[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 126 (Monday, July 19, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4941-S4942]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 1520

  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I rise again--again--to call for 
every Senator to have a chance to vote on our bill, the Military 
Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act. It is time to move 
the most serious crimes like sexual assault and murder out of the chain 
of command and put them in the hands of the most capable people in the 
military--independent, impartial, highly trained uniformed prosecutors.
  This is an issue that deserves urgency. I have been calling for a 
full floor vote since May 24. Since that time, an estimated 3,136 
servicemembers will have been raped or sexually assaulted and more will 
have been victims of other serious crimes. While I am heartened to see, 
after many years of pushing for reform, that growing numbers of our 
colleagues, the Department of Defense, and the President have 
acknowledged that we must move sexual assault and related crimes like 
sexual violence out of the chain of command, it is simply not enough.
  I ask my colleagues to consider what it truly means to have special 
victim prosecutors looking only at cases of sexual assault and related 
crimes. It means that all the myriad crimes that are often linked to 
special victims' cases will get left out and pushed into a system that 
is not trained to see them for what they are.
  Let's just take a simple case of a forged check. Say a soldier takes 
his girlfriend's checkbook and forges her name. If a commander looks at 
that, they are likely to take that at face value, see it as a simple, 
cut-and-dried case of someone stealing money from someone else, and 
move forward with nonjudicial punishment.
  If a military prosecutor was to look at that same case, they might 
see something entirely different. That is because prosecutors are 
trained to see linkages between crimes. They are taught to ask 
different questions. So when they see a forged check, they ask: Is 
there more happening here? And there usually is.
  Research has shown that financial abuse occurs in 99 percent of 
domestic violence cases. Financial abuse can be the means by which an 
abuser gains control in a relationship, and it is often the main reason 
a survivor stays with their abuser. While a prosecutor who has worked 
on cases of both financial crimes and domestic violence would know 
that, a commander wouldn't likely know.
  The truth is, the realities of intimate partner violence go far 
beyond sexual assault and harassment. It can include forging checks and 
carrying out other forms of financial fraud, as well as other serious 
crimes.
  We know that child endangerment can be linked to domestic violence 
and intimate partner violence, as can kidnapping. Arson can be the tool 
of someone attempting to cover up these

[[Page S4942]]

crimes. And murder, manslaughter, and murder of a pregnant woman can 
be, and often are, the final, tragic culmination of domestic violence. 
When these types of crimes are presented to commanders, they may be 
just the tip of an iceberg--the tip of an iceberg of cases that we all 
agree should be handled by a special prosecutor.
  So if we truly want to help survivors of sexual assault and domestic 
violence, we have to acknowledge that some of those crimes don't happen 
in a vacuum. We must remove all serious crimes out of the chain of 
command and into the hands of trained prosecutors who have the 
education, training, and experience that these cases require and that 
our servicemembers deserve.
  The Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act does 
exactly that, and it is supported by the major veterans service 
organization groups, as well as groups like the National Alliance to 
End Sexual Violence and the National Coalition Against Domestic 
Violence, which recognize the true impact of this reform. It is also 
supported by a bipartisan, filibuster-proof majority of Senators who 
should be allowed the opportunity to cast their vote.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be 
determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican 
leader, the Senate Committee on Armed Services be discharged from 
further consideration of S. 1520 and the Senate proceed to its 
consideration; that there be 2 hours for debate equally divided in the 
usual form, and that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the 
Senate vote on the bill with no intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REED. I object, Madam President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I have been to the floor several times 
with Senator Gillibrand not only to compliment her on the hard work she 
has put into this bill for so many years now--I think going back to 
2013--but also to give my support to this effort as well. She doesn't 
need the compliments. She doesn't want them. But I say that she is 
entitled to the hard work that she has put into this bill, and it is 
time that we pass this legislation.
  We are told that the bill will be considered by the Armed Services 
Committee as part of the NDAA. That is not a good reason to deny 
consideration as a stand-alone bill on the floor, which is what Senator 
Gillibrand has been to this floor numerous times to get done, and each 
time was objected to.
  Now, the Armed Services Committee serves this Senate well for what it 
does on military policy, but when it comes to this particular piece of 
legislation, it is unfortunate that the Committee has a track record of 
gutting provisions that they don't like, even after the provisions 
receive the votes to be included.
  On another issue, I want to recall what the Senate and House 
conferees did to a bill to prevent cuts to the Air National Guard. The 
provision was included in both the House and Senate NDAA but was 
quietly struck from the conference report. And bringing this bill 
separately on the floor of the U.S. Senate and getting it passed will 
prevent like things from happening to this sexual assault legislation.
  So this legislation is needed now.
  I think Senator Gillibrand has said it has 66 cosponsors, and that is 
exactly right, because there are far too many women and men in the 
Armed Forces being sexually assaulted and most never see justice. The 
rates of retaliation are too high, and prosecutions are too low.
  Now, over the past month, I have heard favorable comments about 
attacking this issue from President Biden. I have heard an independent 
commission at the Pentagon speak to it. I have heard Secretary Austin 
speak to it. Now, whether they specifically support this legislation or 
not, they at least have admitted that sexual assault in the military is 
a major, major problem that needs to be dealt with in some way, but I 
am saying it will never be dealt with until we get Senator Gillibrand's 
legislation passed.
  More importantly, it has the votes--66 votes in the U.S. Senate, for 
sure, and probably more when people have to put their vote on the line 
to be a stand-alone piece of legislation. It is time for the 
legislation to finally move forward, and I would urge my colleagues to 
allow it to proceed.
  But as has happened before, we found out today is not that day. But 
that day should have been years ago, considering this problem is 
getting worse from year to year and, more importantly, the fact that it 
is such a big problem, and retaliation is such a big problem that you 
don't even get accurate statistics on the number of people that have 
been sexually assaulted, because they know if they go forward and 
report it, they will be retaliated against. It is a situation that we 
have dealt with for too long without the solutions that have been 
promised working, and so the only way to solve this problem is with 
Senator Gillibrand's legislation.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, 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. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________