[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 127 (Monday, July 20, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4258-S4259]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                   National Defense Authorization Act

  Mr. President, this week, the Senate will be resuming consideration 
and, hopefully, completing the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2021. This is not the end. This is not the completion. All 
this does is get it out of the Senate. Hopefully, we can do that this 
week, and then we have quite a few confirmations we have to do in the 
Senate that are very timely. We have them all lined up, and I think it 
is all going to work.
  This National Defense Authorization Act is the one that is going to 
get our attention for quite a while after today. The House has to do 
theirs, and then we go into conference and we have a conference between 
the House and the Senate, which we will do and participate in.
  Then, as normally is the case, it goes to the Big Four. The Big Four 
are the two leaders from the House and two leaders from the Senate. I 
have been in the Big Four, I think, for 4 years in the past. It ends up 
getting done.
  Anytime a bill is passed for 59 years, you know it is going to pass, 
which is one of the problems. Everybody says: That is going to pass; 
therefore, let's go ahead and load on anything that I have not been 
able to get passed before, because you know that bill is going to get 
passed
  We have a lot of that going on. We have been through that. We had 
many, many amendments on this.
  I think that we all are reflecting on the true meaning of 
Independence Day, and no bill is more important to protecting our 
freedoms than the National Defense Authorization Act. How do I know 
that? There is a document that not many people read any more. It is 
called the Constitution. It tells us what we are supposed to be doing 
here, and what we are supposed to be doing is, primarily, defending 
America.
  I want to highlight the work and the bipartisan, comprehensive nature 
of the legislation. We have already adopted over 140 bipartisan 
amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act. One of the 
reasons for this is that we had the experience last year, and we have 
had it in the past, where one Member wants to get his or her amendment 
adopted, but they will use the leverage they have, which is to object 
to any other amendments coming up.
  We thought, in the event that happened again, that we will put every 
amendment we could put in there. We solicited amendments to come from 
Members, and they came. The number is now 140 bipartisan amendments. 
That is equally divided. I have to say that the group--John Bonsell and 
Liz--did a great job in making this a bipartisan bill. We actually had 
the same number of amendments on each side. Those numbers don't include 
the hundreds of amendments considered in markup or Member interest 
provisions that were included in the base text. That was about 90 
amendments. This bill was truly written by the Members, the Democrats 
and Republicans in both the House and the Senate. It is my hope, and 
Senator Reed agrees with me, that we clear another managers' package, 
if possible.
  Speaking of Senator Reed, I have to say there is not a committee out 
there that enjoys more bipartisan support in the Senate than this 
committee does. Senator Reed and I have disagreed on some things, but 
we always resolved our problems.
  This week, we are also going to vote on six amendments. Some of those 
amendments I support and some I don't. These are the amendments we 
agreed to when we departed here right before the Fourth of July.
  Regardless of my feelings on specific amendments, I want to thank my 
colleagues for coming together. We were able to have these amendment 
votes. It has been at least a few years since we have been able to vote 
on this many amendments on the floor. What we need to have right now--
and I know Members aren't in here now, but their staff is watching. 
Their staff needs to know that we need Members to come down and present 
their amendments and to speak on amendments.
  We have six amendments all lined up. There are a lot of Members of 
the Senate who want to be heard. If you are not down here, you are not 
going to be heard because we are planning on doing six. Of those, we 
will probably do four of those tomorrow and then a couple the next day. 
Then, that is going to essentially be the end of it. I don't want them 
to come and complain to us saying that they want to be heard on 
amendments. This is your opportunity to do that.
  The important thing is we are doing it now. We are coming together to 
get this must-pass bill done. Things can get pretty divisive around 
here sometimes, but the National Defense Authorization Act simply 
always comes together because it has to be done. It has been happening 
for 59 years. It is going to be 60 years in just a few days.
  Senator Reed, the Armed Services Committee, and I worked hard to make 
this a bipartisan bill--in the base text, in the committee mark, with 
amendments, and with the votes. We listened to what our colleagues 
asked for in their Member interest letters. We requested letters. This 
goes all the way back to January. We were requesting letters from 
individuals as to what their interests were going to be as the year 
pressed on.
  We had a bipartisan markup where we adopted over 200 amendments from 
both Republicans and Democrats. On its own, this is a good, bipartisan 
bill. We are trying to make it better on the floor, as we adopt or 
reject additional amendments, which we are going to be doing tomorrow 
and the next day.
  We are about to make it 60 straight years of passing it. We don't 
want to jeopardize that.
  We saw what happened in the House last year when they tried to write 
a partisan bill. It didn't go anywhere. Everything they wanted had 
nothing to do with the military. They had every liberal program in it 
and nothing happened. We remember some of those items. They wanted to 
restrict arms sales. They wanted to block our nuclear modernization, 
block funds for the border wall, and several other things.
  I commend Chairman Smith for returning to the bipartisanship that has 
long been the tradition of the Armed Services Committees on both sides 
of the Capitol. The House is taking up their bill on the floor this 
week. I wish them well. I hope they do block some of the worst 
amendments and the ones that would cut funding for our troops and 
hamstring the ability to defend our Nation.
  I am glad they are prioritizing getting this done. I am also glad 
that they returned to regular order; that is, considering the 
authorization bill before the appropriations bill. That is the order 
that is supposed to be done, and that is what is going to be done this 
time. That is the way things should work around here. We authorize 
first, and then we appropriate.
  What we will do is what we have done every year for the last 59 
years. We will come together--the Senate and the House, Republicans and 
Democrats--and conference our bills this week. Our votes are the next 
step to this goal, and that is going to happen.
  There is nothing else around here that has the 60-year success streak 
the NDAA has. That is it. This is our sacred and profound 
responsibility to the 2.1 million men and women who volunteered to 
serve and their families.
  I remember when the idea of a full volunteer force was something that 
was not really something that really could be done. When I was in the 
military, we didn't have that. It was the days of the draft. Frankly, I 
think there is a lot of merit to that.
  It means a lot right now to the more than 700,000 civilian employees 
in the Department of Defense and thousands more who support our nuclear 
enterprise, and to all Americans that we protect them, their families, 
and their livelihood.
  I thank my colleagues for their contributions and look forward to our 
continued debate on this important bill. This is the most important 
bill of the year.
  Keep in mind that this is something we are going to get done and the 
next important step is this week. I appreciate all the help and remind 
all the Members that this is your time to speak on amendments
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I oppose the confirmation of Russell 
Vought to be Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Mr. 
Vought's tenure as Acting Director of OMB has been characterized by 
mismanagement, political corruption, and lawbreaking. He is unfit to 
lead OMB.
  Mr. Vought played an active role in President Trump's corrupt scheme 
to

[[Page S4259]]

pressure Ukraine to interfere on President Trump's behalf in the 2020 
election. In furtherance of that scheme, OMB illegally withheld 
security assistance for Ukraine under Mr. Vought's leadership, which 
violated the Impoundment Control Act according to the independent and 
nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. GAO even stated that 
OMB's stonewalling of their inquiry had ``constitutional significance'' 
due to the undermining of legislative branch oversight. During his 
confirmation hearing, Mr. Vought could not even explain why OMB 
stonewalled GAO's inquiry by refusing to turn over relevant documents 
requested by GAO and then failed to provide a reason for withholding 
these documents in response to my questions following the hearing.
  Mr. Vought is among those responsible for the Trump administration's 
disastrous response to the COVID-19 pandemic. OMB dragged its feet on 
requesting urgently needed resources to respond to the pandemic, which 
led to deadly shortages of key supplies. Due to insufficient guidance 
from OMB and the Office of Personnel Management, Federal agencies are 
moving forward with haphazard plans to bring teleworking employees back 
into offices in ways that needlessly risk spreading COVID-19 among 
Federal workers, their families, and surrounding communities.
  OMB is responsible for preparing the President's budget, and Mr. 
Vought has advanced budgets that would pay for tax cuts for the wealthy 
and corporations by slashing support for healthcare, education, and 
nutrition assistance. The Trump administration would have been even 
less prepared for COVID-19 if Congress enacted the cuts in these 
budgets to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Mr. Vought 
personally called for cutting the CDC budget as recently as March 10, 
2020, when the pandemic was sweeping the country. At that time, Mr. 
Vought insisted that he would not send a budget amendment to reverse 
these cuts. The administration was forced by circumstances to submit 
such a budget amendment shortly thereafter.
  The Senate should not reward this record of failure and lawbreaking 
by confirming Mr. Vought's nomination.
  Mr. INHOFE. 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. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Under the previous order, the question is, Shall the Senate advise 
and consent to the Vought nomination?
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Indiana (Mr. Braun) and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Burr).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) 
and the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Portman). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 45, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 131 Ex.]

                                YEAS--51

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Loeffler
     McConnell
     McSally
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Perdue
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--45

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Jones
     Kaine
     King
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Manchin
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Braun
     Burr
     Murray
     Schatz
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. ROMNEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President 
be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________