[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 26, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4525-S4531]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020--Resumed

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of S. 1790, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1790) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2020 for military activities of the Department of 
     Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
     activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military 
     personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other 
     purposes.

  Pending:

       McConnell (for Inhofe) modified amendment No. 764, in the 
     nature of a substitute.
       McConnell (for Romney) amendment No. 861 (to amendment No. 
     764), to provide that funds authorized by the Act are 
     available for the defense of the Armed Forces and United 
     States citizens against attack by foreign hostile forces.
       McConnell amendment No. 862 (to amendment No. 861), to 
     change the enactment date.
       McConnell amendment No. 863 (to the language proposed to be 
     stricken by amendment No. 764), to change the enactment date.
       McConnell amendment No. 864 (to amendment No. 863), of a 
     perfecting nature.
       McConnell motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on 
     Armed Services, with instructions, McConnell amendment No. 
     865, to change the enactment date.
       McConnell amendment No. 866 (to (the instructions) 
     amendment No. 865), of a perfecting nature.
       McConnell amendment No. 867 (to amendment No. 866), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for 90 seconds.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                                Interns

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, ever since I was elected to the U.S. 
Senate, I have welcomed young Iowans to intern in my office. 
Internships provide students with the opportunity to gain valuable work 
experience, to apply the things they learn inside the classroom to the 
real world, and to develop skills they will carry with them into the 
future.
  That is why my office offers year-round internships in both 
Washington, DC, and in Iowa. I offer students the opportunity to work 
alongside my staff to learn more about our Federal Government, and it 
happens that about two-thirds of my staff were former interns. This is 
a wonderful educational opportunity, and I encourage all college-age 
students to apply.


                          National Dairy Month

  Mr. President, on another subject, Wells Enterprises, the maker of 
Blue Bunny ice cream, produces more ice cream in one location than any 
other place in the United States. That is why Le Mars, IA, is called 
the Ice Cream Capital of the World.
  It produces over 200 million gallons a year, which I appreciate, 
because I like to eat ice cream. The Wells Ice Cream Parlor is one of 
the busiest tourist attractions in our entire State, and I have been 
there multiple times.
  With this being National Dairy Month, I am proud to recognize Wells 
and all of the hard-working farmers and dairy workers who produce the 
great dairy products that are enjoyed across the country.
  I yield the floor.


                   Recognition of the Majority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.


                            Border Security

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, first and foremost, the American people 
are continuing to hear elected officials talk a great deal about the 
humanitarian and security crisis down on the southern border. Both 
sides of the aisle have talked a lot about this issue for the past 2 
months.
  Here is the difference. It is the Republicans who have actually 
supported giving the administration and the Agencies the emergency 
funding they have been begging for. The Republicans have raised the 
alarm about the conditions on the border and have actually wanted to do 
something about it.
  Our Democratic colleagues have talked a lot about the issue as well, 
but for weeks and weeks, talk is all the

[[Page S4526]]

House of Representatives has been willing to do. The House Democrats 
have been consistently uncooperative and uninterested in anything 
except political posturing. They have talked endlessly about the 
suffering at the border but have resisted every effort to actually make 
a law and get help on the way.
  For 8 weeks now, the men and women and children on our southern 
border have learned the hard way that the ``resistance'' does not pay 
the bills.
  The New York Times' editorial board, of all places, wrote 7 weeks 
ago: ``Congress, give Trump his border money.'' This was the New York 
Times. Yet, week after week, from the House--nothing.
  First, they objected to including the funding in the disaster bill, 
and now that they finally passed something last night, it is a go-
nowhere proposal that is filled with poison pill riders that the 
President has indicated he would veto. They had to drag their bill way 
to the left to earn the support of most Democrats. As a result, the 
House has not made much progress toward actually making a law--just 
more ``resistance theater.''
  The Senate has a better and more bipartisan way forward. The bill 
negotiated by Chairman Shelby and Senator Leahy won huge bipartisan 
support in committee. It is a productive compromise that will go a long 
way to beginning to address the border crisis. There are no poison 
pills--just a clean bill to provide the emergency appropriations the 
White House requested 2 long months ago.
  We have waited long enough. We should not wait any longer. We must 
pass this measure this week.


                                S. 1790

  Mr. President, on another matter, the National Defense Authorization 
Act is one of the most significant pieces of legislation we tackle each 
year. It addresses many national and international priorities, but, 
underneath, there are countless local stories of servicemembers, 
families, communities, and installations all across our country.
  A few weeks ago, I had the opportunity to help cut the ribbon on a 
new state-of-the-art chemical weapons destruction facility at the Blue 
Grass Army Depot in Madison County, which is in my State. For decades, 
this depot has been home to more than a 500-ton stockpile of lethal 
chemical agents. Now, following years of hard work and advocacy, it 
will be, instead, the place at which this toxic legacy of war will be 
finally unwound. Earlier this month, the new facility safely destroyed 
its first munition, and this is just the beginning. This work will 
continue until the entire stockpile is eliminated.
  The Kentucky accomplishment reminds us of the terrible role that 
chemical weapons have played throughout history. Mankind has 
conscripted science onto the battlefield since warfare's earliest 
days--from contaminating water to poisoning arrows and bullets. Yet 
this fast-paced industrialization of the early 1900s brought forth a 
whole new wave of horrors.
  The use of weapons like mustard gas caused devastation in the 
trenches of World War I. President Franklin Roosevelt, in responding to 
the proliferation of these weapons by our adversaries, mobilized an 
unprecedented level of chemical production during World War II. While 
neither side deployed chemical agents on the battlefield, their 
murderous use in Nazi concentration camps and Japanese experiments rank 
among the worst atrocities ever.
  Then, during the Cold War, these horrific weapons brought new 
challenges to our Nation's strategic defense and to communities like 
Richmond, KY. As the first chemical agents arrived in my home State in 
the 1940s, they were stored at the Blue Grass Army Depot--only miles 
away from schools and thousands of families.
  When I joined the Senate in 1985, the Army had recently announced 
plans to begin the destruction of Blue Grass' stores through a process 
called incineration--literally, burning the agents. Imagine that for a 
moment--just throwing a warhead into an oven or a burn pit. Fortunately 
and understandably, nearby residents were concerned about the release 
of toxins into the air. Those fears only grew as we learned about 
numerous nerve gas leaks at the depot that had occurred over the 
previous decade.
  What happened next was a textbook example of representative 
democracy. The people of Kentucky used their voices in the U.S. Senate, 
and they changed the policy of the Nation and made the world a safer 
place.
  It has been my privilege for the last three decades to have worked 
alongside this community for the safe destruction of these deadly 
chemicals. This effort would not have been possible without having had 
allies like Craig Williams, an incredible local leader who pored over 
every detail until he became the leading expert on the depot.
  Together, we stopped the Army's incineration plans and convinced the 
Department of Defense to adopt the safest and most advanced alternative 
for the responsible destruction of the stockpile. It wasn't an easy 
fight, but it was a fight worth having, not only to protect the 
Kentuckians who were potentially in harm's way but also to uphold our 
national commitment to destroy these terrible weapons.
  In 1984, President Reagan asserted America's leadership in calling 
for an international prohibition on chemical weapons. Over the next 
decade, we made international progress toward that same goal by joining 
the Chemical Weapons Convention. The continued work in Madison County 
is part of this historic commitment.
  Unfortunately, while the United States has been taking these steps, 
these horrific weapons have still been posing a threat to international 
peace. Some of our adversaries are choosing a different path by 
preserving, modernizing, and using their stockpiles.
  Remember that Syrian dictator Bashar Assad's use of chemical weapons 
against his own people was the subject of the Obama administration's 
failure to enforce its own so-called redline. We also saw Russian 
operatives deploy advanced nerve agents in the middle of a residential 
neighborhood in the United Kingdom just last year.
  Thankfully, President Trump has taken a different approach to 
American leadership. On two occasions, this administration ordered 
strikes on Syrian military targets after the Assad regime crossed the 
redline. As my colleagues will remember, we also deported Russian 
agents and put in place new sanctions following the chemical attack on 
Sergei Skripal.
  The Senate has taken action as well. The first piece of legislation 
we passed this Congress, S. 1, included the Caesar Syria Civilian 
Protection Act, which holds the Assad regime and its enablers more 
accountable for recent atrocities.
  The use of chemical weapons is a stain on human history. It is time 
for civilized nations the world over to turn the page once and for all, 
and the Blue Grass Army Depot is ready to do its part. So this year's 
NDAA will authorize the funding that this facility needs and the 
resources for countless installations across the country. Each plays an 
important role in their own community.
  I hope my Senate colleagues will join me in keeping our commitment to 
finally finishing this national security mission.


                                Economy

  Mr. President, on another matter, speaking of the local impacts of 
our work, we are continuing to see evidence that Republican efforts to 
roll back harmful overregulation and put more tax dollars back in the 
hands of American families and job creators are working.
  I am proud to say that my home State of Kentucky is a strong example 
of that achievement. With billions of dollars in new investments, a 
rising economic tide for working families, and promising, new 
opportunities like industrial hemp, it is no surprise that an economic 
researcher recently called this moment ``Kentucky's Best Economy 
Ever.''
  Month after month, more Kentuckians are entering the labor force and 
looking to put their skills to work. We are currently experiencing the 
lowest unemployment rate ever recorded in our State. Job seekers are 
filling out applications, polishing their resumes, and preparing to 
clock in.
  Employers are ready too. At last count, Kentucky was home to more job 
openings than individuals looking for work. The economy in the 
Bluegrass State is red hot.

[[Page S4527]]

  These are the results of the pro-growth policies advanced by 
Republicans in Washington and in State capitals around the country--
generational tax reform, major regulatory reform, big bites out of the 
worst parts of Dodd-Frank, eliminating ObamaCare's individual mandate. 
All this and more is helping American workers and American small 
businesses gain more opportunities, higher pay, and the ability to keep 
more of what they earn.
  And the good news keeps coming. Just last week, after nearly a decade 
of the war on coal, the Trump administration finalized the rollback of 
an Obama-era regulation that threatened to shift Kentucky jobs overseas 
and send energy bills through the roof. Instead of harnessing America's 
abundant resources of reliable and affordable energy, the previous 
administration tried to coerce every State to drastically restructure 
its electricity systems to conform to Washington's unfeasible and 
likely illegal restrictions. It is important to remember that all that 
self-imposed economic pain would have produced little to no meaningful 
effect on global emissions.
  I spent years leading the fight against Obama's anti-coal policies. 
And with the help of the Trump administration, we are finally putting a 
stop to Washington overregulation. Last week's decision replaces the 
so-called Clean Power Plan with a regulation that actually works with 
States to encourage energy production while also protecting the 
environment.
  This President's commitment to Middle America is welcome news after 
years of overreach, overregulation, and policies which seem to have 
been dreamt up for the benefit of elite coastal areas but which left a 
lot of the rest of us way behind.
  That wasn't even the only positive announcement from just last week. 
After I reached out to the administration, they confirmed that the 
Department of Agriculture will continue operating job core centers in 
several States, including Kentucky. The three centers that were at risk 
in Kentucky provide important education and job-training services to 
vulnerable youth in some of my State's most distressed communities. 
Their work gives a boost to those who need it most. I made an appeal 
directly to Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue and Labor Secretary 
Alexander Acosta, and I am pleased the decision was reached to ensure 
these centers remain open and able to offer young people the tools they 
need to excel.
  These very recent wins are just the latest few examples of 
Republicans' focus on new economic growth and job creation throughout 
all parts of America, but the list keeps on growing.
  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. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                                S. 1790

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, there is no more important congressional 
responsibility than providing for our Nation's defense. There will 
always be those who wish our Nation harm, and our Nation must always be 
prepared to defend itself. More than that, our Nation needs to be ready 
to defend itself because being prepared for war is a strong deterrent 
to conflict in the first place.
  As I have said before in this Chamber, it is not our strength that 
tempts our adversaries but our weakness. Maintaining our strength will 
ensure that bad actors, whether they are terrorist groups or major 
powers, think twice before attacking our Nation. In the words of Ronald 
Reagan, ``well, to those who think strength provokes conflict, Will 
Rogers had his own answer.'' He said of the world heavyweight champion 
of his day: ``I've never seen anyone insult Jack Dempsey.''
  This week we are considering the National Defense Authorization Act, 
the annual legislation to authorize funding for our military and our 
Nation's defense. Like last year's NDAA, this bill focuses on 
rebuilding our military and ensuring we are prepared to meet 21st 
century threats.
  While many take it for granted that we have the strongest military in 
the world, the truth is that in recent years our military advantage has 
eroded. Budgetary impasses combined with increased operational demands 
left our military undermanned, underequipped, and ill-prepared for the 
conflicts of the 21st century. Meanwhile, other major powers have made 
investing in their militaries a priority, set on diminishing U.S. 
influence.
  In November 2018, the bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission 
released a report warning that our readiness had eroded to the point 
where we might struggle to win a war against a major power like Russia 
or China. The Commission noted that we would be especially vulnerable 
if we were ever called on to fight a war on two fronts. That is not a 
good position to be in, and restoring our readiness has to be our top 
priority.
  We are once again in an era of great power competition, while at the 
same time we continue to face threats from terrorists and rogue 
nations. We have to be able to credibly deter--and, if necessary, 
counter--any threat.
  This year's National Defense Authorization Act continues the 
reinvestment that we have made in our military. It invests in the 
planes, the combat vehicles, and ships of the future, including the 
Joint Strike Fighter and the future B-21 bomber, which will be based at 
Ellsworth Air Force Base in my home State of North Dakota. It 
authorizes funding for research and development and advanced 
technology. It authorizes funds to modernize our nuclear arsenal to 
maximize our deterrence capabilities. It also focuses on ensuring that 
we are equipped to meet new threats on new fronts, including in space 
and cyber domains.
  It is important that we invest in these new areas of the battlefield 
to ensure that we are prepared to meet and defeat threats. And, of 
course, this legislation invests in our troops, the men and women who 
keep our Nation safe and free.
  This year's National Defense Authorization Act will provide our 
troops with a well-deserved 3.1-percent pay increase, which is the 
largest increase in a decade. It also focuses on addressing the recent 
significant health and safety issues with private on-base housing. It 
contains measures to support military spouses seeking employment and 
increases access to childcare on military installations. It also allows 
parental leave to be taken in multiple increments, which is often a 
better fit for our military men and women.
  I am pleased that once again the Senate has taken up the National 
Defense Authorization Act in a timely and bipartisan fashion. There are 
few bills more important than this one. I look forward to passing the 
National Defense Authorization Act later this week and ensuring that 
our military men and women have the tools they need to defend our 
country.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I yield the floor.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.


                     9/11 Victim Compensation Fund

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I begin this morning with some welcome 
news. After meeting with a group of 
9/11 first responders last night, Leader McConnell gave them his 
commitment to move legislation to reauthorize the Victim Compensation 
Fund before the August recess. That is an important commitment.
  I thank the leader. We have been struggling for years to get not a 
quarter, not half but the full Victim Compensation Fund, as well as, of 
course, the healthcare for those who bravely rushed to the towers right 
after 9/11 and the awful attack.
  Even more importantly than thanking the leader, I want to thank the 
first responders who came down here to continue their advocacy. I have 
little doubt that without them, this wouldn't have happened. Many of 
them are sick. Some of them are dying.
  This week, I spoke to New York police detective Luis Alvarez, who is 
now in hospice and dying of cancer. He would normally have been right 
next to John Feal and the other advocates meeting with Leader McConnell 
because his illness never stopped him from advocating for his 
compatriots. Instead of him being there, John Feal gave Leader 
McConnell his badge. It is

[[Page S4528]]

not easy for a police officer to part with their badge, but Alvarez, in 
his usual selfless and magnanimous way, knew how important it would be 
for McConnell to see it.
  I remember my dear friend Ray Pfeifer. Before he passed away, he was 
the same way. He kept coming down, in pain, suffering, and knowing that 
his cancer, caused by 9/11 and the toxins in the air, was incurable, 
but Ray knew that if he kept coming down, it would help others who had 
not yet gotten those cancers but who were sure to get them because 
they, too, had rushed to the towers. His effort was about making sure 
that friends and families were cared for. That is what Alvarez stands 
for; that is what Pfeifer stood for; and that is what all the first 
responders stand for, particularly those who come down, and there are 
many of them.
  That is the very definition of ``selflessness,'' the same 
selflessness that compelled these men and women to rush to the towers 
without a thought for their own safety, to ensure the safety of others.
  Now that Leader McConnell has committed to address this issue before 
August, we are making real progress. We have gotten to the 5-yard line, 
but we are not over the goal line yet when it comes to the Victim 
Compensation Fund. There are still a few ways this Senate could fumble 
the ball. I will be there to make sure they will not.
  As the leader well knows, there is a House and Senate version of the 
9/11 bill. The House has already passed its version through the 
committee. The full House should pass it in early July. The best way to 
get this done without fuss or muss, without somebody fumbling the ball, 
as we are on the 5-yard line, would be to have the Senate vote on the 
House bill. I hope that is what the leader will decide to do.
  I would also say to the leader, respectfully, that he need not wait 
for a must-pass vehicle. Based on the number of cosponsors on the 
Senate bill, we have 60 votes. I want to thank my colleague from New 
York, Senator Gillibrand, for working so hard to round up votes. We 
have the votes to move this bill separately on the floor and alone. It 
would take very little of the Senate's time to take up and pass the 
bill whenever the leader decides to do so. On an issue as important as 
this, we should consider the legislation as stand-alone rather than 
tucked inside a must-pass bill because we know must-pass bills often 
don't pass these days.
  Again, I appreciate the leader's commitment. It means a great deal to 
the 9/11 first responders.
  I spoke to John Feal this morning. He is very optimistic now but also 
told me: Make sure we get this done. We are not there yet. Feal and I 
agree. We are at the 5-yard line. We have come a long way, 95 yards 
down the field, but we are not over the goal line yet, and we cannot 
let a last-minute fumble, one way or the other, stop the Victim 
Compensation Fund from being fully funded permanently or at least for 
as long as can be, helping those who need the help.
  Parenthetically, I prefer permanent or at least the 71 years that is 
in the House bill.


                                  Iran

  Mr. President, I also appreciate Leader McConnell's commitment on 
another front. Yesterday, Leader McConnell promised that the Senate 
would vote on the Udall amendment to the Defense authorization bill. 
Democrats have been urging the leader to allow this crucial vote on our 
Iran policy. I am pleased that this Chamber may consider it. I am 
hopeful that the leader and I will be able to come to some agreement on 
the timing of that vote soon.
  This is a debate the Senate should have for the sake of the 
Constitution, which houses the power to declare war here in this 
branch, for the sake of the Senate, which has ducked too many debates 
and too many amendments this year, and for the sake of the American 
people, many of whom are worried that the President will bumble us into 
another endless war in the Middle East that nobody wants.
  I look forward to working with the leader to schedule a time for this 
very important debate, a debate mandated by the Constitution.


                            Border Security

  Mr. President, finally, on border, over the past several weeks, our 
Nation has come to grips with the horrendous treatment of unaccompanied 
migrant children at our southern border. The reports of what is 
happening at detention centers like the one in Clint, TX, and 
Homestead, FL, have shaken the conscience of the Nation.
  There are hundreds of kids crammed into a facility suited for a few 
dozen, at most, with no beds to sleep on, no soap or toothbrushes to 
clean themselves, and not enough diapers for toddlers to wear. There 
are 8-year-olds taking care of 2-year-olds because they have been 
separated from their parents. Many have worn the same clothes for 
several weeks, many have gotten sick, and several have died while in 
the care of our government.
  Yesterday the New York Times released this picture--a Salvadoran 
father and daughter, Oscar Martinez and 23-month-old Valeria, washed 
upon the banks of the Rio Grande after trying to cross into the United 
States. Her tiny head was tucked inside his shirt, her arm draped 
around his neck. They were holding on to each other.
  President Trump, I want you to look at this photo. These are not drug 
dealers or vagrants or criminals; they are people simply fleeing a 
horrible situation in their home country for a better life.
  How could President Trump look at this picture and not understand 
that these are human beings fleeing violence and persecution, willing 
to risk a perilous, sometimes fatal, journey in search of a better 
life? These people are not coming here to sell drugs or to commit 
crimes. They are coming here to escape brutality, starvation, threats 
of rape, and murder in their home countries. Any normal person would 
flee.
  The sad fact is, we can do something about this if the President 
would stop playing all the political games of blame, blame, blame.
  If Oscar and Valeria had been allowed to petition for asylum in the 
United States within El Salvador, if they asked for asylum to come here 
but did it at the El Salvadoran Embassy, as Democrats have proposed, 
they wouldn't have had to make this perilous journey. If the 
administration had followed through on foreign aid to stabilize their 
home country's government, they would not have had to make this 
perilous journey. If our ports of entry were adequately staffed, if we 
had enough asylum judges and our asylum laws were respected, they might 
not have perished. That is what is at stake.
  There is a rational solution. It has had bipartisan support in the 
past, but the President only wants not to solve the problem--he jumps 
from proposed solution to proposed solution and then abandons them, and 
instead he says: Let's blame the Democrats. That is a disgrace by now.
  Mr. President, you are President of the United States. You are head 
of the executive branch. You control what is happening at the border. 
Much of what is happening at the border, President Trump, stems from 
the chaos and mismanagement in your administration.
  Just yesterday, the Acting Commissioner of Customs and Border 
Protection, John Sanders, abruptly resigned after just a few weeks on 
the job, throwing an agency already in turmoil into another round of 
chaos. The man who will replace him, Mark Morgan, was only installed as 
Acting Director of ICE this month. The Department of Homeland Security 
still lacks a Senate-confirmed leader.
  I saw a report this morning, based on reporting in the New Yorker 
magazine, that even rank-and-file ICE agents who are not particularly 
sympathetic to the plight of these migrants are fed up with the chaos 
in the administration and the erratic nature--one plan one week, 
another plan the next week, another plan the next week, and none of 
them implemented. They shouldn't have been implemented because they 
wouldn't do the job.
  The President's actions at the border are a whirlwind of incompetence 
leading to pictures like this. We have to change our policies.
  President Trump, if you want to know the real reason there is chaos 
at the border, look in the mirror.
  The President continues to blame Democrats, but the real problem is 
the President.
  Democrats believe we have a moral responsibility to act. Right now, 
we are

[[Page S4529]]

working to pass a supplemental appropriations bill to help improve the 
conditions for children at the border. The House passed its version 
last night. It is a much better bill than the Senate version. We should 
take up the House bill in the Senate and send something to the 
President as soon as possible and then make sure the administration 
uses funds to improve the conditions at the border immediately. The 
proposal that was done by the Senate Appropriations Committee, a 
compromise bill between Senator Shelby and Leahy, got 30 votes. So 
there is room for compromise to get something done. There was only one 
dissenting vote.
  Once we pass legislation to help solve the immediate humanitarian 
crisis at the border, we should talk about what else we can do to 
alleviate the situation, including allowing folks to apply for asylum 
in their home countries, including more security assistance to Central 
American countries to crack down on the drug dealers and the violence 
and the degradation, including more judges at the border to reduce the 
backlog in cases and reduce the strain on temporary housing.
  We all--Democrats, Republicans, and Americans--have a responsibility 
to act. The Senate, the House, and especially the President need to 
act, and the President needs to end the chaos, end the fearmongering, 
and get a grip on his administration.
  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. LEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sasse). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                                S. 1790

  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, it is one of Congress's main duties--
arguably, its single most important duty--to provide for the common 
defense of our great country. That sometimes means and necessarily 
entails providing additional funds for unforeseen costs and emergencies 
in times of war. Troops might run out of equipment or munitions or 
might need to be transported through war zones, and it is of the utmost 
importance that they have what they need and that they can get where 
they need to go to fight for our country and to protect us against our 
most pressing and dangerous threats.
  In the past, Congress provided emergency supplemental funding to take 
care of precisely these costs. If it didn't appropriate enough to begin 
with or if some of these unforeseen costs arose, perhaps in excess of 
what Congress had already planned for, Congress would fill the gap and 
would make adjustments to the following year's base budget to account 
for them. In other words, Congress was doing its job, and it was doing 
its job in a thoughtful manner--one that was fiscally responsible and 
one that acknowledged Congress's constitutional role as a lawmaking 
body and the body responsible for funding war operations and declaring 
war.
  But after the September 11 attacks, something seemed to change. In 
2001, the Bush administration created a fund called the Global War on 
Terrorism account, sometimes known operatively as GWOT, separate from 
the base budget. From then on, what was once emergency spending for 
warfighting gaps became a general fund that Congress has used for 
military spending and primarily for operations in the Middle East. Year 
after year, Congress has anticipated this very type of spending, and 
year after year it has failed to integrate that anticipated spending 
into the baseline budget.
  When the Obama administration took over, it changed the name from 
GWOT to Overseas Contingency Operations, or OCO. This is an account 
that was newly created in that administration, but the Obama 
administration left the fundamental practice of GWOT in place. This was 
GWOT by a different name.
  When the Budget Control Act was passed in 2011, President Obama 
requested OCO to be exempted from its defense spending limits. That 
practice has continued to this day, such that these funds are still 
exempt from those limits.
  What has been the result of this trajectory? Well, OCO has morphed 
into an unaccountable slush fund for the Pentagon, insulated from 
scrutiny and certainly unchecked by budget spending caps. It is no 
longer funds that are provided for unforeseen expenses, and no one here 
really pretends otherwise.
  Instead, administrations from both parties have continued to ask for 
billions of these dollars each year, completely outside the budget 
process, for what really are predictable, ongoing activities in the 
Middle East and elsewhere. And Congress has continually enabled them, 
perpetuating this broken, unaccountable system of budgeting and 
spending.
  Since 2001, Congress has appropriated about $2 trillion in total for 
these funds, accounting for 17 percent of defense spending during that 
time period, with each dollar adding to our rising and, indeed, 
staggering debt of $22 trillion. This is not responsible budgeting, 
oversight, or governance, and it must not continue.
  In addition to mending this broken, irresponsible method of 
financing, it is far past time that we reassess the operations toward 
which this money is going.
  We have now been in Afghanistan for 18 years, and we have now been in 
Iraq for 16 years. We have deposed Saddam Hussein, and we have killed 
Osama bin Laden. We have accomplished much of what we set out to do, 
but we have also been pulled into nation building in countries 
thousands of miles away, causing serious harm to those countries and 
our own credibility in the process. Yet these wars drag on and on, with 
no end in sight.

  Unfortunately, the bill before us, the National Defense Authorization 
Act for fiscal year 2020, maintains the broken status quo for OCO, 
authorizing yet another $75 billion--a $7 billion increase from last 
year. It perpetuates the misguided strategy we have been undertaking in 
the Middle East since the beginning of the wars in Afghanistan and in 
Iraq.
  It continues funding--in dollars and weapons and with people--
missions that have no clear end goal for problems that were never ours 
in the first place. For example, it authorizes almost $5 billion for 
the Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, and it calls for a stabilization 
strategy in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Libya. But in 
addition to these dubious nation-building investments that lack an 
overall strategy--at least an overall strategy communicated to the 
American people that tells them how these operations will make them 
safer--there is still a deeper problem. Congress never authorized 
military engagement in four out of six of these countries to begin 
with.
  Article I, section 8 of the Constitution unequivocally states that 
Congress shall have the power to declare war--Congress, not the 
President, not the Pentagon, and not someone else in the executive 
branch, but Congress. Regardless of whether engagement in a particular 
country may or may not be a worthy foreign policy goal, we cannot 
escape this point.
  The Founders could not have been clearer. The executive branch must 
have authorization from Congress to go to war. This was understood at 
the time of the founding. It was written into Federalist 69, in which 
Alexander Hamilton explained that this is one of the distinguishing 
characteristics between our system and the system from which we broke 
away--from London-based national government headed by a King, a King 
who had the authority to start a war on his own without consulting his 
Parliament. Our system was to be different, so they put the power to 
declare war in Congress.
  Why? Well, because it is the branch of government most accountable to 
the people at the most regular intervals through elections. They did it 
this way and designed it this way precisely because they understood 
what is at stake when we go to war. It is not only our precious 
financial resources on the line but our most precious human resources--
the brave men and women who are willing to lay down their lives when we 
go to war.
  So they intended these decisions to be debated and discussed and 
considered with utmost deliberation and consideration in front of the 
American people by their elected, accountable representatives.
  For these same reasons, it is as much Congress's duty to take an 
active role

[[Page S4530]]

in prudently overseeing the operations that it has authorized and 
denying funds to those it has not. Unfortunately, this National Defense 
Authorization Act largely falls short here too. First, instead of 
perpetuating these seemingly indefinite wars, it ought to actively 
prepare a strategy to phase out our engagement in the Middle East, 
particularly for authorizations of force that have lasted for almost 20 
years. Second, for any remaining authorizations, it ought to aim for 
using our resources and our personnel in a way that is far more 
efficient than the status quo.
  Meanwhile, the world has not been static since we began the war on 
terror. Our country is facing new threats. The national defense 
strategy laid out by President Trump and the administration does 
refocus our efforts on stemming the threats posed by Russia and China, 
and this NDAA does reflect some of that strategy by addressing some of 
our most immediate needs to counter them.
  For instance, it reaffirms defense commitments in the Indo-Pacific 
and in the Baltic States, as well as information gathering on technical 
and nuclear capabilities that can be found in both countries. It also 
prioritizes the Arctic region, which both Russia and China are seeking 
to leverage.
  But there are other threats this NDAA fails to address; namely, our 
threats in the Western Hemisphere. In fact, it lacks a comprehensive 
defense strategy or plan for the Western Hemisphere entirely. It is by 
no means prudent to ignore our neighbors to the south, especially given 
the rampant instability throughout the region, including that caused by 
the Maduro regime in Venezuela. Indeed, if we fail to secure our 
borders from the immediate threats we face in the Western Hemisphere, 
it could become impossible to truly provide for our Nation's common 
defense.
  We ought to reject the status quo and reject the failures evident in 
this bill and the process that brings it to us. What we should be doing 
is drawing down our OCO account and integrating this spending into the 
$642.5 billion baseline defense budget. We should be having a real 
debate on whether we should continue to be entrenched in the Middle 
East, and we should be adjusting our defense strategy and the dollars 
behind that defense strategy to address the most pressing threats we 
face today.
  These matters are some of the most important decisions we will ever 
be called upon to make in this body as Senators, as officers within the 
legislative branch of government who are sworn to uphold, protect, and 
defend the Constitution of the United States. We should take the time 
to get these things right. They merit debate over the course of months, 
not simply days or weeks, and they merit not just the participation of 
the Armed Services Committee members but the active participation and 
the utmost care and diligence of all 535 Members of Congress, who 
themselves have taken an oath to uphold, protect, and defend the 
Constitution of the United States.
  It is about time that Congress exercise its most solemn duty of 
prudently budgeting and strategizing to protect the American people. 
Providing for the common defense requires nothing less.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.


                               H.R. 3401

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, last night the House of Representatives 
passed a funding bill that would provide $4.5 billion in emergency 
funding to Departments and Agencies working to manage the humanitarian 
crisis on the southern border. I would note it has been 2 months--2 
months since President Trump requested that emergency appropriations 
bill. In the meantime, there have been many who have talked about the 
overwhelmed capacity at the border and the unhygienic conditions in 
which some of the migrants were being held, but frankly they seem to 
ignore the cause of that problem, pointing mainly to the symptoms--
actually, symptoms of their own inaction.
  If we had simply acted more promptly, I think many of the problems we 
have seen along the border, where families and unaccompanied children 
are being detained and processed according to U.S. law--we could have 
avoided that. But, instead, the politics seemed to overcome good sense 
here in Washington once again, and rather than appropriate the money, 
as the President requested 2 months ago, to provide the resources they 
need in order to deal with this crisis, it just got worse and worse.
  Of course these terrible pictures of people that we have seen, which 
are really hard to look at, showed the hardships being borne by some of 
these migrants. Indeed, some have lost their lives. People seem to have 
forgotten why people make the dangerous trip across Central America, 
across Mexico, and into the United States, and that is simply because 
they are taking advantage of congressional inaction when it comes to 
fixing loopholes in our asylum laws, which, if corrected, would provide 
an opportunity for people to claim asylum in a safer, more orderly way. 
It would also make sure they would not have to die in the process of 
making that terrible trip from Central America, across Mexico, and into 
the United States.
  The House bill number matches our bill here in the Senate, but the 
contents of the bills are quite different. The Speaker of the House has 
been working furiously this week to get Members on board, taking the 
bill further and further to the left with each revision.
  House Democrats have now rammed through a bill that withholds 
desperately needed funds from detention centers that are nearly 
bursting at the seams and creates overly burdensome and prohibitive 
regulations.
  The House bill excludes funding for the Department of Defense as 
requested by the President, underfunds the Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement Agency, and doesn't provide funding for new immigration 
judge teams to address the significant court backlog.
  Just as an example of how far the bill goes, there is a section that 
requires a specific type of exercise for unaccompanied children in 
custody. That is the kind of micromanaging that the House of 
Representatives has included in their bill. It is inadequate by any 
measure. It ignores the most pressing funding needs and instead opts 
for federally mandated exercise. You literally can't make this stuff 
up.
  This isn't an effort to solve the problem or the result of 
conversations that folks are having with the Agencies that are 
crumbling under the weight of this humanitarian crisis. It is simply a 
partisan messaging document worth no more than the paper that it is 
written on.
  I would add that it stands in stark contrast to the bipartisan bill 
we are considering here in the Senate. It enjoys broad support. Indeed, 
it came out of the Senate Appropriations Committee 30 to 1. It 
represents a compromise and a good-faith effort to bring relief to 
those working to manage the crisis. Even the Speaker herself described 
the bill to her caucus as a good bill. So the House has wasted valuable 
time passing a bill that stands no chance of passing in the Senate and 
the President has already made clear that he would veto it if it did.
  I hope we will be able to move quickly to pass the bipartisan Senate 
bill. I urge our House Members to come to the negotiating table with 
reasonable goals in mind.
  Mr. President, I might add in closing some remarks about the Defense 
authorization bill, which we will be voting on today or tomorrow.
  This is one of the most important functions that Congress has to 
support our men and women in uniform. If you look at the list of 
Federal priorities, certainly national security and defense ought to be 
at the very top. That is why, for the last 58 years running, Congress 
has passed a Defense authorization bill.
  Yet our colleague from New Mexico has now introduced an extraneous 
matter that involves a recent aggressive contact by Iran and is 
insisting on a vote on that. Actually, they want to delay the vote 
until Friday when the Presidential candidates who are running and 
debating in Miami tonight and tomorrow night can get back to vote. I 
see no reason for us to delay the vote on the Defense authorization 
bill for those folks who have chosen instead not to do their job here 
but rather to run for President.

[[Page S4531]]

  We have an important job to do here. I see no reason for the delay. 
The majority leader has made it clear that he is happy to give the 
Senator from New Mexico a vote on this authorization for use of 
military force, that, frankly, I don't believe is necessary, but 
nevertheless, the majority leader has generously offered a vote on 
that. We ought to be voting on that today or tomorrow and not 
unnecessarily delay our work until Friday just to accommodate the 
Presidential candidates.
  I would say that the Senator from New Mexico's amendment would 
attempt to put handcuffs on this President unlike any previous 
President, and, indeed, I believe it is probably unconstitutional. It 
would impair our ability to respond to further attacks by Tehran and in 
a way that would make them think that we were weak or irresolute in 
responding to their aggression. The most important thing we can do is 
to make clear to the Iranian regime that their aggression will not be 
unilateral but that we will meet it with proportional and devastating 
response.
  No one wants to go to war in Iran, including the President of the 
United States. I don't believe Iran actually wants to go to war, but 
they are continuing their 30-year conflict with the United States, 
which has cost American lives and American treasury and now threatens 
to block the Strait of Hormuz, which would cause a huge disruption to 
the world economy.
  I hope we can vote on the National Defense Authorization Act. I am 
happy to vote on the amendment of the Senator from New Mexico. I do not 
believe it will pass, and I do believe it is unconstitutional if it 
did. But in order to get our work done, we need to continue to vote and 
vote on the Defense authorization bill and the border supplemental 
without further delay.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Order of Business

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 
notwithstanding rule XXII, the Senate proceed to the consideration of 
H.R. 3401, which was received from the House. I further ask that the 
time until 2 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders for debate 
only; that at 2 p.m., the Senate vote on the bill, with 60 affirmative 
votes required for passage; that if the bill is not passed, it remain 
pending and open to amendment, with the only amendments in order being 
the following: Shelby substitute amendment No. 901; the text of S. 
1900, as reported; a Paul amendment, No. 902, to pay for spending by 
cutting foreign aid; further, that the Senate vote in relation to the 
Paul amendment and, following its disposition, vote on adoption of the 
Shelby amendment, with a 60-vote affirmative threshold for adoption; 
finally, that following disposition of the Shelby amendment, the Senate 
vote on passage of the bill, as amended, if amended, with 60 
affirmative votes required for passage and that the only debate in 
order be 2 minutes, equally divided, prior to each vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 
notwithstanding rule XXII, following the disposition of H.R. 3401, 
there be 10 minutes of debate, equally divided between the managers, 
remaining on the cloture motions filed during Monday's session of the 
Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________