Some Democratic senators regret voting to confirm Kristi Noem as DHS secretary
WASHINGTON — Five days after President Donald Trump's inauguration, seven Senate Democrats voted to confirm Kristi Noem to lead the Department of Homeland Security.
Nearly five months later, most of them are critical of her, with some going as far as to say they regret their votes.
"I'm very disappointed. I'm very disappointed in her," Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told NBC News this week. "If I were voting on her today, I definitely wouldn't vote for her."
Freshman Sen. Andy Kim, D-N.J., also said he would vote differently and oppose her nomination if he could do it again.
"She's weaponizing the Department of Homeland Security. She is taking so many actions right now that are making us less safe and going against a lot of the things that she said that she was going to focus on," Kim said Wednesday. "So I have no confidence in her leadership right now."
The five other Democrats who voted to confirm Noem were Sens. Elissa Slotkin and Gary Peters, both of Michigan; Maggie Hassan and Jeanne Shaheen, both of New Hampshire; and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. The vote on Jan. 25 was 59-34, with Republicans unanimously voting for Noem. Seven senators, six of whom caucus with the Democrats, missed the vote.
At the time, several Democrats were struggling to find their way forward on the issue of immigration enforcement, which is largely run by DHS, following Trump's election victory.
Now, the mood has changed in the wake of the administration's aggressive deportation agenda and moves to target green card holders and international students. On top of that, Democrats expressed outrage after Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., was forcibly removed from a DHS news conference last week when he tried to ask Noem a question.
Slotkin said she voted for Noem because Michigan has "major equities with the Department of Homeland Security" as a border state that is "about to open up a huge new bridge" to Canada.
But while Slotkin stopped short of saying she'd switch her vote, she was critical of Noem's performance.
"She has, frankly, not been in much control of policy. I see her more as a bystander, often, to policy — especially what's going on right now," Slotkin said. "And you know, we've been urging our committee to take more accountability on her."
Peters, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, which oversees DHS, said he's "not surprised" by Noem's actions and disagrees with many of them.
Asked whether he stands by his vote to confirm her, Peters said, "I'm the ranking member on the committee, and I have to have a working relationship with the secretary, regardless of the positions that they take."
"And so far we've, we've been able to have that," he said.
Fetterman — who has broken with his party on some issues, including immigration — didn't comment when he was asked whether he stands by his vote for Noem or how he rates her performance.
The two New Hampshire senators criticized Noem in statements provided by their offices without saying whether they stand by their votes.
'Senator Hassan has serious concerns about some of the Department of Homeland Security's recent actions and continues to press for more answers and oversight — including into Senator Padilla's treatment last week,' Hassan spokesperson Sahil Mehrotra said.
And Shaheen spokesperson Brendan Duff said: 'Senator Shaheen has been disappointed by the Secretary's tenure heading the Department of Homeland Security and remains concerned by her leadership of the agency thus far, including her severe lack of transparency. She intends to continue demanding answers and holding the Department accountable.'
A DHS spokesperson didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who voted against Noem, tore into her performance.
"It's really hard to imagine someone doing a worse job as the secretary of homeland security," Schiff said in an interview. "The draconian, inconsistent, inflammatory immigration policies; the lawlessness; the rendering of people outside the country to maximum-security prisons; the arrest of U.S. citizens; the constant, bizarre spectacle of her doing dress-up outside of a maximum-security prison; or in her various cosplay. It's embarrassing, and it takes the focus off of what should be the heart of that job, and that is protecting our homeland security."
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Some Democrats are finally standing up to Trump – even if it gets them arrested
Not all Democrats are afraid to push back against Donald Trump's immigration policy. Some are willing to be detained. In safely blue areas of the country, constituents are asking themselves who has the audacity to stand up to President Donald Trump's extreme immigration agenda. Earlier this week, New York City constituents got their answer. On June 17, New York City comptroller and mayoral candidate Brad Lander was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents while escorting a man out of immigration court in Manhattan. Lander, who repeatedly asked to see a judicial warrant for the man ICE was attempting to detain, was held in custody for four hours. The federal government is still trying to decide whether it will charge him with a crime. 'We're not just showing up for just a few families, or for the strength of our democracy,' Lander told the supporters waiting for him outside the federal courthouse. 'We are showing up for the future of New York City.' While it's unclear that Lander's arrest will make any difference in his chances to be New York City's next mayor, one thing is now certain: He is the kind of person the city and Democrats need in the Trump era. Democrats should be fighting Trump's systematic hate Lander is now a member of an exclusive group of Democratic politicians who have gotten into legal trouble for combating the Trump administration's extreme deportation agenda. These politicians are not doing anything wrong – they are simply trying to stand up for the immigrants who make this country great. Opinion: Trump lied about the LA protests so you wouldn't see what he's really doing The first to face legal repercussions was Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan, who was arrested in April and later indicted for allegedly assisting an undocumented immigrant in escaping arrest. Then in May, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka was arrested at an ICE detention center when three members of New Jersey's congressional delegation arrived for an unannounced inspection. Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-New Jersey, who was also arrested that day, was indicted on June 10 for allegedly interfering with immigration officers. Less than a week before Lander's arrest, Sen. Alex Padilla, D-California, was handcuffed and thrown out of a Department of Homeland Security news conference. This defiance is encouraging to see. People who have the privilege of a public platform are putting their careers on the line to stand up for those who are being terrorized by the federal government. These actions, so long as they are peaceful, are how Democrats should be reacting to the Trump administration. We need a mayoral candidate who suits New York Until this moment, Lander had flown under the radar for the duration of the city's mayoral race. Despite his position as the city's top financial officer and an endorsement from a panel of experts with The New York Times, Lander has been polling behind front-runner Andrew Cuomo, a former New York governor, and Zohran Mamdani, a member of the New York State Assembly. Who is Zohran Mamdani? A Democratic socialist is running for NYC mayor. I hope he can rally voters. | Opinion It's not that Lander is a bad candidate – he's experienced and policy-driven, and he has a progressive view of what the city can be. He and Mamdani have cross-endorsed each other in the hopes of besting Cuomo in the ranked-choice voting system. Lander just doesn't have Cuomo's name recognition or Mamdani's charisma. By getting arrested, Lander has shown New Yorkers that someone is willing to stand up for their values of protecting immigrants. We don't have to elect Cuomo, who had to resign in disgrace in 2021 after more than a dozen women accused him of sexual harassment. Nor do we have to elect incumbent Eric Adams, who has welcomed ICE into our city against the wishes of the voters. Lander is showing us that we could have someone who is willing to fight the Trump administration while leading the nation's most populous city. And he's one of several showing Democrats the way forward. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Nashville Mayor Freddie O'Connell stands behind doxing ICE agents even after officials said his actions put them in danger
The Democratic mayor of Tennessee's largest city, who has been accused of obstructing federal immigration efforts, defended his office's decision to publicly dox the names of immigration officers. Nashville Mayor Freddie O'Connell's defense came even after the names of federal immigration officials were removed from a public immigration report detailing a month's worth of immigration-related interactions between local police and federal immigration authorities. Initially, the public report detailed immigration officers' names, but following backlash over the move the names were taken down. 'I wouldn't say it was an endangerment process, I would say they may have some concerns – I'm far more concerned about the overall dynamic we have about unmarked, unidentifiable masked people whisking people into vehicles – i think that's a bigger concern,' O'Connell, who is currently under investigation by GOP House lawmakers for potentially interfering with federal immigration efforts, said during a press conference with reporters. O'Connell did add the move was not 'intentional,' but then quickly followed up that he wouldn't have described what happened as 'doxing' in the first place. 'It's not a process that I would characterize as doxing. It was an unintentional release of names that were already part of a public record,' he told reporters. 'They were already part of a public record by being in Department of Emergency Communication's calls, so I don't think it puts them at additional risk. But it's also not an intention of the executive order under which those names are released.' Nashville Mayor Freddie O'Connell was accused of obstructing federal immigration efforts. WireImage Fox News Digital reached out to O'Connell's office for comment but did not hear back in time for publication. Larry Adams, an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Assistant Field Office Director, told local Fox affiliate in Nashville WZTV that ICE agents disagree that making their names public is not a risk, noting their faces can easily be matched to photos on social media. 'It has gotten more and more difficult,' Adams said of his job under the new administration's aggressive deportation tactics, during a ride along with WZTV that occurred last week. 'What affects me the most, is we understand the job we are doing, we understand what we sign up for, it's mostly the attacks or threats against our families.' After Tennessee Republican Congressman Rep. Andy Ogles requested the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) investigate the Nashville mayor over allegedly obstructing federal officials, the agency followed through and opened an investigation. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers gathered at the DHS field office in Nashville on May 4, 2025. REUTERS Meanwhile, two congressional committees are also investigating him, including requesting documents related to O'Connell's Executive Order 30, which has required city departments to report federal immigration communications to the city of Nashville's Office of New Americans. In an interview with Fox News' Laura Ingraham, Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin remarked at the danger associated with doxing federal immigration officers, noting that the act effectively handed cartels intelligence 'on a silver platter.' 'These are the tip of the spear, these are the people on the front lines trying to make our communities safer,' McLaughlin said. 'So, when Democrats and the media show us who they are, we'll believe them, and it's the fact that they're fighting for people like MS-13 and child rapists to be on American streets.' According to local news outlet, the Tennessee Lookout, McLaughlin has also clapped back at O'Connell's claims that the release of immigration officials' names was a mistake. 'They claimed it was a mistake. There's zero chance it was a mistake, and there will be repercussions,' she said, according to the outlet.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
How Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' Could Impact Skiing
On Wednesday, June 11, 2025, the US Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee published a provision to the current reconciliation bill that was introduced by the House earlier this year. The bill is referred to as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' by President Donald bill and its provision introduce a number of polarizing policies on things like funding for environmental and land management agencies, as well as the sale of huge parcels of public lands, which has a potentially massive impact on outdoor recreation in the US. One of the key points in the bill's most recent provision mandates the sale of between 0.5% and 0.75% of the 193 million acres of land managed by the US Forest Service, and 245 million acres managed by the BLM for housing development. In total, the bill references between roughly 2.2 million and 3.3 million acres of land split between BLM (1.23-1.84 million acres), and the Forest Service (between 956,000 and 1.45 million acres) that would be sold across 11 western states including Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Utah, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada and what does this mean for skiers? Keep reading for to keep up with the best stories and photos in skiing? Subscribe to the new Powder To The People newsletter for weekly updates. According to a fact sheet issued by the Committee, which is led by Utah Senator Mike Lee, the sale excludes the sale of National Parks, National Monuments, National Recreation Areas, components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, National Wildlife Refuge System, National Fish Hatchery Systems, Wilderness Preservation Areas, and 'nearly every other protected designations.''This is not about our most sacred and beautiful places. This is often about barren land next to highways with existing billboards that have no recreational value', said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum. The fact sheet also notes that the US Department of the Interior estimates that the BLM has 1.2 million acres of land within a mile of a population center and another 800,000 acres between one and five miles of a population center. The Forest Service has another million acres within one mile of population centers, all which may qualify for 'disposal.' While lands like those in our National Parks and Monuments are protected under their current federal designations, a recent Justice Department opinion means that the President is allowed to both designate and repeal National Monuments, and their land protections, without a vote from Congress, per the Antiquities Act. President Trump is no stranger to the Act, as he significantly reduced the size of Bear's Ears National Monument in Utah in 2017, in what was the largest reversal of federal land protections in U.S. history. A map released by the Wilderness Society shows the large splotches of Forest Service and BLM land that could be included in these disposals across the 11 western states. A quick scroll through the map (included at the top of this article) shows the footprints of many ski areas covered by the green overlay of Forest Service land. While the protections of National Parks and National Monuments feel precarious under the bill and the current administration, the fact sheet does note that land with valid existing use permits cannot be sold as part of the it pertains to skiing, many ski areas in the US operate on Forest Service land with a Ski Area Term Special Use permit, created under the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act of 1986. Section IV of this permit notes that these permits qualify as valid existing rights, making it highly unlikely, at least in the bill's current state, that any of the Forest Service lands that ski areas are on such as Mt. Bachelor, Arapahoe Basin, Mt. Hood, Steamboat, Keystone, Copper, and more could be sold and developed. So, while the current provision to the bill might not threaten ski area footprints themselves, there are other pieces of the bill that would certainly have an effect on skiing, and more broadly, the use of our public lands for recreation. For one, land near ski resorts doesn't necessarily fall under the rights of a Ski Area Special Use permit, and could hypothetically be sold. The fact sheet says that 'the proposal prioritizes lands that are nominated by States or units of local governments; are adjacent to existing developed areas; have access to existing infrastructure; are suitable for residential housing; reduce checkerboard land patterns; or are isolated tracts that are inefficient to manage.' However, with a number like 2.2 million acres as the minimum number of land acreage mandated to be sold in the bill, there is a distinct possibility that the footprint of lands sold would bleed beyond those dubbed 'prioritized' by the proposal. Given the bill's $29 billion in expected revenue, and an emphasis on building housing, a resource that can be sparse in mountain towns that are often bordered by expanses of Forest Service and BLM land, the idea that precious wilderness would be sold is not remotely impossible. Along with the potential sale of lands managed by The Forest Service, proposed funding would also be rescinded for a number of Forest Service programs, including the protection of old growth forests. These budget cuts to the US Forest Service could be up to $392 million in management alone, and another $391 million to Forest Service operations budgets in an effort to 'restore federalism by empowering states to assume a greater role in managing forest lands within their borders.' Additionally, Interior Secretary Burgum is pushing for a bill that would cut $900M in funding for the National Park Service, which would potentially lead to the closure of up to 350 sites managed by the National Park Service, and the cutting of 5,000 full-time Park Service rescinding of funds for the National Park System and Bureau of Land Management would also impact funding for the carrying out of projects concerning the conservation, protection, and resiliency of lands and resources managed by the two agencies, as well as for certain conservation and habitat restoration projects on NPS and BLM Lands. In total, the administration's 2026 budget recommendations would cut around a billion dollars from the NPS. 'Isn't it a betrayal of the relationship (between Congress and the Forest Service) to be cutting programs in half in preparation for shutting them down completely when the vision has not been laid out by Congress to do so?' said Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, who also expressed concern over a reorganization of the country's firefighting teams, an issue close to the hearts of many Oregonians. Beyond the bill's provision on public lands, there are other facets of the bill that have potentially catastrophic long term effects on our climate. As skiers, we know that climate change is already a threat to our winters, livelihoods, and passed, the bill would rescind funding for a number of government agencies and programs that monitor and collect data on climate change-related metrics, as well as for federally funded conservation programs. Specifically, the bill rescinds funding to implement the EPA's addressing of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a commonly used component in traditional ski waxes that have been found to have significant negative environmental impacts. The bill would also rescind funding for the Council on Environmental Quality as it pertains to collecting data related to environmental and climate issues, amongst other things. Funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and USGS, whose work is essential in weather forecasting and studying climate change, would be rescinded. This could be detrimental to certain communities when preparing for extreme weather summarize, the bill and provision in question have the potential for a massive reduction in size to public lands used for recreation, like skiing, and funding cuts to government led research and management of climate change, that could have significant impacts on the planet's rapidly warming climate. Conservation groups such as the Outdoor Alliance and Protect Our Winters, as well as a slew of brands, athletes, and outdoor climate activists in skiing have taken to social media to share information and encourage the public to contact their Senate representatives with their opinions on the bill passed in The House on May 22, 2025, and is now up for debate in the Senate. President Trump is reportedly hoping for a Senate vote to take place by July 4, 2025, but any number of things could delay that vote. If passed, the bill would be sent back to the House for approval before being sent to the oval office to be Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' Could Impact Skiing first appeared on Powder on Jun 18, 2025
