[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.
____________________