and between a potential secretary noem, a deputy chief of staff, stephen miller, and a border czar, tom hogan, all competing with president trump's attention with hard-line immigration enforcements, the department of homeland security will suffer. other agencies will falter. roles like critical investigations into theft or into child exploitation will take a backseat to their

political priorities. areas like cybersecurity and election security. agencies like cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, which is a critical resource in an age of misinformation and disinformation and attacks on our elections, and i speak from experience. maybe you'll recall i served as the chief elections officer for california prior to coming to the senate. rather than rise to the occasion to meet the real threats that we are confronting, governor noem has stated that she wants to d downsize cisa and cut back on our election security efforts, and i don't take those threats lightly. so from national security to

immigration to disaster response to election security, we face serious challenges, colleagues. not one of those challenges will be solved by prioritizing loyalty to one man over loyalty to our country and to our constitution. so, mr. president, given her clear, unwavering allegiance to one man over country, for her willingness to push falsehoods over facts, i will oppose her confirmation and encourage my colleagues to do the same. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

mr. padilla: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from california. mr. padilla: suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. vote:

>> this is their house and we're 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. mr. president, thank you for what you have done for western north carolina. thank you for coming again to see. thank you, your son don jr. came with us twice. they've taken a real interest, and this isn't a politician coming down here looking for boats. looking for votes but a man that wants to do something and

make changes and make life better for you. thank you and, melania, thank you so much for coming. it's an honor to have you here with us. mr. president, please. >> thank you very much. what a good man. he's done a good job, fantastic job. we've comb here for all the people of the region 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 priest administration and i'm here after a few days of the administration and we're going to california, los angeles. they got hit hard as you know. a lot of that could have been prevented i think if they had water, which they had plenty of but didn't use it, but i'm going there but we are set up to go there and saying wait a minute, what about north carolina. they said what would you -- i said i have to stop there first and stopping in north carolina.

>> some north californians can't take a hot water shower and can't drink water and it's delivered to them by some where they go out and somehow find some. it's been four months since the storm made landfall and 180 roads made ruined and earlier the biden administration kicked 2,000 displaced north carolineans out of their temporary housing into freezing 20 degree weather. i don't know how they did that one.

it was flood am the way around and it took us hours and we sat there and full-timely receded enough to get and and close to midnight and tarted around 5, 6: 00 in the morning. we lost everything that we had.

>> north carolina farm bureau. >> different insurance companies and they're all different or just he got let go and fired and they brought in another third party adjustor to low ball us.

they neglected us for -- >> your mother is safe? >> yes, she's right here. >> okay.

crashing four feet on the roof and three or four hour and doing everything in revers and got out in mud to higher ground. going up to the subway and got over to the her daughter's house. would ask unanimous

consent the quorum call be limited. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: and then, mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 38 which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 38 to constitute the majority party's membership on certain committees for the 119th congress or until their successors are chosen. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask

unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the motion to be considered be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22, the postcloture time on the noem nomination expire at 11:30 a.m. on saturday, january 25. i further ask that if cloture is invoked on the bessent nomination, all postcloture time be considered expired and the senate vote on the confirmation of the bessent nomination at 5:30 p.m. on monday, january 27. further, if cloture is invoked on the duffy nomination, all postcloture time be considered expired and the senate vote on the confirmation of the duffy nomination at 12:00 noon on tuesday, january 28. finally, that the cloture vote with respect to the motion to proceed to calendar 3, h.r. 23 ripen at 2:15 p.m. on tuesday, january 28. the presiding officer: without objection. so ordered. mr. thune: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:30 a.m. on saturday, january 25.

that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed, and the senate proceed to executive session and resume executive calendar number 4, kristi noem, postcloture. the presiding officer: without objection. so ordered. mr. thune: mr. president, if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until