Peter Welch
Senator for Vermont · Democratic · United States
“foreign service officers who stood up for the rule of law and democracy in Guatemala, were summarily replaced by U.S. Embassy appointees who reportedly urged members of Guatemala's Congress to support a rightwing candidate tainted by corruption for a seat on the constitutional court, or risk losing their U.S. visas.”
“foreign service officers who stood up for the rule of law and democracy in Guatemala, were summarily replaced by U.S. Embassy appointees who reportedly urged members of Guatemala's Congress to support a rightwing candidate tainted by corruption for a seat on the constitutional court, or risk losing their U.S. visas.”
“[[Page S4103]] To the country's credit, Arevalo was inaugurated on January 15, 2024, and for the first time in decades, Guatemala has a President who is not beholden to the corrupt forces that have exploited political power for their own enrichment and used Guatemala's armed forces and police to harass, threaten, arbitrarily arrest, and e…”
“[[Page S4103]] To the country's credit, Arevalo was inaugurated on January 15, 2024, and for the first time in decades, Guatemala has a President who is not beholden to the corrupt forces that have exploited political power for their own enrichment and used Guatemala's armed forces and police to harass, threaten, arbitrarily arrest, and e…”
“The appropriate role of the United States in Guatemala, as in the rest of Latin America, is to support the people there by improving their lives through free and fair elections, equitable economic opportunities, and access to justice that conforms to international protections of due process. Too often, U.S.”
“The appropriate role of the United States in Guatemala, as in the rest of Latin America, is to support the people there by improving their lives through free and fair elections, equitable economic opportunities, and access to justice that conforms to international protections of due process. Too often, U.S.”
The complete record
Every one of 223 lines we hold for Peter Welch, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“No President, even in the best of circumstances, can transform a country like Guatemala in 4 years, but President Arevalo deserves our strong support. At a time when the trend in Latin America is to elect leaders who equate law and order with subverting judicial independence, militarizing the police, and running roughshod over due process of law, President Arevalo has restored integrity to the office and defended the institutions of democracy. In the long run, that has the best chance of producing the transparency, accountability, stability, and prosperity the Guatemalan people need. ____________________”
“The appropriate role of the United States in Guatemala, as in the rest of Latin America, is to support the people there by improving their lives through free and fair elections, equitable economic opportunities, and access to justice that conforms to international protections of due process. Too often, U.S. policy in Guatemala has strayed from those goals, motivated instead by greed and corrupt interests in our own country, and promoting the militarization of internal security. That is a recipe for a return to authoritarianism, ethnic and social division, and armed conflict. Guatemalans who choose that path should be forewarned that it will ultimately be their own, and the country's, undoing.”
“If political and economic forces in Guatemala, backed by nefarious associates of the Trump administration, continue to try to deny the will of the Guatemalan people and thwart Arevalo's anti-corruption mandate by using their influence to undermine the institutions of democracy for the benefit of themselves and their cronies, they will pay a price when the balance of power shifts in Washington. People here know the history of U.S. political and economic intervention in Guatemala dating back to 1954, and they have long memories when it comes to corruption and the manipulation of judicial and law enforcement institutions in that country.”
“foreign service officers who stood up for the rule of law and democracy in Guatemala, were summarily replaced by U.S. Embassy appointees who reportedly urged members of Guatemala's Congress to support a rightwing candidate tainted by corruption for a seat on the constitutional court, or risk losing their U.S. visas. Unlike President Trump and officials in his administration, I do not believe it is our role--using threats, inducements, or other means--to try to influence the outcome of election of foreign candidates for office, whether Presidents, legislators, or judges. We oppose such interference in our own sovereignty, and it is hypocritical and unwise to engage in such conduct ourselves. I mention this because President Arevalo has another year and a half in his 4-year term.”
“[[Page S4103]] To the country's credit, Arevalo was inaugurated on January 15, 2024, and for the first time in decades, Guatemala has a President who is not beholden to the corrupt forces that have exploited political power for their own enrichment and used Guatemala's armed forces and police to harass, threaten, arbitrarily arrest, and even murder their opponents. But having failed to prevent Arevalo from taking office, those forces have carried out a relentless campaign, aided by counterparts and lobbyists in Washington with close ties to the Trump administration, to sabotage his efforts to reform the justice system and end the culture of corruption, violence, and impunity that has plagued Guatemala for generations. Career U.S.”
“Guatemala is one of Central America's most corrupt countries, so it was not surprising that his election triggered a frantic attempt by his opponents, led in part by then-Attorney General Consuelo Porras, who had been sanctioned by the United States, to invalidate the election on fabricated grounds of fraud and prevent Arevalo's inauguration. The purpose of our trip was to demonstrate our strong support for the choice of the Guatemalan people, in particular Guatemala's historically marginalized indigenous population, and for the integrity of the democratic process.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 115 (Wednesday, July 15, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 115 (Wednesday, July 15, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4102-S4103] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] GUATEMALA Mr. WELCH. Mr. President, in December 2022, I traveled to Guatemala as part of a congressional delegation led by Senator Tim Kaine. Four months earlier, to the shock and dismay of powerful rightwing forces in Guatemala's Congress and business community, Bernardo Arevalo, an anti- corruption activist, had been overwhelmingly elected President in an election widely recognized as free and fair.”
“No President, even in the best of circumstances, can transform a country like Guatemala in 4 years, but President Arevalo deserves our strong support. At a time when the trend in Latin America is to elect leaders who equate law and order with subverting judicial independence, militarizing the police, and running roughshod over due process of law, President Arevalo has restored integrity to the office and defended the institutions of democracy. In the long run, that has the best chance of producing the transparency, accountability, stability, and prosperity the Guatemalan people need. ____________________”
“The appropriate role of the United States in Guatemala, as in the rest of Latin America, is to support the people there by improving their lives through free and fair elections, equitable economic opportunities, and access to justice that conforms to international protections of due process. Too often, U.S. policy in Guatemala has strayed from those goals, motivated instead by greed and corrupt interests in our own country, and promoting the militarization of internal security. That is a recipe for a return to authoritarianism, ethnic and social division, and armed conflict. Guatemalans who choose that path should be forewarned that it will ultimately be their own, and the country's, undoing.”
“If political and economic forces in Guatemala, backed by nefarious associates of the Trump administration, continue to try to deny the will of the Guatemalan people and thwart Arevalo's anti-corruption mandate by using their influence to undermine the institutions of democracy for the benefit of themselves and their cronies, they will pay a price when the balance of power shifts in Washington. People here know the history of U.S. political and economic intervention in Guatemala dating back to 1954, and they have long memories when it comes to corruption and the manipulation of judicial and law enforcement institutions in that country.”
“foreign service officers who stood up for the rule of law and democracy in Guatemala, were summarily replaced by U.S. Embassy appointees who reportedly urged members of Guatemala's Congress to support a rightwing candidate tainted by corruption for a seat on the constitutional court, or risk losing their U.S. visas. Unlike President Trump and officials in his administration, I do not believe it is our role--using threats, inducements, or other means--to try to influence the outcome of election of foreign candidates for office, whether Presidents, legislators, or judges. We oppose such interference in our own sovereignty, and it is hypocritical and unwise to engage in such conduct ourselves. I mention this because President Arevalo has another year and a half in his 4-year term.”
“[[Page S4103]] To the country's credit, Arevalo was inaugurated on January 15, 2024, and for the first time in decades, Guatemala has a President who is not beholden to the corrupt forces that have exploited political power for their own enrichment and used Guatemala's armed forces and police to harass, threaten, arbitrarily arrest, and even murder their opponents. But having failed to prevent Arevalo from taking office, those forces have carried out a relentless campaign, aided by counterparts and lobbyists in Washington with close ties to the Trump administration, to sabotage his efforts to reform the justice system and end the culture of corruption, violence, and impunity that has plagued Guatemala for generations. Career U.S.”
“Guatemala is one of Central America's most corrupt countries, so it was not surprising that his election triggered a frantic attempt by his opponents, led in part by then-Attorney General Consuelo Porras, who had been sanctioned by the United States, to invalidate the election on fabricated grounds of fraud and prevent Arevalo's inauguration. The purpose of our trip was to demonstrate our strong support for the choice of the Guatemalan people, in particular Guatemala's historically marginalized indigenous population, and for the integrity of the democratic process.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 115 (Wednesday, July 15, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 115 (Wednesday, July 15, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4102-S4103] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] GUATEMALA Mr. WELCH. Mr. President, in December 2022, I traveled to Guatemala as part of a congressional delegation led by Senator Tim Kaine. Four months earlier, to the shock and dismay of powerful rightwing forces in Guatemala's Congress and business community, Bernardo Arevalo, an anti- corruption activist, had been overwhelmingly elected President in an election widely recognized as free and fair.”
“1, we don't address the war; No. 2, we don't absolutely insist on defense and intelligence and production decisions being the sole prerogative of this country and not delegate authority to any other country to interfere with what we believe is in our national security interest. Third, we need a coherent plan to have a production system that [[Page S3735]] focuses on weapons of the future and not legacy weapons of the past that are revered by the defense-industrial complex but are not effective on the battlefield. And, fourth, we have to come to a reckoning that, whether it comes to national defense or even domestic programs, they don't pay for themselves, and we have got to step up and accept that responsibility. For far too long, we have been ignoring it. I yield the floor. ____________________”
“I do think we should help our farmers more. I do believe we should put more into education. I do believe we should put more into scientific research. But when I say we should do that, I am also willing to pay for it. And I do believe we have to have a strong military, but we have to pay for that too. And what we have seen in this Congress is that the folks who want to put more money in the military, they may be willing to pay for it by cutting scientific research, by cutting education, by cutting nutrition benefits for the thousands--millions--of Americans who are struggling to feed their kids and can't do it without the SNAP program. There is a lot of good work that has been done by our committee on a bipartisan basis with many of the provisions--policy provisions--in this NDAA, but we cannot act on the NDAA in a responsible way if, No.”
“2, outsourcing absolutely critical decisions about intelligence sharing and weapon-production sharing that have to be the sole prerogative of the United States, our military, our national security community, and our President; and then, third, the failure to have a coherent plan about the extraordinary adjustments that have to be made in the design of weapons systems of the future. And the fourth point I want to make--and I know this is a topic of great concern to you: How are we going to pay for this? We are adding half a trillion dollars to the deficit, and there is literally-- literally--no discussion about how we are going to pay for it. You know, we have a debate in this body about how to spend money, what the priorities should be. And I will acknowledge that I am on the side of spending more money on domestic efforts.”
“And we are seeing these situations where there will be a $35,000 drone that is taken out by a $1 million missile, and all of us know that is not a sustainable situation. Our Pentagon knows that. But in the rush to make the adjustment--and I know that the people in the Pentagon are trying to make that adjustment. You don't make that adjustment by suddenly coming up with a half a trillion dollars where you don't have a plan, you don't have a strategy, and you end up throwing money at a problem without a plan on how to solve the problem. So I have gone through three things here: one, an NDAA that acts as though the war in Iran is not a war that is having an impact on the American people; No.”
“It is about the national security interests in this country and the unfettered right of our military, national security, and President to make decisions on behalf of the American people and exclusively for what is in the best interest of the national security of this country. That provision has no place in this national defense authorization. A third point I want to make is that what we have seen with the extraordinary conflicts in Ukraine, in Iran, and Lebanon is that the old weapons systems that are so expensive don't win the victories. The drone warfare in Ukraine has allowed them, through their ingenuity, to turn the tide on Russia. The B-1 bombers--the exquisite weapons systems that cost so much money--are not winning the conflict in Iran for the United States.”
“But we have never, ever had an obligation to relinquish the exclusive right of decision making that has to fundamentally be made in the best interest of what is in the national security interest of the people of this country. We cannot relinquish that right and that responsibility. So this provision that ``the President, acting through the Director of National Intelligence and, as necessary, the Secretary of Defense, shall''--shall--``subject to applicable law and the protection of intelligence sources and methods, expand and enhance intelligence sharing with the Government of Israel''--my concern here is less the Government of Israel.”
“There are provisions in this bill that create a legal obligation for the United States to do information and intelligence sharing with another government and to enter into joint production agreements with another government. When it comes to sharing intelligence, I want our generals, I want our national security officials, I want our President--our Chief Executive and Commander in Chief--to have unfettered discretion to make those decisions about with whom we share information, what information we share, and under what circumstances to be our decision and our decision alone. And, of course, our military and our national security organizations work very hard to have cooperative relationships with neighboring countries or with fellow countries that are aligned with us on interests, and that can include Israel, as it has at times.”
“We have the obligation to debate that, and many of my colleagues have indicated already by their vote that they oppose the authorization of warfare in Iran. This NDAA bill comes before us as though that is not even going on. That is wrong. We have an obligation to debate that, and we have an obligation to vote on it. But, second, there are provisions in this bill that do outsource fundamental responsibilities and obligations of our military and our national security organizations and our President to make decisions on the basis of what is in our national interest and what is required for national security. My colleague mentioned them.”
“And it was done without an appreciation or awareness that, once the extraordinary power of the U.S. military was applied with weapons that are only ours to deploy, the asymmetric response by the Iranians allowed them to close the Strait of Hormuz, which to this day is not open to the passage of ships. That is having an incredible impact on our economy, on our farmers, on our manufacturers, and on grocery prices. And there is no end in sight. And the fact that we are going to have a debate about authorizing a $1.5 trillion defense budget without having any discussion about what is driving the cost or what is the major defense threat right now--and that is this ongoing war in Iran--is not acceptable.”
“Third--and this is a point my colleague has been making, and I am going to talk about it very immediately--it outsources to another country those decisions on intelligence sharing and weapons production that should only be made by our country. Fourth, it commits the taxpayers of this country to the obligation of another half a trillion dollars with absolutely no outline of how we are going to pay for it, and this on top of a deficit that is the highest we have ever had in this country. So let me talk about these one by one. First of all, it is absolutely catastrophic what is going on, in the Middle East, to our economy. We are in a war that was decided by the President of the United States unilaterally to enter into that war. It was done with the expectation that B-1 bombers would be able to blast their way into victory.”
“Mr. President, I thank my colleague, the Senator from Maryland, for leading this discussion on what is an absolutely critical decision that this U.S. Senate is going to have to make. One of the most important things we do is pass the National Defense Authorization Act. That is the moment where, through the committee process and the floor debate, America lays out a pathway to secure the defense of this country against all threats. It is an extraordinarily important piece of legislation that sets the course for a year. This National Defense Authorization Act fails to address the critical question that is before this country right now, and that is the war in Iran. It fails to address the changing nature of warfare by spending a half a trillion dollars more on weapons systems that are the weapons systems of yesterday.”
“I would say the same about other corrupt, undemocratic governments, including some we treat as partners. But the American people have always opposed using food and medicine as a weapon. That has been a bedrock principle that Republican and Democratic administrations, and the Congress, have reaffirmed over decades. By cutting off the oil, we are imposing collective punishment on Cuba's most vulnerable people. Children and the elderly are dying needlessly. I urge Secretary of State Rubio to consider the human cost of the administration's oil blockade. It is illegal. It is immoral. It is preventable. And it is beneath this country. ____________________”
“The bottom line is this: All basic services, from potable water and sanitation to food production and healthcare, are being severely impacted by the lack of fuel and electricity caused by the U.S. oil blockade. The energy crisis is also limiting the ability of the UN and other humanitarian agencies to deliver aid already committed, with dozens of containers of food and medical supplies reportedly still sitting in ports due to the lack of fuel. The UN's Plan of Action to respond to the crisis is only 21 percent funded. The U.S. has offered $100 million through private mechanisms like the Catholic Church, but it has not yet been delivered. We would all like to see a better government in Cuba, one that cares more about the Cuban people than in holding onto power and enriching themselves.”
“The national water system is functioning with only 37 percent of the fuel required, and 84 percent of water pumping runs on electricity. Food prices have increased by 18 percent. Energy shortages are disrupting agricultural production, food processing, refrigeration, and distribution. Hunger and malnutrition are widespread. The lack of electricity and water, combined with food shortages, is causing psychological distress and exhaustion, especially among children, the elderly, and caregivers. The streets are overflowing with rotting garbage. The hurricane season is beginning, and rising temperatures are creating conditions for a surge in vector-borne and waterborne diseases when the health system is already stretched to its limits.”
“Imagine if there was no electricity in this country for lack of access to oil, due to the hostile acts of another government. We would rightly condemn it as an act of war. Cuba is a bankrupt country the size of Virginia that poses no threat to the United States. And today, Cuba's economy has all but collapsed. According to the United Nations, the impact of the oil blockade has been devastating for Cuba's health system. More than 100,000 surgeries have been delayed, including 12,000 pediatric procedures, due to acute shortages of medicines and medical supplies. Survival rates for children with cancer have fallen from 85 percent to 65 percent. That amounts to thousands of children who would otherwise be alive today. More than 2.5 million people are experiencing water shortages--more than one-fifth of the total Cuban population.”
“Cuba's economy is entirely dependent on imported fuel to power its electrical grid, agriculture, and transportation needs, the country typically requiring around 100,000 barrels per day to function normally. Since January 30, the United States has imposed an illegal blockade on oil shipments to Cuba, so the island is entirely dependent on domestic production which consists of heavy, high-sulfur crude that cannot be easily refined. When asked about the humanitarian crisis on the island, where electricity is unavailable most hours of the day and night and hospitals, schools, and factories have all but ceased to function, the Trump administration routinely blames the Cuban authorities. Any objective observer knows that is a convenient oversimplification.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 103 (Thursday, June 18, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 103 (Thursday, June 18, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S2933] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] CUBA Mr. WELCH. Mr. President, whatever one thinks of the Cuban Government--and I am one who believes its repressive policies and mismanagement of the economy have caused immense hardship for the Cuban people--the depth of misery and desperation people in Cuba are currently experiencing is largely due to the oil blockade, for which the United States is responsible. More than 84 percent of Cuba's total energy supply relies on oil and petroleum products.”
“I would say the same about other corrupt, undemocratic governments, including some we treat as partners. But the American people have always opposed using food and medicine as a weapon. That has been a bedrock principle that Republican and Democratic administrations, and the Congress, have reaffirmed over decades. By cutting off the oil, we are imposing collective punishment on Cuba's most vulnerable people. Children and the elderly are dying needlessly. I urge Secretary of State Rubio to consider the human cost of the administration's oil blockade. It is illegal. It is immoral. It is preventable. And it is beneath this country. ____________________”
“The bottom line is this: All basic services, from potable water and sanitation to food production and healthcare, are being severely impacted by the lack of fuel and electricity caused by the U.S. oil blockade. The energy crisis is also limiting the ability of the UN and other humanitarian agencies to deliver aid already committed, with dozens of containers of food and medical supplies reportedly still sitting in ports due to the lack of fuel. The UN's Plan of Action to respond to the crisis is only 21 percent funded. The U.S. has offered $100 million through private mechanisms like the Catholic Church, but it has not yet been delivered. We would all like to see a better government in Cuba, one that cares more about the Cuban people than in holding onto power and enriching themselves.”
“The national water system is functioning with only 37 percent of the fuel required, and 84 percent of water pumping runs on electricity. Food prices have increased by 18 percent. Energy shortages are disrupting agricultural production, food processing, refrigeration, and distribution. Hunger and malnutrition are widespread. The lack of electricity and water, combined with food shortages, is causing psychological distress and exhaustion, especially among children, the elderly, and caregivers. The streets are overflowing with rotting garbage. The hurricane season is beginning, and rising temperatures are creating conditions for a surge in vector-borne and waterborne diseases when the health system is already stretched to its limits.”
“Imagine if there was no electricity in this country for lack of access to oil, due to the hostile acts of another government. We would rightly condemn it as an act of war. Cuba is a bankrupt country the size of Virginia that poses no threat to the United States. And today, Cuba's economy has all but collapsed. According to the United Nations, the impact of the oil blockade has been devastating for Cuba's health system. More than 100,000 surgeries have been delayed, including 12,000 pediatric procedures, due to acute shortages of medicines and medical supplies. Survival rates for children with cancer have fallen from 85 percent to 65 percent. That amounts to thousands of children who would otherwise be alive today. More than 2.5 million people are experiencing water shortages--more than one-fifth of the total Cuban population.”
“Cuba's economy is entirely dependent on imported fuel to power its electrical grid, agriculture, and transportation needs, the country typically requiring around 100,000 barrels per day to function normally. Since January 30, the United States has imposed an illegal blockade on oil shipments to Cuba, so the island is entirely dependent on domestic production which consists of heavy, high-sulfur crude that cannot be easily refined. When asked about the humanitarian crisis on the island, where electricity is unavailable most hours of the day and night and hospitals, schools, and factories have all but ceased to function, the Trump administration routinely blames the Cuban authorities. Any objective observer knows that is a convenient oversimplification.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 103 (Thursday, June 18, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 103 (Thursday, June 18, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S2933] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] CUBA Mr. WELCH. Mr. President, whatever one thinks of the Cuban Government--and I am one who believes its repressive policies and mismanagement of the economy have caused immense hardship for the Cuban people--the depth of misery and desperation people in Cuba are currently experiencing is largely due to the oil blockade, for which the United States is responsible. More than 84 percent of Cuba's total energy supply relies on oil and petroleum products.”
“The Assistant Attorney General, Harmeet Dhillon, surely, at the direction of the White House, is punishing career attorneys. This is outrageous. Also, reportedly, political appointees at the Department of Justice have ordered the dismissal of all active cases and the closing of all active investigations by this section. Our Civil Rights Division within the Department of Justice has a revered history for standing up for the rights of all citizens and their constitutional rights to be enforced and protected, and that brazen attack on the Civil Rights Division will leave it totally unable--as the President, apparently, prefers--to defend the democratic right of our citizens to vote. I urge my colleagues to oppose the President's Executive order. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.”
“President Trump is attacking the right to vote with respect to dismantling of the Department of Justice organization of attorneys who are being punished for their efforts to protect that right to a vote. That organization within the Justice Department is being actively dismantled. And the President has currently used the Department of Justice as a tool to enact his--my view--very extreme policy positions, and that includes the Civil Rights Division at the Department whose mission includes protecting the right to vote. According to press reports, all career supervisors in the voting rights section have been reassigned to other positions completely outside their areas of expertise. In other words, it is about destroying the Civil Rights Division.”
“The Executive order President Trump has signed flips that framework and purports to vest the President with expansive new powers that he does not have--not just him but any chief executive. It attempts to enact through Executive fiat what the Trump administration seemingly believes it cannot achieve through the legislative process, through an act of Congress; namely, Senate consideration of the SAVE Act, many provisions of which are contained in the President's Executive order. I ask my colleagues to join me in focusing our attention on the very real problems that confront our Nation and are pushing back against the Trump administration's usurpation of the Senate's constitutional prerogatives.”
“Study after study has also shown that the rate of noncitizen voting is incredibly small, almost too small to measure--roughly 0.0001 percent, according to a reliable estimate. Obviously, that error is so small that it is hard to measure and would not have any material impact on our elections. If you don't believe me, ask folks over at the libertarian Cato Institute, a very conservative organization. They have labeled President Trump's claims about noncitizen voting as ``bogus''--their word, not mine. The order of the President also raises significant constitutional issues. The Constitution entrusts our States--and in the case of certain core rules of conduct, Congress--with the authority to regulate elections, not the Executive.”
“At the same time, despite the political violence at home and rising tensions abroad, the Trump administration has taken an ax to CISA. As we know, that is the Agency that works to curb emerging cyber security threats. And that threat, those threats, are a threat to the election integrity that is so essential to the well-being of our democracy. The Executive order makes an assumption that noncitizen voting is a problem. The assertion that noncitizens are voting is alarming. Fortunately, it is not true. Also, Federal law already bars noncitizens from voting in congressional and Presidential elections. So this is not a question of whether there is some backdoor effort on the part of one party to allow noncitizens to vote. It can't be done. It is illegal now. This Executive order would not change that.”
“Like my colleagues--all of us--I am committed to safeguarding the security of our elections and working with anyone and everyone in the Chamber to advance that objective. All of us revere the right of citizens to make the decision about who their leaders are. Unfortunately, many of our colleagues in the House, Republicans in the House, have fought to gut the election security grants our States depend on. I say that--usually, these are not partisan issues on voting, but it is turning into that. And we are seeing a one-sided, one-party approach, particularly out of the House, that goes to the [[Page S2698]] heart of our electoral process and the right of each of our citizens to make their decision and their vote be the one that counts.”
“Mr. President, first of all, I want to thank the senior Senator from California not just for his leadership on protecting the voting rights of all citizens in this country but for his work as the California Secretary of State, where he gained a nationwide reputation for running free and fair elections. Senator Padilla, thank you so much for your work there, and thank you so much for your leadership here. I want to stand here in solidarity with my colleagues to push back, oppose, denounce President Trump's March 25 Executive order, which claims to preserve the integrity of U.S. elections. It does no such thing. And, by the way, the idea that the President, who spent years denying the outcome of the election he lost gives him absolutely no credibility when he is speaking about his commitment to free and fair elections.”
“That means that we exercise authority over tariffs; we don't give that away to an executive branch decision. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.”
“It is not just about how they infect our economy with corruption, where it is who you know rather than how hard you work that is going to get you ahead. It is about the basic structure of our constitutional order, and every single one of us has the responsibility to protect that because that is not about us. It is not about who we represent. It is about how our country can operate with a democratic system where every single person, through their representatives, has a seat at the table. So I urge all of us to take a look at what our constitutional responsibility is. Whether we agree or not on so many different issues of vital concern to the future of this country, we each have a responsibility to act in a way that protects the constitutional system.”
“We have delegated that authority to the President, and it is wrong of us to do that. So we can have different views about whether there should be a tariff or what the rate should be, but we have a collective responsibility to do everything we can to maintain the constitutional structure of three independent branches of government, each a counterweight to the other. That is not just an abstract concept; that is the wisdom that has served us well for well over 200 years, that those checks and balances give all our citizens an opportunity to have a seat at the table when major decisions about their lives and their futures are being made. So that is why this decision that we are about to make is not just about the tariffs. It is not just about, in my view, how recklessly they are being applied and imposed.”
“There is no authority greater than the power to tax, and that is why, in the Constitution, the power to impose tariffs resides in the House of Representatives and the Senate. And shouldn't it be that way? Because in the imposition of the tax, there has to be a decision that--in asking our citizens, who we represent, to turn over hard-earned money to the government, we have to be able to justify the purpose for which those funds are being expended. By allowing the President to take over, in effect, the taxing authority that occurs when the tariff is imposed, we have ceded that responsibility to him or that authority to him, and we have abandoned our responsibility to look our constituents in the eye if and when we say a tax should be imposed. None of us like to do that, but a government has to collect revenues for the common good.”
“So there is no coherent rationale connected to the imposition of this enormous economic pain and cost increase that is being imposed on American businesses and American consumers. [[Page S2690]] The other question here that is profoundly important for this institution--every single one of us is proud to be a Member of the U.S. Senate, and I think our pride is about our pride in the Constitution as citizens where, under the Constitution, this Congress plays a role as a coequal branch of government. And I think every single one of us here is wary of the accumulation of excessive power in any one person or in any one institution. Congress has steadily over the years been ceding much of its responsibility and authority to the executive branch.”
“Another thing is there is a casual disregard for how hard it is for everyday families in the Presiding Officer's State and mine and in the ranking member's State to pay the bills because inflation has been here. Instead of arguing about who is at fault for that, let's solve the problem, not aggravate the problem. And these tariffs aggravate the problem. There is absolutely no denying that. This is just the wrong thing at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. Another element of this is, what is the purpose of these tariffs? President Trump won't give a clear answer. It is to make us rich. They will pay; we won't. It is to bring manufacturing back here. Or it is to punish folks that he deems unworthy. It depends on the day, and it depends on who is asking.”