[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 152 (Wednesday, September 20, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4623-S4624]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             CLOTURE MOTION

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The 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. 282, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr., 
     for reappointment as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 
     and appointment in the United States Air Force to the grade 
     indicated while assigned to a position of importance and 
     responsibility under title 10, U.S.C., sections 152 and 601: 
     to be General.
         Charles E. Schumer, Mark Kelly, Patty Murray, Alex 
           Padilla, Tammy Baldwin, Angus S. King, Jr., Catherine 
           Cortez Masto, Margaret Wood Hassan, Debbie Stabenow, 
           Michael F. Bennet, Richard Blumenthal, Kirsten E. 
           Gillibrand, Martin Heinrich, Maria Cantwell, Benjamin 
           L. Cardin, Chris Van Hollen, Richard J. Durbin, Jack 
           Reed, Brian Schatz.

  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 Executive Calendar No. 282, the following named officer 
for reappointment as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and 
appointment in the United States Air Force to the grade indicated while 
assigned to a position of importance and responsibility under title 10, 
U.S.C., sections 152 and 601: to be General, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, 
Jr., shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. 
Feinstein) is necessarily absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. 
Scott).
  Further, if present and voting: the Senator from Alaska (Ms. 
Murkowski) would have voted ``yea.''
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 89, nays 8, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 234 Ex.]

                                YEAS--89

     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blackburn
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boozman
     Britt
     Brown
     Budd
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Daines
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Ernst
     Fetterman
     Fischer
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kaine
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Lujan
     Lummis
     Manchin
     Markey
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Moran
     Mullin
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Paul
     Peters
     Reed
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rosen
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott (FL)
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
     Young

                                NAYS--8

     Braun
     Cruz
     Hawley
     Lee
     Marshall
     Schmitt
     Tuberville
     Vance

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Feinstein
     Murkowski
     Scott (SC)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Murphy). On this vote, the yeas are 89, 
the nays are 8, and the motion is agreed to.
  The Senator from Alabama.


                              Nominations

  Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, 2 hours ago, Senator Schumer announced 
that we will be voting on the Commandant of the Marine Corps, the Army 
Chief of Staff, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  It is about time. I have called for individual votes on these 
nominees for almost 6 months. Instead of voting, Democrats have spent 
months complaining about having to vote. They want to use floor time 
for things like liberal judges, like the one we confirmed a couple of 
hours ago.
  Senator Schumer could have confirmed these nominees a long, long time 
ago. We have had more than 80 days off this year in the Senate, not 
including weekends. Yet Senator Schumer is outraged that we are voting 
on these nominations.
  As I have noted before, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff was given a floor vote in 2018. The current nominee for that 
position, General Brown, was given a floor vote for his current 
position not long ago. Despite what Senator Reed and others have said, 
there is nothing wrong with a floor vote on these nominations.
  I ran for Senate so I could vote on behalf of the people of the State 
of Alabama. I didn't come up here just to outsource my job to the 
Pentagon or the White House. Yet that is exactly what Democrats want to 
do. That is the current position of Senate Democrats.
  The Constitution says we make the laws here in Congress, not in the 
Pentagon and not in the White House. So this is not about me. It is 
about the Senate and the Constitution. This is a win today for the 
legislative branch of government. Voting gives all Senators a voice for 
their constituents.

[[Page S4624]]

  The Constitution says that the Senate is to ``advise and consent'' to 
the President's nominations. Over the last 6 months, Democrats in this 
Chamber have actually complained that the Senate has too much power. 
Senator Schumer made reference this afternoon to proposals by Democrats 
to make the Senate weaker. Senate Democrats have been more than happy 
to go along with executive overreach when a Democrat is in the Oval 
Office.
  Democrats have spent the last 6 months attacking me for standing up 
to an illegal and immoral new policy. Many of these attacks have been 
wrong on the facts. First, they said I was leaving important jobs open. 
That is false.
  Then they complained that we have acting officials in many important 
roles. They claim that generals and admirals just can't do the job as 
an acting official.
  Senator Reed came to the floor 2 weeks ago and said we ``have no 
effective military leadership'' in several branches of the military 
right now. One member of the House said the military is ``paralyzed.''
  I don't even think the Pentagon would defend these accusations. 
Democrats still have never shown me one fact to show that we were 
behind on readiness. It is just not true.
  Just last week, GEN Charles Flynn, our top Army general in the 
Pacific, said he hasn't noticed any challenges because of the hold--not 
any. Over the weekend, the outgoing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, General Milley, said our readiness is better than it has been in 
years.
  This hold is not affecting readiness.
  If Democrats want to complain, then they should look in the mirror. I 
don't control the Senate floor; the Democrats do.
  In a typical week, we work 3 days. Those aren't the kinds of hours 
people are working back in my home State of Alabama. This is one of the 
least productive Senates in our lifetime.
  Democrats can't have it both ways. Either they can confirm these 
nominees through regular order or they can stop complaining about 
acting officials.
  Democrats say there is a large backlog of nominees. They say it would 
take a long time. Well, I agree. It has been a big backlog. But, again, 
Chuck Schumer allowed the backlog to build up over 6 months. It is his 
fault.
  We could have been confirming one or two a week over the last 200 
days. It would have taken us just 4 hours of voting each week.
  But we didn't do it. We took another angle of just sitting back and 
watching. Chuck Schumer refused again and again and again.
  We don't have a lack of leadership in our military. We have a lack of 
leadership right here in the U.S. Senate.
  Despite the lack of leadership, Senators are perfectly capable of 
voting. Voting is our job. That is why we were sent here.
  So to be clear, my hold is still in place. The hold will remain in 
place as long as the Pentagon's illegal abortion policy remains in 
place. If the Pentagon lifts the policy, then I will lift my hold--easy 
as that. That has been my position from the very beginning.
  I am not afraid to vote on these nominees or on all of these 
nominees. I came here to this Chamber to vote, and I reserve the right 
to seek another cloture petition on the nominees in the future.
  So that is where we stand today.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________