This is not an official government website.
© 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Congressional Daily Record
This section captures a formal floor step rather than a policy debate. It mentions legislation such as To provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14., committees such as Committee on Armed Services, members such as Richard Blumenthal.
Official title: Unanimous Consent Requests--S. 1032 (Executive Calendar)
Issued
June 17, 2026
senate side of the record
People
3
Linked members mentioned in this section
Legislation
3
Bills and resolutions linked from this section
Committees
1
Committees connected to this section
Senate Holds
0
No hold activity linked here
Source Document
Connected Data
People mentioned
Committees
Source Control
Reader mode is for comprehension. The linked government PDF is the official published source.
Download official Senate Record PDFReturn to issue contextMr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am back again after Republicans have blocked my effort for a vote—a vote—on the Major Richard Star Act. Six times Republicans have blocked benefits for combat-injured veterans.
Let's be very clear. Right now, a combat-injured veteran with less than 20 years, including at least 400 service men and women who have been injured in the Iran war, are going to be docked dollar for dollar in their retirement pay for what that received in disability benefits.
That is wrong. It is morally wrong. It is legally wrong. It is politically wrong. And by a simple act of Congress, we can correct this injustice.
The Major Richard Star Act will cost about $9 billion over 10 years. We have worked to reduce the amount of funding necessary from $13 billion. But Republicans are saying that there needs to be a subtraction from another program, what is called an offset or a pay- for, so that there is no additional spending on those veterans who have been combat injured and are reduced in their retirement pay dollar for dollar when they receive disability benefits for that combat injury.
then they are docked dollar for dollar for their retirement pay as a result of the disability pay. They have earned both. They deserve both.
I could end there in arguing for the Major Richard Star Act.
And, in fact, this idea of a pay-for—how absurd? How unfair? The cost of caring for our veterans is a cost of war, and we should be prepared to make that investment and spend that money on men and women who were promised both retirement pay and disability benefits. We made that promise to them. A great nation keeps its promises, especially to our bravest and boldest.
their argument and do my best with it because if there needs to be an offset, I have worked hard to find one. And, in fact, I offered it in the Armed Services Committee as an amendment just days ago.
What was the result? My amendment was ruled out of order. Why? Maybe we will find out some time, but the fact of the matter is I have an offset, and I want to tell the Members of this body how we can find $9 billion in a $1.1 trillion Defense budget.
Committee approved a National Defense Authorization Act with, yes, $1.1 trillion. That is about a 30 percent or more increase over last year. The Department of Defense is awash in money, and a lot of it is going to programs that are wasteful, will never see the light of day, and are completely unnecessary to our national defense.
So let's talk about an offset. Let's take the high figure, $13 billion, the maximum figure, funding needed for the Major Richard Star Act.
In the “Great Big Beautiful Bill,” also known as H.R. 1, there are billions and billions of dollars, and $111 billion of it is unspent. In fact, it is not only unspent, it is unobligated. That is to say, if you want to talk legalese, there isn't a contract dispended. There isn't a commitment to allocate it to a contractor or a member of the military— $111 billion.
There is no feasible way that the U.S. Department of Defense—call it the Department of War—can allocate or obligate that money before the end of the fiscal year, which is September 30 of 2026. There is just no way that the Department of Defense can obligate all of that money before the end of the fiscal year for which it is appropriated under that “Great Big Beautiful Bill.”
I propose taking $13 billion of it and making it available to the Department of Defense, which has responsibility. It has the obligation to pay retirement and disability compensation—to pay retirement compensation.
additional money for retirement pay, let's take a DOD program that will in effect involve unobligated and unspent money.
even though it offends me deeply to correct an injustice by saying: We have to take the money from another Department of Defense program.
program than do what Republicans are suggesting we do as an alternative. In fact, they have a bill which they have called the Take Care of America's Veterans Act. They take care of America's veterans to correct the Richard Star injustice by cutting an unprecedented amount of disability benefits for more than 1.4 million veterans.
provisions that still have not been fully made available, even though the bill was announced last week on a Thursday before we all left for home.
veterans who suffer from sleep apnea or tinnitus. That is millions of veterans.
It takes away their benefits. It robs them of benefits that they are entitled to receive. Now, I think that solution is deeply unfair and profoundly unnecessary. And my view is supported by members of the veterans community, the veterans service organizations that have weighed in against that supposed solution.
The VFW national commander Carol Whitmore said:
The [Veterans of Foreign Wars] strongly opposes the Take
Care of America's Veterans Act as currently drafted because
it asks future disabled veterans to bear the cost of
expanding benefits through changing the VA rating schedule
for tinnitus and obstructive sleep apnea—common conditions
associated with . . . poly trauma.
I think this point is very important. This bill, the Major Richard Star Act, is a standalone bill to do justice. And the Republican solution is to take away benefits from veterans who have suffered combat injuries that those benefits are designed to address.
The DAV national commander Coleman Nee said:
[W]e reject the premise that the only way to fulfill the
promises made to the men and women who served in the past is
by cutting benefits for veterans in the future.
And IAVA CEO Dr. Kyleanne Hunter said:
Veterans' disability compensation is not a budgetary
offset.
Foreign Wars, and Paralyzed Veterans of America, and Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America have all opposed the Take Care of America's Veterans Act for this same reason.
And as Dr. Hunter said:
It is compensation for injuries [and] illnesses and
conditions incurred through military service. Of particular
concern are proposals that target veterans living with
service-connected tinnitus and sleep apnea.
the Department of Defense—unobligated funds—money that will not be spent, not taking away from disabled veterans.
Department of Defense or Department of War program is a profoundly dangerous way to set a precedent and a pay-for.
Hegseth, said he supports the Major Richard Star Act without an offset. Large bipartisan majorities in the Senate—we have 80 cosponsors here— and in the House—336 cosponsors—support the Major Richard Star Act without an offset. That is the reason why, as recently as yesterday, a senior Department of Defense official told stakeholders that the Department of War will support the Major Richard Star Act without an offset.
deserve better than the rule that Secretary Collins apparently is talking about issuing. He hasn't issued it yet. He hasn't formally proposed it. There is no comment period. But my Republican colleagues say he is going to issue it; therefore, we should use it to make these savings. Well, he should not issue it. He should not eliminate benefits for sleep apnea and tinnitus. If he does it, he will have betrayed those veterans who lose those benefits.
My position has been consistent. I opposed President Biden and his administration when they had a similar proposal in 2022. And do you know what happened? They withdrew it because the hue and cry from the veterans community was so loud and the firestorm was so hot that they had no alternative. I ask the veterans of America to once again make their voices heard against an injustice.
adopt such a misguided, unfair, and unjust policy. What veterans deserve is the Major Richard Star Act, and my hope is that we can break through this logjam and that today, my Republican colleagues will not object and do right by our Nation's veterans.
unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be discharged and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 1032, the Major Richard Star Act; that the Blumenthal substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Banks). Is there an objection?
The Senator from North Carolina.
Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I am going to be brief because I know we have other Members waiting to speak. But just by way of offsets, I know that my friend from Connecticut said he is offended by requiring an offset.
I think the Presiding Officer and I might be like-minded on this. The Presiding Officer and I both have the distinction of voting against the PACT Act in 2022. I voted against the PACT Act—only nine Members of the U.S. Senate did; the majority of my conference voted with it— because it was unfunded. It was a trillion-dollar promise being made to veterans. I knew absolutely well that if we didn't do the work to figure out how to pay for it, we weren't going to fulfill that promise.
As I told everyone back then, I am from a veterans State. We have 1 million veterans in our State. One in 10 people in North Carolina is a veteran. I talk to them every single day. When they asked me why I voted against it, I said: When I make a promise, I want to fulfill it.
you are just making a promise. You haven't created the mechanics and you haven't really made a promise you can fulfill because you haven't said how the money is going to come.
the problems with implementing the PACT Act. I have seen other hearings about how other promises have been broken so that we can start fulfilling the promises of the PACT Act. That is what happens when you don't think through the process, and I think that is what we have here.
the Take Care of America's Veterans Act. Rather than come down here and produce the same result—and I should add that my colleague from Connecticut was not able to pass this through unanimous consent when Democrats were in the majority. If we want to solve this problem, if we want to solve this specific problem, which I want to solve, we do the work in the committee to put the policy down and to fund it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from North Carolina for making my argument for me. We should not make empty promises. Those veterans are due their retirement benefits fully. They are due their compensation benefits fully. We promised them those benefits. The Major Richard Star Act enables them to receive what we have promised them.
And yes, this bill has been before the Congress for a long time. It has been written and rewritten. Work has gone into it. And I have now presented to the Senate an offset which should be unnecessary. My colleague from North Carolina is absolutely right—we should not demand offsets to do what is right and to fulfill our promises. But if it takes a vote of the full body, I would welcome it.
a vote, give us a vote, enable us to vote aye or nay, which I have demanded now again and again and again.
unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Democratic leader but no later than August 7, 2026, the Committee on Armed Services be discharged and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 1032; further, that there be up to 2 hours for debate on the bill equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Blumenthal substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time; and the Senate vote on passage of the bill, as amended, with 60 affirmative votes required for passage, all without intervening action or debate and no amendments or motions in order to the bill prior to the vote on passage.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
The Senator from North Carolina.
Mr. TILLIS. Reserving the right to object, it has been said that if it has already been said before, there is no need in saying it again. So I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. I regret again that we have been blocked now for a seventh and eighth time, but I will continue to fight for the Major Richard Star Act. It represents the will of 80 Members of the U.S. Senate, hundreds of Members of the House of Representatives, and the overwhelming view of
veterans in America and the people of America.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
Mr. SCHATZ. If the Senator from Florida is ready to deliver her remarks, I would defer. I don't have enough time to give my remarks before the 2:15 vote, so just to keep the Senate on time, I will defer and try to land another time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Florida.