Gary Peters on Homeland Security

Selfridge Base plays a key role in keeping Michigan strong

"Since World War I, Selfridge Air National Guard Base has been a critical asset to our Armed Forces," said Peters, a member of the Armed Services Committee and former Lieutenant Commander in the US Navy Reserve. "This resolution recognizes the remarkable contributions of generations of men and women who have served at Selfridge and helped strengthen our nation's security. Selfridge plays a key role in keeping Michigan strong, and I'll continue fighting to support the base for years to come."

AdWatch: endorsed by VoteVets for military service

VoteVets described itself as the "largest progressive group of veterans in America." A 2016 report from the Center for Public Integrity described the group as a "liberal 'dark money' nonprofit."

The new ads will start airing Thursday in multiple TV markets, including Detroit, Flint and Grand Rapids, according to a press release.[Ad text: "Call Gary Peters. Thank him for sponsoring the Securing America's Ports of Entry Act"]

Less-than-honorable discharged veterans can regain benefits

Protect religious non-profits against terrorism

Served in US Navy Reserves; signed back up after 9/11

Following the terrorist attacks on September 11th, Gary signed back up for the Navy Reserve, and again served overseas in support of US operations. During his twelve years of service, he received numerous awards and citations, including the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal and the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal.

Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell, and reinstate discharged gays.

Repeals current Department of Defense policy [popularly known as `Don`t-Ask-Don`t-Tell`] concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces. Prohibits the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the Coast Guard, from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation against any member of the Armed Forces or any person seeking to become a member. Authorizes the re-accession into the Armed Forces of otherwise qualified individuals previously separated for homosexuality, bisexuality, or homosexual conduct.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require the furnishing of dependent benefits in violation of section 7 of title 1, United States Code (relating to the definitions of `marriage` and `spouse` and referred to as the `Defense of Marriage Act`).

Endorsed by VoteVets.org; against wasteful defense spending.

About VoteVets.org:
Founded in 2006, and backed by over 220,000 supporters, the mission of VoteVets.org is to use public issue campaigns and direct outreach to lawmakers to ensure that troops abroad have what they need to complete their missions, and receive the care they deserve when they get home. VoteVets.org also recognizes veterans as a vital part of the fabric of our country and will work to protect veterans` interests in their day-to-day lives. Statistics:

• Over 220,000 supporters in all 50 states, including troops, veterans, military families, and their supporters
• State Captains organizing in all 50 states
• Over 200 interviews, news stories, and on air media appearances
• Over 5 million voter contacts since 2006 in various forms
• Over $30 million raised and spent since inception

• An end to wasteful spending, such as the out-of-date F-22, with a greater focus on practical equipment, such as body and vehicle armor.
• A 21st Century G.I. Bill, to make college affordable for our returning service-members, allowing them to become part of the middle class.
• A repeal of Don`t Ask, Don`t Tell, allowing more Americans to serve in the Armed Forces, and stop the depletion of our military of essential specialists, such as translators.
• Increased financial support for mental health care for our service members, as well as greater research and treatment of Traumatic Brain Disorders.
• An end to the destructive `Stop Loss` policy, which involuntarily extended deployments, as well as increased time on the home front between deployments.
• Passage of landm

  Restrict domestic monitoring of phone calls.

  Peters signed restricting domestic monitoring of phone calls

  The Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ensuring Effective Discipline Over Monitoring Act of 2014 or the USA FREEDOM Act: Congressional Summary:

• Requires the FBI, when seeking phone call records, to show both relevance and a reasonable suspicion that the specific selection term is associated with a foreign power engaged in international terrorism.
• Requires a judge approving the release, on a daily basis, of call detail records; and to limit production of records to a period of 180 days.
• Requires a declassification review of each decision issued by the FISA court; and make such decisions publicly available, subject to permissible redactions.

Opposing argument: (ACLU, `Surveillance Reform After the USA Freedom Act`, June 3, 2015): The USA Freedom Act that passed by a 67-32 margin is not as strong as we wanted. It is markedly weaker than the original version of the USA Freedom Act that the ACLU first supported in 2013. We supported a sunset of the provisions in an effort to advance more comprehensive reform, including rejecting surveillance through cybersecurity information-sharing legislation. Notwithstanding this, however, it is very clear that the USA Freedom Act is a historic step forward.

Opposing argument: (Cato Institute , `Cato scholars differ on USA Freedom Act`, Oct., 2015): The privacy community remained divided over the USA Freedom Act. The final version of the bill reauthorized several expiring Patriot Act provisions, but limited bulk collection. Some legislators argued that to pass new legislation would only provide the government convenient new legal justification for its spying--which it would interpret broadly. On the opposite side of the argument stood some pro-privacy groups who held that modest reforms were better than no reforms at all.

End bulk data collection under USA PATRIOT Act.

Congressional summary:: Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ending Eavesdropping, Dragnet-collection, and Online Monitoring Act or the USA FREEDOM Act:

• Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to require that the records sought pertain to an individual in contact with a foreign power.
• Amends the USA PATRIOT Act to minimize the acquisition and retention of information and to prohibit its unauthorized dissemination.
• Imposes additional requirements on the authorized use of pen registers and trap and trace devices (devices for recording incoming and outgoing telephone numbers).
• Prohibits the searching of collections of communications of US persons.

  Opponent`s argument against (Electronic Frontier Foundation): The bill only addresses a small portion of the problems created by NSA spying. It does not touch problems like NSA programs to sabotage encryption standards; it does not effectively tackle the issue of collecting information on people outside of the US; and it doesn`t address the authority that the government is supposedly using to tap the data links between service provider data centers, such as those owned by Google and Yahoo. The bill also does not address excessive secrecy; it won`t deal with the major over-classification issues or the state secrets privilege.

  Opponent`s argument against (J. Kirk Wiebe, former NSA Senior Intelligence Analyst interview with TheRealNews.com): It`s window dressing. Stopping bulk collection is a good step, but the only thing that`s going to fix this is direct access into NSA`s databases by an independent group of hackers, techie types, people like Snowden who know how to get into a network and look at things and verify that the data they`re collecting and what they`re doing with it complies with the Constitution. The NSA has essentially operated illegally--unconstitutionally--for 60% of its existence.

  Source: HR3361 & S1599 14-H3361 on Oct 29, 2013

  $515B for military plus $89B off sequester for wars.

  Peters voted YEA National Defense Authorization Act

  Congressional Summary: HR 1735: The National Defense Authorization Act authorizes FY2016 appropriations and sets forth policies regarding the military activities of the Department of Defense (DOD), and military construction. This bill also authorizes appropriations for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), which are exempt from discretionary spending limits. The bill authorizes appropriations for base realignment and closure (BRAC) activities and prohibits an additional BRAC round.

  Wikipedia Summary: The NDAA specifies the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense (DOD) for Fiscal Year 2016. The law authorizes the $515 billion in spending for national defense and an additional $89.2 billion for the Overseas Contingency Operations fund (OCO).

  Opposition statement by Rep. Gerry Connolly (May 15, 2015): Congressman Connolly said he opposed the bill because it fails to end sequestration, and pits domestic investments versus defense investments. Said Connolly, `This NDAA uses a disingenuous budget mechanism to circumvent sequestration. It fails to end sequestration.`

  Support statement by BreakingDefense.com(Sept, 2015): Republicans bypassed the BCA spending caps (the so-called sequester) by shoving nearly $90 billion into the OCO account, designating routine spending as an emergency war expenses exempted from the caps. This gimmick got President Barack Obama the funding he requested but left the caps in place on domestic spending, a Democratic priority. `The White House`s veto announcement is shameful,` Sen. John McCain said. `The NDAA is a policy bill. It cannot raise the budget caps. It is absurd to veto the NDAA for something that the NDAA cannot do.`

  Legislative outcome: House rollcall #532 on passed 270-156-15 on Oct. 1, 2015; Senate rollcall #277 passed 70-27-3 on Oct. 7, 2015; vetoed by Pres. Obama on Oct. 22, 2015; passed and signed after amendments.

  Source: Congressional vote 15-HR1735 on Apr 13, 2015

  Exempt Veterans Affairs from federal hiring freeze.

  Peters signed exempting Veterans Affairs from federal hiring freeze

  Excerpts from Letter from 53 Senators to President Trump We are deeply troubled that your freeze on the hiring of federal civilian employees will have a negative and disproportionate impact on our nation`s veterans. As such, we urge you to take stock of this hiring freeze`s effect on our nation`s veterans and exempt the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) from your Hiring Freeze.

  • Have you considered how this hiring freeze will affect VA`s ability to provide veterans with access to health care?
  • How it will affect VA`s ability to decide on appeals for disability compensation?
  • How it will impact those veterans who apply to federal jobs?
  We urge you to classify VA`s delivery of health care as a national security and public safety responsibility, and exempt it from this hiring freeze. To do otherwise is to jeopardize the national security and public safety of our nation.

  Opposing argument: (Heritage Foundation, `Eliminate Redundant Government Hiring,` May 9, 2017): It`s not hard to find federal programs that are duplicative or ineffective. The president`s executive order requires all agency heads to submit plans for reorganizing their operations. Their proposals are to `include recommendations to eliminate unnecessary agencies and programs.` That all sounds great, but what does it actually mean?

  Well, for starters, it means the previous federal hiring freeze is no more. But it doesn`t mean programs and departments are free to hire willy-nilly. Instead, they`ve been instructed to follow a smart-hiring plan, consistent with the President`s America First Budget Blueprint.

  A few agencies, like the Defense Department and Veterans Affairs, will beef up staff. Most, however, will have to pare down employment. All federal employees can expect to see resources shift to higher-priority ones. Many may be asked to do something new or different with the goal of optimizing employees` skills and time.

  Source: Letter on DVA 17LTR-DVA on Jan 26, 2017

  Click here for definitions & background information on Homeland Security. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Gary Peters. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Gary Peters. Click here for SenateMatch quiz answers by Gary Peters. Click here for a summary of Gary Peters's positions on all issues. Click here for issue positions of other MI politicians. Click here for issue statements from MI primary archives. Click here for issue statements from MI secondary archives.
  Other candidates on Homeland Security:		Gary Peters on other issues:
  MI Gubernatorial: Aric Nesbitt Dick Posthumus Garlin Gilchrist Garrett Soldano Gretchen Whitmer James Craig Jocelyn Benson John James Mike Cox Mike Duggan Perry Johnson Tom Leonard Tudor Dixon MI Senatorial: Abdul El-Sayed Debbie Stabenow Elissa Slotkin Haley Stevens James Craig Joe Tate Leslie Love Mallory McMorrow Mike Rogers Peter Meijer MI politicians MI Archives	Senate races 2026: AK: Dan Sullivan(R,incumbent) vs.Andy Barr(R) vs.Mary Peltola(D) AL: Tommy Tuberville(R,retiring) vs.Barry Moore(R) vs.Steve Marshall(R) vs.Kyle Sweetser(R) vs.Everett Wess(D) AR: Tom Cotton(R,incumbent) vs.Dan Whitfield(I,withdrew) vs.Hallie Shoffner(D) vs.Ethan Dunbar(D,lost primary) CO: John Hickenlooper(D,incumbent) vs.Janak Joshi(R) vs.Julie Gonzales(D) vs.Mark Baisley(R) DE: Chris Coons(D,incumbent) vs.Mike Katz(I) FL: Ashley Moody(R,appointee) vs.Alan Grayson(D) vs.Angie Nixon(D) vs.Alex Vindman(D) GA: Jon Ossoff(D,incumbent) vs.Buddy Carter(R) vs.Mike Collins(R) vs.John F. King(R,withdrew) IA: Joni Ernst(R,retiring) vs.Ashley Hinson(R) vs.Jim Carlin(R) vs.Bob Krause(D) vs.Josh Turek(D) vs.Zach Wahls(D) vs.J.D. Scholten(D,withdrew) ID: Jim Risch(R,incumbent) vs.David Roth(D) vs.Todd Achilles(I) IL: Richard Durbin(D,retiring) vs.Juliana Stratton(D) vs.Raja Krishnamoorthi(D) vs.Robin Kelly(D) vs.Don Tracy(R) KS: Roger Marshall(R,incumbent) vs.Patrick Schmidt(D) KY: Mitch McConnell(R,retiring) vs.Andy Barr(R) vs.Nate Morris(R) vs.Daniel Cameron(R) vs.Charles Booker(D) vs.Pamela Stevenson(D) LA: Bill Cassidy(R,incumbent) vs.John Fleming(R) vs.Julia Letlow(R) vs.Jamie Davis(D) MA: Ed Markey(D,incumbent) vs.Seth Moulton(D) vs.John Deaton(R) vs.Brian Shortsleeve(R) vs.Mike Minogue(R) vs.Shiva Ayyadurai(I) ME: Susan Collins(R,incumbent) vs.Janet Mills(D) vs.Graham Platner(D) MI: Gary Peters(D,retiring) vs.Haley Stevens(D) vs.Mallory McMorrow(D) vs.Mike Rogers(R) vs.Abdul El-Sayed(D) vs.Joe Tate(R,withdrew)	MN: Tina Smith(D,retiring) vs.Angie Craig(D) vs.David Hann(R) vs.Peggy Flanagan(D) vs.Royce White(R) vs.Michele Tafoya(R) MS: Cindy Hyde-Smith(R,incumbent) vs.Scott Colom(D) vs.Ty Pinkins(D then I) MT: Steve Daines(R,retiring) vs.Kurt Alme(R) vs.Alani Bankhead(D) vs.Reilly Neill(D,lost 6/2 primary) vs.Seth Bodnar(I) NC: Thom Tillis(R,retiring) vs.Michael Whatley(R) vs.Roy Cooper(D) vs.Wiley Nickel(D,running for D.A.) NE: Peter Ricketts(R,incumbent) Cindy Burbank(D) vs.Dan Osborn(I) NH: Jeanne Shaheen(D,retiring) vs.Chris Pappas(D) vs.John Sununu(R) vs.Scott Brown(R) NJ: Cory Booker(D,incumbent) vs.Justin Murphy(R) NM: Ben Ray Lujan(D,incumbent) vs.Matt Dodson(D,lost 6/2 primary) vs.Larry Marker(R) OH: Jon Husted(R,appointee) vs.Sherrod Brown(D) OK: Markwayne Mullin(R,appointed to Cabinet) vs.Kevin Hern(R) vs.Troy Green(D) vs.Ervin Yen(I) OR: Jeff Merkley(D,incumbent) vs.Jo Rae Perkins(R) vs.David Brock Smith(R) RI: Jack Reed(D,incumbent) vs.Connor Burbridge(D) SC: Lindsey Graham(R,incumbent) vs.Catherine Fleming Bruce(D) vs.Paul Dans(R) vs.Annie Andrews(D) SD: Mike Rounds(R,incumbent) vs.Julian Beaudion(D) vs.Brian Bengs(I) TN: Bill Hagerty(R,incumbent) vs.Marquita Bradshaw(D) vs.Diana Onyejiaka(D) TX: John Cornyn(R,incumbent) vs.Ken Paxton(R) vs.James Talarico(D) vs.Wesley Hunt(R,lost primary) vs.Jasmine Crockett(D,lost primary) VA: Mark Warner(D,incumbent) vs.David Williams(R) WV: Shelley Moore Capito(R,incumbent) vs.Tom Willis(R) Rachel Fetty Anderson(D) vs.Jeff Kessler(D,lost primary) vs.Zach Shrewsbury(D,lost primary) WY: Cynthia Lummis(R,retiring) vs.Harriet Hageman(R) vs.Reid Rasner(R) vs.James Byrd(D)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War/Peace Welfare Other Senators Congressional Votes (analysis) Congressional Ratings Affiliations Policy Reports Page last updated: Jun 09, 2026; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org