[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 24, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2648-S2658]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             CLOTURE MOTION

  Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending 
cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination 
     of Executive Calendar No. 896, Dara Lindenbaum, of Virginia, 
     to be a Member of the Federal Election Commission for a term 
     expiring April 30, 2027.
         Charles E. Schumer, Christopher Murphy, Tina Smith, 
           Robert Menendez, Christopher A. Coons, Michael F. 
           Bennet, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Benjamin L. Cardin, 
           Elizabeth Warren, Tim Kaine, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, 
           Sheldon Whitehouse, Tammy Duckworth, Debbie Stabenow, 
           Edward J. Markey,
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
nomination of Dara Lindenbaum, of Virginia, to be a Member of the 
Federal Election Commission for a term expiring April 30, 2027, shall 
be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley), 
the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray), and the Senator from 
Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen), are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), 
the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Toomey).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. 
Boozman) would have voted ``nay.''
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 54, nays 39, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 195 Ex.]

                                YEAS--54

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Lujan
     Manchin
     Markey
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Murphy
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--39

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Braun
     Burr
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     Moran
     Paul
     Risch
     Romney
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Wicker
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Boozman
     Merkley
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Rubio
     Toomey
     Van Hollen
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 54, the nays are 
39.
  The motion is agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Murphy). The Senator from Massachusetts.


                           Order of Procedure

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 6 p.m. 
today, the Senate vote on confirmation of the Lindenbaum nomination and 
the cloture motions on the Padin, Sweeney, and Morrison nominations; 
and that if cloture is invoked on any of those nominations, all 
postcloture time be considered expired and the Senate vote on 
confirmation of the nominations at a time to be determined by the 
majority leader or his designee, following consultation with the 
Republican leader.

[[Page S2649]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                         Nuclear Proliferation

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, what is the current threat of nuclear 
annihilation?
  The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists' Doomsday Clock measures how close 
humanity and the planet is to destruction. The answer is: 100 seconds. 
That is tied for the closest we have ever been to planetary ruin since 
the clock started in 1947.
  Recent nuclear events are likely to turn the dial even further. The 
size, diversity, and lethality of North Korea's weapons continue to 
grow, as does its threat to our allies in the region. North Korea's Kim 
Jong Un has fired more than a dozen missiles this year. Preparations 
are being made for another nuclear test.
  Iran is just weeks away from acquiring a nuclear weapon, the tragic 
consequence of Donald Trump blowing up the Iran nuclear deal that 
President Biden is now trying to stitch back together.
  In Xinjiang, the same province where China has constructed forced 
labor camps, more than 100 domes, likely housing missile silos, dot the 
landscape. The Pentagon says these sites are part of the evidence 
behind China's quest to double its nuclear forces in the next 5 years.
  Belarus's authoritarian leader Lukashenka has made a deal with the 
devil, Vladimir Putin, to stay in power. Part of the price for Putin's 
lifeline was a demand that Lukashenka amend the Belarus Constitution to 
allow for the placement of Russian nuclear weapons on its territory, 
further taunting Ukraine and all of Europe with existential ruin.
  European leaders are readying the distribution of iodine tablets in 
the event of mushroom cloud drifts overhead. The continent's residents 
are building fallout shelters right now.
  It should come as no surprise then that in a recent poll, 70 percent 
of Americans said they fear that Putin will use nuclear weapons in the 
war in Ukraine. These global fears are well-founded. We fought over the 
course of decades to make nuclear weapons taboo, but they are making a 
big comeback. In January, the five nuclear weapons States of the 
Nonproliferation Treaty affirmed that ``a nuclear war can never be won 
and must never be fought.'' But actions speak louder than words, and 
the actions of Russia in Ukraine, the hundreds of missile silos taking 
form in China, and the $51 billion the United States is set to spend on 
nuclear weapons this year alone tell us that nuclear weapons are still 
very much in vogue.
  The Doomsday Clock was created at the start of the nuclear age, and 
in the past 75 years, the minute hand has fluctuated. It has inched 
closer to midnight with the Soviet Union's first nuclear weapons test, 
India's ``Smiling Buddha'' test, and more recently, President Trump's 
threats of ``fire and fury'' against Kim Jong Un.
  When the destructive power of nuclear weapons has been curbed, the 
clock has receded from midnight. Kennedy and Khrushchev answered the 
Cuban Missile Crisis by banning atmospheric and undersea nuclear tests; 
Bush and Gorbachev retired thousands of nuclear weapons made obsolete 
by the fall of the Iron Curtain; and Obama locked down nuclear material 
around the globe, keeping it out of the hands of terrorists.
  I fear that we are seeing echoes of the darkest days of the Cold 
War--a time marked by fear and distrust of an adversary's true 
intentions; a time when the gold-plated defense establishment plowed 
ahead with new capabilities without any consideration of how 
proliferation begets proliferation; a time when the myth of a ``bomber 
and missile gap'' with the former Soviet Union spurred an arms race 
that brought us to the brink.
  Thankfully, President Biden has taken some steps to crank the minute 
hand back from midnight. While Trump was intent on dissolving the New 
START treaty with Russia, President Biden saved it in his first days in 
office. The treaty's value, especially in the context of Russia's war 
in Ukraine, cannot be overstated. The treaty puts our eyes on Russia's 
strategic forces so we can be confident in distinguishing between 
Putin's nuclear bluster and actions that should legitimately raise the 
alarm.
  But the New START treaty is not enough. Putin's provocations about 
nuclear escalation, coupled with his brandishing of battlefield nuclear 
weapons, highlight our need to negotiate new systems into a future 
treaty or agreement with Russia. Putin's invasion of Ukraine threw a 
wrench into progress in the U.S.-Russia strategic dialogue, but when 
the moment arrives, we need to restart these discussions, and we need 
to be bold.
  The use of nuclear weapons as coercive tools means it is essential 
that we do not welcome any new members to the nuclear weapons club. 
President Trump failed us by creating a minefield of obstacles against 
cleanly reentering the Iran nuclear deal, but President Biden knows 
that the alternative to reentry is far worse: We will see more 
enrichment, more proxy attacks, and risk a direct war with Iran versus 
the United States.
  We must also hold our partners to the same verification standard as 
we hold Iran. Saudi Arabia must come clean about its illicit nuclear 
and missile cooperation with China. We should insist that Saudi Arabia 
adopt the Additional Protocol to its International Atomic Energy Agency 
Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement so that we can be sure that any 
future nuclear program turns out peaceful megawatts, not megatons; so 
that it is an electricity program and not a nuclear weapons program.
  Kim Jong Un's recent missile launches show that we ignore the North 
Korean leader at our own risk. In consultation with our allies, we need 
to break the endless cycle we have seen: a provocation from the North, 
followed by sanctions, then another provocation, sparking a fresh round 
of sanctions. Our policy is stuck in an endless loop of nuclear 
Groundhog Day. It is time to concede that a leader like Kim Jong Un, 
who is willing to divert resources away from his starving people in 
order to strengthen his weapons of mass destruction program, cannot be 
coerced to disarm by piling on sanctions alone. While the 
denuclearization of North Korea is a worthy long-term goal, we have to 
humble ourselves to pursue the art of the possible--incremental steps 
that reduce the threat of war on the Korean Peninsula.
  In facing all of these challenges, we cannot continue to preach 
temperance from a barstool. As the leader of the only country to have 
used nuclear weapons in a conflict, we can't afford to take a back seat 
when it comes to reducing nuclear risks. The President must use his 
position to send the message that responsible nuclear weapons powers 
don't roll out new weapons systems in military parades; they sit down 
in good-faith negotiations to reduce the sizes and uses of their 
nuclear deterrents--and that must include China.
  Russia's invasion of Ukraine has set back the nonproliferation 
regime, but it also creates an opportunity for President Biden to 
challenge China's Xi to join him in reassuring a rattled world that 
firing on nuclear reactors is off limits, that threatening countries 
with existential weapons is unacceptable, and to show the world that 
the inevitability of a ``Sputnik moment'' with China does not have to 
come to pass. Our two countries may disagree on a lot, but we can 
embrace the organizing principle that the only way to win an arms race 
is not to run in one.
  For instance, we are concerned about China's development of 
maneuverable hypersonic systems and its plans to expand its ICBM force, 
but Pentagon leaders admit that Beijing's concerns about advances in 
U.S. missile defenses are partly the impetus for that buildup. We are 
concerned that China may be drifting away from its no-first-use 
doctrine, but both the United States and Russia explicitly allow for 
the use of nuclear weapons in response to a nonnuclear attack. We fear 
that China may use new civilian nuclear reactors to churn out massive 
amounts of separated plutonium for bombs, but other countries in the 
region also have the capacity to divert fissile material from a 
peaceful to a nonpeaceful program.
  If President Biden can get Xi to the negotiating table, we have a 
chance to shape an alternative future to the inevitable doom that the 
Pentagon has previewed--one that does not see the United States and 
China joining Russia in pursuit of new innovative, more lethal ways to 
kill one another; one that instead negotiates near-term confidence-
building measures to reduce

[[Page S2650]]

nuclear risks with China and that can ultimately lead to the conclusion 
of formal arms control agreements between our countries. The United 
States cannot do it alone, but we can break the cycle of nuclear 
escalation and secure a future wherein the fate of millions no longer 
hangs on the whims and judgments of fallible leaders or the military-
industrial complex.
  We need President Biden to outline that bold action plan that draws 
inspiration from our better angels, not from the unhinged policies of 
nuclear weapons overkill that Stanley Kubrick lampooned in ``Dr. 
Strangelove.''
  In my book ``Nuclear Peril: The Politics of Proliferation,'' written 
in 1983, I wrote:

       Nuclear proliferation is a problem too long ignored. Now, 
     before it is too late, the public must draw the line. The 
     stakes are too high.

  The public clearly understands that the stakes for our planet have 
never been higher, but it is not too late, not yet. Once the clock hits 
midnight, though, our time is up. It is time for action, not rhetoric. 
This issue is one that can no longer be ignored.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.


                          Biden Administration

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, the Biden administration has made a 
name for itself in attacking the very institutions that they were sworn 
to protect. If you look at what is happening outside Washington right 
now, you can see the ripple effects of this institutional sabotage. 
There is inflation; there are shortages; there is crime; and there are 
drugs flooding our communities.
  This weekend, I was chatting with one of my politically independent-
minded friends back home, and here is what she told me.
  She said:

       Everything the Democrats are doing is making my life 
     harder. It makes things worse.

  Last Tuesday, I held a telephone townhall with a few thousand 
Tennesseans, and they told me the same thing.
  I spoke to a dad from Chattanooga, and something he said really 
struck me. He was telling me about how worried he was about his 
children's futures. He said the only common thread he can see tying all 
of this together is suffering.
  Think about that. Here is a dad--a dad--who is looking at the actions 
of the Democrat-controlled House, Senate, and White House, and to him, 
he is perceiving the intent as being to inflict suffering.
  He asked me what the goal was of all of this--referring, of course, 
to Biden's agenda. He couldn't figure it out, and I really don't blame 
him. No reasonable person can look at what the Biden administration has 
done and say that they feel like the administration has our best 
interests at heart or that they have a vision for the future of the 
country. What they do have is an agenda, a ``to do'' list, and it seems 
sometimes they struggle with that.
  To Tennesseans, this government, under this administration, with this 
leadership, is all broken. It is broken. Nowhere has this been more 
pronounced than in President Biden's refusal to support law 
enforcement, both down on the border and in our local communities.
  Since day one, the President has done everything in his power to 
sabotage the tens of thousands of people the Department of Homeland 
Security employs to secure the homeland. He has done this knowing full 
well that international criminal organizations, terrorists, and cartels 
are taking advantage of his lack of action. In fact, business has never 
been better for the drug dealers and the human traffickers. At times, 
they are raking in as much as $100 million a week. That is right. Who 
is profiting? It is the cartels that are pushing drugs, that are 
pushing fentanyl, that are pushing gangs, that are pushing sex 
trafficking; the cartels that have turned themselves into global 
organizations, bringing in people last year from 160 different 
countries to our southern border. To do what? It is to enter illegally, 
to claim asylum, to ask the U.S. taxpayer to finish the journey for 
them to wherever they are wanting to go. This is what the people are 
seeing.
  Now take a look at what is happening in our own backyard, if you 
will. In 2021, almost 108,000 Americans died from drug overdoses. About 
4,000 of these were Tennesseans--all tragic losses. Law enforcement in 
Benton County, TN, told me recently that about 80 percent of the drugs 
they seize contain fentanyl, which, as we all know, is deadly even in 
very small amounts. Ask any law enforcement officer where these drugs 
are coming from, and they will tell you that the majority of this is 
coming across the southern border. The cartel mules are smuggling it 
right across that border.
  Our Border Patrol is overworked; they are underfunded; they are 
understaffed; they are working overtime. They are doing their best, but 
they can't get it all. They look at the surveillance cameras. They see 
the ``got-aways.'' They know that they are coming.
  If the Biden administration abandons their title 42 authority at some 
point in the future, it is going to get worse. We will have the 
equivalent of the population of a small town in Tennessee coming right 
across that border.
  In Tennessee, we have got 345 towns, and 90 percent of those are 
18,000 in population or fewer. When you look at Connecticut, you have 
got 215 towns, and 87 percent of those are--you have got it--18,000 or 
fewer in population. If you look at the State of Maryland, there are 
536 towns, and 458 of those are 18,000 or fewer in population. That is 
85.4 percent. Now think about that number of people crossing the border 
every single day, and all that the traffickers--the drug traffickers, 
the human traffickers--and all of the gangs have to do is blend in. 
Come on in.
  I would like to say, until the Biden administration wises up and 
secures the border, every town will be a border town, and every State 
will be a border State.
  The problems associated with drugs and criminal activity don't stay 
in New Mexico or Arizona or Texas or California. They bleed into the 
rest of the country and into the hands of local law enforcement. They 
have enough to be dealing with.
  Here are some stats for you. In 2021, homicides in U.S. cities 
reached a near-record high. The number of law enforcement officers 
intentionally killed on the job was the highest since 9/11, and ambush-
style attacks on police increased 115 percent.
  Meanwhile, earlier this year, the Biden administration floated the 
idea of using yet another Executive order to limit law enforcement's 
access to resources and Federal grant money. Between the ``defund the 
police'' movement and this halfhearted support from their President, it 
is no wonder that law enforcement officers are resigning or quitting or 
retiring in record numbers.
  I would ask the President and Secretary Mayorkas and my Democratic 
colleagues to listen to what those who have sworn to protect and serve 
are telling them, because they know what the Biden administration needs 
to do.
  This administration would be well-served to keep title 42 until we 
have a plan to replace it. Embrace the ``Remain in Mexico'' policy and 
do what law enforcement has asked for decades: build a wall. They need 
that barrier. Give them technology, better technology, and more 
officers and agents. That is what they need. They continue to ask for 
it. Give them what they need to do their job to protect this country.
  As it stands, Democrats have abandoned Border Patrol, abandoned local 
law enforcement, and according to my friends in Tennessee, they have 
abandoned we, the people. And the people are losing faith. They look at 
the White House and they have no idea who is in charge. They don't see 
their concern for the future reflected in the actions of the President 
or his staff who repeatedly corrects him. They don't see a vision for 
America. All they see is a to-do list, an agenda, that will fail them 
over and over again because it leads to more government control and 
less freedom for we, the people.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.


                             Infrastructure

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, yesterday, I was in Southern Maryland at 
the Thomas Johnson Bridge. This bridge was built in the 1970s. It 
connects St. Mary's County with Calvert County. There are critical 
facilities that are located in this region. I say that because

[[Page S2651]]

this is an evacuation route. We have Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power 
Plant. We have Pax River. We have the Cove Point LNG facilities.
  When it was built, a few thousand cars traversed the bridge on a 
daily basis. Now over 30,000 cars trasverse this bridge. It is not 
safe. It is a two-lane bridge, and it needs to be replaced. Major 
accidents occur on a regular basis, causing incredible congestion, as 
well as risking people's health.
  I was there at the invitation of Senator Van Hollen. He could not 
make it physically to be there, but he helped arrange for a 
congressional earmark to help advance the replacement of this bridge.
  I say that because we need to deal with traffic safety in this 
country, and replacing unsafe bridges is just one part of that program.
  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's 2021 fatality 
report was just recently released, and the numbers are shocking. Nearly 
43,000 people lost their lives on our highways in 2021. This is the 
highest number since 2005. We are moving in the wrong direction on 
traffic safety. It is the largest increase in fatalities since we have 
been keeping the records since 1975.
  Pedestrians and bicyclists, nearly 7,500 lost their lives in 2021. 
And if you look at the deaths between 2010 and 2019, 53,435 people, 
pedestrians, were killed as a result of traffic accidents. The impact 
is disproportionate in communities of color.
  In its report, Dangerous by Design, Smart Growth America found that 
``older adults, people of color, and people walking in low-income 
communities are disproportionately represented in fatal crashes 
involving people walking--even after controlling for differences in 
population size and walking rates. The fatality rate in the lowest 
income neighborhoods was nearly twice that of the middle income census 
tracts . . . and almost three times that of higher-income 
neighborhoods.''

  If you have had a friend or a family member killed or injured by a 
roadway collision, then the issue of safety is a personal one. The 
reality of the situation, however, is that this is an issue that 
affects all of us. All safety incidents cause delays and congestion on 
our roads, and these delays are disruptive. They make us late to pick 
up our kids from daycare. We miss important meetings. Our levels of 
anxiety rise as we sit in traffic frustrated as our cars burn fuel in 
stop-and-go traffic, sending excess pollution into the air we breathe. 
All of this hurts our wallets, our health, and our sense of well-being.
  With new data sources and analytical tools, the Center for Advanced 
Transportation Technology, ``the CATT Lab,'' at the University of 
Maryland has been able to quantitate some of the other impacts. Using 
numbers the CATT Lab analysts consider as conservative for the value of 
time placed on commercial vehicles and the traveling public, they found 
that there were nearly $8 billion in user-delay costs due to safety 
incidents on National Highway System roadways in 2019. Safety-related 
incidents accounted for over 18 percent of all congestion and over 300 
million vehicle hours of delay. And this is just on our National 
Highway System, not our local roads.
  Imagine if we could get back those 300 million hours of time to be 
with our families, to be more productive at work, to be more creative, 
and to live happier lives. Imagine if we could get back the $8 billion. 
This is something that is obviously of concern to everyone. The worst 
thing that we could do at this critical moment is to be complacent, to 
shrug our shoulders and say this is just the price we pay to have cars 
and the so-called freedom that our cars provide.
  For those who have lost a loved one to a collision, this is an 
unacceptable price, and it should be unacceptable to all of us because 
we can do better and we must do better.
  I applaud the Biden administration and the Department of 
Transportation for putting forth a National Roadway Safety Strategy 
earlier this year that adopts a long-term goal of zero roadway 
fatalities. The plan takes a comprehensive look at safety and all the 
pieces needed to help us tackle this challenge, from safer drivers to 
safer vehicles to more effective after-crash care. All these components 
are necessary. Today, however, I just want to focus on our roads.
  Yes, we need individual drivers to do their part: to slow down, stay 
focused, to be alert. Yes, we need new technologies for safer vehicles. 
This is true, but it is not enough. What we need now more urgently than 
ever is better infrastructure and safer roadways. Therefore, fixing 
this problem is not about halting construction; it is about building.
  We need the infrastructure but the kind of infrastructure that will 
provide safety. We need better sidewalks, better bike paths, and better 
intersections. In many places, we need to remove the vast expanses of 
pavement that have for so long facilitated speeding and restore the 
network of neighborhood streets that facilitate connections and support 
communities and children.
  This is the infrastructure that will be better for businesses too. 
Many communities have found that small businesses aren't helped by 
roads that make it easier for cars to speed right by. They are helped 
by safe places for customers and employees to walk around and spend 
time. We need the infrastructure, but we need the right kind of 
infrastructure.
  This year, we have a historic opportunity to change course and invest 
in infrastructure we need for stronger communities and safer roadways 
through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, but we have to be deliberate 
and determined in seizing this opportunity.

  I was proud to be part of the Environment and Public Works Committee. 
I chair the Infrastructure Subcommittee. We worked together, Democrats 
and Republicans, to produce a bipartisan surface transportation bill, a 
bipartisan WRDA bill--Water Resources Development Act. They were 
incorporated into the bipartisan infrastructure package. I am proud of 
that work.
  The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides several new policy tools 
and funding to help us address safety on our roads. I would like to 
highlight three important programs in the infrastructure law that will 
play a vital role in helping us to change course.
  First, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides $15.6 billion for 
the Highway Safety Improvement Program, which is one of our 
longstanding formula programs whose purpose in statute is to ``achieve 
a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on 
all public roads.'' These are formula funds that go to our States.
  With the enactment of the infrastructure law, the Highway Safety 
Improvement Program will now incorporate a consideration of a safe 
systems approach, which aims to protect vulnerable road users from the 
start, from the designing of our roads.
  A consortium the Johns Hopkins Center for Injury Research Policy 
convened has highlighted the importance of a safe system approach based 
on a wealth of evidence-based research. Their report said that a safe 
systems approach ``begins with a commitment to eliminate fatalities and 
serious injuries among all road users, and uses thoughtful road and 
vehicle design to minimize crashes that occur when people make mistakes 
and to reduce crash forces so that people are less likely to be injured 
when crashes occur. By designing safety into the road system, deaths 
and serious injuries are engineered out.'' That is what the report 
pointed out.
  Here again, the message is clear--we cannot simply wait for all 
drivers to be error-free. We need to design and build better roadways.
  Under the new and improved Highway Safety Improvement Program that 
the bipartisan infrastructure bill will deliver, every State is 
required to complete a vulnerable road user safety assessment to study 
where and when fatalities and serious injuries are occurring, including 
a demographic breakdown to ensure equity considerations are 
incorporated. States must identify projects and strategies to reduce 
the risks to pedestrians and cyclists. States in which vulnerable users 
represent 15 percent or more of all roadway fatalities must spend 15 
percent of their Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program dollars on 
vulnerable user safety.
  Based on 2016 to 2018 fatality rates, 28 States would have to spend 
at least

[[Page S2652]]

$200 million on improvements like sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks, 
and others. This is a major step forward to facing up to the problem 
and taking action to address it.
  The second issue in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Practice I want to 
talk about is a major expansion of the Transportation Alternatives 
Program. I am particularly proud about this program. I authored this 
program originally with Senator Cochran but later with Senator Wicker. 
The two of us have worked together to connect communities together 
through pedestrian and bicycle paths so that pedestrians don't have to 
be on highways in order to get around their community.
  Transportation Alternatives is such a critical program because it 
supports priorities local communities identify for projects to make 
roads safer and more accessible. This is one of the few programs where 
our local governments make the determinations.
  Transportation Alternatives have funded projects that have improved 
the quality of life in all kinds of communities across the country in 
every congressional district, and in big cities and in rural areas. The 
infrastructure law increases funding for the Transportation 
Alternatives to 10 percent of the Surface Transportation Block Grant 
Program, which amounts to $7.2 billion over 5 years. The infrastructure 
law also specifies that projects under the Safe Routes to School 
Program are an eligible use for funds under the Transportation 
Alternatives Program.
  Safe Routes Partnership is an organization that has worked with us on 
the Transportation Alternatives Program. It has helped governments 
implement Safe Routes to School initiatives to make it safer, more 
convenient, and fun for children to walk and bicycle to school.
  In Montgomery County, Maryland, crashes involving people walking or 
biking near schools decreased by 25 to 42 percent after Safe Routes to 
School efforts provided engineering improvements, like better 
crosswalks and signs. And by providing the opportunity to walk and bike 
to school, we can improve safety and promote health and physical 
activity. Through initiatives like Safe Routes to School, the 
Transportation Alternatives Program is poised to make a major 
contribution to delivering on local demands to become more walkable, 
more bike friendly, and safer for all road users.

  Now, the third program I wanted to highlight from the infrastructure 
law is Reconnecting Communities, which will deliver $1 billion to 
address an outstanding equity challenge related to our transportation 
infrastructure. We held a hearing about the need for this program last 
year in the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee.
  The building of our national highway system from the 1950s was, in 
many ways, a great national achievement, a major public investment in 
our infrastructure that transformed our country and that we continue to 
rely on today; but for far too many communities, especially communities 
of color, ethnic communities, and urban centers, the construction of 
our highways had traumatic and destructive impacts. Rather than 
connecting their communities and expanding their opportunities, highway 
construction brought demolition, displacement, isolation, and 
exclusion. I consider it a major achievement that we finally will have 
a Federal program focused on addressing this harmful legacy.
  My own city of Baltimore struggles with these lasting impacts today 
that include unsafe and unhealthy conditions for families trying to 
navigate their city. I specifically refer to the Franklin-Mulberry 
corridor in downtown Baltimore, where you have a highway that was 
constructed and never completed that divided existing communities. And 
that division still exists today, making it more difficult for people 
to live in that community.
  The Reconnecting Communities Program in the bipartisan infrastructure 
bill will establish a program to improve safety as it also addresses 
longstanding inequity in our infrastructure, and it is a program that 
is about building the right kind of infrastructure, not just removing 
barriers. After we remove the old infrastructure that no longer serves 
our needs, we need to replace it with the kinds of infrastructure we 
need more of, such as better sidewalks, neighborhood street grids, 
signs and crosswalks, and parks that the neighborhood can appreciate 
and grow.
  So we see how the infrastructure law provides new opportunities and 
multiple programs that can complement and reinforce each other to build 
better infrastructure and safer infrastructure. I have just highlighted 
three ways in which the bipartisan infrastructure law can do this, 
delivering better and safer roads for Americans and bringing down the 
unacceptably high numbers of traffic fatalities and injuries: the new 
Highway Safety Improvement Program, Transportation Alternatives, and 
Reconnecting Communities. This list is not exhaustive. The 
infrastructure law does even more.
  Just last week, Department of Transportation officials announced the 
availability of $5 billion over 5 years for a new program focused on 
safety established by the infrastructure law. The law also provides a 
mandate to update the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices to give 
local governments more flexibility to implement safety measures.
  I could go on and on. The bottom line is that we have a lot of work 
to do, and setting this new policy is just the beginning. We need 
leaders at all levels of government to take on this challenge.
  I talked about Transportation Alternatives, which will now receive a 
full 10 percent of the surface transportation block grant funds, but 10 
percent is just that, 10 percent. We cannot have 10 percent of our 
funds working for safer roads and 90 percent of our funds working to 
make them less safe. We need safety prioritized and integrated in all 
of our infrastructure investments.
  I talked about Reconnecting Communities, a new $1 billion program to 
remove barriers that have harmed and isolated neighborhoods from 
opportunity, but we cannot have $1 billion working to remove these 
barriers and billions and billions more dollars spent erecting new 
barriers. We need to build the right kind of infrastructure that we 
need for our future, not continue on the same path we have been on in 
the past--the path that has led to 43,000 deaths in 2021 alone.
  To accept the status quo would be the most dangerous and radical 
course of action. Again, I applaud the Department of Transportation for 
announcing a new national roadway safety strategy in January that 
thinks through safety across all of the Department's programs and 
authorities.
  We need this leadership from the Federal level, and the Biden 
administration is providing it. As we implement the infrastructure law 
and begin to make generational investments to improve our Nation's 
infrastructure, we will need all levels of government working together. 
The challenge of our dangerous roads requires all of us to pay 
attention, but the benefits of investing to make our transportation 
network safer cannot be understated. If we use the infrastructure law 
to its greatest potential with respect to safety, we will have a 
stronger, more productive economy and a healthier, more just America.

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


                              Immigration

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, in April, more than 234,000 migrants were 
apprehended at the southern border. This is an alarming number, and it 
is the highest monthly total in 22 years.
  We have a humanitarian, public health, and national security crisis 
happening at the border. The Department of Homeland Security is bracing 
for an even bigger surge in the weeks and months to come, with the 
possibility--the estimates of 18,000 new people showing up every single 
day.
  The Biden administration continues to be absent in this crisis, and 
instead of offering constructive policies, they are removing ones that 
are helping prevent even more people from entering our country.
  Last week, the court made the decision to require title 42 to remain 
in place. The reality of ending it would

[[Page S2653]]

create an even greater border emergency. Yet the Biden administration 
is appealing the court's decision.
  A recent POLITICO-Harvard poll found that 55 percent of Americans 
oppose ending this title 42 prohibition. President Biden and Vice 
President Harris have refused to take any leadership on this issue. Not 
only have they attempted to repeal title 42; President Biden's first 
order of business after taking office was to repeal nearly every 
immigration policy of the previous administration.
  Repealing policies like title 42 without any plan of action will 
leave our border agents with an unmanageable task of apprehending, 
vetting, and documenting hundreds of thousands of migrants while trying 
to stop drug and human trafficking.
  In my conversations with border agents, they describe just how hard a 
task they have. The cartels have learned that flooding the border with 
migrants provides a distraction that affords them a better chance of 
successfully bringing drugs across the border. It is no wonder that 
fentanyl seizures at the southern border increased 48 percent in April 
2022 from the previous year of April 2021.
  Our border agents and officers are being asked to be caretakers, law 
enforcement officers, medical professionals, and so much more. They 
have a tireless and thankless job. I visited the border in April of 
last year to meet with the Border Patrol, the DEA, and the FBI and to 
hear firsthand about how the crisis affected their operations. They 
shared how handling a large surge of migrants has made it extremely 
challenging to carry out their mission to stop and disrupt transitional 
criminal organizations from drug trafficking.
  These agents were sounding the alarm in April of 2021 when border 
encounters totaled 178,000. Now, compare that to the 234,000 migrants 
crossing the border in April of this year.
  I have consistently worked to increase resources to our Border Patrol 
agents. We must prioritize additional border security measures that 
include a physical barrier and investments in new technologies. We must 
also enforce our immigration laws and work to reform our immigration 
system so that we reward those who follow the law and disincentivize 
illegal crossings.
  While title 42 will remain for now, the Biden administration plans to 
continue to fight this ruling and has almost zero constructive plans to 
help improve the crisis at the southern border.
  One thing is for certain, our Border Patrol agents are doing an 
incredible job. And I want them to know they are supported in the U.S. 
Senate, and we thank them for their service our Nation.


              recognizing C.W. Porubsky Grocery and Meats

  Mr. President, today I recognize a Kansas business that has served 
Topeka, our State capital city, for more than 75 years with hot bowls 
of chili, cold-cut sandwiches, spicy pickles, and warm conversations.
  To someone from out of town, Porubsky's Grocery and Meats doesn't 
seem like much, but to railroad workers, Topeka locals, and legislators 
from the statehouse who frequent Porubsky's, it was the best place in 
town to grab a delicious meal and receive a friendly welcome.
  Opened in 1947 by Katie Porubsky and her son Charlie Porubsky, C.W. 
Porubsky Grocery and Meats was an iconic restaurant in Topeka and had 
fans around the country. While the grocery store portion was originally 
the driving force behind the business, it is best known for being a 
spot to meet folks for lunch.
  Gourmet magazine summed it up as well as anyone when it stated that 
``Porubsky's is not just a place to eat. It is a destination in 
itself.'' Charlie Porubsky's sons, Matthew, Charlie Jr., and Mark, 
alongside the Porubsky daughters, Cecelia Pierson and Teresa Thomas, 
have kept this business alive and have made their homes in Topeka.
  Over the years, the restaurant has developed a reputation of having 
some of the most delicious chili in the area. The start of chili season 
is a day their loyal customers look forward to year in and year out.
  My personal experience with Porubsky's dates back to my time in the 
Kansas Legislature. Several of my fellow legislators and I would make 
the trek to Porubsky's during legislative breaks. Meeting from January 
through June meant that we had at least 3 full months to truly enjoy 
Porubsky's hot pickles and spicy chili. With meats and cheese trays 
displayed, the restaurant was a warm respite from the cold and a 
welcome break from our political and governmental dealings.
  Even today, as I travel across Kansas, I have a habit of altering my 
plans so that I can have a ham salad sandwich with three slices of 
cheese and a cold Coke at Porubsky's and enjoy the warm family 
hospitality. When my flight from DC to Kansas at the end of the week 
lands early, I have the chance, during that 2-hour drive home, to make 
the trek across the Kansas River and up to North Topeka to go to 
Porubsky's. And I will find wonderful people, great food, and a sense 
that I am home, where all the talk is not about politics and not all 
the Washington, DC, insider conversation; it just feels like you are 
around real people and real Kansans.
  While Porubsky's and many family-owned establishments like it lack 
the bells and whistles of nationwide chains, the underlying quality 
that truly matters is the collection of people it takes to make it 
work. The value of places like Porubsky's can't be measured in economic 
profits or Yelp reviews. What the Porubsky family has been serving up 
for decades is more than just tasty sandwiches; it is a place where you 
can go to know people and to be known--and known so well that your 
sandwich is made before you even make it to the counter to order it.
  Squeezing into a seat at the restaurant, it doesn't matter if you are 
a Republican or a Democrat. It doesn't matter where you come from. At 
places like Porubsky's, everyone is welcome.
  While I am sad to see Porubsky's close their doors after decades--75 
years--of service, the Porubsky family themselves and their famous 
grocery will never be forgotten. I knew Charlie and Cecelia's mom and 
dad, and I know Charlie and Cecelia well today. I thank them for being 
such good friends and for looking after my well-being and that of 
thousands of other customers over so many years.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.


                                Ukraine

  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, today marks exactly 3 months since Russia 
began its war on Ukraine. I have come to the Senate floor for what is 
now the 13th straight week since that time while the Senate has been in 
session to talk about this unprovoked, illegal, and brutal war that 
they are waging on our ally Ukraine, a democratic and sovereign 
country.
  Since I spoke last week, we had a very important development. At the 
end of last week, the Senate came together in a strong bipartisan vote 
to pass what is called the supplemental funding bill for Ukraine. The 
vote was 86 to 11. It passed the House the week prior with a similar 
strong bipartisan vote. Congress, in this legislation, actually went 
above what the President had requested. He initially requested $33 
billion and Congress decided to provide $40 billion to ensure that the 
Ukrainians had the funding they needed through this fall.
  In combination with the help from about 40 different countries around 
the world, Ukrainians now have the ammunition and weapons, as well as 
the humanitarian and economic support they need to survive and also to 
continue their fight for the next several months. Importantly, the 
supplemental spending bill will replenish what is called the 
Presidential Drawdown Authority. It was depleted. That is the authority 
that lets us very quickly transfer weapons from our own surpluses to 
the Ukrainians and it has been very effective. The legislation raised 
the Presidential Drawdown Authority cap to $11 million, $3 billion over 
the President's request. Again, the notion is this is going to be 
needed.
  The bill also includes $6 billion for what is called the Ukraine 
Security Assistance Initiative, a program I first authored in 2015 to 
enhance the Ukrainian military's ability to fight off Russian 
aggression. When we started that program, Russia was only in this part 
of Ukraine and the line of contact was here in eastern Ukraine.
  Here are a couple of maps that show the progress that has been made 
in

[[Page S2654]]

pushing back as Russia has invaded Ukraine starting on February 24. All 
this area here that is in blue was controlled by Russia at one point, 
as was this lighter red area. The darker red area was what Russia took 
back in 2014 after Ukraine chose to look to the West rather than to 
Russia for alliance and support.
  This is what they took in 2014. Then they came in on February 24 with 
the hope of taking the entire country, and they did control this 
territory. Everything you see in blue has been pushed back. It is no 
longer Russian-held territory. It is now back in Ukrainian hands. So 
this is the map of today.
  There is progress being made around Kharkiv. This is a beautiful city 
in this part of Ukraine. The blue you see here is where Ukrainian 
military have recently pushed back the Russian forces--in one case, 
right up to the Russian border. You also see the same here in the 
eastern and southern--more southern parts of Ukraine, where some 
progress has been made.
  But there is fierce fighting all in this region. And, in fact, 
recently, you can see where the Russians have made some progress in 
trying to cut off some of the Ukrainian troops. Initially, they had 
hoped to make a bridge here to cut off troops in this area. Thousands 
of them now are pushing through right here and making some progress.
  It is a hot war, and the Ukrainians are desperate to have enough 
ammunition to continue to fight that war to protect their homeland and 
to have better weapons to be able to push back against Russia.
  The end of this war has to be that Russia is pushed out of Ukraine. 
That has to be our objective. It is certainly one that the Ukrainians 
share.
  The successes against Russia in the battlefield are a testament to 
the bravery and the effectiveness of Ukrainians who are fighting to 
defend their freedom, fighting to defend their families, defend their 
homeland.

  But it is also a success that is due to the effectiveness of our 
help, and particularly, the Ukraine Security Initiative over the past 7 
years, especially the training element of it. It was money well spent 
by U.S. taxpayers to ensure that--along with other NATO countries who 
provided funding for this, as well--that there was a training component 
to ensure the military would be more effective. And you can see the 
results of it. They are outgunned, outnumbered, and yet have been able 
to push Russia out of all this part of Ukraine and are making some 
progress in these areas.
  The supplemental spending bill I talked about also includes $4 
billion in foreign military financing to allow Ukraine to get American-
made weapons and equipment through a lend-lease-type program.
  Importantly, the supplemental also includes $3.9 billion to support 
enhanced U.S. troop deployments to Europe. That is critical to me 
because it has never been more important than now to ensure that we 
have the troops we need along the border here to be able to ensure 
Russia knows that if they go beyond Ukraine, we will respond and 
respond forcefully as NATO--all 30 countries of NATO. So we have 
reinforced our troops' presence in Eastern Europe, places like Poland, 
places like Slovakia, Romania, and around the region to be able to 
ensure that our article 5 agreement under NATO--which is a mutual 
defense commitment--can be kept.
  Again, it is not just us, but it is all the members of NATO. If 
Russians make a further mistake and do what President Putin has talked 
about doing--going to places like the Baltics, Lithuania, Latvia, 
Estonia--NATO will be there, and that should be a big deterrent. Of 
course, this legislation, the supplemental, was not inexpensive. Forty 
billion dollars is a lot of money. It has to be subject to appropriate 
safeguards for transparency and accountability.
  Last week, I spoke about many of these safeguards that some of us 
helped get into the legislation, including the critical role that 
Congress will play in providing regular oversight over these funds. I 
expect the administration to keep Congress promptly informed of how it 
intends to spend this money as required by this law.
  Effective oversight of Ukraine will also require a strong diplomatic 
presence on the ground. We have people there watching how the money is 
being spent and can report back. I am pleased that the administration 
heeded the Senate's call to reopen our embassy in Kyiv last Sunday. 
Kyiv is the capital of Ukraine, here in the middle of Ukraine. It now 
has a U.S. embassy presence. The officials at the embassy were here in 
Poland. Some have gone to Lviv in the last few weeks, but now, as of 
this last week, we are back in Kyiv and we are open for business.
  By the way, the same day the embassy opened, we reported out the new 
ambassador nominee for Ukraine. We haven't had an ambassador there for 
way too long--about a year and a half or so. And we actually then voted 
on her on the Senate floor--it may be the fastest nomination ever 
through this place. That is very important. We unanimously confirmed 
Bridget Brink to be the Ambassador. She was the Ambassador to Slovakia. 
She has been in Ukraine before as a Foreign Service Officer. I think 
she is a very good choice. She is leaving her post in Slovakia and 
going right into Ukraine. Our diplomatic presence there is once again 
going to be in a strong position and, therefore, telling the rest of 
the world that the United States is here and here to stay.
  Now that Congress has provided this $40 billion to support Ukraine 
and to support our troops in the area, it is up to the administration 
to ensure that it is used effectively, particularly with regard to the 
military assistance.
  I encourage the administration to use these funds in accordance with 
the needs on the ground in Ukraine. We have to be sure that we are 
giving them what they actually need. We have to listen to the 
Ukrainians who are fighting on the front lines. To me, this would 
include, as an example, what is called the mobile Multiple Launch 
Rocket Systems, or MLRS, that they are asking for. This enables them 
and Ukraine to sit back a little further and not be subject to shelling 
from the Russian forces, and yet to provide damage to some of the 
artillery Russia is using against these cities--flattening these 
beautiful cities and killing so many civilians.
  We cannot delude ourselves into thinking if we stop providing certain 
weapons systems like the MLRS, that somehow we will, therefore, not be 
provoking Russia and that President Putin will gracefully acknowledge 
that gesture and cease his assault or lessen his assault on Ukraine. 
That is not going to happen. Let me be clear. Russia's unprovoked and 
brutal invasion of a sovereign and democratic Ukraine is the 
provocation here; not us, not the military assistance we are providing 
Ukraine just to be able to defend their homeland and their families.
  President Biden must be forward-leaning in providing military 
assistance to the Ukrainians that they need and make it clear that we 
are in this conflict until it ends--until Russian troops leave, until 
the bombardments end. If President Putin senses weakness or 
equivocation on our part or the part of our allies, he will intensify 
his attacks on Ukraine.
  I want to speak for a moment about the broader situation in Europe. 
Back in 2014, Ukraine made this decision to ally with us, with Europe, 
with freedom, with democracy, rather than Russia and authoritarianism 
and tyranny. Russia did not take that well. Again, that is when they 
annexed Crimea here and parts of the Donbas, Luhansk, and Donetsk. When 
they did that, the reaction of the West was, frankly, underwhelming. 
When President Putin launched this war--comprehensive war--on February 
24, he probably expected the same feckless response. The global 
community, when these two happened, really did not respond 
as forcefully as we should have. Instead of getting the same response 
that he expected, President Putin initiated an abrupt reversal, 
particularly in European diplomacy and military policy.

  Previously, Europe prioritized avoiding any conflict with Russia by 
following practices that they believed would be seen by the Kremlin as 
nonconfrontational. The European and the global approach, including the 
U.S. approach, to Russia and Ukraine changed when this unjustified and 
brutal assault began.
  Just as President Putin has weakened Russia's position with his 
unprovoked invasion, the NATO alliance that he tried to undermine has

[[Page S2655]]

only grown stronger. In fact, two new countries, Finland and Sweden, 
have now officially applied for the 30-member-strong NATO membership.
  In the aftermath of Russia's invasion, public support for joining 
NATO skyrocketed in Finland and Sweden. This is especially remarkable 
in Sweden, whose policy of neutrality dates all the way back to the 
Napoleonic Wars, well before World War II. But as President Putin has 
indiscriminately killed innocent men, women, and children in Ukraine 
and flattened some of the most beautiful cities, the Finnish and 
Swedish people have seen the benefit of NATO as a security blanket for 
them too.
  I am glad Finland and Sweden applied to join NATO. It is the world's 
most successful military alliance in history. Each of these two 
countries has an impressive military and a commitment to higher defense 
spending, so they have a lot of value to add to the NATO alliance. 
Their membership will further tilt the power base in Europe in NATO's 
favor and that is good for peace and tranquility. It is good for the 
United States, and it is good for our allies.
  I was pleased that President Biden hosted the leaders of both those 
countries last week and that Leader McConnell also visited Finland and 
Sweden when he was overseas just a couple of weeks ago. I join the 
leader in calling for the Senate to approve their membership bids to 
NATO before the August recess. Let's make the United States the first 
country to approve their applications for NATO membership.
  I understand that all 30 of our NATO allies have been supportive, 
with one exception, Turkey. They have expressed concerns about Finland 
and Sweden joining the alliance for issues unrelated to NATO, in my 
view. I trust these issues can be worked out among the three countries 
and encourage the administration to take a lead in moving this 
application forward. Joining NATO is a serious matter of war and peace. 
No one should be playing politics here. I look forward to supporting 
Finland and Sweden's NATO application when they are voted on here in 
this Chamber.
  The Russian military has suffered substantial losses in this war 
already. Exact estimates are impossible to come by, but it appears in 
just the first 3 months of this war, Russia has lost as many soldiers 
as it did in the 9-year war that they waged in Afghanistan.
  Let's remember that President Putin thought this would be an easy 
victory. He thought Ukraine's defenses would be torn apart and 
shattered in a matter of days and the Ukrainians would lose all hope 
and all morale. And he thought his actions would split NATO, that the 
alliance would be unable to respond. Clearly, the opposite has been the 
case.
  And within Russia, there has been dissent, as well. Last week, Boris 
Bondarev, Counselor at the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation 
to United Nations in Geneva resigned his post. His letter to his 
colleagues is telling. This is from a senior Russian official:

       For 20 years of my diplomatic career, I have seen turns of 
     our foreign policy, but never have I been so ashamed of my 
     country as on February 24 of this year--

  Referring to the date the invasion was launched.

       The aggressive war unleashed by Putin and the entire 
     Western world is not only a crime against the Ukrainian 
     people, but also, perhaps, the most serious crime against the 
     people of Russia, with a bold letter Z crossing out all hopes 
     and prospects for a prosperous free society in our country.

  He is right. There have also been reports of many rank-and-file 
Russian soldiers who oppose this war and refuse to fight. And there is 
a recent report of a Russian officer who became so disillusioned with 
the lies he had been told, he resigned in protest. His own words are 
telling:

       We had a radio receiver, and we could listen to the news.

  He said this to CNN, by the way.

       That's how I learned that shops are closing in Russia and 
     the economy is collapsing. I felt guilty about this. But felt 
     even more guilty because we came to Ukraine.

  And he should. This resignation is telling as Russians from every 
part of society are beginning to see this war for what it is--
unprovoked, tragic, shameful acts of aggression that have brought 
international condemnation and shame to Russia as a nation. I am 
confident this is the first of many acts of conscience by senior and 
junior Russian officials as they seek to restore some level of honor 
and dignity to their Nation. Kremlin officials and commandos on the 
ground should know that the world is watching and the war crimes are 
being recorded. It is not too late to say no to orders to attack and 
kill your innocent neighbors in Ukraine.

  Now, as I have mentioned over the last several weeks as we talked 
about that, there are a number of very important sanctions that are in 
place. We talked about trading sanctions; eliminating Russia's tax 
status; banking sanctions to crush the economy in Russia; the desperate 
need right now for us to focus more on energy and boycotting energy 
supplies because that is the single most important sanction that has 
not been put in place in the way it needs to be. It is funding the 
Putin war machine. Europe is making progress on this. In fact, by 
August, we are told, they will no longer be buying Russian coal, for 
example. But Russia is still getting from Europe $870 million a day in 
energy receipts, and that is funding the Putin war machine.
  Especially when Russia not only continues its onslaught on Ukrainian 
defensive combatants but on noncombatants, these sanctions must be 
tightened. And what they are doing is committing war crimes. I call on 
the International Criminal Court, which has announced an investigation 
already, to follow in Ukraine's footsteps and immediately begin a war 
crimes tribunal now--don't wait--because it can have a deterrent effect 
if it is done now.
  We continue to hear the stories every day, and the stories get worse 
and worse. I was glad to hear that a court in Kyiv began hearings 
against Sergeant Vadim Shishimarin, the first Russian soldier to go on 
trial for alleged war crimes. He is accused of shooting and killing a 
62-year-old civilian man in the northeastern Ukrainian region of Sumy 
in late February just a few yards from his home. He pled guilty, and 
just yesterday--yesterday--he was sentenced to life in prison.
  Again, Russian officials and commanders need to see this. These war 
crimes are being committed, they are being prosecuted, and there will 
be consequences.
  Sadly, this one case we talked about is just a drop in the bucket. 
Ukraine's Prosecutor General has said that her office is currently 
investigating more than 10,000 alleged war crimes by Russian forces 
involving more than 600 suspects. It will take a vast amount of time 
and resources to hold these criminals to account, and the United States 
should help Ukraine in this regard. The supplemental spending package 
we talked about includes money to do just that--to investigate and 
document war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Russian 
forces in Ukraine.
  My hope is that holding these Russians accountable will have that 
deterrent effect.
  Because of these terrible actions, I believe Russia also deserves to 
be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism. I believe the Senate 
should vote on that. In Chechnya, in Syria, and now in Ukraine, Russia 
has committed atrocities that reflect a complete disregard for the 
value of human life. It has terrorized its neighbors and committed 
clear war crimes and crimes against humanity in Ukraine.
  Let me be clear. What the Russian military is doing in Ukraine is not 
just the product of individual undisciplined units; tacit approval for 
acts like these come from the top of the command chain.
  I have mentioned America's leadership stateside and what everyday 
Americans have done in light of this Russian aggression and their 
support for Ukraine. It is truly impressive. It is happening in my 
State of Ohio and around the country, the contributions in so many 
ways: the medical supplies that have been sent, the personal vanity 
kits that have been sent, the amount of food that has been voluntarily 
given through the World Central Kitchen and others. But tonight I want 
to close with a few thoughts on our leadership abroad as President 
Biden is wrapping up his first trip to Asia.
  First, I commend the President for taking this trip and for working 
with

[[Page S2656]]

our allies. As China continues to advance its interest not only 
throughout the Indo-Pacific but around the globe, it is so important 
that the United States help lead freedom-loving countries in countering 
their malign actions too.
  I visited the region last month with some of my colleagues, and my 
takeaway was that our partners in the region have a newfound interest 
in working with us, allying with us, particularly with what is going on 
with regard to China's aggressive behavior in the Indo-Pacific region.
  I also think one of the best ways to push back against what China is 
doing and considering doing, particularly with regard to Taiwan, is for 
us to win in Ukraine. Russia being defeated in Ukraine will affect what 
happens in the Indo-Pacific region.
  China right now is entirely aligned with Russia. Their joint 
statement earlier this year says, as the invasion was being planned, 
``Friendship between [our] two States has no limits, there are no 
`forbidden' areas of cooperation.''
  We are now seeing China's attempt to extend their reach with a base 
in the Solomon Islands, as an example. We heard about this when we were 
over there. They have negotiated in secret a security agreement to 
allow Beijing to send military personnel to this new Pacific ally of 
theirs and base naval vessels potentially on the islands. This would be 
terrible for the region, particularly for Australia--their eastern 
border is only about 1,200 miles away from the Solomon Islands.
  In Ukraine, we have shown strong leadership. We must not stop now 
when it comes to our allies across the globe. It doesn't matter if it 
is Russia or China--we must be the beacon of strength for the free 
world and help bring people together. To do so, we must also start 
thinking about what it will take to aid Ukraine in the long term. I am 
not talking about nation building here, but I am talking about helping 
them in terms of this protracted conflict with Russia and ensuring that 
we do rebuild a democratic and free Ukraine. Thinking ahead in this 
fashion may seem premature to some, but I do believe it can save 
resources in the long run by thinking about how to plan for that now.

  In short, we should plan for the possibility of a longer conflict 
than we had originally anticipated.
  Again, our role in Ukraine is essential, but it is a role that 
combines us with so many other partners around the world. Again, over 
40 countries are helping right now in terms of assistance to Ukraine. 
We are not the world's policeman, but we are kind of like the world's 
sheriff, and bringing in that posse of other freedom-loving countries 
is so critical for us to do, whether it is in the Indo-Pacific region 
or whether it is in regard to Ukraine. We have had tremendous success 
in terms of bringing people together to stand for freedom, to stand for 
democracy, and to stand for the rights of the Ukrainian people.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Markey). The Senator from Connecticut.


                    Robb Elementary School Shooting

  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, 13 kids dead in an elementary school in 
Texas right now. What are we doing? What are we doing?
  Just days after a shooter walked into a grocery store to gun down 
African-American patrons, we have another Sandy Hook on our hands. What 
are we doing?
  There have been more mass shootings than days in the year. Our kids 
are living in fear every single time they set foot in a classroom 
because they think they are going to be next. What are we doing?
  Why do you spend all this time running for the U.S. Senate? Why do 
you go through all the hassle of getting this job, of putting yourself 
in a position of authority, if your answer is that, as the slaughter 
increases, as our kids run for their lives, we do nothing? What are we 
doing? Why are you here if not to solve a problem as existential as 
this?
  This isn't inevitable. These kids weren't unlucky. This only happens 
in this country and nowhere else. Nowhere else do little kids go to 
school thinking that they might be shot that day. Nowhere else do 
parents have to talk to their kids, as I have had to do, about why they 
got locked in a bathroom and told to be quiet for 5 minutes just in 
case a bad man entered that building. Nowhere else does that happen 
except here in the United States of America, and it is a choice. It is 
our choice to let it continue. What are we doing?
  In Sandy Hook Elementary School after those kids came back into those 
classrooms, they had to adopt a practice in which there would be a safe 
word that the kids would say if they started to get thoughts in their 
brain about what they saw that day, if they started to get nightmares 
during the day, reliving stepping over their classmates' bodies as they 
tried to flee the school.
  In one classroom, that word was ``monkey.'' Over and over and over 
through the day, kids would stand up and yell ``monkey,'' and a teacher 
or a paraprofessional would have to go over to that kid, take them out 
of the classroom, talk to them about what they had seen, work them 
through their issues.
  Sandy Hook will never ever be the same. This community in Texas will 
never ever be the same.
  Why? Why are we here if not to try to make sure that fewer schools 
and fewer communities go through what Sandy Hook has gone through, what 
Uvalde is going through? Our hearts are breaking for these families. 
Every ounce of love and thoughts and prayers we can send, we are 
sending. But I am here on this floor to beg, to literally get down on 
my hands and knees and beg my colleagues: Find a path forward here. 
Work with us to find a way to pass laws that make this less likely.
  I understand my Republican colleagues will not agree to everything 
that I may support, but there is a common denominator that we can find. 
There is a place where we can achieve agreement. This may not guarantee 
that America never ever again sees a mass shooting. It may not 
overnight cut in half the number of murders that happen in America. It 
will not solve the problem of American violence by itself. But by doing 
something, we at least stop sending this quiet message of endorsement 
to these killers whose brains are breaking, who see the highest levels 
of government doing nothing shooting after shooting.
  What are we doing? Why are we here? What are we doing?
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.


                        Tribute to Mike DeVries

  Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, today I have the distinct honor of 
recognizing Mike DeVries of Fergus County as Montanan of the Month for 
his dedication to serving his community and his courage during the 
Denton fire this past December.
  Mike joined the volunteer fire department shortly after moving to 
Denton with his family back in 2004 and has been loyal to the 
department and community ever since, serving as chief for 11 years.
  On December 1, 2021, Mike's love of his community and resolute 
leadership was on full display. As the West Wind fire tore through the 
town of Denton, Mike acted swiftly to maintain incident command and 
ensure the safety of his firefighters and members of the Denton 
community.
  As Montana suffered a terrible fire season in 2021, Mike not only 
coordinated aid and resources, he showed care and compassion to his 
fellow residents of Denton and the surrounding area.
  He met with folks who were impacted by the fires and connected 
personally with all the local firefighters and community members who 
showed up to help.
  Serving as the Denton fire chief is just one of the ways Mike gives 
back to his community. He is also on the elder board of the Denton 
Bible Church and has served several terms on the town council.
  As a volunteer fire chief, he has spent countless hours training, 
traveling, and managing the department.
  His son Joel says that Mike is held in high regard by other 
firefighters as he works to build relationships between Denton and 
surrounding departments.
  While Mike is quick to give credit to his crew, he deserves 
recognition for his leadership during the 2021 fire season, loyalty to 
the Denton Fire Department, and compassion for his community.

[[Page S2657]]

  Mike, keep up the great work. You do make Montana proud.


                       Tribute to Karen Pfaehler

  Mr. President, today, I have the honor of recognizing a staff member 
who has turned into family over the years.
  Karen Pfaehler is truly one of a kind. She has set the standard for 
constituent recognitions in Montana, and now it is my turn to recognize 
her as she retires after many years of service to Montana.
  Karen got her bachelor's degree in elementary education and 
psychology and was hired to work as a military aerospace program 
manager and contract analyst in Denver, CO.
  As fate would have it, she met the love of her life, Gus Pfaehler, at 
a sales convention.
  They moved to Hong Kong for his work and lived there for many years. 
Later, while living in Bangkok, Karen volunteered and ran the charity 
division of the American Women's Club. The organization's philanthropic 
arm gave donations, mostly to Peace Corps volunteers and orphanages.
  Karen also enjoyed entertaining Ambassadors and dignitaries for 
various functions and events.
  It was in Hong Kong that Karen and her husband raised their daughter 
Jaclyn, the pride of their lives.
  After their time in Bangkok came to a close, they moved stateside to 
Salt Lake City, UT.
  Once Gus retired from his corporate role, they decided to call 
Bozeman, MT, home, and it was here that Karen was able to pursue her 
passion of events and events planning and politics. Her skills were 
highly sought after, and soon she became a mainstay in Montana 
political events. In fact, in 2015, she signed on with my team and, 
lucky for us, she decided to stay.
  Karen and her sidekick Winnie, her dog, have spent countless hours 
combing through every detail of Montana news and headlines, catching 
every outstanding Montanan.
  Karen has worked tirelessly, making sure all Montanans are honored 
for their heroism, their anniversaries, their birthdays, and, of 
course, she planned all of our events.
  One story in particular that comes to mind was when she received word 
a large gathering was coming to one of our instate offices. Karen 
wasted no time getting the details ironed out and created a welcoming 
experience for our visitors and even had breakfast treats for 
everybody. It was a wonderful gathering thanks to her hard work and her 
dedication.
  Karen, your expertise and attention to every detail will be missed. 
The charisma, the positive attitude you bring to everything you do, is 
highly regarded by all of your peers and by me.
  Thank you for your years of service to the great State of Montana. We 
wish you well on your next chapter of being a full-time grandma. God 
bless you.


                     Nomination Of dara Lindenbaum

  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today in support of Dara 
Lindenbaum's nomination to be a Commissioner on the Federal Election 
Commission--FEC--the independent agency responsible for enforcing 
Federal campaign finance laws.
  Ms. Lindenbaum is an experienced nominee who is respected on both 
sides of the aisle; that is why earlier this month her nomination was 
reported out of the Rules Committee with bipartisan support, including 
from Ranking Member Blunt. I hope more of my Republican colleagues will 
join us in supporting her nomination today.
  I would also like to note that the last time the Senate considered 
the nomination of FEC Commissioners in December 2020, we confirmed two 
Republicans and one Democrat, who--importantly--restored a quorum to 
the Commission.
  Ms. Lindenbaum's confirmation will simply maintain the Commission's 
current partisan balance, since she has been nominated to fill the seat 
being vacated by Commissioner Walther after many years of service.
  The FEC is charged with a critical role in ensuring accountability in 
our system of government, and it was established by Congress in the 
wake of the Watergate scandal to restore the public's faith in our 
electoral processes, to make it clear that, in America, politicians 
must play by the rules, so that the votes of the people decide our 
elections.
  Now, 47 years later, the work of the FEC is as important as ever. The 
2020 election cycle was the most expensive in history. Total spending 
was over $14 billion with $8 billion spent on political advertisements 
alone. And too many voters feel like their voices are being drowned 
out. At the same time, the Commission is facing the challenges that 
arise given rapidly evolving technologies and the ongoing threat of 
foreign interference in our elections.
  It is a big and important job, but Dara Lindenbaum is more than 
capable of taking it on. Ms. Lindenbaum has extensive experience in 
election and campaign finance law, with years of experience working for 
a civil rights nonprofit and in private practice. She also has 
firsthand experience at the FEC where she worked as a law clerk early 
in her legal career, and her work representing clients before the FEC 
will allow her to bring an important perspective to the Commission.
  Throughout the confirmation process, Ms. Lindenbaum has shown that 
she will be a fair and effective Commissioner. In her testimony, she 
stated that ``[t]he consideration of the facts and the law in front of 
me will be my guideposts as I seek to provide clarity to the regulated 
community, increase transparency, and collaborate with my fellow 
Commissioners[.]''
  She is both well qualified and well respected. Before Ms. 
Lindenbaum's nomination hearing, the Rules Committee received a letter 
from 30 of the Nation's top campaign finance lawyers. The letter 
``enthusiastically'' recommends Ms. Lindenbaum's confirmation, and it 
is signed by Republicans, Democrats, and Independents, including Lee 
Goodman, a former Republican Chairman of the FEC, and Karl Sandstrom, a 
former Democratic Commissioner. In the letter--and these are their 
words, not mine--these attorneys praise her as a ``thoughtful and 
conscientious advocate'' and ``a genial and inclusive colleague.'' I 
agree with their conclusion that she would be ``an excellent addition 
to the Commission.''
  The fact that Ms. Lindenbaum has support from top campaign finance 
attorneys in both parties is no surprise, since she learned about 
getting along across the aisle at a young age--from her own family. 
Growing up, her parents supported different political parties, and so 
every election day, she would take two trips to their polling place, 
one to watch her mom vote and then another with her dad. Her parents' 
example will serve her well on the Commission, which in recent years 
has often suffered from partisan divides and stalemate.
  As we know, no more than three Commissioners can be from the same 
political party, but it requires four votes to take most actions. So 
when votes consistently fall along party lines, very little gets done. 
For example, the FEC has not enacted any major disclosure rules or 
internet regulations in over a decade. Hundreds of enforcement cases 
have been left unresolved. This is not fair to candidates or to the 
public.
  While I continue to urge my colleagues to pass legislation to address 
some of these issues, it is also up to the Commissioners to figure out 
ways to work across party lines and find bipartisan agreement. I know 
that Ms. Lindenbaum is up to the task and that she will work to find 
common ground with her fellow Commissioners on these difficult issues.
  Our Nation was founded on the ideals of democracy, and we have seen 
for ourselves in this building how we can't afford to take that for 
granted. We are reminded every day, as we see the people of Ukraine 
putting their lives on the line to stand up for their democracy, that 
it is up to all of us to protect our system of government here at home. 
At its core, that is the job of the FEC, to ensure the agency fulfills 
its mission to ``protect the integrity of the Federal campaign finance 
process'' and, in doing so, to keep our democracy strong.
  I am confident that Dara Lindenbaum is up to this challenge, and I 
urge all of my colleagues to vote for cloture and support her 
confirmation.


                     Vote on Lindenbaum Nomination

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Peters). Under the previous order, all 
postcloture time has expired.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Lindenbaum 
nomination?
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

[[Page S2658]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) and 
the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) are necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman), the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn), the 
Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), 
the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Toomey).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. 
Boozman) would have voted ``nay'' and the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz) 
would have voted ``nay.''
  The result was announced--yeas 54, nays 38, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 196 Ex.]

                                YEAS--54

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Collins
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Lujan
     Manchin
     Markey
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--38

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Braun
     Burr
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     Moran
     Paul
     Risch
     Romney
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Wicker
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--8

     Boozman
     Cornyn
     Cruz
     Merkley
     Murkowski
     Rubio
     Toomey
     Van Hollen  
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to 
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the 
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's actions.

                          ____________________