[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.
____________________