Michael F. Bennet
Senator for Colorado · Democratic · United States
“(c) Requirement for Competitive Procurement Strategy.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Space Acquisition and Integration, in coordination with the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, shall submit to…”
“(c) Requirement for Competitive Procurement Strategy.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Space Acquisition and Integration, in coordination with the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, shall submit to…”
“(e) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for five years, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing-- (1) the number of qualified providers supp…”
“(e) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for five years, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing-- (1) the number of qualified providers supp…”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4197-S4198] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 6705. Mr. BENNET (for himself and Mr.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4197-S4198] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 6705. Mr. BENNET (for himself and Mr.”
The complete record
Every one of 209 lines we hold for Michael F. Bennet, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“(e) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for five years, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing-- (1) the number of qualified providers supporting each major proliferated space acquisition program relating to the architectures described in subsection (c)(1); (2) annual funding allocated among such providers; and (3) with respect to such proliferated space architectures-- (A) industrial base health indicators; (B) supply chain vulnerabilities; (C) actions taken to promote sustained competition among providers; and (D) recommendations for any additional legislative authorities required to strengthen competition and resilience.”
“(d) Minimum Competitive Investment.--Beginning in fiscal year 2028, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office shall, to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with mission requirements-- (1) maintain not fewer than two qualified domestic providers for each major proliferated space acquisition program relating to the architectures described in subsection (c)(1); and (2) ensure that not less than 25 percent of annual production quantities, contract value, or program funding for each such program is competitively awarded to a qualified provider other than the incumbent provider, unless the Secretary of the Air Force submits to the congressional defense committees-- (A) a certification that-- (i) only one responsible source exists for such program; (ii) mission assurance requirements cannot reasonably be met through competitive procurement; or (iii) such allocation would substantially increase program risk or cost without corresponding operational benefit; and (B) a detailed justification and an assessment of the impact on competition and the defense industrial base of awarding a greater such percentage to the incumbent provider.”
“(2) Elements.--The strategy required by paragraph (1) shall include-- (A) an assessment of the risks associated with single- source procurement of any such architecture; (B) an evaluation of industrial base capacity, workforce, supply chain resilience, and surge production capability with respect to such architectures; (C) recommendations to sustain not fewer than two viable domestic providers for each major capability area relating to such architectures; and (D) a plan for preserving meaningful competition in future production of, and capability upgrades to, such architectures.”
“(c) Requirement for Competitive Procurement Strategy.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Space Acquisition and Integration, in coordination with the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a strategy to maintain competition for the development, procurement, and maintenance of proliferated national security space architectures, including-- (A) the proliferated architecture of the National Reconnaissance Office; (B) space-based tactical data transport capabilities; (C) space-based advanced moving-target indication capabilities; (D) Space Data Network capabilities; and (E) any successor proliferated low-Earth orbit operational architecture that supports a mission of the Department of Defense.”
“(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the Department of the Air Force and the National Reconnaissance Office should maintain robust competition across proliferated national security space acquisition programs; [[Page S4198]] (2) acquisition strategies should preserve multiple domestic sources capable of designing, manufacturing, integrating, and sustaining proliferated satellite constellations; (3) competition should be sustained throughout production and follow-on capability development whenever practicable; and (4) long-term acquisition strategies should strengthen the United States industrial base rather than create unnecessary single-source dependencies.”
“(4) Congress is concerned that recent acquisition strategies for certain proliferated space capabilities may not adequately sustain multiple viable domestic suppliers capable of supporting future national security requirements. (5) Maintaining multiple competitive providers for space vehicles, mission payloads, tactical data transport, and supporting ground infrastructure is in the national security interest of the United States.”
“(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) The United States requires a resilient, survivable, and rapidly scalable space architecture to support joint all- domain operations against peer adversaries. (2) Competition among multiple qualified domestic providers is essential to maintaining innovation, reducing costs, increasing production capacity, and mitigating risks associated with single-source dependencies. (3) Excessive reliance on a single contractor or limited supplier base for proliferated space architectures creates strategic risks to the defense industrial base, supply chain resilience, production surge capacity, and operational continuity.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4197-S4198] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 6705. Mr. BENNET (for himself and Mr. Hickenlooper) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4748, to establish the Foreign Investment Review Authority to determine whether foreign countries that have made investment commitments to the United States have complied with those commitments, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle A of title XV, add the following: SEC. 1510A. PROMOTING COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL BASE RESILIENCE FOR PROLIFERATED SPACE ARCHITECTURES.”
“(e) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for five years, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office shall jointly submit to the congressional defense committees a report describing-- (1) the number of qualified providers supporting each major proliferated space acquisition program relating to the architectures described in subsection (c)(1); (2) annual funding allocated among such providers; and (3) with respect to such proliferated space architectures-- (A) industrial base health indicators; (B) supply chain vulnerabilities; (C) actions taken to promote sustained competition among providers; and (D) recommendations for any additional legislative authorities required to strengthen competition and resilience.”
“(d) Minimum Competitive Investment.--Beginning in fiscal year 2028, the Secretary of the Air Force and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office shall, to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with mission requirements-- (1) maintain not fewer than two qualified domestic providers for each major proliferated space acquisition program relating to the architectures described in subsection (c)(1); and (2) ensure that not less than 25 percent of annual production quantities, contract value, or program funding for each such program is competitively awarded to a qualified provider other than the incumbent provider, unless the Secretary of the Air Force submits to the congressional defense committees-- (A) a certification that-- (i) only one responsible source exists for such program; (ii) mission assurance requirements cannot reasonably be met through competitive procurement; or (iii) such allocation would substantially increase program risk or cost without corresponding operational benefit; and (B) a detailed justification and an assessment of the impact on competition and the defense industrial base of awarding a greater such percentage to the incumbent provider.”
“(2) Elements.--The strategy required by paragraph (1) shall include-- (A) an assessment of the risks associated with single- source procurement of any such architecture; (B) an evaluation of industrial base capacity, workforce, supply chain resilience, and surge production capability with respect to such architectures; (C) recommendations to sustain not fewer than two viable domestic providers for each major capability area relating to such architectures; and (D) a plan for preserving meaningful competition in future production of, and capability upgrades to, such architectures.”
“(c) Requirement for Competitive Procurement Strategy.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force, acting through the Assistant Secretary for Space Acquisition and Integration, in coordination with the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, shall submit to the congressional defense committees a strategy to maintain competition for the development, procurement, and maintenance of proliferated national security space architectures, including-- (A) the proliferated architecture of the National Reconnaissance Office; (B) space-based tactical data transport capabilities; (C) space-based advanced moving-target indication capabilities; (D) Space Data Network capabilities; and (E) any successor proliferated low-Earth orbit operational architecture that supports a mission of the Department of Defense.”
“(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the Department of the Air Force and the National Reconnaissance Office should maintain robust competition across proliferated national security space acquisition programs; [[Page S4198]] (2) acquisition strategies should preserve multiple domestic sources capable of designing, manufacturing, integrating, and sustaining proliferated satellite constellations; (3) competition should be sustained throughout production and follow-on capability development whenever practicable; and (4) long-term acquisition strategies should strengthen the United States industrial base rather than create unnecessary single-source dependencies.”
“(4) Congress is concerned that recent acquisition strategies for certain proliferated space capabilities may not adequately sustain multiple viable domestic suppliers capable of supporting future national security requirements. (5) Maintaining multiple competitive providers for space vehicles, mission payloads, tactical data transport, and supporting ground infrastructure is in the national security interest of the United States.”
“(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) The United States requires a resilient, survivable, and rapidly scalable space architecture to support joint all- domain operations against peer adversaries. (2) Competition among multiple qualified domestic providers is essential to maintaining innovation, reducing costs, increasing production capacity, and mitigating risks associated with single-source dependencies. (3) Excessive reliance on a single contractor or limited supplier base for proliferated space architectures creates strategic risks to the defense industrial base, supply chain resilience, production surge capacity, and operational continuity.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4197-S4198] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 6705. Mr. BENNET (for himself and Mr. Hickenlooper) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4748, to establish the Foreign Investment Review Authority to determine whether foreign countries that have made investment commitments to the United States have complied with those commitments, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle A of title XV, add the following: SEC. 1510A. PROMOTING COMPETITION AND INDUSTRIAL BASE RESILIENCE FOR PROLIFERATED SPACE ARCHITECTURES.”
“185, a joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorized by Congress. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted yea. ____________________”
“190, motion to proceed to Calendar No. 432, S.J. Res. 196, A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Education relating to ``Reimagining and Improving Student Education-Federal Student Loan Program Final Regulations''. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted yea. I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 191, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 776, Matthew A. Schwartz, of New York, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Second Circuit. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted nay. I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 192, motion to proceed to the consideration of S.J. Res.”
“I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 187, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 777, Michael J. Hendershot, of Ohio, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted nay. I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 188, confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 777, Michael J. Hendershot, of Ohio, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted nay. I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 189, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 778, Arthur Roberts Jones, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted nay. I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 113 (Monday, July 13, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 113 (Monday, July 13, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S3736] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] VOTE EXPLANATION Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 185, motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 780, John George Edward Marck, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted nay. I was necessarily absent for rollcall vote No. 186, confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 780, John George Edward Marck, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas. Had I been present for the vote, I would have voted nay.”
“Colorado has spent years implementing top-tier cyber security measures and audits to prevent hackers from interfering with our electoral process. We have one of the most secure election systems of any State in the country, and because Coloradans have trust in our gold standard system, we have some of the highest voter turnout in America. That is the model we should be using across the country, in my view. Instead of wasting time and taxpayer dollars on the SAVE Act, Congress should be implementing Colorado's practices all across the country. I yield the floor to my colleague from Rhode Island. Thank you very much for his leadership in bringing the Nation's attention to this issue today. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.”
“In Colorado, we are the first State in America to complete a risk-limiting audit, the gold standard for verifying the integrity of election results to begin with, and it entails counting and comparing a representative sample of ballots to the reported result. To prevent hacking, none of our voting machines are attached to the internet. We require county clerks to use two-factor authentication to access voter databases. And once a vote is cast, a bipartisan team of election judges in each county checks every signature against the copy in the database for any discrepancies. All election officials and judges with access to the tabulation process must pass a Colorado Bureau of Investigation background check.”
“Compare those 30,000 Kansans who attempted to register and were denied to the 30 people--30 people--the 30 noncitizens who reportedly voted in the 2016 election nationwide. That is about 0.0001 percent of all votes cast. If there ever was one, this is a solution in search of a problem, and the only solution doesn't even work. It only makes it harder for law- abiding Americans to register to vote or patriotic Americans to register to vote. Perhaps it would be better if this bill were modeled after the system that we have in Colorado. We have set the gold standard in my State. It is a system that actually encourages people to vote in a fraud-free system.”
“The SAVE Act does nothing to make it easier to cast a ballot; it only succeeds in making it harder for Americans to register to vote and to exercise their rights. This is not theoretical. Kansas tried to implement its own State- level SAVE Act in 2013, with disastrous results. The law blocked over 30,000 potential registrants in just 2 years--about 12 percent of all voter registrations during the period. State officials acknowledged in court that over 99 percent of affected voters were U.S. citizens. Now, even Kansas's Republican secretary of state, who championed the bill when he was a State legislator, has warned against it, saying: It didn't work out so well. I would say so. About 12 percent of the people who tried to register couldn't.”
“In other words, government issued driver's licenses and military and Tribal identifications would not satisfy the bill's requirements. The SAVE Act would severely restrict online voter registration and mail-in registration and eliminate voter registration drives altogether. It would make it harder or even impossible for up to 69 million married American women who have changed their names, because their last name doesn't match the one on their birth certificate. Meanwhile, half of Americans don't even have a passport. How are they going to register under this law? They can't. Over 60 million Americans who live in rural areas--now they are going to have to drive miles and miles and miles, hours out of their way, to stand in line at a local election agency.”
“Mr. President, I, too, am here on the floor today to oppose the SAVE Act. Today, Americans register to vote in a variety of ways, typically set by each State in this country, but Federal law requires that Americans attest to citizenship under penalty of perjury. In Colorado, you can register online; you can register in person; you can register through the mail. It can be as easy as providing your Social Security number and signature, which every American has, through the secretary of state's website. Alternatively, the SAVE Act would change that by requiring that all American citizens, whether registering for the first time or updating their registration, to present proof of citizenship in person, largely in the form of a passport or a birth certificate.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 60 (Thursday, April 3, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 60 (Thursday, April 3, 2025)] [Senate] [Page S2274] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 8:30 A.M. TOMORROW Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, with that--if I can find my glasses--I ask unanimous consent to amend the previous order and that the Senate stand adjourned until 8:30 a.m., with all other provisions of the order remaining in effect. There being no objection, the Senate, at 11:14 p.m., adjourned until Friday, April 4, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. ____________________”
“We should find a better way of supporting them, and we should shelve this budget, which is going to do nothing but harm the American people. I thank the Presiding Officer for his patience. I thank the staff for being here so late tonight even though tonight's lateness is going to be nothing compared to tomorrow night's lateness. ____________________”
“Those are the choices that we should be making tonight. I want to finish this by thanking again the people who have come to my townhall meetings; to the people who have brought their loved ones, especially their children, to those townhall meetings; to the people who took the time to write, who have not given up on the idea that they can have a voice in this democracy and that the decisions that this place can make can actually align with the priorities that they have. They are not asking for anything here except the chance to continue to take care of their children, to take care of their parents, to take care of their loved ones, and to be contributing members of our society. We should support their ambitions for themselves. We should support their ambitions for our country.”
“From birth to death, our Medicaid Programs are a lifeline for my constituents and for millions of Americans. My colleague from Georgia started his speech by saying that a budget is a moral document. I could not agree with him more. I think we should reconsider, in the face of the advocacy that we are hearing, whether these are the best choices we can make, and of course, they are not. In a rational world, we would be figuring out how to get everybody healthcare in this country and do it for less money than these other countries are spending, just as they are doing, and we would be able to use the savings from that to pay down our deficit if we wanted to do that or invest in our military if we wanted to do that or invest in our roads and our bridges if we wanted to do that or in the mental health of our children if we cared to do that.”
“I would certainly not be who I am today without lifesaving medical expenses I would never be able to afford myself. I am currently caring for my now-disabled mother, who also relies on Medicaid and support services. Without Medicaid, I, my family, and millions of others would be left to die. Medicaid is a lifeline for so many of us, and we all deserve access to healthcare in the richest, most powerful country known to humankind. I couldn't have said that better myself. Nearly 1.3 million Coloradans like Kalyn rely on Health First Colorado and CHIP to get health coverage. Half a million of them are children. These cuts would affect more than half of Colorado's seniors who rely on Health First Colorado to help pay for nursing homes because they literally can't afford to die anywhere else.”
“They represent our societal commitment to providing and promoting those opportunities to all citizens, and these values and commitments--manifested in Medicaid services--are the sole reason that I have been able to overcome quadriplegia and live a purposeful, beautiful life. My name is Kalyn Rose-- She is from Denver-- --and I was born with a rare condition: osteogenesis imperfecta. My mother lost count of all my broken bones at a young age, but it is certainly over 100 fractures and likely 50-plus surgeries now. Because of my access to Medicaid, I have been able to get life-supporting surgeries, emergency room visits, and wheelchairs that I would not otherwise . . . receive. Thanks to Medicaid, I live a full life as an artist, educator, mentor, and community advocate based in Denver, CO.”
“I continue to benefit from daily home health care through a consumer- directed program available through Colorado Medicaid, and can pay for medical appointments and services, physical therapy, and occupational therapy services, which keep me healthy enough to [continuously] [[Page S2274]] contribute to disability rights advocacy across the state and [the] Nation. In no uncertain terms, Medicaid's home- and community-based services has repeatedly opened the door of opportunity for me to live a meaningful, independent life. Without these services, I would be unemployed, living either with my parents or in a nursing facility. Home- and community-based services represent American values of equal opportunity to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.”
“But as I began my rehabilitation, I learned about Medicaid and home- and community-based services. By the time I returned home, I had set up home health care services that allowed me to receive the needed care to be independent throughout the day and enabled my parents to continue working. By the time 1 year had passed after my accident, I was back living on my college's campus and taking a full slate of classes. As I write this, I am a staff attorney at the Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition--an organization I dreamed of contributing to professionally when I was a volunteer advocate here over a decade ago.”
“Don't force parents to actually leave their households when there is no one else to take care of their children. No one would make these choices in one of our communities at home. I would like to hear a city council meeting where these were the choices that were being made: Cut electric for the poorest people in the country. Borrow as much money as we have ever borrowed. Give the benefit to the two wealthiest neighborhoods in town. It doesn't make any sense. Here is a letter from Bryce in Denver: When I sustained a cervical spinal cord injury from a shallow water diving accident at age 20, the only thing I was certain of was that my future aspirations and independence were finished. I had plenty of time to think about what I had lost as a quadriplegic during my 45-day stay in the ICU.”
“It is a crisis in the richest country in the world. Now we are going to provoke this crisis. We are going to make it even worse. We are going to destabilize these families. For what--so we can give tax cuts to the wealthiest people in America? Why don't you just not do that part of the bill? Why don't you just not do that part of the bill? This economy has shoveled benefits for 50 years on the wealthiest people in our country. Do we want to compound that unfairness with a set of tax policies like the ones that are being pursued here and turn around and cut healthcare for the most vulnerable people in America? If you are concerned about waste, fraud, and abuse, go after waste, fraud, and abuse, but don't make people's lives even more painful. Don't make people's lives even more difficult.”
“I change her, dress her, get her out of bed, feed her, bathe her, drive her to therapy and other appointments, exercise, massage, and physical therapy at home, give her her medications, get her ready for bed, and help her in the middle of the night if she wakes up. Because she depends on me, I'm unable to get a job outside of the [house, and that] is why I depend on this waiver. I would rather care for my daughter, give her the quality care and love she deserves, than hire a stranger and depend on them to take care of my child. Without the waiver, I wouldn't be able to afford to stay home and make sure she is safe and happy. Thanks to the waiver, she [has] the therapy she needs. It's a crisis, and we need Congress to ensure that everyone has access to home- and community-based services right now. It is a crisis. It is a crisis.”
“Barbara from Greenwood Village: Our son Derek is autistic and nonverbal. His dad and I are 86 plus, and it became hard for us to take care of him. We wanted to be sure he would be in a safe and secure situation and happy there. On May 29 of this year, we were able to find a host home for him to live in. He is doing well there. He has people that take him out in the community 6 days a week to enjoy being out and about, which is so very important to his happiness and well-being. We pray that Medicaid will continue to support him in continuing this new way of life for him. Our community of people with disabilities desperately need help! Sasha from Fountain: I have a 9-year-old, wheelchair-bound daughter with cerebral palsy. She depends on me 100 percent. She depends on me 24/7, morning, day, and night.”
“He cannot be in a typical daycare or even go to preschool due to the high level of support he requires. Medicaid pays for his speech therapy and occupational therapy. After just 6 months of ABA therapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy, Jackson is now speaking. He's not as aggressive and is getting better with managing the sensory issues that he struggles with daily. Without Medicaid, we would not be able to pay for our home or food as I am his paid caregiver through Medicaid. I cannot work a typical job. It is important that he receives these therapies and supports for Medicaid as well as me so that our family can survive and he has the brightest future possible. If anything is taken away from him or us, it will be detrimental. Please give my son and our small family a fighting chance. Thank you.”
“Joaquin has received services ranging from medications that prevent constant pain to (before our move) air ambulance flights from Albuquerque to CHCO, including several life- saving surgeries. Losing funding for Medicaid directly translates to unnecessary suffering and even loss of life for Joaquin and countless children like him. Please do not allow that to happen. Mr. President, I can't tell you the number of parents I have met who have spent 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in care of their own children but who are able to do it because of the small payment that is made by Medicaid. What are these parents supposed to do if this is cut? How are we going to meet the moral obligation of this country to our children with this cut? A letter from Brittny in Denver: My son has autism, a developmental disability, and a speech delay.”
“The care I say that all of us deserve. Erica from Johnstown: My son has Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. His care alone without Medicaid waivers will cost us at least $1 million per year. Medicaid allows me to be paid to take care of my child and not rely on nursing care. Medicaid has really helped him get the best care possible without having to worry about the cost. And to be able to have his parent there to take care of him. Samuel from Denver: My name is Samuel. I moved to Denver with my wife Cynthia and our son Joaquin just over a year ago-- Welcome-- in order to have his complex medical issues treated at Children's Hospital of Colorado. Medicaid has without exaggeration saved our lives; my wife is paid as our son's caregiver when she would otherwise be unable to work.”
“It provides funding for adult programs that give her purpose, medical equipment, and living assistance--expenses that most families simply cannot afford. No family could afford. Without Medicaid, she and many others like her would be left without critical care, increasing the risk of institutionalization or homelessness. Medicaid also plays a vital role in adoption. Many children with disabilities, like my daughter, find forever families because Medicaid provides the financial support needed to care for them. Without it, fewer families would be able to adopt, leaving more children to age out of the system without the care they desperately need. Please support Medicaid funding and policies that ensure individuals with disabilities receive the care and dignity they deserve. Thank you for your time and dedication to this critical issue.”
“As aging parents-- Eighty-six-year-old parents-- --we are greatly concerned about these proposed huge cuts to Medicaid . . . It's so important for us to know that all these supports will still be in place after we are gone and unable to advocate for him. Please help us to do this by not cutting Medicaid benefits!!! The next letter is from Michell in Thornton: I am writing to urge you to protect and strengthen Medicaid for individuals with disabilities. My daughter, who was adopted at age 10, is now 21 but has the cognitive level of a five-year-old. She has Fragile X Syndrome, ADHD, PTSD, anxiety, and possible fetal alcohol syndrome. She requires constant supervision, behavioral support, and medical care beyond what private insurance covers. Medicaid is essential for her survival and quality of life.”
“That is why they are there at 8 o'clock or 9 o'clock at night with their children when their children should be home in bed, because they want people here to understand what it is going to mean to their families if these cuts go into place. The first letter is from Barbara of Greenwood Village: We are 86 year old parents of our 53 year old, nonverbal autistic son who we had become physically unable to care for him in our home anywhere. We were able to place him in a host home May 29, 2024, where he is being provided a safe and caring environment. He requires 24/7 supervision, to be given his needed daily medication, and seeing that he gets to all needed doctors and dental appointments and continues to do so. Without continuing Medicaid's current level of support, we are terrified that these needs may not continue to be met!”
“I want to also say a word of thank-you to the people that have come to my townhalls--sometimes with their children, sometimes with their children with disabilities--to advocate on [[Page S2273]] behalf of their children, to advocate on behalf of children all over our State and all over the country whose lifeline is this healthcare program that is being cut in this budget. There were so many people that wrote in. The No. 1 issue--when we have these townhalls, we write down the questions that are asked. The No. 1 issue is Medicaid because the people that have loved ones who are on the program know it is going to be cut, know that they have nowhere else to turn.”
“There is a choice that would never be made--a choice to hurt the people that now are going to have to go without healthcare; a choice to blow a massive hole in the deficit--not to invest in the country but to cut taxes for the wealthiest people. Why don't we have a tax cut for working people? Why don't we have a tax cut for the middle class? Why don't we expand the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit for working people here? Mr. President, I am going to finish. I do want to read some letters that have been written to me from people in Colorado who are deeply concerned about these cuts to Medicaid.”
“We know that they cost the country $4 trillion; that the sons and daughters of teachers and firefighters and police officers all over this country who are not going to benefit in a material way from the tax cuts are going to have to pay back the debt that is incurred to give them to people who, as the Senator from Georgia said, aren't even asking, really. Many of them know we are in this situation where we have the worst income inequality that we have had since the 1920s and that we should be thinking about how to build that middle class again, give people the chance to get into the middle class, which is what we should be focused on. So there is a set of priorities here that somehow makes sense when it gets to Washington, DC, but surely doesn't make sense in the towns and cities of this country.”
“What are you going to spend that money on? Parks? Public safety? On the mental health challenges that I described earlier? On our infrastructure? Our roads? Our bridges? Our schools? And the answer is: No, no, no. Well, what are you going to spend it on? We are going to give tax breaks to the two wealthiest neighborhoods in town and let it trickle down to everybody else. That is the Trump tax policy. That was the Trump tax policy in 2017, and it is the Trump tax policy this year. It is very unusual, by the way, to have a President who has been here twice with an interruption, but that is the case with President Trump. We now know the facts of the math that he claimed the last time. He said last time that the tax cuts would pay for themselves.”
“But here comes a budget where a massive hole is being blown into the deficit and is causing a proposal to cut healthcare for the poorest people in the country and the poorest children in the country--here is what it is doing. It is cutting taxes for the wealthiest people in America. Fifty percent of the benefit of this tax bill will go to the top 5 percent of Americans. Fifty percent of the benefit of this tax bill will go to the top 5 percent of Americans. I have said it on the floor before. I am not going to dwell on it again. This is analogous. It is the same if a mayor in Denver or Grand Junction or Limon or Durango or Springfield came to see the citizens of those communities and said: I am going to borrow more money than we have ever borrowed before. You ask them: What are you going to spend it on? I am worried about that.”
“You don't need this exercise in self- government. I can fix it. You should expect your private sector and your public sector to be hopelessly corrupt, hopelessly bankrupt. That is a dark vision, but that is the dark vision that he was elected on twice. I think we would be a lot better off trying to figure out how to create an economy that, when it grows, it grows for everybody, not just the people at the very top; and an economy that, when people work hard, they feel like they know they will be able to propel their kids forward. It was an economy that reestablished the American dream for this entire country. We better do that. We better do that if we are going to have any hope of saving this democracy.”