[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 20 (Tuesday, February 1, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S424-S426]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                          Biden Administration

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, we recently passed the 1-year anniversary 
of President Biden's inauguration. It is a natural time for taking 
stock of the first year of his Presidency.
  In President Biden, we were supposed to get a leader--a leader at 
home and on the world stage. The grownups, we were told, were back in 
the room. But the truth of the matter is that President Biden's first 
year in office has been marked by a lack of leadership more than 
anything else.
  Again and again, President Biden has simply abdicated his 
responsibilities. Take perhaps the two defining domestic crises of the 
Biden Presidency: our inflation crisis and our border crisis. In both 
cases, the response of the President and his administration has by and 
large been to stick their fingers in their ears and pretend the crises 
don't exist. Sure, the President or his people make a gesture toward 
the problem every now and then, but mostly, you would be forgiven for 
thinking that neither the border crisis nor the inflation crisis was 
even on the President's radar.
  Migrants continue to pour across our southern border in massive 
numbers, creating a humanitarian, enforcement, and security nightmare. 
And the President? Well, he appears to believe that if he ignores the 
problem long enough, it will go away. When he does talk about 
immigration, it amounts to a green light to the cartels and traffickers 
to keep leading migrants to our borders. That is why I recently joined 
more than 100 lawmakers in requesting that the Department of Homeland 
Security's inspector general investigate the Biden administration's 
border failures.
  Between the President's rhetoric and his failure to take any 
meaningful action to address the influx of illegal immigration, it is 
no surprise that we saw more than half a million attempts to cross our 
southern border illegally in the current fiscal year's first 3 months 
alone--half a million.
  Meanwhile, American families are struggling with the worst inflation 
in 40 years--40 years. The last time inflation was this bad, ``E.T.'' 
was just premiering, and ``Return of the Jedi'' hadn't even come out 
yet. American families are struggling with huge increases in the price 
of the most basic necessities, from food to fuel. And the 
administration's response? Mostly crickets.
  Of course, President Biden hasn't just been largely ignoring this 
crisis; he actually helped create it. The so-called American Rescue 
Plan Act the Democrats passed and the President signed into law in 
March of last year helped produce the sky-high inflation we are 
experiencing. But instead of addressing the resulting crisis, the 
President has been focused on passing another massive government 
spending bill that would almost undoubtedly worsen our inflation 
problem. Yes, his solution to our inflation crisis is to double down on 
the strategy that helped produce so much inflation in the first place.
  Meanwhile, Americans are wondering if their paychecks will stretch to 
afford the sharp increases at the grocery store and in gas prices, 
utility bills, household commodities, and the list goes on.
  On the world stage, of course, the defining moment of President 
Biden's first year was his disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. The 
President's arbitrary, chaotic withdrawal was a real low point for our 
country. Thirteen of our military men and women died in a terrorist 
attack during the evacuation from Kabul. We abandoned thousands of 
individuals who had worked with us in Afghanistan and whom we had 
promised to protect and left behind hundreds of American citizens. The 
President, who was supposed to restore our standing on the world stage, 
left our allies wondering if our word could be relied on, not to 
mention the fact that the disastrous withdrawal left our country in a 
more precarious national security position.
  Meanwhile, the President's recent press conference left serious 
questions as to how well he is likely to handle another pressing 
national security, and that is the issue in Ukraine. Casually 
dismissing a possible ``minor incursion'' into Ukraine's sovereign 
territory did not inspire confidence in the President's ability to 
stand up to Russia.

  We can't afford missteps and walk backs. Putin is looking to test 
America and NATO's resolve, looking for any hesitation or division. I 
hope the President and the majority party will take seriously the 
threat to Ukraine, utilize any remaining levers of American influence 
to deter a renewed attack, and, if Putin proceeds, make him immediately 
realize it was a miscalculation.
  Perhaps the biggest thing the President was going to do--the most 
important way he was going to be a leader--was to pull our country 
together. That was the defining theme of President Biden's inaugural 
address.
  I quote:

       Today, on this January day, my whole soul is in this: 
     Bringing America together. Uniting our people. And uniting 
     our nation.

  Contrast that speech with the speech that book-ended the other end of 
his first year, his speech in Georgia on election legislation. We went 
from a President who wanted to unite our Nation to a President who 
refers to his political opponents as enemies.
  ``We can see each other not as adversaries but as neighbors,'' the 
President said in his inaugural address. ``We can treat each other with 
dignity and respect.'' In his Georgia speech, by contrast, the 
President's political opponents became not only adversaries but enemies 
and racists, all for the crime of disagreeing with the President's 
vision of election reform.
  The President's complete condemnation of half the country was 
striking. I lost track of the number of people he implied were racist. 
The President assumed bad faith on the part of those who disagree with 
him. Missing from his speech was any shred of recognition that perhaps 
Americans of good will can disagree on election legislation. No, if you 
disagree with the President, you are a racist. Like Hillary Clinton 
before him, it is clear that President Biden conceives of a large 
portion of the American people as deplorables. The President repeatedly 
referred to justice in his Georgia speech. Perhaps he should consider 
the profound injustice of baselessly suggesting half the country is 
racist.
  In his inaugural address, the President said, ``We must reject a 
culture in which facts themselves are manipulated and even 
manufactured.'' I have been profoundly disappointed to see the 
President and many of my Democrat colleagues manipulate the facts about 
State election bills to support their desire for a Federal takeover of 
elections.
  Manipulated facts were a hallmark of the President's speech in 
Georgia, as he tried to twist a mainstream election law into Jim Crow 
2.0. His attempts were particularly ironic given that the State he was 
complaining about offers greater opportunities to vote than are offered 
by the President's home State of Delaware.
  Days later, at a press conference marking his first year in office, 
the President laid the groundwork for future division and disunity by 
suggesting that the 2022 elections could be illegitimate if Democrats' 
election legislation doesn't get passed; that is, I assume, if 
Democrats don't win. It was yet another profoundly disappointing remark 
from a President who was supposed to take the lead in bringing this 
country together.
  One year into the Biden Presidency, it has become clear that the 
President of the inaugural address--the President whose whole soul was 
committed to uniting our Nation--has long ago disappeared. The 
President has not only failed to unite the country, but, as his ugly 
and divisive speech in Georgia made clear, he has come to regard anyone 
who opposes his policies with active hostility and contempt.
  Just 1 year--1 year--after dedicating himself to uniting our country, 
the President is dividing Americans into supporters and enemies. ``We 
must end this uncivil war that pits red against blue, rural versus 
urban, conservative

[[Page S425]]

versus liberal,'' the President said in his inaugural address. It is 
too bad the President's actions have not matched his words.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Padilla). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


            Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act of 2022

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the former leader of the Soviet Union, 
Vladimir Lenin, once said:

       You probe with bayonets: If you find mush, you push. If you 
     find steel, you withdraw.

  Well, apparently, the current Russian President subscribes to this 
same point of view. President Putin has made no secret of his desire to 
restore the former Soviet Union. In 2005, he declared:

       The [demise] of the Soviet Union was the greatest 
     geopolitical catastrophe of the century.

  ``The [demise] of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical 
catastrophe of the century,'' he said in 2005.
  He went on to say:

       As for the Russian people, it became a genuine tragedy. 
     Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and countrymen found 
     themselves beyond the fringes of Russian territory.

  So perhaps we should not have been surprised when, in 2008, Russia 
invaded Georgia--that is, the country of Georgia. Then, when it came to 
a global response, the Russian President found mush, so he pushed. In 
2014, Russia invaded Ukraine for the first time since the end of the 
Cold War, taking its Crimea region. Once again, President Putin found 
mush, so he pushed.
  Today, more than 100,000 Russian troops are massed along the 
Ukrainian border. An invasion could happen at any moment. This 
impending crisis raises a fundamental question for the freedom-loving 
countries of the world: Will President Putin be met with mush or steel? 
Will the anticipated cost of an invasion in terms of blood, treasure, 
and reputation become so high that he backs down or will a muted global 
response encourage his lust for empire?
  In times like these, the civilized world looks to the United States 
for leadership. Ours may no longer be a unipolar world, with the rise 
of China and the dreams of empire of the Russian Federation, but our 
country remains a beacon of freedom, strength, and democracy that 
serves as an example for the rest of the world.
  So the question the world is asking is, Will America still lead? Will 
we accept our responsibilities under treaties like that of the North 
Atlantic Treaty, which formed NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization? To be sure, Ukraine is not yet a member of NATO, but will 
we and the other members allow Putin to dictate membership in the 
multilateral, rules-based order represented by NATO by threats and 
force? Will we aid a democracy like Ukraine in its self-defense? These 
are questions that lie before us, and so far, the Biden 
administration's response has been less than reassuring.
  Last year, the administration waived sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 
Pipeline, giving Russia the green light to continue its monopoly on the 
energy supply to Europe along with its ability, because of that 
monopoly, to weaponize energy to an even greater extent.
  The administration's response led to a poorly planned and even more 
poorly executed exodus from Afghanistan, leaving Afghans vulnerable and 
at the mercy of the Taliban and leaving our friends and allies around 
the world aghast at the manner in which that exit occurred.
  Then, a couple of weeks ago, President Biden suggested that minor 
incursions--minor incursions--by Russia into Ukraine may be tolerated--
a line that he would later, thankfully, walk back.
  President Biden has given our allies multiple reasons to doubt the 
resolve and credibility of the United States as that leader of the free 
world. Whether out of naivete or idealism or just error of judgment, it 
doesn't change the fact that President Biden has repeatedly projected a 
lack of decisiveness and weakness, and Putin, you had better believe, 
has taken notice.
  As it stands today, the international response to Russian aggression 
is disjointed and disorganized at best. France is all in on diplomacy. 
The United Kingdom is offering clear but limited military assistance. 
Germany, unfortunately, seems to support appeasement. The United States 
and the rest of the world are waiting for President Biden to step up to 
the challenge.
  I believe we have a responsibility to stand with Ukraine and help its 
people defend its sovereignty and its democracy. Now, that doesn't mean 
having American troops on the ground, but there are other ways we can 
help Ukraine defend itself and raise the costs of a threatened Russian 
invasion into their country. Forceful language and threats of sanctions 
may be important, but they are clearly not enough. We need to take 
concrete steps to minimize the likelihood of a Russian attack and 
ensure that Ukraine, as I said, has the resources they need in order to 
defend themselves in the event of an invasion.
  There is a historical parallel. During World War II, President 
Roosevelt recognized how critical it was for the United States to 
support Great Britain even at a time when the American people were 
isolationists and when America's official policy was neutrality toward 
the war in Europe. President Roosevelt recognized it was important to 
do what we could to support Great Britain during its hour of need, when 
it was literally hanging on by a thread, because it lacked the 
resources it needed to protect its people and fend off German forces. 
So President Roosevelt vowed to transform the United States into what 
he called the arsenal of democracy and worked with Congress to devise a 
creative solution that later became known as the Lend-Lease Act. This 
legislation, signed into law in March of 1941, allowed the United 
States to supply our allies with weapons, ships, aircraft--any materiel 
they needed in order to mount their defense at a critical time in the 
war in Europe.

  Later that year, Winston Churchill, the Prime Minister, said the bill 
``must be regarded without question as the most unsordid act in the 
whole of recorded history.'' Now, Winston Churchill certainly had a way 
with words, and when he calls it an unsordid act, I guess today we 
would say it was the most selfless and unselfish act in the whole of 
recorded history by the United States of America.
  The circumstances today are not those of March of 1941. There is no 
mistake about that. Yet, if you look back at the historical parallels--
at the circumstances in 1939, when Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia for 
similar reasons for which Putin is claiming he has a right to invade 
Ukraine--they are chilling. If we had stood up to Germany then, we 
might have avoided a global calamity and prevented the loss of millions 
of innocent lives.
  So what best to inform our actions today but the experience of the 
past, to correct our mistakes, and to duplicate the successful efforts 
in World War II or at other times in our history. The lessons of the 
past must inform the present, and I believe we still have a duty to 
lead when it comes to protecting democracies and freedom-loving 
countries around the world.
  Once again, America can now become that arsenal of democracy for 
Ukraine. To that end, I have introduced bipartisan legislation called 
the Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act to ensure that Ukrainian 
forces have the resources they need to deter and defend against Russian 
aggression.
  I am proud to have worked with senior members of the Armed Services 
Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee--people like Senators 
Cardin, Wicker, Shaheen, Graham, Blumenthal, Sullivan, and Hassan--on 
this legislation, which will give the administration and give President 
Biden more flexibility and more efficiency when it comes to being that 
arsenal of democracy for Ukraine.
  As it stands today, the President of the United States has a menu of 
options to support our friends and allies in times of conflict. In some 
cases, like the loan of equipment, the United States could eventually 
retain end use. In others, this would make clear we would support 
grants or emergency aid where we would not recover the funding or 
assets sent to our allies. This

[[Page S426]]

bill provides an additional option on the menu, allowing the United 
States to provide assistance that may otherwise be unfeasible unless we 
could retain end use. This legislation authorizes the President to 
enter into lend-lease agreements directly with Ukraine and provide the 
military equipment necessary to protect the Ukrainian people.
  My hope is that this will send another message to Vladimir Putin that 
not only do you need to consider the statements and actions of the 
executive branch but that you also need to look at the bipartisan 
support that Ukraine is getting in the U.S. Congress--tangible 
support--in terms of weapons they can use to deter and, if not to 
deter, to defeat Russian aggression. Russia must know that an invasion 
would be met with steel and not mush. If Russian troops make the 
decision to move forward, Ukrainian forces would have the lethal 
weapons needed to defend their sovereignty. I am proud of the fact that 
this effort does have such strong bipartisan support, and I hope more 
of our colleagues will join us in this legislation.

  This is one important way we can send a message to our friends and 
allies around the world that you are not alone, that America can be 
trusted, that our commitments are credible and they will be met not 
just with words but with action.
  Thanks to the leadership of Chairman Menendez of the Foreign 
Relations Committee and Ranking Member Risch, I have been proud to work 
with this bipartisan group of colleagues to discuss not just this lend-
lease legislation but a more comprehensive approach to counter Russian 
aggression. We have discussed the lend-lease bill, as well as 
additional security assistance and lethal aid for Ukraine.
  The group is currently crafting a package of targeted sanctions, as 
well, meant to deter Russia from invading. It includes limited but 
immediate sanctions in response to ongoing aggression and, in 
particular, cyber attacks, which were a new domain unknown in World War 
II but which are very real in 2022.
  Russia cannot operate under the illusion that it will only receive a 
slap on the hand for invading Ukraine. I will leave it to the chairman 
and ranking member to make announcements about this legislation, but 
suffice it to say that I am encouraged that bipartisan progress is 
being made.
  We agree on the outlines of what is being discussed, and we are 
committed to striking a deal as quickly as possible because time is of 
the essence. Nobody knows, except Vladimir Putin, when he will order 
the invasion of Ukraine. But make no mistake, America stands with 
Ukraine, and we will do everything we can to help them defend 
themselves against an invasion by the Russian Federation.
  This is not just a Ukraine problem. This is not just a Europe problem 
or a NATO problem. The potential for escalation makes this a global 
security problem. Russia didn't stop after Georgia or Crimea, and it 
likely will not stop after Ukraine.
  We are confronting the scope of Russia's power and influence on the 
global stage, and America's leadership, as always, is absolutely 
crucial.
  The United States has a responsibility to promote peace and security 
around the world. If Russia invades Ukraine and America does nothing, 
we show the world that our position can't be trusted, that our promises 
to our allies are not credible, and we also show that we will sacrifice 
the lives and the treasure of freedom-loving countries like Ukraine to 
the biggest bully on the continent.
  A shifting global order would send a signal to other countries, as 
well--not just in Europe but around the world, in places like China and 
Iran--that all bets are off. They may be incentivized to mount similar 
pressure campaigns and not fear retaliation by the United States and 
our allies. If that were to happen, America would no longer be the 
global superpower. We would suddenly become a regional power with mere 
aspirations and no global reach.
  Make no mistake, an attack on Ukraine is also an attack on America's 
global security interests and on world peace and could have cascading 
consequences that right now are too horrible to contemplate.
  This is an existential threat to our leadership in the world and to 
the global order we underwrite and to our way of life and the way of 
life for freedom-loving democracies around the world. A Russian 
invasion of Ukraine is far more existential than a mere isolated and 
faraway quarrel.
  I appreciate the hard work of Senators on both sides of the aisle to 
develop this response--this strong response--to Russia's threatened 
aggression. We need to do our part to ensure that, when Russia probes 
with bayonets, it shall be met with steel.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.