[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 169 (Tuesday, September 28, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6716-S6717]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Russia
Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I rise today to continue the discussion that
we have been having about the harms of Nord Stream 2.
I will discuss in this speech one of the administration's legal
responsibilities, in particular to impose sanctions in a way that they
are now defying those legal responsibilities.
I do want to note that every day brings new evidence of the
incoherence of President Biden's sellout and surrender to Vladimir
Putin. Since we last discussed this, elections have occurred in Germany
and the government of Angela Merkel, on whose behalf the Biden
administration claims to be acting, will now be replaced. So the entire
surrender to Russia by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris was for nothing. I
will discuss that further throughout the day and throughout the week.
We have heard repeatedly from my Democratic colleagues that my
actions to block some of President Biden's nominees are unprecedented.
That accusation doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Senators routinely use
their prerogatives, and, indeed, Democrats regularly engaged in massive
obstruction over months and years of President Trump's nominations.
What isn't unprecedented, however, is Joe Biden's open defiance and
literal lawlessness in not imposing the sanctions mandated by multiple
laws passed overwhelmingly by Congress.
Right now, I would like to talk about one of the laws that the
President is violating: CAATSA--the Countering America's Adversaries
Through Sanctions Act. Before getting into the details of Nord Stream
2, I would like to note a couple of things about CAATSA.
First, CAATSA was explicitly designed for the purpose of taking away
the President's discretion whether or not to impose sanctions on Russia
in cases where Congress had deemed it necessary to mandate them. And
secondly, on that basis, CAATSA passed Congress with nearly unanimous
support: 419 to 3 in the House, and 98 to 2 in the Senate.
As for the purpose of CAATSA, I would like to quote some of my
colleagues from the other side of the aisle who were both clear and
celebratory about the bill.
Senator Murphy, who has been particularly loquacious in opposition to
these holes, said about CAATSA: ``It is not often that Congress takes
away, from the president, discretionary powers on foreign policy.''
Worth remembering.
Senator Schumer, who has also had more than a little bit to say on
these holes, said that CAATSA was necessary because of what he
described as the President's ``seeming inability to deal with the many
transgressions of Russia.''
Gosh, Senator Schumer was right. We now have a President unwilling
and unable to deal with, as he put it, the ``many transgressions of
Russia.''
What about Senator Menendez?
Senator Menendez has stood on this floor, including at 4:00 and 5:00
and 6:00 in the morning, railing about these blocks.
Well, what did he say about CAATSA?
He said that CAATSA sent ``the most powerful message in the world,
that the United States--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents--stand
together.''
Those were really fine sentiments. I wish they held true when there
was a Democratic President as much as Senator Menendez believed them
when there was a Republican President.
And how about Senator Durbin?
Senator Durbin is never lacking an opinion on any topic. Here is what
he said: ``We had to tell them enough is enough, and when it came to
the sanctions and trusting the president, we basically said we want to
make sure the president will not lift these sanctions.''
Well, do you know what? Senator Murphy was right. Senator Schumer was
right. Senator Menendez was right. Senator Durbin was right. That is
why Congress came together to pass CAATSA, tough legislation to prevent
a President from doing what Joe Biden is doing right now: surrendering
to Putin, surrendering to Russia, ignoring U.S. law, and giving Putin a
multibillion-dollar gift.
And, when my Democratic colleagues didn't believe the Trump
administration was implementing the full breadth of mandatory sanctions
under CAATSA, they made the purpose of CAATSA even clearer.
On January 30, 2018, Senator Cardin led a letter about CAATSA to
then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, cosigned by 21 other Democrats--
almost half of the caucus. They said that the Trump administration's
failure to impose mandatory sanctions ``do not fully reflect the clear
congressional intent described in the legislation . . . We expect the
administration to provide a full explanation as to why it has not
imposed mandatory sanctions'' under several provisions of CAATSA.
Then, on May 18, 2018, Senator Menendez led a letter about CAATSA to
several inspectors general, cosigned by two other Democrats. They said
that ``[s]everal mandatory provisions of the law have not been
implemented . . . despite strong evidence that actions taken by or on
behalf of the Russian government are in violation of the CAATSA
sanctions law.''
In fact, I would like to read more of that letter because it is so
abundantly clear about the purpose of CAATSA:
In light of the apparent violations and the lack of
corresponding sanctions actions, we are concerned about
whether the sanctions implementation process within the
administration is fulfilling CAATSA's mandate and intent. In
general, with respect to mandatory measures, the President is
required to make determinations in the event he has
established that sanctions behavior has taken place, and then
either impose sanctions or exercise a waiver.
So a binary choice: One or the other. That is what of a President is
required.
And do you know what? Senator Cardin and Senator Menendez, well, they
might have meant it, but they didn't say it: Only Republican Presidents
are required to do this.
They didn't write that in their letters because, of course, CAATSA
doesn't say that. What they said is a President is required to make
that choice. The law requires the President to make that choice.
Senator Cardin was right. Senator Menendez was right. And Joe Biden
is telling them: Go jump in a lake.
He is telling the U.S. Congress: Go jump in a lake.
He is telling the American people: Go jump in a lake.
He is cutting a deal with Putin, and don't bring no stinkin' laws to
get in his way.
That brings to us Nord Stream 2. One of the provisions that my
Democratic colleagues cited in both of those letters was section 228:
``Sanctions with respect to certain transactions with foreign sanctions
evaders and serious
[[Page S6717]]
human rights abusers in the Russian federation.''
Section 228 mandates the imposition of sanctions on any company that
conducts any ``significant transactions,'' including ``deceptive
transactions,'' for Russian companies that are already sanctioned.
There is no doubt--zero--that the company Nord Stream 2 AG, which is
the company responsible for the planning, the construction, and the
eventual operation of Putin's Nord Stream 2 Pipeline, has committed
acts that require the implementation and the imposition of those
mandated sanctions under CAATSA 228.
Indeed, that is one of the many reasons the pipeline was halted for a
year, and Putin only began building it again on January 24 of this
year--4 days after Joe Biden was sworn in. Because Joe Biden has been
so weak on this issue, because the pipeline exists only as a gift from
Biden to Putin, this pipeline is, in a very real sense, the Biden-Putin
pipeline.
We know that the Biden administration is defying the law, because the
Biden administration told us so in May. The Biden administration sent a
report to Congress describing how Nord Stream 2 AG had conducted
deceptive transactions for sanctioned Russian companies. That is the
explicit trigger in CAATSA for sanctions, and yet the Biden
administration has refused to meet its obligations under CAATSA, and
that leads to the reasonable compromise that I have offered.
For several months, I have had in place a hold on all State
Department nominees and on several Treasury Department nominees as
well. The reason for the hold has been simple--because Joe Biden is
defying the law and is giving Vladimir Putin a multibillion-dollar gift
that constitutes a generational geopolitical blunder that puts billions
of dollars into the Russian coffers every year that Putin will use for
military aggression against America and our allies. Biden's surrender
to Putin weakens Europe profoundly. It makes Europe dependent on Russia
even more so for energy and subject to Russia's energy blackmail. And
it also, on top of that, destroys jobs here in the United States.
For months, I have had in place the blanket hold that has caused
increasing cries of pain and dismay from our Democratic colleagues.
Interestingly, these same Democratic colleagues all agree that what
Biden is doing with the Biden-Putin pipeline is terrible. Almost to a
person, the Democrats who are complaining about this have denounced Joe
Biden for giving Putin this multibillion-dollar gift, but they say they
want to confirm his nominees anyway.
So what I have said is: All right. Fine. If the Biden administration
wants to defy the sanctions law that I drafted--the Cruz-Shaheen
sanctions law, it is two different bills that I drafted with Senator
Shaheen, Democrat from New Hampshire. We passed into law, overwhelming
bipartisan support from both Houses of Congress. If Joe Biden wants to
ignore those laws, then there is another avenue to resolve much of this
dispute, which is simply to follow the law under CAATSA.
So I extended an offer to Secretary Blinken, to Secretary Yellen, to
the White House that I would lift my holds on every career State
nominee and on the Treasury nominees where I placed holds in exchange
for one of two things: No. 1, the best outcome would be for the Biden
administration to actually implement CAATSA and sanction Nord Stream 2
AG, to follow the law, to do what is mandatory.
That would be the best outcome. If they did so, I would immediately
lift my holds.
But, secondly, I get that the White House politically has decided
they want to surrender to Putin on this. My understanding is there is
an interagency process--the State Department argued to do the right
thing. The State Department argued: Impose the sanctions on Nord Stream
2 AG, stop this pipeline, which, by the way, is what Tony Blinken sat
in my office and promised State would do. It is what just about every
senior nominee to the State Department has promised they would do.
State argued to do the right thing, but according to public reports,
the political operatives at the White House overruled their own State
Department. They said: Never mind the national security interests of
the United States. Never mind protecting America. Never mind stopping
Putin and Russia. Never mind protecting Europe's energy security. Never
mind protecting Europe from blackmail by Putin. We want to surrender
because Angela Merkel wants us to.
I talked last week about how a friend of mine jokes that the White
House political team sleeps with votive candles of Angela Merkel under
their beds. There is a view in the White House that what Merkel wants,
Merkel gets, even if it is bad for America, bad for Germany, bad for
Europe, but good for Russia.
Of course, Merkel is on her way out now, but they still want to do
this surrender. And this surrender, by the way, if it is completed,
will hurt America for generations to come--10 years, 20 years, 30 years
from now.
The next Russian dictator will be enriched by Joe Biden's surrender
to Putin on the Biden-Putin pipeline.
The two options: First, after imposing sanctions, they could leave
them in place. But, secondly, recognizing that they don't want to do
it, there is a second option I gave them, which is that they could
impose sanctions under CAATSA, but then they could delist Nord Stream 2
AG.
In other words, they could exercise the political decision not to
impose the sanctions. That gives them their policy--preferred policy
outcome.
What it also does under CAATSA is it triggers an automatic
congressional override vote.
So I told Secretary Blinken, I told Secretary Yellen: It is very
easy. If you believe in this foolhardy policy of surrendering to Putin,
then put your money where your mouth is. Follow the law, which is
clear, unequivocal, black letter law. Impose the sanctions. And you do
have a vehicle. You can delist it. The President can make a
determination that even though the sanctions are mandatory, he wants to
delist it.
But here is what Congress did. In CAATSA, it triggered an automatic
congressional override vote. And what I have told the administration
is: You know what. Whether I win or lose that override vote, if you
actually follow the law in such a way that it triggers that vote, I
will lift my holds--my holds on the career State nominees, my holds on
the Treasury nominees. You have a path. Simply subject yourself to
congressional oversight.
Now, it is very clear why they haven't taken this offer, which has
been in writing for months now. Because Joe Biden thinks if we had a
vote in this Senate, he would lose. He thinks if we had a vote in the
House, he would lose. He knows that Republicans would vote against him.
And if Democrats had a modicum of consistency, virtually every
Democrat in this Chamber and the House has been unequivocal that the
Nord Stream 2 Pipeline is devastating to U.S. national security. And so
the Biden White House doesn't want to risk members of his own party
voting against his surrender to Russia. So, instead, they defy the law.
That is an irresponsible course of action.
There is a very reasonable compromise on the table, and all of the
perils the Democrats are lamenting about these holds can be avoided if,
if, if Joe Biden will simply follow the law, follow CAATSA. The
mandatory sanctions that Democrats explained were designed to prevent a
President from doing what Joe Biden is doing right now, which is
surrendering to Russia. There is a reasonable compromise on the table.
All that is required is for Joe Biden to take it.
I yield the floor.