[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 216 (Wednesday, December 15, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9167-S9175]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022--Resumed

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of the House message to accompany S. 
1605, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       House message to accompany S. 1605, a bill to designate the 
     National Pulse Memorial located at 1912 South Orange Avenue 
     in Orlando, Florida, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House of 
     Representatives to the bill.
       Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House of 
     Representatives to the bill, with Schumer amendment No. 4880 
     (to the House amendment), to add an effective date.
       Schumer amendment No. 4881 (to amendment No. 4880), to 
     modify the effective date.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is 
recognized.


                                Kentucky

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, in the aftermath of Western Kentucky's 
devastating tornado outbreak, I have maintained close contact with 
State and local officials. My staff has been on the ground since the 
outset of the crisis, helping residents access Federal resources and 
keeping me up-to-date with any developments. Toward the end of the 
week, I will travel back to Kentucky to meet with my constituents and 
visit the areas affected.
  The stories coming out of Kentucky are harrowing. But in recent days, 
we also heard about the generosity, the hard work, and the hope that 
are helping our State recover.
  Kentuckians desperately need help to rebuild, so our universities, 
normally bitter rivals on the court, are rallying together to raise 
money and gather supplies for relief efforts.
  This Christmas is shaping up to be exceptionally difficult for 
children all across Western Kentucky, so churches

[[Page S9168]]

are organizing toy drives to help make the holidays a little bit 
brighter. Western Kentucky community organizations are stretched to the 
limit, so businesses based in the Commonwealth, from distilleries to 
car manufacturers, to insurance companies, have stepped up and donated 
literally millions. Remarkable stories of survival and resiliency have 
trickled out of the disaster zone.
  Last weekend's storm destroyed much of the First Christian Church in 
Mayfield, but the congregation discovered their communion table and 
altar cross fully intact while picking through the rubble. A symbol of 
hope and rebirth survived amid so much pain.
  Across town, the Mayfield Health and Rehabilitation nursing home was 
physically devastated when it took a direct hit from the tornado on 
Friday night, but all 74 of the facility's elderly residents survived 
with only minor injuries. As one staff member said, this was ``truly a 
miracle.''
  And in Bremen, KY, when a man visited the wreckage of his home on 
Saturday, he discovered his grand piano mostly undamaged--undamaged--
despite the storm. Amid the surrounding devastation, he sat down to 
play and to sing hymns. His songs, shared on social media, warmed the 
hearts of thousands.
  These stories of hope have ricocheted across the Commonwealth, 
bringing smiles and strength to communities that need them most. And 
they give me faith that Kentucky will recover from this crisis stronger 
than ever.


                                S. 1605

  Now, Mr. President, on an entirely different matter, today, the 
Senate will pass this year's National Defense Authorization Act by a 
big bipartisan margin.
  I have talked for weeks about the importance of this legislation, 
given the global threats and international challenges that face our 
country from China to Russia, to the fight against terrorists in the 
Middle East.
  I will also be proud to vote for this bill because of the enormous 
impact it will have on my home State. The proud servicemembers based in 
Kentucky play an outsized role in our national defense. From deploying 
across the world to fighting COVID-19 here at home, they do amazing 
work to keep America safe.
  In the past week, they have stepped up to provide critical support as 
Kentucky deals with the aftermath of our devastating tornadoes. Our 
Commonwealth's heroes and their families deserve our full support, and 
I am proud that this year's National Defense Authorization Act delivers 
for them.
  Nearly $1 billion for the Assembled Chemical Weapon's Alternative 
Program that supports the chemical munitions destruction mission at the 
Blue Grass Army Depot; robust funding to deter Russia in Europe; the 
emission of Fort Knox's Fifth Corps Headquarters; continued investments 
in research and modernization that will guarantee our soldiers, 
including those at Fort Campbell, are prepared to counter emerging 
threats like China.
  We have also built on our previous efforts to lift up Kentucky's 
military families. The bill provides additional funding for modern, 
high-quality childcare facilities, including $27 million for a new 
childcare development center at Fort Knox. It authorizes an across-the-
board 2.7-percent pay raise for our troops.
  This bill is critically important to the servicemembers who make 
immense sacrifices to keep our Nation safe. I am proud to support it 
and help cement the Commonwealth's role as America's most military-
friendly State.


                               Inflation

  Mr. President, now one final matter, I described yesterday how 
inflation is hurting families all across our country. Since then, yet 
another key economic indicator has set an unfortunate record.
  In the last year, wholesale prices grew at their fastest pace on 
record. Anyone with a shred of sense knows this is the absolute wrong 
time--wrong time--to unleash a multitrillion-dollar taxing-and-spending 
spree.
  Every single day brings new evidence our Democratic colleagues should 
give the country a break. But the cost of Washington Democrats' latest 
obsession isn't the only problem. The context of what they want to pass 
is actually just as bad.
  We have known since the start of the COVID pandemic that Democrats 
saw it as an opportunity to transform American society. They have 
actually been quite candid about that. And their reckless taxing-and-
spending spree they are writing behind closed doors is a Trojan horse 
to let the radical left dictate intimate details to American families.
  There is a long list of policies inspired by the authors of the Green 
New Deal. A whole slew of new programs and mandates are aimed at 
fitting the entire country's systems for producing and consuming energy 
into sort of a California-shaped box: special subsidies for expensive 
lifestyle choices like electric vehicles and electric bicycles; new 
redtape to strangle the most reliable and affordable sources of 
American energy; subsidies for supply chains that China dominates so 
that America borrows in order to ``Build Back Beijing''; and don't 
forget the so-called Civilian Climate Corps, just what we need at a 
time of inflation and labor shortages--a Potemkin make-work program for 
liberal activists.
  Of course, Washington Democrats intend to grab greater control over 
the development of America's young people long before they are eligible 
for made-up green jobs. Their spree contains a massive ``toddler 
takeover'' that insults the diversity of American families and their 
aspirations. It only throws money at a subset of secular childcare 
centers that woke bureaucrats happen to favor.
  Forget faith-based options, forget flexible part-time arrangements, 
forget being remotely fair to families with a parent at home, Democrats 
want to bring their inflation into childcare and make daycare more 
expensive, more inflexible, and more unfair.
  And then there is the latest offensive in a long campaign to restrict 
more of American's healthcare choices. Democrats' plan would mean more 
one-size-fits-all programs, more government control, a wet blanket over 
the world-leading innovation pipeline that creates new cures, and a 
further gamble with seniors' Medicare when the trust fund is already in 
danger of insolvency.
  Then there are the massive tax hikes our colleagues want to use to 
cover the bill--all those radical changes, all those Big Government 
intrusions into family life, compared with the crushing tax hikes that 
would hit our country like a ton of bricks.
  There are new surcharges on individual taxpayers. There are tax hikes 
for passthrough businesses. There is a brandnew, radical scheme to make 
American industry less competitive that Senate Democrats scribbled down 
with no hearings or committee process.
  President Biden promised he wouldn't raise taxes one penny on anyone 
making less than $400,000. But experts agree that Democrats' tax hikes 
would break that promise. People with far less income would be 
affected.
  So for goodness' sake, in 2022, their bill would give a bigger 
percentage tax cut to people making more than $1 million every year 
than the families that pull in between $75,000 and $100,000. That is 
according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
  The average person who makes upward of $1 million gets a bigger tax 
break--a bigger tax break--from Democrats' bill than the average 
household that makes just under--just under--six figures.
  In large part, that is because of an absurdly expensive tax giveaway 
that Democrats want to hand out to benefit high-income earners in blue 
States. Their SALT policy would make the Federal Government subsidize 
the property tax bills of people with mansions who choose to live in 
high-tax States.
  It is an insane proposition, and it is struggling to even earn 
support from Democrats' rank and file. But their leaders from New York 
and California are obsessed with it, so go figure.
  But SALT is only just the beginning of the gravy train this bill 
steers toward Democrats' pet projects and causes. There is also a tax 
code tweak that would create a special deduction for union dues, while 
letting one for charitable contributions actually expire. Another 
special incentive--to the tune of $10 billion--would help liberal 
colleges and universities indoctrinate students in new ``environmental 
justice'' programs, whatever that is. Still,

[[Page S9169]]

others would pour $29 billion into funding a ``National Green Bank,'' 
$2.5 billion into increasing--listen to this--``tree equity,'' $1.67 
billion to bail out news outlet, and an extra billion on top for 
``improving climate resilience'' of Pacific salmon--an extra billion on 
top for ``improving climate resilience'' of Pacific salmon.
  And then, of course, there are the extra special ways Democrats want 
to use this bill to fulfill more personal hometown priorities. Speaker 
Pelosi didn't end up getting to earmark millions of Federal dollars for 
redeveloping a park in her district. Ah, but she did secure one 
Congressman's vote by upping the funding for a defunct regional 
commission that largely benefits his district by 13,000 percent. That 
is old-school vote-buying, a slap in the face to taxpayers.
  Our own colleague, the Democratic leader, has pledged to ``use all of 
[his] power'' to personally steer tens of billions of dollars toward a 
hometown New York City housing authority with a long and storied 
reputation of corruption, mismanagement, and scandal.
  So it is hard to wrap your head around all this; that is, unless you 
subscribe to Washington Democrats' apparent core principle--core 
principle: When the American people are footing the bill, the menu is 
all-you-can-eat.
  Mr. LEAHY. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lujan). The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                               Debt Limit

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the House came together with the Senate to 
raise the debt limit, which I think was good because another closedown 
of our government would have been disastrous. So I am proud, as 
President pro tempore, to sign the joint resolution that raises the 
debt limit, and that will go now to the President. The Speaker signed 
it, I have signed it, and now the President will be able to sign the 
bill. I was very, very proud to do that.


                                S. 1605

  Mr. President, on another matter, we are going to soon have the 
opportunity to vote on passage of the fiscal year 2022 National Defense 
Authorization Act, the NDAA. As they do every year, I am sure Senators 
will get out press releases touting all of the things in this bill that 
they support, as I do: a pay raise for the military, increases for 
medical research, investments to counter Chinese aggression. These are 
things all worth talking about, but let's be honest and go beyond the 
rhetoric, tell the American people about what we are doing and what we 
are not.
  We can stand here on the Senate floor--we can do it back home--and 
declare our unwavering support for our troops and their families, can 
claim to support a strong national defense, but until we put our money 
where our mouth is and provide the funding we say we support, then 
those words ring hollow. It is only rhetoric.
  Now, the NDAA is an important piece of legislation, and I applaud 
those Senators who put it together. It sets overarching policy for the 
Department of Defense. It guides our national security. But--but--make 
sure people understand that what it does not do is provide the funding 
to implement the policies it sets. It says what the policies will be; 
it declares what the funding should be; but there is not one penny--not 
one penny--in this bill. That is the job of the Appropriations 
Committee.
  As we prepare to vote for the NDAA, Republicans have not come to the 
table to negotiate top-line spending numbers so that we can actually 
enact an appropriations bill to pay for our national defense. Some have 
said that they would be fine if the government ended up operating under 
a full-year continuing resolution. Fortunately, there are some key 
Republicans, as with all Democrats, who don't want a continuing 
resolution; they would like to get the bills done. But we have to 
actually do it. We can't talk about it. We can't be private and say 
``Oh, yeah, I am for you on that,'' but we actually do it.
  So I suggest that if people are wondering whether a continuing 
resolution helps us, do the math. A full-year CR would not only reduce 
defense spending by $35 billion compared with what is in the NDAA bill, 
but it would actually cut defense spending below last year's level. 
Just think about that.
  We can talk about all the wonderful things we are doing, but if we 
don't pass the appropriations bill, if we only have a continuing 
resolution, we cut defense spending below last year's levels. So 
instead of the $35 billion that they are touting and one minute waving 
the flag and declaring they support our troops and our military and 
then the next day have no problem in cutting the funds--if we refuse to 
go ahead and actually pass the appropriations bills and go instead to a 
continuing resolution, we are cutting funds. It almost makes me think 
of Alice in Wonderland. I wonder if we are going through the looking 
glass.

  Democrats have put a fair offer on the table to get us through this 
morass. It provides a 5-percent increase for defense programs compared 
to last fiscal year, a 13-percent increase for all other programs. The 
5-percent increase for defense we picked because it is equal to the 
increase contained in the NDAA that we are going to vote on today.
  I would predict that the large majority of Senators, Republicans and 
Democrats alike, will vote for the NDAA with that 5 percent increase. 
Well, stop holding up the appropriations bill that actually has the 
money--that has the money. The NDAA is a promissory note; the 
appropriations bill is the cash.
  The money we have in appropriations is equal to the increase for 
defense programs that Republicans unanimously endorsed when the NDAA 
was marked up in the Senate Armed Services Committee. It is equal to 
the increase that just passed the House. In the U.S. Congress, that is 
as close to a consensus as I have seen around here, and I have been 
here a few years.
  One Republican House appropriator has even said publicly that he 
wants an appropriations deal at the NDAA levels because the NDAA fully 
funds our defense needs for the coming year. I want him to know that is 
the offer the Democrats put on the table 2 months ago. So far, I have 
heard deafening silence.
  We have to go for it. We have people in both parties who understand 
the need for an appropriations bill. I recommend we all get together 
and get it done because the men and women who serve in the military 
deserve more than lipservice.
  Any Senator who votes for this authorization bill today should have 
no problem embracing an offer that provides the money to actually pay 
for it. They certainly should not be putting us on a course for a full-
year continuing resolution, which would cause cuts in our national 
defense and, I believe, would weaken our national security.
  Secretary Austin has said that a full-year's CR would be unsound, 
misappropriate billions of dollars, and erode the U.S. military 
advantage relative to China. The Secretary also noted that investments 
in research, infrastructure, and public health are equally critical to 
our national security.
  I ask unanimous consent that Secretary Austin's full statement be 
printed in the Record at the end of my statement.
  The strength of our military and national security is built on the 
strength of our people. Without domestic investments in education, 
healthcare, research, economic development, and science, we can't 
maintain our military. Without combating the opioid, substance abuse, 
and mental health crises facing our country today, we will no longer be 
able to recruit the best of the best. We need full-year appropriations 
bills to make these investments so people can sit and see what we have 
and where we are going with it.
  Recently, some Members on the other side of the aisle have taken to 
the floor of the Senate to decry a lack of progress on the 
appropriations bills. They criticize Democrats for not bringing bills 
to the floor. But let's be real. The only reason we have been unable to 
move more bills through committee or bring bills to the floor for 
debate is because Republicans have said they oppose them until we have 
a top line. OK. Then negotiate the very top line they require to move 
bills instead of refusing to negotiate that top line. Come

[[Page S9170]]

on. You can't put barriers across the highway and then complain that 
traffic is stopped.
  I have been calling for bipartisan and bicameral negotiations with 
the White House to reach an agreement on top lines since March--March, 
April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, and now 
December. It is probably time enough to get moving.
  In October, I released a comprehensive proposal, with the support of 
House Democrats, on a path forward. I would ask the Republicans to join 
us at the negotiating table. We have a job to do. We are 10 weeks into 
the fiscal year. Let's step up and make a serious offer on a top-line 
agreement. We Democrats have done that. Republicans need to do that 
now--not one that panders to the extremes of their base--and do it in 
the next few weeks.
  I have been here for a lot of years. Most of the time I have been 
here, I have been on the Senate Appropriations Committee. I have seen 
Republicans and Democrats come together. I have seen Senators from the 
left and the right come together, knowing that you have to have a 
consensus, knowing that you don't pass appropriations bills on sound 
bites and on a wish list; you do it with substantive work.
  Our staff has been working throughout recesses and everything else to 
have this, so let's get to work. Let's negotiate full-year 
appropriations bills that address our country's many needs, including 
our country's national defense. We have done this over and over again 
over the years. We can easily do it now.
  I have talked with the leaders of both parties. I think we are ready. 
I think anybody who fully understands how appropriations work know that 
a continuing resolution for the year is not the way to go. It doesn't 
help the country. It doesn't help the people whom we represent. It 
certainly doesn't help the credibility of the U.S. Senate. And we are 
in a position where the House wants to work with us. Let's get to work 
and spend a few days doing that. Let's pass the omnibus with the 
individual appropriations bills in it. It has been done in the past. It 
can be done again.
  My staff has been working night and day and weekends. We have 
everything together. I have talked with several Senators on both sides 
of the aisle. They want to go forward. Well, let's go forward for the 
sake of the country, for the sake of this body that I respect so much.
  Every single day, when I walk here into the Senate, I think what a 
privilege it is to be here. But with that privilege comes a 
responsibility--a responsibility to the people of this country, the 
people we represent. We can fulfill that responsibility by passing 
these appropriations bills.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                           Immediate Release


statement by secretary of defense lloyd j. austin iii on the impact of 
            a full-year continuing resolution--dec. 6, 2021

       The Department of Defense once again faces the threat of a 
     continuing resolution to fund our programs and operations 
     into the new year. While the short-term CR passed by Congress 
     was a necessary measure to keep the government open and 
     provide additional time to reach agreement on full-year 
     appropriations bills, some have even suggested a CR could 
     last an entire year, an unprecedented move that would cause 
     enormous, if not irreparable, damage for a wide range of 
     bipartisan priorities--from defense readiness and 
     modernization, to research and development, to public health.
       A full-year CR would be a fiscally unsound way of funding 
     the Department of Defense and government as a whole. It would 
     misalign billions of dollars in resources in a manner 
     inconsistent with evolving threats and the national security 
     landscape, which would erode the U.S. military advantage 
     relative to China, impede our ability to innovate and 
     modernize, degrade readiness, and hurt our people and their 
     families. And it would offer comfort to our enemies, disquiet 
     to our allies, and unnecessary stress to our workforce.
       Essentially, in terms of real dollars, a CR would represent 
     a budget cut--and a significant one at that.
       I urge Congress to reach a bipartisan, bicameral agreement 
     on FY 2022 appropriations, and avoid a full-year CR, in the 
     coming weeks.
       First and most importantly, failure to reach an agreement 
     would put our military and their families under additional 
     and needless stress. It would mean that providing the 2.7 
     percent pay increase the President proposed and they so 
     richly deserve--as well as housing allowances and other new 
     benefits--would come at the expense of suspending many of 
     their change-of-station moves and force us to limit the 
     numbers of new recruits we bring in. And it would result in 
     over five billion dollars in cuts to our operating accounts, 
     too, hurting the readiness of our troops and curtailing our 
     ability to cover the health-care needs of military families.
       More than 100 military construction projects--many of which 
     directly impact the quality of life of our people--would also 
     be delayed if Congress maintains current funding levels under 
     a full-year CR. And make no mistake about it, the impacts of 
     those delays would be felt not only across the Department, 
     but also in local communities around the country as job 
     opportunities are lost and revenue for local businesses 
     diminishes.
       Of course, failing to reach an agreement on appropriations 
     would also significantly impact the programs, the 
     technologies and the initiatives we are trying to undertake 
     to ensure we remain the most capable military in the world. 
     The Department's efforts to address innovation priorities 
     such as cyber, artificial intelligence and hypersonics 
     programs would be slowed.
       At a time when our adversaries are advancing their concepts 
     and capabilities to erode our strategic advantages . . . and 
     as we begin to knit together a truly groundbreaking vision of 
     integrated deterrence . . . our hands will be tied. We will 
     be forced to spend money on things we don't need and stop 
     spending money on investments we desperately do need.
       And I'd note that as important as full-year appropriations 
     are for the Department of Defense, investments at the State 
     Department, in research and development at the major research 
     agencies, and in infrastructure and public health are equally 
     critical to our national security.
       Again, I strongly urge Congress to seize this opportunity 
     to sustain American competitiveness, advance American 
     leadership, and enable our forces by immediately reaching a 
     bipartisan, bicameral agreement on full-year 2022 
     appropriations. It's not only the right thing to do, it's the 
     best thing they can do for our nation's defense.

  Mr. LEAHY. 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. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Recognition of the Majority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.


                                S. 1605

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, on NDAA, for the past six decades, 
Congress has worked on a bipartisan basis to pass an annual Defense 
bill without fail. After today, this year will be no different.
  Later this morning, the Senate will hold a vote to pass NDAA 
legislation for fiscal year 2022 that has been negotiated on a 
bipartisan, bicameral basis. After it is approved by this Chamber, the 
bill will go to the President's desk for his signature.
  With so many priorities to balance, I thank my colleagues for working 
hard over these last few months, both in committee and on the floor, to 
get NDAA done. I want to particularly recognize my colleague Chairman 
Reed for his work shepherding this important process through.


                         Build Back Better Act

  Mr. President, now, for a Build Back Better update, this week, 
Democrats also continue working on getting the Senate into a position 
where we can vote on the President's Build Back Better legislation. We 
are also continuing to hold conversations, as Senate Democrats, on the 
urgent work of advancing the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis 
Voting Rights Advancement Act.
  There is universal view in our caucus that we need to pass 
legislation to protect our democracy. What the Republican legislatures 
are doing--on a purely partisan basis--is undermining, destroying our 
democracy.
  We believe that we can restore the Senate to work the way it is 
supposed to and at the same time deal with voting rights. And that is 
what we are aiming to do.


                          Judicial Nominations

  Mr. President, now, on judicial nominations, in addition to our 
legislative agenda, the Senate is also making good progress this week 
on confirming more of President Biden's nominees, both to his 
administration and the Federal bench.
  Today, we will vote to confirm two more of the President's judicial 
nominees, and it is possible I will file cloture on more today. At the 
district

[[Page S9171]]

level, we will confirm Samantha Elliott to serve as district judge for 
the District of New Hampshire. And we will also vote on the 
confirmation of Jennifer Sung to sit as a circuit judge for the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
  Throughout her career, Ms. Sung has proven herself to be an 
exceptional and impartial adjudicator, a valiant advocate for working 
Americans, and I am confident she will be an excellent judge who adds 
to the personal and professional diversity of the Ninth Circuit.
  For much of her time in private practice, Ms. Sung dedicated herself 
to representing workers in disputes against unscrupulous employers. The 
folks she has fought for over her career haven't been privileged 
individuals. On the contrary, they have been everyday working 
Americans: low-income workers, minority workers, and largely 
underserved communities--folks who just want a fair shake.
  As a member of the Oregon Employment Relations Board, where she has 
served in a quasi-judicial role adjudicating disputes between workers 
and management, Ms. Sung has displayed immense skill striking a 
delicate balance between protecting the interests of working Americans 
while applying the law fairly and impartially and without 
preconception. This balance is crucial for anyone under consideration 
for the bench, and that is the point.
  We are having, of course, demographic diversity. Ms. Sung represents 
that as an Asian American. But we are also having professional 
diversity, where people from different walks of life and different 
experiences serve in these very important courts, not just prosecutors 
and people from big law firms. So this is a very, very important change 
that we are making to the bench.
  This year, we have made progress in adding that new level of 
diversity to the bench, but we still have a lot of work to do to make 
our courts reflect the diversity and richness of our democracy.
  And on one more judge, Ali Nathan, earlier this morning it was my 
honor to come before the Senate Judiciary Committee to introduce Ali 
Nathan, nominated by President Biden, on my recommendation, to serve as 
circuit judge for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
  Judge Nathan is a remarkable and barrier-breaking nominee for the 
Federal bench. A graduate of Cornell Law School, a clerk for both the 
Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court, under Justice Stevens, and a 
member of President Obama's White House counsel and the Office of the 
Solicitor General in New York, Judge Nathan's resume is nothing short 
of impeccable.
  I can happily say that this will be the second time I have 
recommended Judge Nathan to serve on the bench. A decade ago, I urged 
President Obama to consider Ali Nathan to serve as district judge in 
the Southern District.
  I am glad President Obama listened. And after a decade of admirable 
service on the bench, it is clear that appointing her was the right 
decision. And, one more important point, if confirmed to the Second 
Circuit, Judge Nathan would only be the second LGBTQ woman to serve as 
a Federal appellate judge in the United States--another important step 
in tearing down the barriers in the halls of justice.
  If confirmed, I am confident that Judge Nathan will serve with 
distinction and excellence on the Second Circuit.
  So, thanks to Senate Democrats, President Biden has more total 
circuit and district judge nominees confirmed before December 15 of his 
first year than any President since Ronald Reagan. By the end of the 
day, the tally will stand at 31 new judges confirmed in 2021.
  Let me repeat that. By the end of today, the Senate will have 
confirmed 31 judges in President Biden's first year--20 to the district 
courts and 11 to serve as appellate judges on the Federal circuit.
  Four years ago, under President Donald Trump, Republicans lacked any 
robust legislative agenda and focused almost entirely on rubberstamping 
the parade of far-right, unqualified, and highly ideological 
nominations to the Federal bench.
  This year, we are administering the antidote: All year long the 
Democratic majority has begun rebalancing our courts with mainstream, 
highly qualified, and diverse judges--historically diverse both in 
their profession and personhood.
  Over half of the new judges are women, over half are people of color, 
and all of them are immensely qualified by virtue of their skills, 
their experience, and their unique perspectives they bring to the 
Federal bench.
  We are going to continue working as much as we can for the rest of 
this year to confirm more judges. And you can be sure that we will push 
even harder in 2022.
  Mr. President, one more point on Republican nomination obstruction, 
besides judicial nominees, we have a responsibility in this Chamber to 
confirm President Biden's nominees to his administration. Every 
President--and this one too--deserves to have his administration 
filled, and for years in the past, both sides have worked together when 
possible. But this year, we are seeing a new low from Senate 
Republicans. Because of the cynical blockade of a handful of Members on 
the other side, the Senate now faces a backlog of at least 150 
nominees, many of whom would have sailed through the Chamber in years 
past.
  We have now had to file cloture on twice as many nominees at this 
point in President Biden's administration as Republicans had to do 
under President Trump.
  Let's be clear about the nominees at issue. We aren't talking about 
partisan firebrands or candidates who come out of left field. The bulk 
of these men and women are uncontroversial, by the book, professional 
public servants. Many of these nominees would work on issues like 
supply chains and national security, which our Republican colleagues 
say they want to address. But now those lives, and the lives of their 
families, have been thrown into total limbo, all because a handful of 
Republicans have hijacked the rules of the Senate to slow the 
confirmation process to a glacial pace, against precedent and common 
sense.
  We have been working over the past day to secure a lift on many of 
these holds. I want to echo what Senator Menendez has made clear: If 
the Senator from Texas offers a proposal that does not include lifting 
all State, Treasury, and USAID nominees, we cannot come to an 
agreement.
  Democrats are working to clear as much of the backlog as possible by 
consent. If we can't make too much progress, we may need to stay and 
hold votes on nominees this weekend and next week until we do.
  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. 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.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that prior to 
the vote, I be able to complete my remarks, followed by Senator Inhofe, 
followed by Senator Reed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                                S. 1605

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I am pleased that today we will finally 
move to a vote on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2022. Thanks to the Democrats' focus on their reckless Build Back 
Better tax-and-spending spree, consideration of the NDAA, one of the 
most important bills we consider every year, was delayed for months.
  Of course, once we finally got onto the bill, Democrats rushed the 
process. Senators of both parties filed a total of 1,000 amendments on 
this bill, but not one--not a single one--of those amendments received 
a vote on the Senate floor.
  But at least we are finally here set to pass this critical 
legislation. I am pleased the Republicans were able to strengthen this 
bill in committee and in the so-called preconference negotiations. This 
includes removing troublesome provisions like red-flag laws that would 
summarily suspend the Second Amendment rights of our men and women in 
uniform.
  Thanks in large part to Republican efforts, the final bill is $25 
billion above President Biden's inadequate budget request.

[[Page S9172]]

  We have made a lot of progress over the past several years on 
rebuilding our military, which, I might add, after years of 
underfunding and budgetary uncertainty, combined with heavy operational 
demands, had been left underequipped, undermanned, and underprepared to 
meet the threats of the 21st century. The situation had gotten so bad 
that in 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--an especially chilling warning considering the mounting 
destabilization from both of these countries today. The Commission 
noted that we would be especially vulnerable if we were ever called on 
to fight a war on two fronts.
  But, as I said, over the past several years, we made a lot of 
progress on restoring military readiness. Unfortunately, President 
Biden's inadequate budget request threatened to undo some of that 
progress. So I am pleased--very pleased--that, thanks in large part to 
Republican efforts, Democrats and Republicans have agreed on a final 
number that will continue our reinvestment in our military so that our 
men and women in uniform will have the resources they need to address 
the threats of the 21st century.
  With both China and Russia flexing their military power and the 
growing danger of a further Russian invasion of Ukraine, it is 
critically important that we ensure that our Nation is always prepared 
to defend itself and our vital national interests, whatever the threat.
  On the subject of Ukraine, I am very pleased the final bill we will 
vote on today includes an additional $50 million in military assistance 
for Ukraine. Ukraine has spent years dealing with a Russian invasion 
that threatens to push further into its sovereign territory, and we 
should be supporting the efforts of this free nation to defend itself 
from Russian aggression.
  I am particularly proud to announce that this year's NDAA contains 
the necessary funding to continue essential preparation for the B-21 
mission at Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota.
  We found out in June of this year that Ellsworth had officially been 
named ``Main Operating Base 1'' for the future B-21 bomber, home of the 
Raider. This designation not only means Ellsworth will be the first 
base to host the B-21 Raider but will also host the formal training 
unit and the first operational squadron. The stealth B-21 bomber will 
eventually replace the Air Force's B-1s, which have been a proven 
workhorse within Global Strike Command but must be divested to free up 
capacity and resources for an even more agile and capable bomber fleet.
  Once operational, the B-21 Raider will be a critical part of our 
Nation's long-range strike capabilities and nuclear deterrent well into 
the future. I am incredibly proud that South Dakota and Ellsworth were 
chosen to serve as the first operating base for the B-21s.
  When I first came to the Senate, the outlook for Ellsworth wasn't so 
rosy. I had barely arrived here in the Senate when Ellsworth was placed 
on the base realignment and closure, or BRAC, list. It was an all-hands 
effort by the congressional delegation and Ellsworth and State and 
community leaders to make the case to the Bush administration and BRAC 
Commission to remove Ellsworth from the closure list.
  Many thought that South Dakota might not have the clout to make this 
stand, that we didn't wield enough influence. We were only given about 
a 12-percent chance of pulling through, but we were determined that we 
weren't going to lose Ellsworth. We stood our ground, and we won the 
day. Ellsworth was removed from the BRAC list that August, and we got 
right to work on building up the base so that we would never again find 
ourselves in the same position.
  In 2007, we saw the Air Force Financial Services Center open at 
Ellsworth, and 2011 saw the arrival of the 89th Attack Squadron and its 
command and control stations for MQ-9 Reapers. In 2015, a decade-long 
mission paid off with the quadrupling of the training airspace for the 
base. The Powder River Training Complex is now the largest training 
airspace in the continental United States and can be used for large-
force exercises that draw combat aircraft from across this country. It 
is also well-suited for B-21 training, which is undoubtedly one of the 
reasons Ellsworth was chosen as the first home of the Raider.
  I am committed to ensuring that Ellsworth has everything it needs for 
its new mission so that it can continue to serve as one of our Nation's 
essential military assets for decades to come. To that end, I worked to 
ensure that this year's National Defense Authorization Act contain not 
only full funding for B-21 development but full funding for the first 
of many equipment and support facilities that will be needed for the B-
21 mission at Ellsworth, including a low observable coating and 
restoration facility, a wash rack and maintenance hangar, expanding the 
flight simulator facility, and more. It is imperative that these and 
follow-on military construction projects at Ellsworth stay on pace to 
ensure the B-21, once fielded, can begin operations alongside the 
current B-1 mission at Ellsworth to enable a smooth transition from one 
mission to the next.
  The National Defense Authorization Act also ensures adequate support 
for our B-1s in South Dakota and in Texas and deployed on Bomber Task 
Force missions so that they have the resources they need until they are 
replaced by the B-21s.
  I will continue to do everything I can here in Congress to support 
our B-1s at Ellsworth and advance the B-21 mission.
  Providing for our Nation's defense is one of our most serious 
responsibilities as Members of Congress. We have an obligation to 
ensure that our Nation is prepared to meet any threat, whether the 
danger comes from terrorism, rogue states, or major powers. We have an 
obligation to ensure that our men and women in uniform have the 
resources they need to confront the threats that we ask them to face.
  I am frustrated that it took us so long to move to consideration of 
this year's National Defense Authorization Act, but I am happy we did 
at least manage to secure a solid piece of legislation, and I look 
forward to voting for this bill later today.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I am very pleased that the Senate is 
finally voting on the fiscal year 2022 Defense authorization bill. It 
is the most significant bill of the year.
  There is an old document that nobody reads anymore called the 
Constitution. It kind of tells us what we are supposed to be doing 
around here, and sometimes we forget. We are talking about national 
defense. That is what we are supposed to be doing. That is why Congress 
has passed a defense authorization bill for the last 60 years. This 
will be the 61st year in a row. It will pass. It will pass in about 
another half hour from now. It is going to pass because it has passed 
in the past, and everyone realizes this is the most important thing we 
do here. A lot of people don't say that, but it is true.
  Every year, we come together--the House and the Senate, the 
Republicans and the Democrats--and put our differences aside and build 
this bill together and show our servicemembers that we really support 
them. I think that is so important.
  All we have to do is argue about this bill, and what we are doing is 
reflecting on the people who are out there on the line, out there 
making the sacrifice and losing their lives in many cases. It is 
important that they know this is the most important thing we do, and 
that is exactly what we did this year.
  It looked a little different this year because the Senate didn't take 
up the bill until after Veterans Day. I was critical of Senator Chuck 
Schumer. We filed our bill--Senator Reed and I filed this on September 
22. We didn't take it up until November 17. That is 2 months that was 
wasted that we could have used and used very productively. We don't 
need to do that. We can't let that happen again.
  It is the most important bill we do all year, and it shouldn't be 
left to the last minute. That is especially the case right now because 
we face threats like we have never before in my lifetime faced. We have 
China and Russia. They are growing and modernizing their militaries at 
a rate that we have never

[[Page S9173]]

seen before and using their new technology to menace their neighbors. 
We are seeing Russia build up forces on the Ukrainian border, most 
likely intended to be used for them to attack. We feel that is what is 
happening now.
  We have seen evidence that China is testing hypersonic missile 
technology that we don't even have. We don't have hypersonic missile 
technology like the Chinese have. Those of us who have studied what 
happened in World War II, we swore we weren't going to let this happen. 
And for a long period of time, we had the best of everything. In one 
area where America should have the best of everything, we didn't have 
the best of everything.
  So we have seen threats and are seeing threats now that we haven't 
seen before. Yes, on the Ukrainian border--we know what is happening 
there. We know 100,000 people are ready to go in. The Russians are 
there. Now we are seeing China use things that we don't even have 
today.
  At the same time, following a disastrous withdrawal, terrorist 
organizations are resurging in Afghanistan. I think we all remember in 
Afghanistan--what happened when the President went in and we had a 
withdrawal when we shouldn't have had a withdrawal. Our allies and 
partners are questioning our credibility and commitment because of that 
debacle.
  Iran continues to expand its nuclear program, and North Korea 
continues its own provocations.
  In short, we have no shortage of challenges to our security and our 
military supremacy. The security situation with both China and Russia 
has gotten far worse since the Armed Services Committee first advanced 
this bill back in July. It has gotten worse over the last few days and 
certainly every week.
  I can't think of a more necessary bill to pass right now, as we are 
going to do in another short period of minutes. This Defense 
authorization bill is the most important bill we have. I worked 
together with Chairman Reed, Senator Reed, Chairman Smith, Ranking 
Member Rogers, and the Armed Services Committees in both Chambers to 
build a bill that will help us respond to all these threats. We worked 
together. We worked together in the committee for a long time.
  People think, well, this is only something that we are doing--those 
of us who are in the position to be providing the leadership in our 
military--that we do once a year, but I can tell you right now, after 
we do this--I think it will get passed today and will be signed--we 
will start again on next year already.
  Our final product is a responsible, bipartisan path forward to 
strengthen the national security and gives our troops the resources, 
training, equipment, and benefits they deserve. We are talking about 
our troops. They need it. We don't want them to have close fights out 
there. We don't want them to have equipment that isn't the best 
equipment.
  I am afraid that we are in a situation right now where that is the 
case. The first and most important way to do that is by boosting the 
defense top line by $25 billion. That is what we did. The very first 
thing that we did was to bring that up to something where it is $25 
billion over President Biden's request.
  I know defense isn't Biden's top priority, but we showed that it is a 
bipartisan priority in this Congress. In fact, it was the 2018 NDS. 
This is the NDS. This is the National Defense System. This is in 2018, 
and we had six of the smartest Democrats in this field and six of the 
smartest Republicans. We got together and put together this thing 
called Providing for the National Defense. This was the Defense 
Strategy Commission. It is one we have been following since that time, 
and it shows that we can get things done. This is what we refer to. 
This is our pattern, and a budget cut like the President wanted isn't 
going to get us there.
  In total, this bill authorizes almost $778 billion for the Department 
of Defense and for nuclear programs at the Department of Energy. This 
increase supports many of the military's unfunded priorities, things 
they need that President Biden's inadequate budget couldn't meet, plus 
things Congress agrees that the Department must fund in critical areas.
  And we provided a 35-percent increase above the President's budget 
for military construction, the largest MILCON that we have had in over 
10 years. We also provided a $4.7 billion increase for shipbuilding, 
allowing our military to purchase five new battle-force ships, which 
will be key in our priority theater, in the Indo-Pacific. And I think 
we know what the Chinese have been doing with their ship program.
  We bolstered support to key allies, like Taiwan and Ukraine. This 
year's NDAA actually increases funding for the Ukrainian Security 
Assistance Initiative by $50 million, giving Ukraine some $300 million 
in defense, which is also in our defense too.
  And the bill includes strong bipartisan support for our nuclear 
deterrent, which is the cornerstone of our national security. We fully 
fund the nuclear modernization, which is a top priority for our 
military and will solidify support for a key leg of our nuclear triad. 
Our triad system is one that we have adhered to, and it is something 
that is working. This actually supports a key leg of that nuclear 
triad, which is the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent.
  The bill works at every turn to maintain our military supremacy and 
in some areas to spur us to catch up in other areas where we have 
fallen behind. We have fallen behind China and Russia in certain areas, 
and we don't like that. And this is what we are trying to correct at 
the current time.
  One area where we do that is in cyber security. We have people, not 
just experts on the outside. There is one of the members of our Senate 
Armed Services Committee, Senator Mike Rounds, who probably knows more 
about cyber security than any one of the advisers that are out there. 
The bill creates a whole-of-government approach, the public-private 
partnership to detect and disrupt our adversary's cyber operations.
  We also accelerate innovation in key emerging technologies, like 
artificial intelligence, hypersonic weapons, quantum computing, and 5G. 
We are doing these things. We are just not doing it as fast as we 
should, and this is one of the reasons that we are going to pass the 
most important bill of the year in just a few minutes.
  Our bill takes numerous steps to harden our industrial base and 
remove Russia and China from our national security supply chain.
  Of course, our top priority, this year and any year, is our troops, 
the brave men and women who have volunteered to lay down their lives, 
on the line, for our country. This year's bill gives them a well-
deserved pay raise and improves health. By the way, these are things 
that people who sometimes talk about the fact that we are spending some 
money--I don't know how many times I have heard people say: Well, we 
spend more on defense than China and Russia together.

  Well, that is true, but we do something that China and Russia doesn't 
do. The most expensive item we have is taking care of our troops, 
making sure that the kids of our troops have schools to go to that are 
good schools, that we have good housing.
  They don't care about things like that, but we do, and we spend more 
on our military, and people try to use that against us. Well, our 
people are first, and we are the only country that believes that.
  It prevents servicemembers from being dishonorably discharged for 
refusing the coronavirus vaccine. This is something where we changed a 
system that otherwise would have offered a dishonorable discharge, and 
it is in this bill.
  So it is a good bill. It is not perfect. No bill is perfect. There 
are some things I would have had in this bill and I am sure that 
Senator Reed would have had in this bill that didn't make it.
  Before we close, I do want to thank the good people who work so hard 
on this bill on the floor. People don't realize that. You go back to 
the real world and you talk to real people, as I do when I go back to 
Oklahoma, and they point out that they don't believe that people are 
really working. But in the case of the military, they are.
  I just have to say the hours that they work. I had occasion to talk 
to the group about John Wason--John Wason is the minority staff 
director--and about the number of hours that he works and that his team 
works. And I am going to read the names of this

[[Page S9174]]

team. Senator Reed is going to be reading the names of the majority on 
the team.
  But I think it is important that people understand that we have 
committee staff who work hard, and we are very thankful for the people 
who provide all that effort.
  On his team, John Wason has Rick Berger, Tom Goffus, Scott 
Richardson, Greg Lilly, Marta Hernandez, Jennie Wright, Adam Barker, 
Allen Edwards, Katie Magnus, Sean O'Keefe, Brad Patout, Jason Potter, 
Brian Slatterly, Katie Sutton, Eric Trager, Adam Trull, T.C. Williams, 
Robert Winkler, and Annie Caputo.
  From my staff I had Luke Holland, Dan Hillenbrand, Don Archer, Dan 
Holder, Sam Trizza, Esther Salters, Jake Johnson, Jake Hinch, Alexandra 
Slocum, Victor Sarmiento, Dixon Yonan, Leacy Burke--what would we do 
without Leacy Burke?--Laurie Fitch, and Naomi Walker.
  And sometimes we forget about the hard-working floor staff. Nobody 
ever mentions that. We have a lot of the same people who have been 
there for a number of years, and we couldn't operate without them. And 
they were really busy on this bill. And that is Robert Duncan, Chris 
Tuck, Tony Hanagan, Katherine Foster, Brian Canfield, Max Boyd, and 
Maddie Sanborn.
  I am grateful for all of their services.
  And don't forget: This is only half of the battle. After this, we 
have to go through and after we have made the priorities that we have 
made, the appropriators will get busy and do what they have done to be 
a part of this effort, which is the most significant effort that we are 
having.
  So today I encourage all of my colleagues to support this year's 
National Defense Authorization bill--I know they will--and extend our 
60-year track record of getting this bill done. And let's tell the 
troops that we love them and we support them.
  With that, I yield to Chairman Jack Reed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise to express my support for the fiscal 
year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. I am pleased, as we all 
are, that we will be voting soon on passage.
  I would like to thank Ranking Member Inhofe for his leadership and 
his thoughtfulness on this bill. He has been an excellent partner 
throughout this whole process.
  Our Nation faces an enormous range of security challenges, and it is 
more important than ever that we provide our military men and women 
with the support they need to keep Americans safe.
  To that end, this bill makes great progress. It addresses a broad 
range of pressing issues, from strategic competition with China and 
Russia, to disruptive technologies like hypersonics, AI, and quantum 
computing, to modernizing our ships, aircraft, and vehicles. It 
provides our servicemembers with the resources and support they need to 
defend our Nation, while at the same taking care of their families.
  Importantly, this bill authorizes a well-deserved 2.7-percent pay 
raise for both military members and the DOD civilian workforce. It also 
increases parental leave to 12 weeks for all servicemembers and creates 
a new 2-week bereavement leave benefit for both military and Federal 
civilian employees.
  I want to especially note that this bill includes historic, sweeping 
reforms to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and how the military 
investigates and prosecutes sexual assault and other offenses, 
including murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, and many other crimes. Just 
as my Senate colleagues, the President's Independent Review Commission, 
and survivors advocate groups have called for, this bill takes 
prosecutorial power away from the chain of command for these cases. Our 
bill creates ``special trial counsel,'' highly specialized prosecutors 
who will have exclusive, binding, and final decision-making authority 
over whether to prosecute these offenses. This is a sea change for the 
military justice system, and I am grateful to my colleagues in both 
Chambers and on both sides of the aisle for working together to achieve 
this historic reform for the well-being of our military women and men.
  Indeed, we listened to survivors, advocates, and experts because we 
owe it to our servicemembers to get this policy right. The world is as 
dangerous and complex as it has ever been. We depend on the military to 
answer the call in these challenging times, and we owe it to them to 
ensure the policies we enact on this matter and others preserves this 
Nation's military power and cohesion. I respect those who might see 
this matter differently, but this bill makes our country and our troops 
more secure because we listened to advocates and experts to reach a 
compromise with the House of Representatives.
  This year's defense bill also makes excellent progress toward meeting 
the challenges of long-term strategic competition with China and 
Russia. It invests in the people, platforms, infrastructure, and game-
changing technologies that will define the future. It extends and 
modifies the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, or PDI, and reiterates the 
Senate's intent to improve our force posture in the Indo-Pacific, 
increase readiness and presence, and build the capabilities of our 
partners and allies to counter the increasing aggression of China.
  Similarly, this year's bill authorizes the continuation of the 
European Deterrence Initiative, or EDI, in recognition of the vital 
need to support our allies and partners in Europe as we work toward the 
shared goals of deterring Russian aggression, addressing strategic 
competition, and mitigating shared security concerns.
  With respect to our services, we have taken steps to improve their 
capabilities and their ability to fight and win. Across the Army, Navy, 
Air Force, Marine Corps, and Space Force, this bill makes significant 
efforts to improve the readiness of our aircraft, ships, vehicles, 
missiles, and weapons systems. It authorizes significant increases in 
military construction projects, modernizing our nuclear triad and 
missile defense systems, and investing in cutting-edge technologies 
such as artificial intelligence, microelectronics, advanced materials, 
5G, and biotechnology.
  And with regard to our withdrawal from Afghanistan, we must capture 
the lessons of the last two decades to ensure that our future 
counterterrorism efforts in Afghanistan and elsewhere continue to hold 
violent extremists at bay. To that end, I am pleased that this bill 
includes the Afghanistan War Commission Act, an amendment spearheaded 
by Senator Duckworth.
  This bill was originally crafted by the Armed Services Committee 
after a series of thoughtful hearings, discussions, and debates on both 
sides of the aisle. Through the committee markup process, we considered 
more than 300 amendments and ultimately adopted 143 amendments. Senator 
Inhofe and I introduced this bill to the full Senate with the intent of 
adding more amendments on the floor. Although we were not able to come 
to an agreement to debate and vote on several amendments on the floor, 
we were ultimately able to adopt amendments from Senators on both sides 
of the aisle in the final legislation.
  Over the past several weeks, the Senate and House Armed Services 
Committees have worked around the clock to come to an agreement on this 
final version of this bill. I am proud of the improvements we made 
throughout this process, and I was pleased to see the House vote last 
week in an overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion, 363 to 70, to pass the 
bill. We have produced a strong NDAA that both parties and both 
chambers can support, and the President will be able to sign.
  I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the phenomenal 
staff who have made this bill possible. I want to specifically 
recognize the director for the Democratic staff, Elizabeth King, and 
the director for the Republican staff, John Wason. They have led their 
staffs and collaborated admirably with bipartisanship, diligence, and 
utmost professionalism.
  I would also like to thank members of the Armed Services Committee 
staff: Jody Bennett, Carolyn Chuhta, Jon Clark, Jenny Davis, Jonathan 
Epstein, Jorie Feldman, Creighton Greene, Gary Leeling, Kirk McConnell, 
Maggie McNamara Cooper, Bill Monahan, Mike Noblet, John Quirk, Andy 
Scott, Arun Seraphin, Cole Stevens, Soleil Sykes, Keri Lyn Michalke, 
Hailey Becker, Patrick Shilo, Alison Warner, Leah Brewer, Debbie 
Chiarello, Joe Gallo,

[[Page S9175]]

Leslie Ashton, Cami Pease, Brittany Amador, Griffin Cannon, Nate Green, 
Brandon Kasprick, Sofia Kamali, Tom Maggiacomo, and, once again, staff 
director Elizabeth King.
  From my personal office, I would like to thank Neil Campbell and 
Elyse Wasch.
  Also, let me thank the floor staff and the leadership staff. Gary 
Myrick, Tricia Engle, Dan Tinsley, Brad Watt, Stephanie Paone, Nate 
Oursler, Rachel Jackson, and Liza Patterson. You have been part of this 
process for the last several weeks, and you have done a remarkable job. 
We thank you for that very, very much.
  I would like to thank Senator Inhofe again for his partnership 
throughout this process, and I would thank Chairman Smith and Ranking 
Member Rogers from the House Armed Services Committee for their 
collaboration as well.
  Finally, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this excellent bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to concur 
with amendment No. 4880 is withdrawn.


                        Vote on Motion to Concur

  The question is on agreeing to the motion to concur.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, the yeas and nays are requested.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Wyoming (Ms. Lummis).
  The result was announced--yeas 88, nays 11, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 499 Leg.]

                                YEAS--88

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blackburn
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hassan
     Hawley
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Kaine
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lujan
     Manchin
     Marshall
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Tuberville
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--11

     Booker
     Braun
     Gillibrand
     Lee
     Markey
     Merkley
     Padilla
     Paul
     Sanders
     Warren
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Lummis
       
  The motion was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.


                             Change of Vote

  Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, on rollcall vote No. 499, I voted aye. It 
was my intention to vote nay. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that I 
be permitted to change my vote since it will not affect the outcome.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)

                          ____________________