[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 31, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S528-S533]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



        Nominations of Betsy DeVos, Tom Price, and Andrew Puzder

  Mr. President, along with Rex Tillerson, I have serious concerns with 
the nominees that are going through our Senate HELP Committee, as well 
as the vetting process that has taken place.
  My Republican colleagues rushed us into a hearing on President 
Trump's nominee for Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, for example. 
When we started the hearing, the Republican Chairman, the senior 
Senator from Tennessee, preemptively declared he would be limiting 
questions to just 5 minutes per Member, a shocking and disappointing 
breach of committee tradition, clearly intended to limit public 
scrutiny.
  When the questions began, it quickly became clear why Republicans 
felt the need to protect her. Ms. DeVos refused to rule out slashing 
investments in or privatizing public schools. She was confused about 
the need for Federal protections for students with disabilities. She 
argued that guns needed to be allowed in schools across the country to 
``protect from grizzlies.''
  Even though she was willing to say that President Trump's behavior 
toward women should be considered sexual assault, she would not commit 
to actually enforcing Federal law, protecting women and girls in our 
schools.
  I would say I was shocked at this candidate's lack of qualifications 
to serve, but at this point, you know what, nothing surprises me when 
it comes to President Trump's new administration.
  As was the case with Ms. DeVos, Democrats were also unable to 
thoroughly question President Trump's nominee for Health and Human 
Services, Congressman Tom Price. I can understand why Republicans would 
not want Congressman Tom Price to defend his policies, which would take 
health care coverage away from families, voucherize Medicare, and 
undermine women's access to reproductive health services, despite 
President Trump's comments to make health care better for patients and 
even provide insurance for everybody. These are issues that families 
and communities do deserve to hear about, and they also deserve a 
thorough investigation into serious questions about whether Congressman 
Price had access to nonpublic information when he made certain medical 
stock trades while he was in the House.
  Lastly, I have to say, I have grown increasingly concerned that 
President Trump's nominee for Secretary of Labor, Andrew Puzder, 
represents yet another broken promise of his to put workers first. On 
issue after issue, Andrew Puzder has made clear that he will do what is 
best for big businesses, like his own, at the expense of workers and 
families.
  He has spoken out against a strong increase in the minimum wage. He 
has been one of the most vocal opponents of our efforts to update the 
rules so that millions more workers can earn their overtime pay.
  Puzder has even talked about replacing workers with robots because 
``they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there's never a 
slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case.'' That is a 
quote from Puzder.
  He has aggressively defended his company's offensive ads, leaving 
women across the country wondering whether he can be trusted in a role 
that is so critical to women's rights and safety in the workplace.
  All of that makes a lot of sense coming from a millionaire CEO who 
profits off of squeezing his own workers. But it is very concerning 
coming from a potential Secretary of Labor, someone who should be 
standing up for our workers and making sure they get treated fairly, 
rather than mistreated.
  So, now more than ever, people across the country want to know how 
the Trump administration will continue to impact their lives. We 
Democrats consider it our job to stand up when President Trump tries to 
hurt the families whom we represent. We are ready to stand with 
families we represent, to hold him and his administration accountable, 
and we refuse to back down and are prepared to fight back.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong 
opposition to President Trump's nomination of Rex Tillerson to be the 
next Secretary of State. There are many, many reasons to oppose this 
nomination, and my colleague from Washington has just listed several of 
them. But the main reason for me is as simple as it is disturbing: 
Tillerson's extensive and longstanding ties with Russia mean that the 
United States of America simply cannot trust him to be a strong 
advocate for the interests of our country.
  Here is what has been publicly reported. Our intelligence agencies 
have concluded that the Russian Government conducted a successful 
series of cyber attacks on the United States designed to help Donald 
Trump get elected President. Intelligence chiefs have briefed the 
President on a dossier alleging that the Russian Government has 
collected compromising information on him. And in response, the 
President has attacked the intelligence community.

  This week, he installed his political crony, Steve Bannon, a man with 
ties to White nationalists, on the National Security Council while 
marginalizing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the 
Director of National Intelligence.
  Now, there is significant reason to believe that the President has 
extensive financial relationships with Russia, but nobody actually 
knows any of

[[Page S529]]

the details because he has refused to release his tax returns. And, 
apparently, the President's own national security adviser is currently 
under FBI investigation for his own interactions with the Russian 
Government.
  This is only the 12th day of the Trump Presidency, and this is what 
is going on right now--12 days. I wish this weren't happening. I wish 
things were normal, but this is not normal. We cannot simply ignore all 
of this as we evaluate the President's nominees to critical foreign 
policy and national security jobs.
  I have heard some people say that Rex Tillerson doesn't know anything 
about diplomacy or have any experience with foreign policy. I actually 
think that is wrong.
  For the last decade, Tillerson has served as the CEO of ExxonMobil, a 
massive company that would have roughly the 42nd largest economy in the 
entire world if it were its own country. As the leader of that giant 
oil company, Tillerson was an expert at diplomacy; specifically, how to 
advance the interests of his own fabulously wealthy oil company and 
himself, no matter the consequences for American foreign policy toward 
Russia.
  Russia has vast oil resources, and Exxon is one of the world's 
largest oil companies. Getting at that oil is a critical priority for 
Exxon--such a high priority, in fact, that when it came time to pick a 
new CEO, Exxon chose Tillerson, who had spent years managing the 
company's Russia efforts. This isn't just a passing coincidence. 
Tillerson has worked closely with Putin's senior lieutenants, and, in 
2013, Tillerson received the highest honor that the Kremlin gives to 
foreigners.
  Tillerson's Russia projects ran into trouble the following year, 
however, because after Russia invaded Ukraine and started illegally 
annexing territory, Europe and the United States slapped sanctions on 
Russia. Those sanctions made life more difficult for Exxon, so 
Tillerson ignored them. He forged ahead despite the sanctions, signing 
more agreements with Russia, and then he used his army of well-funded 
lobbyists to undermine our sanctions with Russia.
  When confronted with the facts about this in his confirmation 
hearing, Tillerson first pretended that he didn't know if the company 
had lobbied at all. And then later, he said: Well, the company simply 
participated in discussions with lawmakers without actually taking a 
position.
  He is saying that they paid their lobbyists to show up and just talk 
generally, not to advance what the company wanted. You know, when you 
hear something that lame, you wonder just how dumb he thinks we are.
  Mr. Tillerson has argued that in his job at Exxon he was advocating 
for the interests of his giant oil company. And he understands that 
being Secretary of State is a different job.
  Really? At his hearing, Tillerson lamented that when sanctions are 
imposed, ``by their design, [they] are going to harm American 
businesses''--as though the principal question the Secretary of State 
should be asking when deciding whether to hold Russia accountable for 
hacking our elections or for annexing Crimea is whether it might dent 
the bottom line of a powerful oil company.
  And has Tillerson really separated himself from Exxon? Tillerson is 
receiving a massive $180 million golden parachute for becoming 
Secretary of State--$180 million. It is a special payout that he 
wouldn't get if he were taking some other job. He is getting it only 
because he is coming to work for the government.
  I have opposed these parachutes for many years now, and many of us 
have worked on legislation to make them criminally illegal--many of us. 
I have opposed nominees in my own party over them because if your 
employer offered you $180 million to go to work for the government, 
that looks an awful lot like a bribe for future services. This kind of 
payment raises questions about whether you work for the government, for 
a multinational oil company, or for both at the same time. America 
deserves a Secretary of State who works for the American people, 
period.
  Will Tillerson help Exxon while he is in office? Well, the law 
requires him to recuse himself from any matters involving this company 
for how long? For just 1 year.
  Common sense requires Tillerson, who, again, is receiving a $180 
million special payment from the company where he has worked his entire 
adult life--common sense requires him to recuse himself from all 
matters involving Exxon for the entirety of his time in government. But 
when pressed by my Massachusetts colleague, Senator Markey, Tillerson 
flatly refused to do it.
  Mr. Tillerson's views, experiences, relationships, and compromising 
arrangements with Russia aren't my only problem with this nomination, 
not by a long shot.
  Mr. Tillerson's company has spent years lying about climate change. 
In Massachusetts, we have laws about consumer fraud: telling people 
lies about your product, lies that could make a difference about 
whether or not customers want to buy it. The Massachusetts attorney 
general, Maura Healy, has been investigating whether Exxon deliberately 
misled people about the impact of climate change on our economy, on our 
environment, on our health, and on our future.
  Exxon didn't want to answer, so they bullied and stonewalled all the 
way. But it hadn't worked. In fact, our attorney general won a court 
ruling earlier this month, and Exxon is being forced to hand over 40 
years' worth of internal documents that will show what the company knew 
about climate change, when they knew it, and whether they lied to their 
customers, their investors, and the American public.
  Tillerson bobbed and weaved on climate change at his confirmation 
hearing. I wonder if he is just trying to avoid accidentally saying 
anything that might help Massachusetts finally find out and hold his 
company accountable for massive fraud. Look, that may be OK for a CEO, 
but that is not good enough for someone who wants to be our Nation's 
Secretary of State.
  Climate change is a defining issue of our time, and the last thing we 
should do is hand our foreign policy over to someone who cares more 
about lining his own pockets than the survival of our planet.
  I could go on at length about the glaring problems with Mr. 
Tillerson's nomination. It is amazing how far we have fallen, to go 
from John Kerry, an accomplished statesman, combat veteran, 
Presidential candidate, long-time public servant, and son of 
Massachusetts, to a billionaire with a golden parachute and no record 
of public service or putting American foreign policy interests ahead of 
his own corporate interests.
  When we vote, Senators should understand this: Handing American 
foreign policy over to the leader of a giant oil company is not 
something we do in the United States; it is something Vladimir Putin 
would do in Russia.
  Donald Trump is building his Presidency in the image of Vladimir 
Putin, and that is good for Russia, but it is a real problem for 
America.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition to the 
confirmation of Rex Tillerson, the President's nominee to be Secretary 
of State, and I will tell you why in two words: Vladimir Putin.
  Rex Tillerson's ties to Russia have been widely reported. The Senator 
from Massachusetts has outlined a number of them, specifically his ties 
to President Putin, who awarded him the Order of Friendship after 
signing deals with the state-owned oil company, Rosneft.
  Now isn't the time to cozy up to Russia. Now is the time to stand up 
to Russian aggression in Crimea, in eastern Ukraine, and Syria.
  Just yesterday, we heard reports of another outbreak of fighting 
between Ukrainian forces and Russian-backed separatists in war-torn 
eastern Ukraine. And all you have to do is speak to a Ukrainian and let 
them tell you--as I met with the former Prime Minister yesterday, and I 
will be meeting with a former Member of their Parliament, let them tell 
you what it is like to have the Russian Army march on your country and 
take part of it away, as they did with Crimea, and then come in under 
the disguise of little green men, as if they did not have ties to the 
Russian Army. That is going on in eastern Ukraine right now.
  Our own intelligence community has told us that the Russian President 
personally ordered a campaign to influence the 2016 Presidential 
election

[[Page S530]]

right here in the United States. That campaign--a mix of covert Russian 
operations, cyber attacks, cyber operations, and propaganda--was only 
the latest in a series of efforts to undermine American leadership and 
democracies around the world and what is coming next for the elections 
in Europe in the next few months.
  Russia is testing us, and I am concerned that Mr. Tillerson cannot 
stand up to the Russian President who, I am afraid, thinks of himself 
as the next Russian czar.
  In Mr. Tillerson's past, as Exxon's CEO, he lobbied against sanctions 
on Russia for invading and seizing Crimea--the very sanctions that we 
and our allies have put on Russia for taking over sovereign territory 
of another independent country. And now it is not clear, as our 
Nation's top diplomat, that Mr. Tillerson would fight to keep the 
sanctions in place, even as President Trump is now considering lifting 
them, despite the clear evidence of Russia's continued aggression.
  During his confirmation hearing, Mr. Tillerson refused to condemn the 
Russian and Syrian bombings in Aleppo as war crimes, a question that 
was proffered to him by the Senator, my colleague from Florida, who 
happens to sit in the Chair right now.
  I also have serious concerns that Mr. Tillerson doesn't understand 
the urgent need to combat climate change. You don't have to remind us 
about climate change in Florida. South Florida is ground zero for 
climate change. Miami Beach is awash at the seasonal high tides as the 
water flows over the curbs and over the streets, causing Miami Beach to 
spend hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars to install pump 
stations, raise the roads, and address all kinds of flooding and 
saltwater intrusion. Other South Florida communities have had to move 
their water well locations farther west because of the intrusion of 
South Florida into the freshwater aquifer.

  Climate change is not a problem that we are going to face some day in 
the future; it is a daily struggle for communities along our coasts all 
over America. The U.S. State Department is responsible for engaging 
with other countries to confront both the cause of climate change and 
the devastating impact of drought, sea level rise, and severe weather.
  By the way, speaking of sea level rise, this Senator convened a 
meeting of the Senate Commerce Committee in Miami Beach a couple of 
years ago. We had testimony from a NASA scientist that measurements--
not forecasts, not projections, but measurements--in the last 40 years 
of sea level rise in South Florida were 5 to 8 inches higher. That is 
sea level rise. That is why even the Department of Defense is 
concerned. Climate change has the potential to destabilize nations. How 
about Bangladesh? It has the potential to drastically reduce potable 
water supplies and result in crop loss and food shortage and to create 
climate refugees.
  We simply cannot play fast and loose with the science that will help 
save our planet. The top diplomat of our country has to confront the 
reality of climate change today and to work on it immediately. Mr. 
Tillerson has not adequately laid out a plan to address that global 
climate crisis.
  For all the reasons I have outlined, including many more, I will vote 
no.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Rounds). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, as the Presiding Officer well knows, 
the Secretary of State is one of the most important positions in the 
President's Cabinet. He is the Nation's chief diplomat, and he 
champions American values. He is the symbol in a sense, the chief voice 
and advocate around the world of America. The Secretary of State is in 
a sense our representative to the world, embodying and promoting, 
hopefully, the best in America to billions of people around the globe, 
proving to the world yet again that America is exceptional, that we are 
the greatest country in the history of the world, and that we have a 
respect for the rule of law, for human dignity and rights for all, 
including the right to live in a safe and free environment.
  Past Secretaries of State have changed history, averted and navigated 
war, brokered peace, championed human rights, and fought to make the 
world a better place. In this time of immense uncertainty, we must 
demand nothing less of our next Secretary of State than that he be a 
great reflection and representative of the United States to the world.
  The likes of Hillary Clinton, Colin Powell, Madeleine Albright, 
George Marshall, and Charles Evan Hughes have all held this position. 
To join these titans or even to aspire to their position is no small 
challenge. We need a candidate who will continue to embody what is 
right even in the face of resistance from adversaries and foes who do 
not admire and, in fact, seek to do harm to our way of life.
  As ExxonMobil's CEO, the President's nominee, Rex Tillerson, has 
worked hard and successfully for his corporation. In fact, he has put 
that corporation's interests ahead of America's interests. That may 
have been his job, and I understand that was his job description, but 
doing that job well does not qualify him to be our Nation's chief 
diplomat and to assume the mantle of defending our national interests.
  Having worked for four decades for this oil giant, without any 
government experience, I am unconvinced that Mr. Tillerson has shown he 
is able to reverse this oil interest mindset and put America's needs 
before his former employer. I do not have faith that he can rise to the 
paramount challenge of representing us on the world stage.
  I share my colleagues' concerns. We have heard numerous of our 
colleagues express the same view--that his oil interests will harm the 
progress we have made to protect the environment and slow the impact of 
climate change. I say that reluctantly because I hope I am wrong. He is 
likely to be confirmed, but I hope my colleagues think hard and long 
and join me in opposing Rex Tillerson.
  I am also hopeful that a number of his other stances, such as 
enforcing sanctions that hold our adversaries accountable--notably, 
Russia and Iran--will change as well. These stances have been 
troubling. I have little confidence that Mr. Tillerson will vigorously 
enforce these sanctions and even less confidence that he will guide 
President Trump to provide the crucial advice our demonstrably rash and 
ill-advised President needs.
  I want to point particularly to some of the tactics ExxonMobil used 
in its litigation against legal challenges that were brought based on 
climate change information that allegedly was concealed by ExxonMobil. 
These tactics are deeply troubling, and I hope that maybe the toughness 
of ExxonMobil in those tactics will be replicated in the toughness that 
is brought to bear in enforcing the sanctions against Iran and Russia 
because he has shown a troublesome trend of opposing sanctions that 
have held Iran accountable--sanctions that pushed Iran to the table in 
negotiating the Iran nuclear agreement, which has made our world a 
safer place.
  Across decades and administrations, the Senate reached an 
overwhelmingly bipartisan consensus that the Iran regime should be 
aggressively sanctioned for its global missile program, state 
sponsorship of terrorism, and gross human rights violations. ExxonMobil 
directly and together with other global oil companies and through the 
financing of third-party advocacy organizations has persistently tried 
to stop Congress from passing sanctions legislation.
  ExxonMobil has been a board member of USA Engage since its founding 
in 1997 and from 2003 to 2007 held the chairmanship of that 
organization. For two decades it has actively lobbied Congress to 
oppose Iran-related sanctions bills, including last year for at least 
four such pieces of legislation.
  ExxonMobil has worked to prevent the authorization and extension of 
the Iran sanctions act, which I am proud to say was renewed for another 
10 years by Congress, becoming law just a few weeks ago, and I was 
proud to support it. Yet, during Mr. Tillerson's hearing, he denied 
that ExxonMobil ever lobbied against Iran's sanctions, in the face of 
facts to the contrary. As Ronald Reagan said, ``Facts are stubborn 
things.''

[[Page S531]]

  Foreign policy experts and military leadership have explicitly 
identified Russia as a growing threat and a violator of international 
law. Many of us in this body--in fact, I would say the majority--have 
recognized that fact. Yet Mr. Tillerson does not seem to treat Russia 
with the same gravity.
  We need a Secretary of State who is going to work with our NATO 
allies and stand up for us and not give Putin a pass. We are all aware 
of Mr. Tillerson's inappropriate stance toward relations with a country 
responsible for assaults on world order through cyber attacks, illegal 
land grabs, and war crimes. We are the victims of a cyber attack by 
Russia, an act of cyber war. The Secretary of State must be somebody 
who regards that kind of attack as intolerable and unacceptable.
  Mr. Tillerson's affinity for Russia is alarming because he adds to 
the growing list of Putin admirers in this administration, and that 
list unfortunately includes the President himself and National Security 
Advisor Michael Flynn.
  Mr. Tillerson's opposition to sanctions imposed on Russia for its 
illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 was not the result of national 
security concerns but, rather, because ExxonMobil stood to make 
millions, even billions of dollars from the business deal that 
corporation had recently made with Russia to develop its oil and gas 
interests. What is good for ExxonMobil is not necessarily good for the 
United States of America. These sanctions were put in place because 
Russia's invasion of Ukraine was unacceptable and now has led to at 
least 10,000 deaths, 20,000 wounded, and 2 million people displaced.
  These are hard numbers and hard facts--the result of Russian 
aggression that must be countered.
  As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I have fought to include 
and pass the NDAA's robust funding for Ukrainian assistance. I am proud 
to say that this initiative was successful. I also successfully urged a 
provision that terminated U.S. contracts with the Russian arms export 
agency.
  Mr. Tillerson made it clear during his nomination hearing that his 
stance was unchanged. He could not admit that Vladimir Putin is a war 
criminal, despite these deaths and the torture involved in this 
aggression and other similar acts, or to say that the sanctions against 
Putin's Russia are necessary and appropriate. His views are 
inconsistent with the interests of the United States of America.
  Given his troubling trend of dodging questions during his testimony, 
I cannot confidently say that he will follow the clear direction of 
Congress concerning sanctions policy. I will say bluntly and frankly to 
my colleagues that my particular concern is that sanctions laws contain 
waivers. Those waivers are provided to the President for the rare 
requirement that such sanctions may be waived when it is in the 
national interest or for national security. This exception must be used 
exceedingly sparingly and judiciously. Sanctions without enforcement 
are worse than no sanctions at all. They are meaningless, and they 
raise false expectations. My fear is that under Mr. Tillerson, if he is 
advising President Trump, those exemptions and exceptions will swallow 
the rule.
  Talking about rules, if confirmed, Mr. Tillerson will be responsible 
for executing President Trump's extremely misguided policy expanding 
the global gag rule, which prevents foreign aid from being provided to 
global health programs that discuss or provide abortion services. The 
result will be to obstruct programs that cover everything from HIV 
prevention to maternal and child care and epidemic disease responses, 
putting lives at risk. This is just the opposite of what we ought to be 
doing. It makes the world less safe, as does this weekend's Executive 
order that bans refugees and Muslims. We need someone willing and able 
to voice resistance and opposition to policies that flagrantly fly in 
the face of everything we value--our American values. We need a 
Secretary of State ready to stand up for the most vulnerable people and 
speak truth to power, even when that power is the President of the 
United States. The fact is, sadly, that Mr. Tillerson has never taken 
strong stances on these issues, leaving us guessing as to what he will 
do when and if he is in office.
  I cannot support anyone to be Secretary of State who fails to condemn 
the suspension of our Refugee Resettlement Program directly under his 
purview. When we target refugees, we target people who are victims of 
the same oppressors and tyrants and murderers that we call enemies. 
Refugees are not our enemies. Many are fleeing the murderous Syrian 
regime and ISIL, which are our enemies. We are at war with ISIL, and we 
must win that war. We are disadvantaged by a policy that excludes 
refugees on the basis of religion, because we alienate our allies with 
the sources of intelligence and troops on the ground, and we lead to 
the misimpression--and it is a misimpression--that we are at war 
against Islam or our Muslim neighbors when, in fact, our enemy is 
violent extremists.
  These refugees and immigrants see America as a beacon of hope, but 
they are now receiving the message that, whoever they are and however 
strong their claim to come here is, their religion will bar them, their 
religion denies them the right to come to this country, their religion 
will ban them.
  Mr. Tillerson has never denounced this strategy when it does so much 
to damage our international credibility, our values at home, and our 
Constitution. Four judges have stayed the President's Executive orders. 
My respectful opinion is that the President's orders are, in fact, 
illegal.
  The question is this: Will he defend career diplomats who have spoken 
out against these policies? Will he take a stand himself against them? 
Will he stand up for American values?
  One story in particular struck me because it involves my own State of 
Connecticut. Last Saturday, a Syrian refugee who settled in Milford, 
CT, 2 years ago, Fadi Kassar, anxiously awaited the arrival of his wife 
and two daughters, ages 5 and 8. He has not seen them since resettling 
in this country. His family was turned away before they could board a 
flight to the United States. They were told they were not going to be 
allowed to enter this country following the President's refugee ban. 
Despite having been granted refugee status--asylum--three days before 
the refugee ban, they would no longer be united with Mr. Kassar in the 
United States.
  I am working--and I hope the Secretary of Homeland Security may be 
listening, if not at this moment then at some point in the future, to 
my entreaty that he do the right thing, that he make their entry 
possible. They have gone through all of the necessary screenings, 
submitted all of the necessary forms. Yet, under the President's 
Executive action, they are denied refuge in the United States based 
only on their nationality and their religion.
  Mr. Kassar's family is now back in Jordan without luggage, without 
clothes, and without the new home they were so close to having. My 
office has offered assistance to Mr. Kassar's lawyers, and we are 
working to help in any way we can.
  The United States--Connecticut in particular--has a proud moral 
tradition and heritage of aiding refugees who need our help when their 
own homelands are in turmoil. President Trump's egregious acts 
contravene our values, contradict our Constitution, and should be 
rescinded immediately.
  Mr. Tillerson, join me in urging President Trump to rip up this 
order. It is the only solution.
  I am not confident, until I hear him say so, that he is ready to be 
the leader we need in the Department of State to ensure that America's 
values of acceptance and assistance hold strong in an administration 
that directly challenges these most cherished traditions and values.
  Our Secretary of State must be clear-eyed about threats facing our 
Nation, both from adversaries abroad and others who would do us harm 
inside our borders. I regretfully conclude that Mr. Tillerson has 
failed to demonstrate that ability to do so, and I urge my colleagues 
to join me in opposing his nomination.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHATZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.

[[Page S532]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCHATZ. Mr. President, American history has been shaped by U.S. 
Secretaries of State. Secretary Dean Acheson guided the United States 
through the Cold War. Secretary Madeleine Albright proved that 
diplomacy does not depend on gender and that protecting refugees and 
human rights are core American principles. Secretary Henry Kissinger 
laid the groundwork for peace between Egypt and Israel. And forgive me 
for using such a recent example, but Secretary John Kerry helped to 
bring the international community together to tackle climate change.
  As our Nation's top diplomat, the Secretary of State is the highest 
ranking cabinet member and the President's top adviser on U.S. foreign 
policy.
  The Secretary balances relationships with some 180 countries and is 
responsible for tens of thousands of Americans working at more than 250 
posts around the world.
  In other words, it takes a remarkable knowledge base and skill set to 
be Secretary of State, particularly as the United States takes on a 
complex and complicated set of issues. At the top of the list is 
climate change. The global changes we have seen in the climate are 
affecting almost every part of the world, from droughts in Sub-Saharan 
Africa to rising sea levels in parts of Asia.
  We have also not seen this level of refugees and migrants since after 
World War II. The Rohingya, Syrians, Afghans, Guatemalans, and many 
others are fleeing war, violence, persecution, and instability. 
Globalization and technology have disrupted economies, leaving 
governments, companies, and workers trying to figure out how to keep up 
with the times without being left behind. Terrorism and violent 
extremism haunt parts of the globe, from the Middle East to Europe, and 
to our own borders.
  The Secretary of State has to take on all of these challenges and do 
it in a way that advances U.S. interests and values. After reviewing 
his record and his testimony before the Senate, I am not satisfied that 
Rex Tillerson is the right person to lead the State Department. On each 
of these criteria--views, knowledge base, and skills--I have concerns 
about his nomination at this point in the process.
  First, I am not satisfied with Mr. Tillerson's views. There has been 
a clear consensus among both parties on the foundation of U.S. foreign 
policy. Throughout the confirmation process, however, Mr. Tillerson 
indicated that his views did not necessarily align with that consensus. 
During discussions on international human rights, the hearing record 
shows that Mr. Tillerson was vague about oppressive governments, 
extrajudicial killings, and the bombing of hospitals. He demurred when 
given the opportunity to rule out a Muslim registry, a concept that is 
anathema to American values, and yet this administration is dangerously 
close to implementing one.
  Perhaps most concerning were Mr. Tillerson's views on Russia. I don't 
need to be the umpteenth person to list the many, many concerns we have 
about a country that is not America's ally. For decades, there has been 
bipartisan consensus about U.S. relations with Russia, and I am 
uncomfortable with confirming a Secretary of State who does not share 
that bipartisan view.
  Secondly, I am not satisfied that Mr. Tillerson has the knowledge 
base to lead U.S. diplomacy. His vision for the State Department seemed 
to confuse the roles of the Department of State and the Department of 
Defense. During his confirmation hearing, Mr. Tillerson responded to a 
question on the South China Sea, but his answer focused on military 
solutions instead of the long list of diplomatic options which we 
should first explore.
  That is not to say a Secretary of State can't recommend military 
solutions. There is certainly a long history of the State Department 
doing just that, but it should always be as a last resort. It always 
comes after a long pursuit of peace through diplomacy.
  Finally, I am not satisfied that Mr. Tillerson will be able to 
translate the considerable skills he has from ExxonMobil to the State 
Department. His long career at Exxon is certainly impressive, but it is 
the only international job on his resume, and let's be clear, the 
company's record does not at all align with U.S. foreign policy, from 
accusations related to human rights abuses to Exxon's business 
operations in countries that are not friendly to the United States. I 
am not arguing that this makes Mr. Tillerson a bad person. As the CEO 
of a big company, he had his own imperatives and his own obligations, 
and I understand and respect that. But it is not enough to say that I 
used to care only about ExxonMobil's interests, but now I only care 
about the U.S. interests.
  The next leader of the State Department will have to argue for our 
values and our priorities with friends and adversaries alike. He or she 
will need to balance business interests with national security and with 
American values. I approach this nomination process with an open mind, 
but Mr. Tillerson's confirmation hearing left me with too many doubts 
about his views, his knowledge set, and his abilities. I will be voting 
no on his nomination.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise to express my opposition to the 
nomination of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. The position of 
Secretary of State was one of the original four Cabinet positions 
created by President George Washington.
  Even after we declared, fought for, and won our independence as a new 
country, our Founders knew that this world is interconnected. They 
understood that what we needed was to engage with other countries and 
to manage our affairs all across the world.
  Our first Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson, had previously been 
our Minister to France, our closest ally at the time of our Nation's 
founding.
  Today, the role of Secretary of State is as important as ever. We 
need a Secretary who will reassure our allies, project strength and 
competence around the world, and push back against the President's 
worst impulses.
  Having reviewed his qualifications and testimony before the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee, I am unfortunately convinced that Mr. 
Tillerson is not the right person to lead the State Department and to 
represent the United States abroad.
  Mr. Tillerson has spent decades at ExxonMobil, where he rose through 
the ranks from an engineer to chairman and CEO. We should value hard 
work and success in the private sector, but we should also ask what the 
President's nominees were working toward. Mr. Tillerson's success at 
Exxon in large part can be attributed to deals he struck and 
connections he made with Russian plutocrats and government officials, 
including Vladimir Putin.
  Over the years, Mr. Tillerson's views toward Vladimir Putin have 
been, in a word, flexible. Mr. Tillerson has always put Exxon first, 
cozying up to Putin's authoritarian regime when it suited his own 
business interests.
  In 2008, he spoke out against the Russian Government's disrespect for 
the rule of law and its judicial system, but in 2011, after reaching a 
$500 billion deal with the Russian state-owned oil company, he changed 
his views.
  Under Vladimir Putin, the Russian Government silences dissent. They 
murder political rivals and journalists. Many of Putin's political 
opponents have been poisoned or shot. Since 2000, at least 34 
journalists have been murdered in Russia, many by government or 
military officials.
  Mr. Tillerson was awarded Russia's Order of Friendship by Putin in 
2012--one of the highest honors Russia conveys to foreigners.
  When Congress was working in a bipartisan manner to enact sanctions 
on Russia for its illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, ExxonMobil was 
lobbying against the bill under the leadership of Mr. Tillerson.
  During his confirmation hearing, his answers demonstrated either a 
lack of understanding or a willful ignorance of the destabilizing role 
Russia plays around the world.

[[Page S533]]

  Last year I traveled to Ukraine and Estonia, countries that are on 
the frontline of Russian aggression. They are genuinely concerned about 
President Trump's desire to embrace Russia. I heard firsthand how 
important the support and presence of the United States is to our 
allies in the Baltics.
  In recent years, Russia's belligerence has only grown. Russia has 
conducted a cyber attack against Estonia, seized territory in Georgia, 
kidnapped an Estonian border guard, and illegally annexed Crimea. 
Russian military patrols have approached NATO member territory and have 
come recklessly close to U.S. military vessels. These irresponsible 
actions can have severe, dangerous consequences.
  What should be most disturbing to any American is that last year 
Russia interfered with our election to undermine public faith in our 
democratic process. The intelligence community reported that Vladimir 
Putin himself ordered the interference--a significant escalation of 
Russian attempts to sow chaos in the West.
  I recognize the President's right to choose his appointments to the 
Cabinet, but, as the Senate provides its advice and consent, there are 
still too many unanswered questions for me to support this nomination. 
We still have not seen President Trump's tax returns, breaking a 40-
year tradition adhered to by nominees of both parties. This lack of 
transparency means that we don't know about the Trump family's possible 
past and current business ties to Russia. What message do we send to 
our allies if the Secretary of State and potentially even the President 
have a history of significant business dealings with a corrupt regime? 
How will this impact our moral authority as a country to take action 
against corruption worldwide?
  The Secretary of State is the U.S. Ambassador to the world. It is 
essential that the Secretary is someone who can provide unquestioned 
leadership and represent American values. There must be no question 
that the Secretary of State is acting in the best interest of the 
United States and is willing to take strong action to advance our 
interests. He must put the American people first and not his former 
shareholders and friends in the Exxon boardroom.
  I am concerned that Mr. Tillerson will prematurely lift the sanctions 
that have been put in place against Russia. Sanctions are not meant to 
be permanent, but they should never be removed until they have achieved 
their purpose.
  When our Secretary of State looks at a map of the Baltic region, we 
need a statesman who sees allies that contribute to NATO, not a new 
opportunity for offshore drilling.
  The Senate must ensure that we are a moderating voice and are 
approving moderating voices in the Trump administration.
  I supported the nominations of Secretary Mattis to lead the 
Department of Defense, Secretary Kelly to lead the Department of 
Homeland Security, and Ambassador Haley to serve as U.S. Ambassador to 
the United Nations, and I supported these individuals because I believe 
they will serve as a positive influence against the worst instincts and 
erratic tendencies of President Trump and his political advisers.
  America must stand by its allies and serve as a shining example of 
democracy. I cannot support a Secretary of State nominee if there is 
any doubt as to whether they will be a strong, independent voice within 
the Trump administration. The events of the past week have made the 
need for such leadership abundantly clear. That is why I will vote 
against the nomination of Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State, and I 
urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about the 
Secretary of State nominee, as well as President Trump's recent 
Executive order on refugees. I believe we need a Secretary of State who 
will clearly stand up to Russian aggression. I am concerned about the 
nominee's past statements and his relationship with Russia, and I am 
not going to be voting for him. If he is confirmed, I hope we can work 
with him. Some of his newer statements have been positive on taking 
that on, as well as some of the many issues confronting our world.
  The reason I am so focused on Russia is, first of all, we have a 
significant Ukrainian population in Minnesota. We are very proud of 
them. I was recently in Ukraine, Georgia, as well as Lithuania, Latvia, 
and Estonia with Senators McCain and Graham. I saw firsthand the 
meaning of Russian aggression on a daily basis. In these countries, the 
cyber attack is not a new movie. They have seen it many times before. 
It is a rerun. In Estonia, in 2007, they had the audacity to move a 
bronze statue of a Russian fighter from a town square where there had 
been protests to a cemetery. What did they get for that? They got their 
Internet service shut down. That is what they do. In Lithuania, they 
decided something you could imagine happening in our own country. On 
the 25th anniversary of the celebration of the independence of their 
country, they invited, as an act of solidarity, the members of the 
Ukrainian Parliament--who are in exile in Kiev from Crimea, which has 
been illegally annexed by Russia. They invited them to meet with them 
and celebrate in Lithuania. What happened to them; again, cyber attacks 
on members of the Parliament.
  This is not just about one political candidate. We saw in the last 
election in the United States--where now 17 intelligence agencies have 
collectively said there was an infringement--that there was an attempt 
to influence our elections in America. It is not just about one 
candidate. It is not just about one political party, as Senator Rubio 
so eloquently noted. It is not even just about one country. It is an 
assault on democracies across the world.
  I think we need to take this very seriously, not just from an 
intelligence standpoint but also from a foreign relations standpoint. 
That is why I introduced the bill, with Senators Feinstein, Cardin, 
Leahy, and Carper, to create an independent and nonpartisan commission 
to uncover all the facts. It is also why we have an expanded sanctions 
bill that is bipartisan, led by Senators McCain and Cardin.
  What we do matters. I think you see that, not only with regard to our 
relations with those countries in the Baltics but also with what we 
have seen in just the past few days because of this Executive order. I 
hope that having a Secretary of State in place would help, as well as 
more involvement from other agencies so something like this will never 
happen again.