[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 107 (Tuesday, June 20, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2139-S2143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



             Unanimous Consent Request--Executive Calendar

  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the consideration of the following nominations en bloc: 
Calendar No. 46 through No. 52, No. 82 through No. 107, No. 110 through 
No. 113, No. 130 through No. 139, No. 180 through No. 205, No. 224 
through No. 234, No. 236 through No. 246; that the nominations be 
confirmed en bloc; that the motions to reconsider to be considered made 
and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no 
further motions be in order to any of the nominations; that the 
President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
  The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I 
object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, this is now the sixth time that I have 
been on this floor asking for unanimous consent so that the U.S. Senate 
can do its job to ratify, to approve the nominations of flag officers' 
promotions at the Department of Defense.
  That is something that we have done as a matter of course in the U.S. 
Senate for the last 230 years. No Senator in the history of the United 
States has ever prevented the Senate from proceeding with these 
nominations of flag officers.
  I certainly don't have to tell the Presiding Officer how important 
these promotions are, how critical they are. And observer after 
observer after observer has said that it is in the national security 
interest of the United States, not surprisingly, for this Senate to 
confirm these promotions, to ratify these promotions.
  We are compromising our national security when one Senator out of the 
whole 100 people decides that they are going to do something that no 
Senator has ever done in the history of the United States. No Senator 
has ever put a blanket hold on the promotions of flag officers, and 
there is a good reason for that, because if people are willing to play 
politics with that, they are playing politics with our national 
security. If they are willing to play politics with that, they are 
playing politics with the expectations of people who have spent an 
entire career defending the national security of this country, serving 
the public, serving in the Department of Defense, and who now have been 
promoted to a position of trust and responsibility.
  By the way, this doesn't just affect those people who are getting 
that promotion. It also affects the people who are below them who can't 
get the promotion that now is no longer vacant because they are stuck 
in the job that they are in.
  And I am shocked that somebody here would do this and pretend that 
this is just common: You know, this is the Senate. This is the way the 
Senate functions. This the way the Senate, as my colleague from Alabama 
has said, just does its business.
  This is not how the Senate ever does its business. It is not how the 
Department of Defense does its business. And it, particularly, I think, 
should be particularly grieving to the American people because of the 
reasons the Senator from Alabama is doing what he is doing.

[[Page S2140]]

  Tonight, we are here on basically the 1-year anniversary of the 
Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs decision. 
If you told me when I was in law school that a majority of the Supreme 
Court would join the majority opinion by Justice Alito that would say, 
if it wasn't a right or a freedom in 1868, it is not a freedom today--
if you told me that was the basis on which they were going to strip a 
fundamental freedom from the American people, I would have said that 
will never happen; it is never going to happen.
  That is what is happening, and that is the result of a 50-year 
crusade to overturn a woman's right to choose in the United States of 
America. It is the first time since Reconstruction that we have given 
up a fundamental right here. It is first time since Reconstruction that 
we have been stripped of our fundamental rights and our freedoms have 
been diminished, that they have grown smaller in the hands of a 50-year 
campaign that was waged to put four people on the Supreme Court--a 
majority on the Supreme Court--who subscribe to the best named doctrine 
I have ever heard named in American political history or anybody's 
political history, and that is the doctrine of originalism, a doctrine 
that was dressed up to create a scenario or a legal set of arguments 
that somehow there were a group of people in this society with such 
mystical powers that they were capable--unlike anybody else in America, 
they would be capable of divining the originality intent of the 
Founding Fathers, putting aside the fact, tonight, that everybody in 
this Chamber who studied the Constitution even for 10 minutes knows 
that the Founders had fundamental disagreements among themselves and 
that the Constitution itself was a product of these fundamental 
differences--not their fundamental consensus but the fundamental 
differences. There was consensus on some issues. There was compromise 
on other issues.

  But I dwell on that for a moment just to say, especially to people 
around here--maybe the age of the pages in the Senate--that you 
shouldn't give this theory of legal interpretation any great weight 
just because they dressed it up and called it something called 
originalism or they said somehow they could divine what the Founding 
Fathers said.
  Fundamentally, what it came down to in the case of the Supreme Court 
was that because abortion wasn't a freedom, as they said, in 1868--a 
country where women didn't even have the right to vote in the United 
States yet--that it was not going to be a freedom today, and they 
stripped the American people of this freedom.
  And there are people on this floor, people, you know, in the other 
party who spent 50 years trying to create a Supreme Court like this, 
basically since Ronald Reagan was our President. I think Ronald Reagan 
would be shocked by the extreme nature of the opinion that was rendered 
by Justice Alito, but who knows.
  What we do know is this has been a 50-year campaign that has been 
waged. And the second that the Supreme Court did what they have been 
shooting for the last 50 years, what they started to say was: Don't 
worry about it. It is not a big deal. This is just reverting to States' 
rights. This fundamental constitutional right, this fundamental 
constitutional freedom, it is just being reverted to the States.
  What has happened since then? Twenty States have banned abortion 
since that decision was made or restricted access. Nine of those States 
have no exceptions for rape or incest, like the State of Alabama, I 
think, which has an exception for the life of the mother.
  So there is a lot to worry about in this decision. There is a lot to 
worry about for our men and women in uniform.
  Before Dobbs, women in the military had at least some assurance that 
wherever the Pentagon sent them, they would have minimal access to 
reproductive care, a protected constitutional right, a protected 
freedom. That is no longer the case.
  One of the very first calls I got after Dobbs was decided was from a 
woman whom I know in Colorado who was an Air Force officer. She was a 
pilot. She told me her personal story, and then she said: I don't 
understand how they could have possibly made the decision they made 
because this is a fundamental readiness issue.
  Well, they didn't have to deal with that. They didn't have to deal 
with that fundamental issue of readiness. They didn't have to deal with 
the fundamental fact of how people every single day would be dealing 
with the loss of this right or the loss of this freedom because nothing 
in their interpretive doctrine requires them to do that. It only 
requires them to ask: Was it a freedom in 1868? Not a freedom today.
  And in response to this shocking development--and it is shocking. You 
know, if you are the age of the pages who are here, if you are my 
daughter's age--my oldest daughter is 23 years old--you are wondering 
how it is possible. We were having this conversation the other day. We 
were driving by a billboard in Colorado advertising some stuff in 
Colorado. Amazing thing that we could be, on the one hand, legalizing 
marijuana in this country and on the other hand, banning abortion. If 
you told me that when I was a teenager in America, I would have said: 
What are you smoking? That is impossible. That is impossible, and that 
is where we are.
  What the Supreme Court did in this case is fundamentally unpopular 
with the American people. The American people are angry that this has 
happened. It didn't happen by accident. This is a war that has been 
waged on a woman's right to choose. It is a war that has been waged for 
that doctrine of originalism.
  And a lot of people and a lot of institutions in America are having 
to make adjustments in the wake of this shocking development, and the 
Pentagon is one of those places.
  In the wake of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade, the 
Pentagon extended two policies that already exists for servicemembers 
if a medical procedure is not available near their duty station. One 
was the travel allowance. If you are not--if you can't get that knee 
operated on close to your duty station, we are going to pay you to 
travel. That is what the rules say today.
  By the way, that is not a law that Congress passed. That is the DOD 
making regulations, which is how this works, to ensure that people 
serving our country are able to get the medical care that they need. We 
say: You know what, you will have to travel and because you have to 
travel to do this, we are going to give you paid leave to do that, to 
go get that knee surgery.
  And what the DOD said in the wake of the Dobbs decision reversing Roe 
v. Wade is that if you are doing that because you made a decision to 
seek reproductive healthcare, you made a decision to have an abortion, 
we are going to apply the same rules to you that we apply for these 
other surgeries. We are not going to treat you differently. We are 
going to treat you exactly the same. That is what we are going to do. 
And if you need to travel because it is not available, you can do it.
  So if you live in a State like Alabama, where my colleague who is 
blocking every single appointment or promotion in the DOD, where he 
lives--where, if you are a doctor and you perform an abortion, you can 
go to jail for 99 years--if you are living in a State like Alabama 
where abortion is banned, and there are very limited exceptions, if any 
exception, that you can go somewhere else to do it or the DOD will 
actually pay for you to go, and the DOD will give you paid leave. That 
is true whether you are seeking women's reproductive healthcare or you 
are going for knee surgery. But knee surgery isn't banned in 20 States 
in this country.
  And there was one other thing that the Department of Defense said. 
They said: You know what, in the case of a pregnancy, you can tell your 
commanding officer, you can tell your command 20 weeks after you 
learned of your pregnancy. You don't have to tell people right away 
because things might happen in the early stages of pregnancy or you 
might make a decision to have an abortion in that time. This was an 
attempt by DOD to harmonize the rules at DOD for healthcare with the 
changes of the Supreme Court. It would be difficult, in my mind, at 
least, to imagine a more modest set of changes to the rules by DOD.

  I thought about what could be more modest than saying: OK. If we are 
going to pay people who are getting

[[Page S2141]]

knee surgery or pay them paid leave, then we are going to do this for 
everybody else--for women who need reproductive healthcare. If we are 
going to pay people to travel for these other things, then we are going 
to let people travel.
  I would think most people who have disagreements about abortion in 
this country might say: Well, that is fair. People have the right to be 
able to make this decision on their own--or they should have the right 
to make this decision on their own--and we shouldn't discriminate 
against people just because we might have a disagreement about 
abortion.
  One thing this set of rules does not do in any shape or form is pay 
for an abortion. The Senator from Alabama has almost admitted as much 
on this floor. He said it is sort of tantamount to that. It is sort of 
this, and Senator Lee from Utah was saying it is sort of, but they know 
that it is not. That is not what the rules do. That is a debate that we 
are going to need to have here, but that is not what is happening here. 
What is happening here is the rules, as I stated.
  The Senator from Alabama was so enraged by this, so infuriated by 
this, so angered by this, that he has now put a blanket hold on 249 
military promotions to unwind those rules, to change those rules, to 
force the DOD to retreat and for the DOD to say: OK. From here on out, 
here is what we are going to do. We will pay for your travel for every 
single operation that you can't get at your duty station except if you 
are a woman who is seeking reproductive healthcare. If you are a woman 
who is going to have an abortion, we are going to discriminate against 
you. We are going to treat you differently than anybody else for every 
other purpose.
  And we are going to give you paid leave because we understand that it 
is inconvenient to have to go somewhere else from your duty station. By 
the way, you haven't asked to be at that duty station. We are going to 
give you paid leave except if you are going because of reproductive 
healthcare, in which case, we are going to discriminate against women 
and say, uniquely: You do not get paid leave. And, I guess, you have to 
inform your commanding officer--somebody does--that you are pregnant 
sooner than the 20 weeks.
  That is the world that the Senator from Alabama is trying to pursue 
here on this floor by holding every single military promotion, every 
flag officer promotion in the United States of America when Putin is 
invading Ukraine and China is sailing their shiny new navy all over the 
South China Sea. And I know he knows. He can't think it is a good idea.
  He has come out here and said: Don't worry about it. There are acting 
people who are doing those jobs. Don't worry about it. The generals 
don't actually make decisions. It is the enlisted people who are doing 
all the work. Don't worry about it. Somehow this is going to help with 
the recruiting quagmire that he has pointed out.
  I don't think, by the way, it is going to help with the recruiting 
quagmire that he has talked about out here; that women who are thinking 
about joining the military are going to know that their life, their 
lives, are in the hands of politicians in Washington, DC. Their very 
lives are in their hands. Their destiny is in their hands. And DOD can 
send them to a place where abortion is banned and doctors go to jail 
for 99 years if they perform an abortion or they might be lucky enough 
to serve in a place like Colorado where we codified Roe v. Wade anyway. 
We are the first State in America to do it.
  And I don't have to tell the Presiding Officer, who, by the way, 
served and has been on the Armed Services Committee, how important 
these jobs are we are talking about: the next Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General C.Q. Brown; the Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff; the Chief of the National Security Agency; the 
next military representative to NATO. You think that is an important 
job?
  Soon this hold is going to include the next Commandant of the Marine 
Corps, the Army Chief of Staff, the Chief of Naval Operations, putting 
our national security at risk.
  Mr. President, I asked unanimous consent at the outset of tonight's 
proceedings if we could have unanimous consent on a number of these 
promotions.
  I ask unanimous consent that those names and ranks and positions be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                          Military Nominations


                            IN THE AIR FORCE

       Exec. Cal. #46--Col. Leigh A. Swanson to be Brigadier 
     General


                              IN THE ARMY

       Exec. Cal. #47--Maj. Gen. Sean A. Gainey to be Lieutenant 
     General; Exec. Cal. #48--Maj. Gen. Heidi J. Hoyle to be 
     Lieutenant General; Exec. Cal. #49--Brig. Gen. Laurence S. 
     Linton to be Major General; Exec. Cal. #50--Brig. Gen. Stacy 
     M. Babcock to be Major General and Col. Peggy R. McManus to 
     be Brigadier General


                            IN THE AIR FORCE

       Exec. Cal. #51--Maj. Gen. Andrew J. Gebara to be Lieutenant 
     General


                              IN THE ARMY

       Exec. Cal. #52--Maj. Gen. Robert M. Collins to be 
     Lieutenant General


                            IN THE AIR FORCE

       Exec. Cal. #82--to be Brigadier General: Col. David J. 
     Berkland; Col. Amy S. Bumgarner; Col. Ivory D. Carter; Col. 
     Raja J. Chari; Col. Jason E. Carrothers; Col. John B. Creel; 
     Col. Nicholas B. Evans; Col. Bridget V. Gigliotti; Col. 
     Christopher B. Hammond; Col. Leslie F. Hauck, III; Col. Kurt 
     C. Helphinstine; Col. Abraham L. Jackson; Col. Benjamin R. 
     Jonsson; Col. Joy M. Kaczor; Col. Christopher J. Leonard; 
     Col. Christopher E. Menuey; Col. David S. Miller; Col. 
     Jeffrey A. Philips; Col. Erik N. Quigley; Col. Michael S. 
     Rowe; Col. Derek M. Salmi; Col. Kayle M. Stevens; Col. Jose 
     E. Sumangil; Col. Terence G. Taylor; Col. Jason D. Voorheis; 
     Col. Michael O. Walters; Col. Adrienne L. Williams
       Exec. Cal. #83--Col. Corey A. Simmons to be Brigadier 
     General


                              IN THE NAVY

       Exec. Cal. #84--Rear Adm. George M. Wikoff to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #85--Rear Adm. Frederick W. Kacher to be Vice 
     Admiral


                            IN THE AIR FORCE

       Exec. Cal. #86--to be Brigadier General: Col. Sean M. 
     Carpenter; Col. Mary K. Haddad; Col. James L. Hartle; Col. 
     Aaron J. Heick; Col. Joseph D. Janik; Col. Michael T. 
     McGinley; Col. Kevin J. Merrill; Col. Tara E. Nolan; Col. 
     Roderick C. Owens; Col. Mark D. Richey; Col. Norman B. Shaw, 
     Jr.
       Exec. Cal. #87--to be Brigadier General: Col. Kristin A. 
     Hillery; Col. Michelle L. Wagner
       Exec. Cal. #88--to be Major General: Brig. Gen. Elizabeth 
     E. Arledge; Brig. Gen. Robert M. Blake; Brig. Gen. Vanessa J. 
     Dornhoefer; Brig. Gen. Christopher A. Freeman; Brig. Gen. 
     David P. Garfield; Brig. Gen. Mitchell A. Hanson; Brig. Gen. 
     Jody A. Merritt; Brig: Gen. Adrian K. White; Brig. Gen. 
     William W. Whittenberger, Jr.; Brig. Gen. Christopher F. 
     Yancy


                              IN THE ARMY

       Exec. Cal. #89--Col. Carlos M. Caceres to be Brigadier 
     General


                              IN THE NAVY

       Exec. Cal. #90--Rear Adm. Shoshana S. Chatfield--to be Vice 
     Admiral


                              IN THE ARMY

       Exec. Cal. #91--Col. William F. Wilkerson to be Brigadier 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #92--Col. Evelyn E. Laptook to be Brigadier 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #93--Brig. Gen. Ronald R. Ragin to be Major 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #94--to be Brigadier General: Col. Brandon C. 
     Anderson; Col. Beth A. Behn; Col. Matthew W. Braman; Col. 
     Kenneth J. Burgess; Col. Thomas E. Burke; Col. Chad C. 
     Chalfont; Col. Kendall J. Clarke; Col. Patrick M. Costello; 
     Col. Rory A. Crooks; Col. Troy M. Denomy; Col. Sara E. 
     Dudley; Col. Joseph E. Escandon; Col. Alric L. Francis; Col. 
     George C. Hackler; Col. William C. Hannan, Jr.; Col. Peter G. 
     Hart; Col. Gregory L. Holden; Col. Paul D. Howard; Col. James 
     G. Kent; Col. Curtis W. King; Col. John P. Lloyd; Col. 
     Shannon M. Lucas; Col. Landis C. Maddox; Col. Kareem P. 
     Montague; Col. John B. Mountford; Col. David C. Phillips; 
     Col. Kenneth N. Reed; Col. John W. Sannes; Col. Andrew O. 
     Saslav; Col. Charlone E. Stallworth; Col. Jennifer S. 
     Walkawicz; Col. Camilla A. White; Col. Scott D. Wilkinson; 
     Col. Jeremy S. Wilson; Col. Scott C. Woodward; Col. Joseph W. 
     Wortham, II; Col. David J. Zinn


                          IN THE MARINE CORPS

       Exec. Cal. #95--to be Brigadier General: Col. David R. 
     Everly; Col. Kelvin W. Gallman; Col. Adolfo Garcia, Jr.; Col. 
     Matthew T. Good; Col. Trevor Hall; Col. Richard D. Joyce; 
     Col. Omar J. Randall; Col. Robert S. Weiler


                              IN THE NAVY

       Exec. Cal. #96--to be Rear Admiral (lower half): Capt. 
     Walter D. Brafford; Capt. Robert J. Hawkins
       Exec. Cal. #97--to be Rear Admiral (lower half): Capt. Amy 
     N. Bauernschmidt; Capt. Michael B. Devore; Capt. Thomas A. 
     Donovan; Capt. Frederic C. Goldhammer; Capt. Ian L. Johnson; 
     Capt. Neil A. Koprowski; Capt. Paul J. Lanzilotta; Capt. 
     Joshua Lasky; Capt. Donald W. Marks; Capt. Craig

[[Page S2142]]

     T. Mattingly; Capt. Andrew T. Miller; Capt. Lincoln M. 
     Reifsteck; Capt. Frank A. Rhodes, IV; Capt. Thomas E. Shultz; 
     Capt. Todd E. Whalen; Capt. Forrest O. Young
       Exec. Cal. #98--to be Rear Admiral (lower half): Capt. 
     Brian J. Anderson; Capt. Julie M. Treanor
       Exec. Cal. #99--to be Rear Admiral: Rear Adm. (lh) Casey J. 
     Moton; Rear Adm. (lh) Stephen R. Tedford
       Exec. Cal. #100--Rear Adm. (lh) Rick Freedman to be Rear 
     Admiral:
       Exec. Cal. #101--Rear Adm. (lh) Kenneth W. Epps to be Rear 
     Admiral:
       Exec. Cal. #102--to be Rear Admiral: Rear Adm. (lh) Stephen 
     D. Barnett; Rear Adm. (lh) Michael W. Baze; Rear Adm. (lh) 
     Richard T. Brophy, Jr.; Rear Adm. (lh) Joseph F. Cahill, III; 
     Rear Adm. (lh) Brian L. Davies; Rear Adm. (lh) Michael P. 
     Donnelly; Rear Adm. (lh) Daniel P. Martin; Rear Adm. (lh) 
     Richard E. Seif, Jr.; Rear Adm. (lh) Paul C. Spedero, Jr.; 
     Rear Adm. (lh) Derek A. Trinque; Rear Adm. (lh) Dennis Velez; 
     Rear Adm. (lh) Darryl L. Walker; Rear Adm. (lh) Jeromy B. 
     Williams
       Exec. Cal. #103--Capt. Frank G. Schlereth, III to be Rear 
     Admiral (lower half):
       Exec. Cal. #104--to be Rear Admiral (lower half): Capt. 
     Joshua C. Himes; Capt. Kurtis A. Mole
       Exec. Cal. #105--to be Rear Admiral (lower half): Capt. 
     Thomas J. Dickinson; Capt. Kevin R. Smith; Capt. Todd S. 
     Weeks; Capt. Dianna Wolfson


                            in the air force

       Exec. Cal. #106--to be Major General: Brig. Gen. Thomas W. 
     Harrell; Brig. Gen. Jeannine M. Ryder


                          in the marine corps

       Exec. Cal. #107--Lt. Gen. James W. Bierman, Jr. to be 
     Lieutenant General


                            in the air force

       Exec. Cal. #110--To be Major General: Brig. Gen. Curtis R. 
     Bass; Brig. Gen. Kenyon K. Bell; Brig. Gen. Charles D. 
     Bolton; Brig. Gen. Larry R. Broadwell, Jr.; Brig. Gen. Scott 
     A. Cain; Brig. Gen. Sean M. Choquette; Brig. Gen. Roy W. 
     Collins; Brig. Gen. John R. Edwards; Brig. Gen. Jason T. 
     Hinds; Brig. Gen. Justin R. Hoffman; Brig. Gen. Stacy J. 
     Huser; Brig. Gen. Matteo G. Martemucci; Brig. Gen. David A. 
     Mineau; Brig. Gen. Paul D. Moga; Brig. Gen. Ty W. Neuman; 
     Brig. Gen. Christopher J. Niemi; Brig. Gen. Brandon D. 
     Parker; Brig. Gen. Michael T. Rawls; Brig. Gen. Patrick S. 
     Ryder; Brig. Gen. David G. Shoemaker; Brig. Gen. Rebecca J. 
     Sonkiss; Brig. Gen. Claude K. Tudor, Jr.; Brig. Gen. Dale R. 
     White


                          in the marine corps

       Exec. Cal. #111--Maj. Gen. Bradford J. Gering to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #112--Maj. Gen. Gregory L. Masiello to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #113--Rear Adm. James P. Downey to be Vice 
     Admiral


                              in the army

       Exec. Cal. #130--Maj. Gen. John W. Brennan, Jr. to be 
     Lieutenant General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #131--Vice Adm. Karl O. Thomas to be Vice 
     Admiral


                          in the marine corps

       Exec. Cal. #132--Lt. Gen. Michael S. Cederholm to be 
     Lieutenant General


                            in the air force

       Exec. Cal. #133--Brig. Gen. Derin S. Durham to be Major 
     General


                              in the army

       Exec. Cal. #134--to be Brigadier General Col. Brandi B. 
     Peasley; Col. John D. Rhodes Col. Earl C. Sparks, IV
       Exec. Cal. #135--Brig. Gen. William Green, Jr. to be Major 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #136--Maj. Gen. Mark T. Simerly to be Lieutenant 
     General


                          in the marine corps

       Exec. Cal. #137--Maj. Gen. Ryan P. Heritage to be 
     Lieutenant General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #138--Vice Adm. Craig A. Clapperton to be Vice 
     Admiral


                            IN THE AIR FORCE

       Exec. Cal. #139--Col. Brian R. Moore to be Brigadier 
     General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #180--Vice Adm. Daniel W. Dwyer to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #181--Rear Adm. Daniel L. Cheever to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #182--Rear Adm. (lh) Darin K. Via to be Rear 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #183--Rear Adm. (lh) Darin K. Via to be Rear 
     Admiral (lower half)


                            in the air force

       Exec. Cal. #184--Lt. Gen. Scott L. Pleus to be Lieutenant 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #185--Brig. Gen. Dale R. White to be Lieutenant 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #186--Maj. Gen. David A. Harris, Jr. to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #187--Maj. Gen. David R. Iverson to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #188--Lt. Gen. Kevin B. Schneider to be General
       Exec. Cal. #189--Maj. Gen. Laura L. Lenderman to be 
     Lieutenant General


                              in the army

       Exec. Calz. #190--Maj. Gen. David M. Hodne to be Lieutenant 
     General


                          in the marine corps

       Exec. Cal. #191--Maj. Gen. Roger B. Turner, Jr. to be 
     Lieutenant General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #192--Rear Adm. Yvette M. Davids to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #193--Rear Adm. Brendan R. McLane to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #194--Rear Adm. John E. Gumbleton to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #195--Rear Adm. Christopher S. Gray to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #196--Vice Adm. Charles B. Cooper, II to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #197--Rear Adm. James E. Pitts to be Vice 
     Admiral


                            in the air force

       Exec. Cal. #198--Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach to be General
       Exec. Cal. #199--Maj. Gen. Linda S. Hurry to be Lieutenant 
     General


                              in the army

       Exec. Cal. #200--Brig. Gen. Miguel A. Mendez to be Major 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #201--Col. Marlene K. Markotan to be Brigadier 
     General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #202--Vice Adm. William J. Houston to be Admiral


                            in the air force

       Exec. Cal. #203--Col. David M. Castaneda to be Brigadier 
     General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #204--Rear Adm. Robert M. Gaucher to be Vice 
     Admiral
       Exec. Cal. #205--Rear Adm. Douglas G. Perry to be Vice 
     Admiral


                              in the army

       Exec. Cal. #224--Maj. Gen. Karl H. Gingrich to be 
     Lieutenant General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #225--to be Rear Admiral Rear Adm. (lh) Kenneth 
     R. Blackmon; Rear Adm. (lh) Marc S. Lederer; Rear Adm. (lh) 
     Robert C. Nowakowski;
       Exec. Cal. #226--to be Rear Admiral (Lower Half) Capt. 
     Jeffrey A. Jurgemeyer; Capt. Richard S. Lofgren; Capt. 
     Michael S. Mattis; Capt. Richard W. Meyer; Capt. Bryon T. 
     Smith; Capt. Michael R. Vanpoots
       Exec. Cal. #227--Capt. John E. Byington to be Rear Admiral 
     (lower half)
       Exec. Cal. #228--Capt. John A. Robinson, III to be Rear 
     Admiral (lower half)
       Exec. Cal. #229--Capt. David E. Ludwa to be Rear Admiral 
     (lower half)
       Exec. Cal. #230--Capt. Peter K. Muschinske to be Rear 
     Admiral (lower half)
       Exec. Cal. #231--Capt. Marc F. Williams to be Rear Admiral 
     (lower half)


                              in the army

       Exec. Cal. #232--Lt. Gen. Andrew M. Rohling to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #233--Maj. Gen. John B. Richardson, IV to be 
     Lieutenant General


                              in the navy

       Exec. Cal. #234--Vice Adm. Jeffrey W. Hughes to be Vice 
     Admiral


                            in the air force

       Exec. Cal. #236--Lt. Gen. Gregory M. Guillot to be General
       Exec. Cal. #237--Maj. Gen. Heath A. Collins to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #238--Lt. Gen. Jeffrey A. Kruse to be Lieutenant 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #239--Maj. Gen. Michael G. Koscheski to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #240--Lt. Gen. Donna D. Shipton to be Lieutenant 
     General


                              in the army

       Exec. Cal. #241--Maj. Gen. Anthony R. Hale to be Lieutenant 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #242--Lt. Gen. Laura A. Potter to be Lieutenant 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #243--Maj. Gen. William J, Hartman to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #244--Lt. Gen. John S. Kolasheski to be 
     Lieutenant General
       Exec. Cal. #245--Col. Matthew N. Gebhard to be Brigadier 
     General
       Exec. Cal. #246--Col. Katherine M. Braun to be Brigadier 
     General.

  Mr. BENNET. Former Defense Secretary Gates, who, by the way, for 
those who don't know, was appointed by George W. Bush, said that the 
Senator from Alabama has made the military ``a pawn.'' That is a guy 
who served in a Republican administration. We have had Secretaries of 
Defense from both sides of the aisle who said the Senator from Alabama 
is hurting our national defense, hurting our national security, is 
playing politics with our Department of Defense.
  What is his justification again? Well, it is no different than what I 
already said. He uses different words. He says that the DOD has made--
the Department of Defense--by making these rules, into an abortion 
travel agency. Those are his words: abortion travel agency. Well, that 
is not true.
  We have already talked about the travel allowance and the absence 
without leave and more time to notify. I am sure there are some 
people--a handful of people in America--who couldn't see the wisdom in 
that, who would disagree with that. But I will bet you that the vast 
majority of people in this country, including people who have a 
different view on a woman's right to choose than I have, would say that 
women ought to

[[Page S2143]]

have the right, in the Department of Defense, to get travel paid for 
just like anybody else and to get paid leave and to be able to have 20 
weeks to be able to tell their commanding officer that they are 
pregnant.
  This is an effort to punish women who are seeking reproductive 
healthcare and forcing them, for reasons I don't understand, to tell 
their commanding officer the minute that they are pregnant.
  This is reminiscent to me of the States after Dobbs--after the Court 
overturned Roe v. Wade--that started to look at bills to try to prevent 
women from traveling from States that had banned abortion to States 
that had made abortion legal.
  It is kind of a shocking place for us to be in to hear people--a 
party--embrace freedom and talk about freedom all the time and still 
live in a place where we are talking about trying to ban Americans from 
traveling from one State to another or not allowing the Department of 
Defense to pay money or to use paid leave for women's reproductive 
healthcare the way they do for anything else.
  I mean, I do believe strongly--I believe strongly in a woman's right 
to choose, and I believe it should be a decision that is made between a 
woman and her doctor. Most Americans agree with that. I know that there 
is profound moral disagreement on this question, and I respect that. 
But I think it is fair to say that the Senator from Alabama's position 
on this to not allow paid leave, to not allow paid travel, to not allow 
women to get 20 weeks before they have to tell their commanding 
officers that they are pregnant--the vast majority of Americans, I 
think, would agree that those rules are appropriate.
  By the way, one of the other reasons the Senator from Alabama has 
objected to this is that he has said that if the Senate wanted those 
rules, it should have passed those rules. Well, the Senate doesn't 
write the rules like that. We didn't pass the rules that exist today 
that pay for people to be able to go get surgery or get paid leave in 
the military. Those are rules that the Department of Defense makes, 
having been delegated that authority by the Congress.
  But, man, he is in a totally different place on this. He says that he 
is going to keep this hold until the Pentagon follows the law or 
Congress changes the law; that is the way we do it here in the Senate. 
That is a reference to what I was just talking about in terms of the 
rules.
  By the way, this is not how we do this in the Senate. It is just not. 
It is not. And the evidence is that no one in the history of this body 
has ever done this--ever in the history of the country. Nobody has done 
this. Nobody has done it. And I would say that not only has nobody done 
it, nobody has done it and taken a political position that is so far 
outside the mainstream of conventional American politics.
  I think the American people should be asking their Senators where 
they stand on this. There are only 100 people here. It is not hard to 
find our telephone numbers or our addresses. They should be asking 
them: Do you agree that we should be holding up every single flag 
officer's promotion because one Senator thinks that we shouldn't have 
paid leave or paid travel for women who need reproductive healthcare?
  He says he is going to relent only when that is true. He is only 
going to relent when there is a DOD policy that pays for every other 
surgery that somebody could get, that has paid family leave for any 
other procedure that you could get, but bans that for abortion. That is 
an extreme position. That is an extreme position.
  It is an extreme position to say that we are going to not allow 
people to have 20 weeks to make this decision.
  There are no exceptions in Alabama for rape or incest. That may be 
part of the reason why he has the perspective he does. It is a State 
where, if you are a doctor and you perform an abortion, you could go to 
jail for 99 years. But that is not what the majority of Americans 
believe on this issue. It is not. It is not. I don't even think the 
majority of Alabamians believe that. But the majority of Americans 
certainly don't. The majority of Americans believe in a woman's right 
to choose. The majority of Americans believe that these questions are 
best decided between a woman and her doctor or her family and her faith 
if she has one.
  That is what my State believes. We were the first State that 
decriminalized abortion before Roe was even decided and were the first 
State to codify a woman's right to choose. That is, I think, what 
freedom actually looks like.
  Our State, Colorado, is the first State to codify Roe since the 
Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. And other folks were saying: You 
don't need to worry about the States. Now one of the largest States in 
America--a large State where something like 65 percent of the people 
support a woman's right to choose--the Governor of that State, the 
State of Florida, has banned abortion after 6 weeks. He signed that law 
at 11 at night when nobody would be around to see the way he was 
trampling on the freedom of his constituents.
  Most Americans, if they knew this debate was happening, would be 
shocked, I think, to hear that what we are trying to do here is prevent 
women from getting paid leave; that we are trying to prevent women from 
having paid travel; that we are trying to prevent women from having 20 
weeks to tell their commanding officer. That is what the Senator from 
Alabama is saying, that until that happens--until we are preventing 
women from those things, until we are discriminating against women who 
are seeking reproductive healthcare--he is going to continue to hold 
all these nominations. Forever?
  I don't know how anybody can take that position and say they stand 
for freedom, but that is the position the Senator from Alabama has 
taken. I hope he will reconsider what he is doing because of the damage 
it is causing our national security at a moment when, as I said, Putin 
has invaded Ukraine and China is pressing, you know, its advantages in 
various places around the world.
  We need the Senator to lift these holds, and I am going to keep 
coming to the floor until he does.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________