[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 208 (Wednesday, December 9, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7317-S7323]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021--CONFERENCE 
                                 REPORT

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask that the Chair lay before the 
Senate the conference report to accompany H.R. 6395.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair lays before the Senate the 
conference report to accompany H.R. 6395, which will be stated by 
title.

[[Page S7318]]

  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 
     6395), to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2021 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, 
     having met, have agreed that the House recede from its 
     disagreement to the amendment of the Senate and agree to the 
     same with an amendment and the Senate agree to the same, 
     signed by a majority of the conferees on the part of both 
     Houses.

  Thereupon, the Senate proceeded to consider the conference report.
  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the 
Record of December 3, 2020.)


                             Cloture Motion

  Mr. McCONNELL. I send a cloture motion to the desk for the conference 
report.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under 
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The legislative clerk read as follows

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the conference 
     report to accompany H.R. 6395, an Act to authorize 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for military activities 
     of the Department of Defense and for military construction, 
     to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal 
     year, and for other purposes.
         Mitch McConnell, John Thune, Shelley Moore Capito, Thom 
           Tillis, Roy Blunt, Cory Gardner, Roger F. Wicker, 
           Marsha Blackburn, John Cornyn, Mike Crapo, Pat Roberts, 
           Cindy Hyde-Smith, Kevin Cramer, Richard Burr, James M. 
           Inhofe, Steve Daines, Deb Fischer.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 1151

  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 189, S. 
1151. I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be 
agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time 
and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and 
laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, this is a 
substantial proposal, one that merits full consideration on the floor 
of the Senate with the opportunity to debate and amend to understand 
how many government agencies would be affected, to understand whether 
it merits a sunset date, to understand what the effects would be, not 
just on the regime of Venezuela but the people of Venezuela, and for 
that reason I will object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, I rise to speak again today 
about the crisis in Venezuela, a defining human rights issue of our 
time.
  Nicolas Maduro is starving his own people, and innocent children are 
dying. It is a genocide right here in our hemisphere. Every day that 
passes, the situation in Venezuela grows more dire.
  This weekend, the world watched as Maduro orchestrated a sham 
election. No one was fooled by this pathetic attempt. The appearance of 
democracy is not democracy. Maduro is a murderous dictator who doesn't 
respect human rights or the will of his people. He must be stopped.
  The Trump administration has taken decisive action to hold Maduro 
accountable, sanction the Venezuelan regime, and cut off the funds 
Maduro uses to hold on to power. But the United States and all freedom-
loving countries around the world must do more.
  As Governor, I strictly prohibited the State of Florida, including 
all State agencies, from investing in any company that did business 
with Maduro's repressive regime.
  It is simple. Why would we ever use taxpayer money to support a 
regime that is killing its own people?
  My bill, the Venezuelan Contracting Restriction Act, does the same 
thing on the Federal level by prohibiting Federal agencies from doing 
business with anyone who supports Maduro. Last year, we included a 
targeted version of this measure in the NDAA that prohibited the 
Department of Defense from doing business with anyone supporting 
Maduro's regime.
  Now it is time for us to be clear and united in our support for the 
Venezuelan people and prohibit every agency in the Federal Government 
from doing anything that would support Maduro and his genocide.
  Mr. President, I ask consent to address the Senate in Spanish.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. (English translation of the statement made in 
Spanish is as follows:)
  I stand with the people of Venezuela and will always fight for 
freedom and democracy in Latin America.
  Mr. President, what I have proposed is a simple action we can take as 
Americans to help end Maduro's genocide.
  I am completely disappointed with my Democratic colleague's objection 
to my request today. This bipartisan proposal cleared the Homeland 
Security and Government Affairs Committee with unanimous consent.
  I am eager to resolve my colleague's concerns quickly, and I hope 
that he and the other Senator who objected before will work with me to 
get this done. Unfortunately, they have not been willing to meet with 
me to fix this and to get this done.
  I am not giving up and plan to bring this up again and again. We 
don't have time to delay. We cannot lose sight of the fact that Nicolas 
Maduro is killing his citizens. We need to take every action we can to 
say to Maduro that the United States will not stand and let this 
continue.
  Even though my bill was blocked today, I will never stop fighting 
until Venezuela and all of Latin America can begin a new day of 
freedom.
  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. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                             Climate Change

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I mentioned recently in one of these 
speeches that an identity-laundering group called Donors Trust decided 
to do a letter to the editor of my home State paper asserting that they 
were just as innocent as newborn lambs.
  The Center for Media and Democracy has recently obtained the IRS form 
990 for calendar 2019 for this little lamb, Donors Trust, and it has 
some fascinating findings.
  Donors Trust took in a total of $312 million in donations in 2019--
nearly a third of a billion dollars--up from $198 million in 2018. Of 
that, more than two-thirds came from two huge donations--two--one for 
$150 million and another for $69 million.
  Out of the $312 million they received, $219 million came in two 
donations, and both of the donations were anonymous. Now, who makes 
anonymous donations of that size? Most people making a donation that 
big want their name on the building at the university. What is going 
on? Who has that kind of money to give away and a desire to hide 
themselves? One wonders.
  Donors Trust gave out $162 million in anonymized grants in 2019--
mostly to rightwing groups. This is up from $142.3 million in 2018. I 
should actually probably not say that Donors Trust gave them out but, 
rather, that they transmitted the funds for the anonymous donors 
because a donor can tell Donors Trust where the money is to go. Donors 
Trust then provides the expedient service of hiding the donor's 
identity.
  So where did this anonymous money go? Well, grants of interest 
include $7 million to the Federalist Society--1 year, $7 million--up 
from last year's $5.9 million. Yes, this is the same Federalist Society 
that has selected judges and Justices for the Trump administration.
  Is it not obvious that big special interests might buy their way to 
the Federalist Society judicial selection table with big, anonymous 
donations? When you farm out to secretive private organizations the 
power to select Supreme Court Justices and the secretive organizations 
take big, anonymous donations, what else are you to expect?

[[Page S7319]]

  It would be interesting to know who paid for a voice in selecting 
Supreme Court Justices, and it would be interesting to know what 
business they may have before the Court. But all of that is shrouded in 
secrecy and anonymity. It would be logical to assume that $7 million 
bought a seat or two at that table; we just don't know for whom or what 
their interests were.
  Relatedly, Donors Trust transmitted $10.5 million to something called 
the 85 Fund, a Leonard Leo shell group formerly known as Judicial 
Education Project. Who is Leonard Leo? Leonard Leo ran the Justice-
picking, Court-packing scheme for the Federalist Society for years 
until an expose by the Washington Post made it prudent for the 
operation to bring in a new face named Carrie Severino. It is a little 
bit like replacing a burned agent in a covert operation with a new 
agent.
  The logical conclusion is that this $10 million is also related to 
packing the courts with special interest-chosen judges and Justices, 
and if so, that brings the total for that project to over $17 million, 
counting the Federalist Society money--$17 million in 1 year just 
through Donors Trust.
  Of course, once you have packed the Court with agreeable Justices, 
you need to tee up agreeable cases for them. And guess what. Donors 
Trust also transmitted $2.7 million to advocacy groups that bring those 
cases, including the groups that presented to the Supreme Court Janus, 
the anti-labor case, and Shelby County, the anti-voting rights case. 
These are just two of the more infamous of the 80 5-to-4 partisan 
decisions giving big wins to Republican donor interests--just the kind 
of interests that have the money to push millions through Donors Trust 
and the motive to use Donors Trust to cover their tracks
  When this dark-money-funded enterprise is not busy at the task of 
packing the Court, it is busy propagating climate denial and 
obstruction. It has been at that particular scheme for years. Climate 
denial and related political obstruction, packing the courts, and 
electing Republicans are the three primary purposes of this dark-money 
enterprise.
  To keep climate denial cooking, Donors Trust transmitted nearly $19 
million to rightwing local so-called think tanks, collectively called 
the State Policy Network--a group that propagates climate denial and 
obstruction at the State government level--and to ALEC, the American 
Legislative Exchange Council, which drafts up rightwing and climate 
denial and obstruction legislation for State legislators. This ALEC 
group is so reprehensible that even ExxonMobil withdrew its support for 
it--or maybe they just laundered their support through Donors Trust. We 
don't know.
  Not content with climate denial and obstruction at the State level, 
Donors Trust also transmitted $4.5 million in anonymous money to eight 
different national climate denial organizations. These include the 
Heartland Institute, notorious for comparing climate scientists to the 
Unabomber and sending 200,000 fake, climate-denying textbooks to school 
teachers around the country.
  On this graphic prepared by a researcher into the climate denial 
enterprise, Donors Trust is front and center, right here, right in the 
middle of the web, and that Heartland Institute is right here, part of 
the network.
  The other organization that it funded is the Competitive Enterprise 
Institute, which planted noted climate denier Myron Ebell to lead the 
Trump transition at EPA and usher in the disgraced Scott Pruitt as 
Administrator.
  On a personal note, I should thank Donors Trust for transmitting 
$769,000 from some anonymous donor or donors to a dark-money opposition 
research group called Capital Research Center, which has as one of its 
tasks to feed misinformation about me to rightwing media outlets. I 
think that is my reward for calling out this whole crooked dark-money 
operation. And wouldn't you know--they send out a dark-money group to 
defend their dark-money operation. I appreciate the attention and the 
irony.
  Others in the Donors Trust dark-money creep show include $4 million 
to Project Veritas, which cooked up deceptive sting videos in Minnesota 
and other States to feed the false election fraud narrative of Donald 
Trump and the far right, and also $1.5 million to a beauty called VDARE 
Foundation, whose website is a vector for anti-Semitism, xenophobia, 
and White nationalism. I can see why someone would want to hide giving 
a million dollars to that.
  Donors Trust has a tag-along entity that sends a lot of money into 
the same places--the Charles Koch Foundation. In fact, it is a little 
hard to tell where this Koch Foundation ends and where Donors Trust 
begins.
  Donors Trust has provided significant financial support to the Koch 
political operation's major front group through the Americans for 
Prosperity Foundation, which is here on the graphic. It is like a 
reunion going through this research. And Donors Trust, in turn, has 
received financial support from the Charles G. Koch Foundation. So 
money out to the Koch political operation and in from the Koch 
Foundation. I don't know why the Koch Foundation couldn't just have 
given the money directly.
  It has been reported that the Koch network has provided Donors Trust 
with most of its backbone, even to the point of being described as part 
of the Koch network, and the Donors Trust employees have extensive 
histories within the Koch network of political front groups.
  The Center for Public Integrity reported this gem: ``At a private 
Koch fundraising meeting in the summer of 2010, Donors Trust hosted 
cocktails and dessert for . . . a `target-rich environment' of wealthy 
donors.'' Sweet indeed.
  So when we look at this Charles Koch Foundation, we are looking at 
something interlinked with Donors Trust, and sure enough, there is also 
overlap in where the money goes.
  In 2019, this Koch Foundation gave out $141 million, up from $127 
million in 2018. For the State-level climate denial State Policy 
Network we talked about, it gave $2.5 million across 13 so-called think 
tanks, and it gave nearly half a million dollars to that same ALEC--
American Legislative Exchange Council--we talked about.
  Other Koch grants of note include over $22 million to George Mason 
University, whose role as a hothouse for developing deregulatory and 
climate denial theories is well documented in Nancy Maclean's terrific 
book, ``Democracy in Chains.'' This $22 million continues a 
relationship that helped put Koch operative Neomi Rao from George Mason 
into the Trump White House and then onto the DC Circuit Court of 
Appeals to do the Koch operation's business from behind robes.
  Remember those special interest front groups that tee up legal cases 
for the judges and Justices who have been ushered onto the courts? The 
Koch Foundation turns up there too. The Koch Foundation has spread $6.2 
million around 10 separate amici curiae--friends of court, so-called--
that showed up in a case called Americans for Prosperity v. Becerra. 
And what do you know? Yes, Americans for Prosperity is that Koch 
political operation's main front group--such a small world.

  Why would Koch political interests want to fund amici in a case where 
a Koch front group is already the plaintiff? Well, let's look at that 
case. The ``Becerra'' in Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Becerra 
is the California attorney general, a nominee for HHS Secretary now, I 
gather. The case is an abstruse technical challenge to how the IRS 
shares tax information with States.
  Why this gathering of the Koch-funded clan of front groups around 
this little technical case? Because the lifeblood of all this dirty 
operation is dark money. Indeed, today, our Supreme Court is the Court 
that dark money built. So the dark money operation sees a chance to 
enshrine dark money in the American Constitution. The dark money forces 
that built this Court want the Court to expand the First Amendment to 
protect anonymous, dark money political spending by secretive 
billionaires and corporate interests. This is the case where they 
intend to make their move. It is waiting in the Supreme Court right 
now. Who knows, maybe it has been waiting for Justice Barrett.
  Lined up as amici curiae in this otherwise nondescript case, in the 
order of their Koch Foundation funding, are: the Cato Institute--I 
can't read this well enough to point them out, but these are 
inhabitants of this graph as

[[Page S7320]]

well--$2.4 million from the Koch Foundation; Texas Public Policy 
Foundation, $1.5 million; Pacific Legal Foundation, $1 million; New 
Civil Liberties Alliance, $1 million; Buckeye Institute, $104,200; 
Independent Women's Forum, $100,000; Pacific Research Institute, 
$100,000; Philanthropy Roundtable, $30,000; Institute for Justice, 
$12,584; and National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, $8,156. 
When you look at the kind of money that is being doled out, I think the 
Institute for Justice and the National Right to Work Legal Defense 
Foundation have some cause to complain that they got treated so poorly 
with such small donations from such a big operation.
  The gathering of that clan is not the only clue that something is up. 
Big players in the dark money racket, like the fossil fuel titan 
Marathon Petroleum and the massive climate obstructer that calls itself 
the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are already objecting to requests for 
information about their dark money operations by asserting that such a 
right exists. They are already asserting that such a right exists, 
while the dark money schemers are lining up in this case to make that 
push to the Supreme Court. Wouldn't it be convenient if they helped 
build a Court willing to agree with them and establish this new right 
to dark money influence?
  This whole dark money mess smells to high heaven. Why big donors feel 
they have to hide? Why this complicated network to play Whac-A-Mole 
with different groups who can show up? Why the orchestration of Supreme 
Court briefs with groups that purport to be separate? Why the whole 
scheme? It is a recipe for corruption. It prevents citizens from 
understanding what is going on in their own democracy. It empowers the 
worst forces in politics. It is the mechanism through which climate 
denial has been effectuated, and it is wrapping its tentacles more and 
more tightly around our U.S. Supreme Court.
  And Donors Trust--that sweet little lamb--is at the center of the web 
dolling out hundreds of millions of dollars--some lamb. Donors Trust is 
a wolf in lamb's clothing or perhaps better to say Donors Trust 
provides the lamb's clothing that cloaks the wolves so that they can 
feed more voraciously and anonymously on America's body politic.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma


                          Trump Administration

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I was listening to the previous speaker 
from Rhode Island, and I figure it is time to clarify a few things that 
are said about our President.
  I know that right now a lot of people are believing that we are going 
to have a change; that we will have a Democratic President. A lot of 
decisions are being made, talk is being made. But to show you that 
there is a big difference of opinion, I want to say a few things about 
our President just to remind people. They have forgotten what has 
happened. Now, I know there are differing opinions on that, partisan 
opinions and all that.
  Right now, my very close friend from the Democratic aisle and I are 
going to, hopefully, have a vote tomorrow that will take place, the 
Defense authorization bill--the biggest bill of the year, the most 
significant bill of the year. Senator Reed and I have an agreement on 
almost every element of it. And we have both come to the conclusion 
that it is a tremendous bill. It is one you really can't justify 
opposing.
  A lot of things have been said that are not true, but I want to just 
mention a couple of things because this is a good time to do it.
  We have a President who has done things that just have never been 
done before in terms of accomplishments, positive accomplishments. I 
remember 2 years ago, I wrote this little card because I was keeping 
track of all these goods things that have happened. I remember showing 
it to the President at that time. He read that, and he was very excited 
about the way that we had composed them. Keep in mind, this was 2 years 
ago.
  Look at these 10 things that this President has done: First of all, 
the big tax cut that he had. By the way, when we look at the fact that 
he did such great things for the economy--prior to the pandemic, we had 
the best economy we have had in my lifetime. The pandemic changed all 
of that. But he did this by looking back at history--and it was not a 
Republican; it was a Democrat. It was President Kennedy who had the 
wisdom to say, when he was working on the Great Society programs that 
were going to cost so much money: Well, we have to raise our revenue, 
and the best way to increase revenue is to decrease tax rates. So he 
decreased tax rates. We all remember that. While it worked, 
unfortunately, the President died before he could really take advantage 
and enjoy the benefits of the work he had done by his tax cuts. It has 
been tried since that time, and it has worked.
  But what this President did in addition to that, he didn't have just 
tax cuts; he had regulation cuts. I call it the golden day of 
regulation relief, the best economy we have had in that period of time. 
They say that full employment is 4 percent unemployment, when, in fact, 
we actually got down below 3 percent. That was something that has not 
been done in my memory, and all these things happened and good benefits 
came from that.
  There is a difference of opinion between Democrats and Republicans, 
and we understand that. I have always felt the best thing and indicator 
of success in the economy is to see how many people you get off of food 
stamps, and a lot of liberal friends say that they measure it by how 
many people get on food stamps. Nonetheless, we have 5 million people 
off of food stamps. That is what happened, and that is why we had the 
economy that we had. I hate to think of where we would be today if we 
had started with an average economy. We started with the best economy 
we had in my lifetime, and that was because of the President and the 
support he had from our party.
  The second thing I hold up--now, keep in mind, I am from Oklahoma. We 
are an oil State. We renewed--during the Obama administration, there 
was a war on fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are coal, oil, and gas, and it 
was an effort to try to get it back into renewables. Someday we may 
have the development of renewables. They are not there now. In spite of 
what the previous speaker said, they are not there and available now. 
So what this President did was he stopped the war on fossil fuels.
  As a result of that, we had--and this is in the first 2 years--a 277-
percent growth in crude exports, 132-percent increase in coal exports, 
and a 52-percent increase in natural gas exports. A lot of that 
translated into the economy that we were enjoying.
  In terms of illegal immigration--I know this became very 
controversial--the wall. People didn't like the idea of the wall. I can 
remember a conversation I had with Netanyahu when I was in Israel once, 
and he said he didn't understand how a modern State can have borders 
that are not secured. He said: You can't do that. That doesn't work. 
Well, he has now gotten that done against a lot of opposition--we all 
know that--in Israel.
  How many Presidents--every President I can think of in my career here 
in Washington has said we need to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel to 
Jerusalem, but they don't do it. So this President just went ahead and 
did it. He is a little abrupt--we understand that--but he got these 
things done.
  The WRDA bill--the Water Resources Development Act--right now and, 
actually, the FAA reauthorization were both booming successes. They 
were his efforts.
  And then the judges. I don't know that it is a record, but in the 
period of time, the 4 years that this President has been in office, we 
have had about 220 judges who have been confirmed. These are all judges 
who have one thing in common: They really believe in the Constitution. 
They are Constitutionalists. In addition to that, he has three of the 
U.S. Supreme Court Justices.
  Then, on the repeal, if you talk to anyone in business in America--
this was a couple of years ago--about the biggest problem they had was 
the Dodd-Frank effort. That was the overregulation of business and 
industry. And so he relaxed those rules, and that created a lot of 
prosperity, a reason for the economy that we have today, and the record 
employment that he has given us of 157 million jobs.
  This is back 2 years ago.

[[Page S7321]]

  Now, I would say, if you single out one thing--I don't say this 
critically of the Obama administration. We all have different 
priorities, and I have considered President Obama to be a friend. 
However, his top priority was not a strong national defense. He had 
other priorities. We all know that.
  As a result of that, if you will take the last 5 years--that would 
have been from the year 2010 to 2015--in the last 5 years, he reduced 
the funding of the military by 25 percent. It has never been done 
before.
  But that is something that this President came in and immediately--
and I chair the committee, so I was very much involved in this. But we 
ended up with all these things that--the lifting of that and putting it 
back in the position that it should be.
  Now, this is interesting because somebody reminded me--John Bonsell 
reminded me this morning. He said: What you ought to do is get a list 
of these things that have happened since 2 years ago. So real quickly, 
just to say, identifying China as the No. 1 adversary in the NDS--that 
is the National Defense System, which has worked very successfully. 
That is a program that is put together by six Republicans and six 
Democrats, all experts in the field.
  I talked about national defense, and he stuck with that and has 
identified China for the problems that they are giving us right now.
  He had new investments in the future. Hypersonics is a good example. 
After the last administration, China and Russia both surged ahead of us 
in the research on hypersonics. That is one of the most recent 
developments of modern equipment. That has worked, and we are not quite 
there yet, but we are catching up in the cyber world. He is advancing 
it in that area.
  Then as far as the terrorist leaders Baghdadi and Soleimani, both of 
them were considered to be the worst terrorists on the planet, and he 
has taken both of them out.
  He established the Space Force. The Space Force is something that we 
really needed to do not because so much that we were behind in anything 
but the fact that our competition--Russia and China--were in their 
particular space forces, and we wanted to make sure everybody knew and 
our partners knew that we were right there with them.
  Then, of course, he eliminated the widow's tax. We remember that.
  And the Abraham accords--this is really interesting. We have Arab 
countries right now that are working closely with Israel. This hasn't 
happened before. The UAE is right now working with them. And the 
Israelis didn't have to give up anything, so that is a major 
advancement that we are enjoying.
  Then, of course, one of the issues we are working on right now is on 
the arms sales. We feel that we need to be selling arms to our allies, 
and we want to make sure that the whole world knows that, as a loyal 
friend of ours, we want to make sure that we do for them what we should 
be doing for them.
  During that timeframe he rescued 55 hostages in 24 countries. That is 
a big deal.
  So, anyway, all these things have been going on--and getting tough. I 
know people are upset with his attitude toward NATO. He believes in 
NATO, but he believes that the partners in NATO need to start carrying 
their fair share. And it worked. It increased their share by about $130 
billion.
  That is something that, when you talk to real people--when you get 
out of Washington and you talk to the people on the street, they say: 
Why are we in NATO when they are not carrying their end of it? Well, 
that is all changing.
  Anyway, that is what this President has done. But there is one thing 
that is happening that I think is maybe the most significant thing that 
this President has accomplished. He came out with something. I don't 
know who thought of the words ``Warp Speed'' because I have had a hard 
time remembering that. I have to write it down because I forget it.
  But he came out with something where--General Perna is a real expert 
and has been monitoring what is going on and getting the medical 
equipment necessary to defeat this thing that we have been under now 
for almost a year. And he said--keep in mind, this is back in June. In 
June, he said, by year-end--by December, maybe as early as November, 
but by December we are going to have the decision made and have a way 
to stop the pandemic that has been plaguing us for so long.
  We had a hearing--and the Presiding Officer knows this because he was 
in attendance at that hearing--and we looked at the things that General 
Perna was coming up with that showed us conclusively that we were going 
to have a vaccine that was going to work by year-end and then it would 
take about 3 months after that to get the distribution going.
  So we are talking about having this thing over by April. Now, the 
interesting thing--that happened in June, yet that is still, today--we 
are right on schedule for that to happen.
  My fellow Senator from Oklahoma, James Lankford, gave a speech 
yesterday. It was fascinating. He took a long time to do it, but he 
went into all the indicators that were out there, and you come to the 
conclusion that this plague is going to be over and we are going to be 
able to get back to normal. And that will be certainly good.
  So I just want to mention that those things are happening, and those 
things are things that were on behalf of our President. There are, out 
there, a lot of people--I have never seen the media turn against 
someone like they have our President. So people don't even know these 
good things, but I am hoping we can get this out so that people will be 
aware of it.
  Now, back to the bill that we are going to have. I know that my 
partner, who is the ranking member on the Armed Services Committee, is 
going to want to be heard concerning some of the great things that we 
are going to be doing in that bill. I will be doing the same thing 
tomorrow morning.
  So this is a bill that we can all be proud of. I have never seen it 
misrepresented as much as this bill has been misrepresented.
  With that, I am anxious to hear my partner talking.
  I will yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island


                               H.R. 6395

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I also want to thank the chairman for his 
extraordinary leadership in getting us to this point.
  For 59 years straight we have passed the National Defense 
Authorization Act, and I think, honestly, without the chairman's 
leadership we would have failed this year. So he is owed a great debt 
of gratitude by all of us and appreciation, particularly from the men 
and women of the military.
  Let me speak a bit about this year's bill: the William M. (Mac) 
Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021.
  We reached a conference committee report which was fair and 
bipartisan. In fact, I think the best testimony of that was the vote 
last evening by the House of Representatives--335 to 78, with 1 Member 
voting present. That is, by definition, bipartisan, substantive, 
overwhelmingly supported by both sides as a fair--not only fair but 
extraordinarily beneficial piece of legislation for the country.
  You don't get that vote on something that is partisan and narrowly 
defined and divisive. This bill is bipartisan. Again, Exhibit A: the 
vote last night in the House of Representatives.
  We have passed it for 59 years. There should be no exception this 
year. This is the 60th. And I hope we complete that and I expect we 
will complete that tomorrow.
  And, indeed, this whole effort, like everything else in this country, 
has been twisted and exacerbated by the COVID virus. We have to deal 
with that, but we recognize that, despite all the complications, 
despite all of the issues that come before us, one of our most 
important constitutional duties is to provide for the security of this 
Nation and provide for the men and women who wear the uniform of the 
United States. This bill does that.
  This important bipartisan legislation enhances our national security, 
strengthens military readiness and defense capabilities, protects our 
forces and their families, and it supports the defense industrial base.
  This bill authorizes the active and reserve component end strength 
necessary to meet national defense objectives, provides a 3-percent 
across-the-

[[Page S7322]]

board pay raise for the troops, and authorizes a number of bonus, 
special, and incentive pay authorities necessary to retain and recruit 
the highest quality individuals for military service.
  The conference report, as I indicated, passed by an overwhelming 
margin in the House, and I hope and believe we will have that same 
outcome tomorrow in the Senate.
  Despite everything in this bill to support our forces and bolster our 
national security, there have been threats to veto the bill by the 
President. That is his prerogative as President of the United States, 
but our responsibility and our prerogative is to pass legislation which 
is sound, we hope bipartisan, and serves the needs of the Nation and, 
particularly in this case, the troops. And I believe we have done that.
  There has been some discussion by the President of a repeal of 
section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Obviously that 
is not in our jurisdiction. It is a complicated issue. To simply, at 
the end of this process, stick it in does a great disservice to the 
committees of jurisdiction, as well as to the complexities involved in 
taking away a major factor in the operation of social media companies 
all across this country.
  So, once again, I think it was wise to resist trying to insert a 
repeal of section 230 into the bill. Indeed, our national security and 
our troops should not be held, in a sense, hostage to a very specific 
business concern, and our legislation does not do that.
  As I mentioned a moment ago, the crisis affecting every citizen is an 
exponential spread of the COVID-19 virus, and our military is not 
immune. As of last Wednesday, more than 31,000 military personnel were 
infected. If you add their families and Defense Department civilians, 
the number is over 48,000. These infections undermine our readiness, 
including the ability to train and to deploy safely.
  To respond to this health crisis--again, the most serious crisis we 
have faced in 100 years, with respect to the pandemic--the conference 
agreement requires the Department to develop a strategy for pandemic 
preparedness and response, maintain a 30-day supply of personal 
protective equipment, and to have the capability to resupply such 
equipment rapidly and review the Military Health System's response to 
COVID-19.
  The conference agreement also requires the creation of a registry of 
TRICARE beneficiaries diagnosed with COVID-19 and provides transitional 
health benefits for National Guard members and their families.
  I can't think of a more timely and necessary provision than this 
provision in our legislation, which addresses this pandemic that faces 
us today.
  Now, there has been one very high profile--there are several high 
profile but one high profile issue that is surrounding the bill this 
year, and that is the conference agreement inclusion of the Senate 
provision renaming military installations that are named after 
Confederate leaders.
  This provision establishes a commission to make recommendations for 
the renaming or removal of names, symbols, displays, monuments, and 
paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederacy or any person 
who served voluntarily with the Confederacy. The provision also 
requires the Secretary of Defense to rename and implement the 
commission's plan within 3 years of enactment.
  Now, I know the President recalls this, but this passed our committee 
by voice vote with one, I recall, objection by the Senator from 
Missouri. It came to the floor, and there were some attempts to make 
changes, but changes were not made. The bill passed overwhelmingly 
for--I believe over 80 votes--including the precise language that is in 
this conference report.
  So we went from committee to the floor, to the conference with the 
same language that was not objected to significantly by anyone. I think 
that should be pointed out.
  The senior Department officials at the Department of Defense are all 
open to changing these names. There is bipartisan support and 
cooperation on this issue, and I think it will be something that will 
be implemented and will be appropriately implemented.
  The conference agreement also includes a number of provisions aimed 
at increasing diversity and inclusion within the Department of Defense 
and military services, including the creation of a Chief Diversity 
Officer within the Department and the inclusion of programs at the 
Department to respond to White supremacist, extremist, and criminal 
gang activity within the Armed Forces.
  I say with some sense of remorse and regret that, unfortunately, 
there are some--I don't think significant numbers but some of these 
individuals. We have to respond to them, and we are responding to them.
  The conference report also includes the Elijah Cummings Anti-
Discrimination Act of 2020, which expands and enhances anti-
discrimination employee protections for Federal workers.
  Also, the conference agreement strengthens the Department's civilian 
workforce by including technical fixes and improvements to the Paid 
Parental Leave Program authorized in last year's Defense bill.
  As the Presiding Officer recalls, last year was a major breakthrough, 
giving Federal employees the incentive of paid parental leave. It has 
been extremely well received. Now we have made sure that no one has 
been left out.
  We are all, I believe, disappointed that, as we look at the record of 
all the services dealing with sexual assault in the military, they have 
not made the progress I think we all deem necessary. To reduce barriers 
and encourage victims of sexual assault to report that they were 
assaulted, the conference report requires the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a safe-to-report policy that would allow victims to report 
sexual assault without being punished for minor misconduct related to 
the assault.
  We are also concerned about the issue of domestic violence affecting 
our military families. The conference report requires the Defense 
Department to contract with a private sector independent entity to 
assess the Department's domestic violence program and to recommend 
improvements to enhance the prevention of and response to domestic 
violence in the military.
  Let me turn to the requirements of specific military services. The 
conference report supports a number of programs necessary for 
modernization, including robust funding for the Army's Future Vertical 
Lift Program and long-range precision fires.
  For the Navy and Marine Corps, the bill would add roughly $3 billion 
to authorize a number of unfunded priorities identified by the Chief of 
Naval Operations and the Commandant, including funding for the CNO's 
top unfunded priority, the 10th Virginia-class submarine in the current 
multiyear procurement program. It also mandates changes in the 
oversight and execution of shipbuilding and unmanned systems 
development programs--changes that should help instill more rigor and 
discipline within the Navy's efforts.
  With respect to the Air Force, the bill helps improve oversight of 
the Department by requiring the Secretary of Defense to submit an 
annual 30-year plan for the procurement of aircraft across the 
services--all the services--which is similar to the 30-year 
shipbuilding report that is already in statute. The bill also supports 
the Department's efforts to achieve reduced operating and support costs 
of the F-35 program.
  Turning to science and technology, I am pleased that the bill 
increases funding for important research activity such as artificial 
intelligence and quantum computing. It also includes several provisions 
that strengthen our domestic manufacturing and industrial base, 
including in critical sectors such as microelectronics, 
pharmaceuticals, and rare earth materials.
  The conference report adopts a large number of recommendations from 
the Cyberspace Solarium Commission, which was cochaired by Senator 
King. I must applaud him for his extraordinary work. They did 
remarkable work, Senator King and his colleagues in the Senate and the 
House of Representatives.
  The conference report establishes the National Cyber Director 
position within the Executive Office of the President to provide 
national leadership for cyber security, which cuts across many 
different agencies and jurisdictions. This is one of the key 
recommendations, but

[[Page S7323]]

we have many more recommendations included in the report.
  As we turn and look at the world outside of the United States, 
particularly with regard to Russia and Europe, the conference report 
enhances our ability to deter Russian aggression, maintains strong 
support for Ukraine, and reaffirms our commitment to the Transatlantic 
Partnership by calling for a strong U.S. force posture and capabilities 
in Germany.
  The conference report also expands sanctions on entities engaged in 
the construction of the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline and a requirement to 
impose sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through 
Sanctions Act, CAASTSA, on Turkey for its purchase of the Russian S-400 
air defense system.
  Turning to China, our other major adversary--and as the chairman 
pointed out the two major features in the new national defense strategy 
authored under the guidance and direction of President Trump--turning 
to China, the bill established the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, a new 
authority for the Department of Defense modeled after the European 
Deterrence Initiative, and authorizes an additional $150 million in 
funding. And I give great credit to the chairman because it was his 
idea, and he asked me to participate with him. But it is a great 
recognition of the world as it is today--China in an adversarial 
position--and we responded to it.
  I believe this is one of our strongest bills yet on countering the 
threat that China poses to the United States and our partners and 
allies, including India, Taiwan, and other countries in the region.
  With respect to countering the continued threat posed by ISIS, the 
conference report extends the Iraq and Syria train-and-equip programs 
at the requested funding level, while ensuring appropriate 
congressional oversight of the use of such funds.
  Specific to Iraq, the conference report continues efforts to 
normalize security assistance to Iraq by transitioning funding to 
enduring authorities and not other temporary authorities we have been 
using over the last several years--many years, frankly.
  For Afghanistan, the bill extends the authority to train and equip 
Afghan security forces and enhances congressional oversight. It 
requires an assessment of the progress made on such issues as anti-
corruption, recruitment and retention of security forces, and 
commitments made by the Afghan Government in support of intra-Afghan 
negotiations. It also includes a restriction on funding to reduce U.S. 
forces in Afghanistan until the administration submits an assessment of 
the impact of such actions on U.S. interests.

  In addition, the bill includes a provision to enhance congressional 
oversight of the administration's negotiations with the Taliban to 
ensure the Taliban is in compliance with the commitments made on 
February 29, 2020, and to address current and projected threats to the 
homeland emanating from Afghanistan.
  The key commitment is that we would be able to maintain a 
counterterrorism presence that would be adequate and sufficient to 
suppress any threat emanating from Afghanistan, and that has to be 
confirmed. We are still waiting for that confirmation.
  I am also pleased the conference agreement includes several 
provisions, collectively known as the United States-Israel Security 
Assistance Act, to extend foreign assistance, cooperative development 
programs, and other support to Israel. These provisions demonstrate our 
unwavering commitment to Israel.
  Turning to our nuclear triad, the conference report authorized the 
President's request to continue the modernization of our nuclear 
deterrent, which is quickly nearing the end of its use life, and the 
President recognizes that very precisely. The conference report will 
also ensure the continuation of much needed modernization efforts to 
continue to rebuild our aging National Nuclear Security Administration 
infrastructure. The conference report does not support additional 
testing, as the directors of our weapons labs have assured us and 
certified that it is not necessary at this time.
  The bill before the Senate is bipartisan, with strong support in 
Congress. This bill is critical to our national security, but more 
importantly, it provides the resources our troops need in order to do 
their job and return home safely to their loved ones. Any discussion of 
vetoing this bill undermines the commitment, I believe, that we have 
made to our servicemembers and should be off the table. Vetoing this 
bill would send the wrong signal to our forces, our allies, and our 
adversaries at exactly the wrong time. It is not necessary, and it 
should be avoided.
  Let me close in the way that I began. Let me commend Senator Inhofe. 
He has worked this bill tirelessly, and I believe he has been fair and 
transparent throughout the process. As I said before, the reason we 
have this bill for the 60th year--assuming our vote is strong 
tomorrow--is because of the chairman and several others, but it is the 
chairman principally.
  I would also like to take a moment to commend Mac Thornberry. The 
bill is named after Mac. He is an extraordinary gentleman. I had the 
privilege of serving with him for 2 years in the House of 
Representatives. He is an individual whose wise counsel, whose 
integrity, whose decency, and whose dedication to the men and women of 
the armed services is unparalleled. He is an extraordinary gentleman. I 
can't think of a more fitting tribute and a more apt tribute than 
naming this bill after Mac Thornberry.
  I have to conclude by saying that despite the appearance we have done 
all this work, our staff is extraordinary. John Bonsell and Liz King--
the staff directors--did superb work. Let me recognize my staff, my 
Democratic staff: Jody Bennett, Carolyn Chuhta, Jon Clark, Jonathan 
Epstein, Jorie Feldman, Creighton Greene, Ozge Guzelsu, Gary Leeling, 
Maggie McNamara Cooper, Kirk McConnell, Bill Monahan, Mike Noblet, John 
Quirk, Arun Seraphin, Fiona Tomlin, and last but not least, Elizabeth 
King.
  Again, this Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act 
conference report is the culmination of months of hard work. It is a 
good bill. I would say, in fact, it is one of the best bills that we 
have had in many, many years, and it will provide for our national 
security and our men and women in uniform and their families. I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
  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. 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.
  Mr. INHOFE. Let me first of all say that my colleague, ranking member 
of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Reed, is absolutely right. I 
think about the people that he was praising, the staff people.
  You don't very often hear people back in the real world really 
appreciating the time and effort that comes from the staff. In this 
case, the two individuals that Senator Reed talked about, John Bonsell, 
Liz King--I don't remember one weekend that they have had off during 
this whole thing.
  They are just workaholics. They know how significant this is. They 
know we had a defense authorization bill for the last 60 years, and the 
worst thing we could do to our kids in the field who are risking their 
lives is not send them the resources necessary that are in this bill to 
defend America

                          ____________________