[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 68 (Thursday, April 26, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2451-S2452]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
The Appropriations Process
Mr. ROBERTS. Madam President, I would like to make a very short
comment with regard to the distinguished minority leader's remarks this
morning.
In the midst of his remarks, Mr. Schumer mentioned something that I
think is terribly important. Yesterday, the Rules Committee--and the
distinguished Senator used to be the chairman of the Rules Committee. I
think I was ranking member at that particular time. He spoke of an
agreement to move appropriations bills. I want to thank him for that,
and also Senator Durbin, who indicated that as of yesterday.
We did reach an agreement in a bipartisan way to do something about
filing cloture 86 times and other things going on and reducing that
time period. We will get to that.
The breakthrough could be an agreement that Mr. Schumer has agreed to
with regard to appropriations bills. If we can do that, we might be
able to get back to the regular order that both of us experienced when
we first came to the Senate. Many Members here have not experienced
that.
Mr. SCHUMER. The majority, I think.
Mr. ROBERTS. Yes. Consequently, I want to thank you for that. And I
know Senator Shelby is eager to do the 12 appropriations bills, and I
know Senator Durbin is as well. I think that one statement in the midst
of your comments, sir, is terribly important, and I want people to be
aware of it, and I thank you.
Mr. SCHUMER. Thank you. I appreciate very much the remarks of my
friend from Kansas. I hope these sprouts of bipartisanship can grow
into mighty oaks.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I take this time because I know that
shortly we are going to be voting on Mr. Pompeo's nomination as
Secretary of State, and I want to explain to my colleagues why I cannot
support his nomination.
As I said in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during his
nomination hearing, I appreciate Mr. Pompeo's public service throughout
his career--his service in the military and his service in Congress and
as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. I also appreciate the
fact that he is willing to serve our Nation in this most important post
as Secretary of State.
In the United States, we urgently need a confirmed Secretary of
State, but it is our responsibility in the U.S. Senate to advise and
consent on the President's nominations and to act as an independent
branch of government.
I must state that we are in this urgent need because of Mr. Trump's
abrupt dismissal of our former Secretary of State in the midst of many
international challenges. In my view, though, Mr. Pompeo is not the
right person. I reached that conclusion by his actions and his
rhetoric.
If Mr. Pompeo is confirmed, he will be the top diplomat for the
United States. He must be an independent voice in the White House. I
have questions as to whether he will be that independent voice. He
needs to engage our allies. That is how our diplomacy works. He has to
be the loudest voice for diplomacy in our national security, in the use
of our tools, and the military needs to be a matter of last resort.
I was reminded of this challenge for America when President Macron
addressed the joint session of Congress yesterday. President Macron
pointed out that the United States established multinational world
order in the aftermath of World War II, which is embodied in the
transatlantic partnership, and we, the United States, must lead in
order to preserve that national security blanket. So it is incumbent
upon the Secretary of State to work with our allies--particularly our
European allies but all of our allies.
As just one example, when I look at Mr. Pompeo's record in regard to
the nuclear agreement with Iran, during that discussion as to whether
we would have diplomacy, it was Mr. Pompeo who said that the solution
rests with 2,000 sorties to destroy the Iran nuclear capacity. That is
not diplomacy. That is not leading with diplomacy. Now he is espousing
that, if necessary, we should pull out of the agreement if we can't
change it, even though Iran is in compliance with the agreement. That
is not diplomacy, and that is certainly not working with our European
allies.
Yesterday, we heard President Macron assert that it is critically
important that that agreement move forward if Iran is in compliance.
Yes, we can build on it, but to walk away from it would be wrong.
Another example that gives me great concern is Mr. Pompeo's position
in regard to the Paris climate talks. I know we all have different
views about climate and what our individual policy should be in order
to deal with the realities of climate change, but one thing should be
clear: that we want to be in
[[Page S2452]]
the discussions with the international community.
In regard to Iran, Mr. Pompeo would isolate us from our European
allies, but in regard to withdrawing from the Paris climate talks, he
would isolate America from every other nation in the world. We would be
the only nation not a part of that discussion. Let me remind my
colleagues that the commitments made in Paris are only enforceable by
us. There is no international enforcement mechanism.
Words matter. A top diplomat needs to engage a very diverse global
community. Mr. Pompeo's words unfortunately make it very challenging
for him to be able to have the confidence of the international
community.
He associated American Muslims with terrorism by stating that their
perceived silence in condemning attacks ``has made these Islamic
leaders across America potentially complicit.'' I know that after each
of the horrible terrorist activities we have seen in America, Muslim
leaders in Maryland and Muslim leaders around the world have stood up
and said that they condemn in the strongest possible terms those
terrorist acts.
That should have no space. Unfortunately, those types of comments
give space to those who are promoting a form of nationalism that allows
for hate-mongering, and that cannot be tolerated in our country.
The LGBTQ community is rightly concerned. I go to Mr. Pompeo citing
verbatim the following passage from a sermon castrating members of the
LGBTQ community.
America has worshipped other gods and called it
multiculturalism. We have endorsed perversion and called it
an alternative lifestyle.
That type of language should have no place for someone who wants to
be the top diplomat of America.
So I have come to the conclusion, based upon the necessity of the
Secretary of State to engage the national community, to provide
leadership and the use of diplomacy, that based upon those--my
priorities, policy priorities, not politics or partisanship--that I
cannot support Mr. Pompeo for Secretary of State.
I want to conclude with this. I have had the chance to lead the
Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I have been a
member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee my entire 12 years in
this institution. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee and its
leaders have had a long tradition of bipartisanship, of recognizing the
independent role of the legislative branch and the critical role played
by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and we are always stronger
when we act in unity.
That is a tradition of our committee. I want to just point out that I
don't question anyone's motives on how they vote on the nominee for the
Secretary of State, but I have great confidence that we in the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee will continue the great tradition we have
established as an independent voice and as a voice that tries to work
in unity in the best interest of our Nation.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
Mr. ROBERTS. Madam President, it was an honor for me to speak in
front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this month in support
of my Kansas friend and colleague, Mike Pompeo, as the President's
nominee for Secretary of State. I come to the floor to urge all of my
colleagues, despite the previous remarks, to vote in favor of this
uniquely qualified nominee in such a vital role in our administration's
Cabinet.
The point I would like to make, as we go into the very important
topics we have to discuss on an international basis, is that we need
Mike Pompeo, and we need him now.
As our Nation's most senior diplomat, Mike, I know, will be
forthright, will be forceful and thoughtful and, yes, he will be
diplomatic. He will give the President and the Congress very candid
counsel. He is a man of his word.
Now, I say all of this because I think I, at least, have the
credentials to know Mike and to know who he is and what he is about
because I have known him for more than a decade, first as a friend and
a business leader, then as a congressional colleague, and most recently
as a leader of our intelligence community. We had some long talks
before he accepted that offer by the President, and I thought he was
very well suited.
Mike will represent American ideals and values backed by the strength
of leadership of the free world--yes, the free world and the allies
that have been referred to by my colleagues across the aisle. The point
is, whenever there is a void, the world pays a price. That is why we
need Mike, and that is why we need him now.
I am going to again urge all of my colleagues--all of those who voted
in support of his intelligence post last year and those who now have
the opportunity to support this extremely qualified candidate--to vote
yes and to send our senior diplomat to work on the many challenges that
face our Nation.