[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 201 (Wednesday, December 6, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5767-S5769]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
REMOVING EXTRANEOUS LOOPHOLES INSURING EVERY VETERAN EMERGENCY ACT--
MOTION TO PROCEED
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 30,
H.R. 815.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the motion.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to H.R. 815, a bill to amend title 38,
United States Code, to make certain improvements relating to
the eligibility of veterans to receive reimbursement for
emergency treatment furnished through the Veterans Community
Care program, and for other purposes.
Assault Weapons Ban
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, later this morning, I will join my
Democratic colleagues on the floor to ask unanimous consent to pass the
assault weapons ban, among other gun safety legislation. I will have
more to say before the unanimous consent request, but right now the
scourge of gun violence in America is a national crisis.
I hope my Republican colleagues stand with us to take action that
Americans demand.
Military Promotions
Mr. President, now, on Senator Tuberville, yesterday, 10 months of
pain and uncertainty finally came to an end for hundreds--hundreds--of
military nominees and their families. Senator Tuberville, after months
of obstruction, stubbornness, and reckless disregard for military
readiness, withdrew his blanket holds on over 400 generals and flag
officers, and, in the span of just a few minutes of floor time, the
Senate unanimously confirmed nearly every single one of them to their
posts. Thank God, these military officers finally got the promotions
they so rightfully earned, but it should not have taken so long.
If there is one word that underscores why we prevailed on Senator
Tuberville, it is persistence. For months, I said it would be up to our
Republican colleagues to talk some sense into Senator Tuberville and
get him to relent in his holds. Senators Ernst and Sullivan stepped up
to the plate and deserve a lot of commendation for their courage, for
their strength.
And, as I predicted, the frustration and pressure on the senior
Senator from Alabama eventually won out. We were persistent and
persistent and persistent and held the line that military nominees
should never, never become pawns to push a partisan agenda.
So let this be a warning. No one--no one--should attempt blanket
holds on our military ever again.
After all the damage he caused, Senator Tuberville has nothing--
absolutely nothing--to show for his obstruction, except for the harm
done to our military and the pain caused to
[[Page S5768]]
military families. His reckless strategy did not succeed, and if, in
the future, others try to hold up military appointments to get their
way, they, too, will fail. Again, let this be a warning that no one
should ever hold up military appointments again.
We cannot cave to any single Member's views, no matter how strongly
felt. I don't doubt that Senator Tuberville feels the issue very
strongly opposite of what I feel, but when our military families are at
stake, we should not use these strong feelings to hold them hostage.
What the senior Senator from Alabama did through his holds was bring
the Senate to a new low, and, in the end, it was all for nothing.
I want to thank my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, who spoke
in defense of our military families. I want to thank particularly
Senator Reed, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and Senator
Klobuchar, the chair of the Rules Committee. I also want to thank
Senator Sinema, who was instrumental in creating bipartisan support for
our resolution. On the Republican side, I want to, once again, thank
Senators Ernst and Sullivan for their courage in helping to break the
logjam after so, so many months. Because Senators on both sides
persisted and held the line, this sad chapter in the Senate is finally
over.
Supplemental Funding
Mr. President, now, on the supplemental, the question before the
Senate today is simple yet momentous: Will Senators agree to begin
debate--just a debate--on legislation to defend America's national
security on an issue so important it goes to the actual preservation of
Western and democratic values in the world. Are we willing to hold a
discussion, here on the floor, about steps necessary to safeguard
democracy, stand up to autocratic brutes, and respond to our
adversaries with strength, or will Senators prevent us from moving
forward over extremist border policies? Because, this afternoon, the
Senate will hold a vote on whether or not to move forward on a national
security supplemental.
At stake is America's safety, the safety of democracy, and the future
of the war in Ukraine. As we have done throughout our history, the
Senate should rush to the defense of democracy and stand up to
autocratic brutes.
And I have promised my Republican colleagues that if they agree to
move forward, I will give them a vote for a border package entirely of
their choosing--no conditions. This is a golden opportunity for
Republicans to present whatever border policy they want, and our side
will not interfere with the construction of that amendment in any way.
It has been reported that Senate Republicans will make another
attempt to craft a border proposal and share it with Democrats, because
the last proposal was so far away from what anyone could accept on our
side. Well, I have a suggestion for my Republican colleagues: Vote with
us to begin debate, and then bring that proposal to the floor as an
amendment. We can debate it right here, right here on the Senate floor.
If Republicans vote no today and reject the opportunity to offer a
border amendment, then what the heck is going on? Republicans said they
want border. It is they who have injected border into the Ukraine
issue, even though the two are unrelated. And now they are getting a
golden opportunity to offer border at 60 votes. If that is not good
enough for them, then what are they doing?
Let's not forget, Mr. President, that it was the Republican leader
and others on the Republican side in the House and Senate, mainly from
the hard right, who demanded that border and Ukraine be tied together.
Well, we are willing to give them an amendment--that is what they have
asked for--and now they are spurning that offer. Why hold up Ukraine
aid if they can't even present a border package that can pass the
Senate?
We are asking ourselves this question: Has border been nothing more
than an excuse for the hard right to kill funding for Ukraine and too
many other Republican Senators, who are not part of the hard right, are
going along? I hope that is not true.
I hope Republicans vote yes and take up our offer on a border
amendment at 60 votes because we don't have much time to keep
negotiating off the floor if all we will do is go around in circles,
which is what has happened over the last 3 weeks, despite the good will
of negotiators. Democrats have spent 3 weeks in negotiation in good
faith, trying to get somewhere on the border, to no avail.
We believe we should do something on border. In fact, the President's
proposal, which is the base bill--which I am making the base bill--has
very significant border provisions in it, particularly those talking
about stopping the flow of fentanyl into this country by providing much
more help at the ports of entry. We want to reach a middle ground with
Republicans on border. It is important. But we cannot waste time on
something like H.R. 2, which every single Democrat voted against, which
could never pass the House, while the clock is ticking to get Ukraine
the help it so desperately needs.
Now, I understand that this is frustrating for some of our Republican
colleagues. I appreciate that the hard right may feel boxed in and be
feeling the pressure that they can't come up with a package that can
get only 11 Democrats if all of them vote for it. But the only way
anything on border gets done is with votes from both sides of the
aisle. That is how the Senate works.
So, again, I hope our Republican colleagues do the right thing for
our country and vote in favor of debating the supplemental. I hope they
take this free opportunity, this golden opportunity, to make a real,
serious proposal on the border--though, in reality, they can propose
whatever they want--and see if it can get the 60 votes that is always
required in this type of legislation in the Senate.
If they make a serious offer on the border and it gets 60 votes, then
the Senate will have spoken. If they cannot get 60 votes on a border
proposal, then that should not prevent us from giving Ukraine the aid
they so desperately need.
Let me repeat that again. If Republicans, who injected border into
this whole debate, now can't come up with an amendment that can pass
the Senate, they should not prevent us from giving Ukraine the aid it
so desperately needs.
The world is watching. The world is watching what the Senate does
today. You can bet, my colleagues, Vladimir Putin is watching. Hamas is
certainly watching. Iran, President Xi, North Korea--all of our
adversaries are closely watching. Let us do the right thing and move
forward today.
AI Insight Forums
Mr. President, now, today, on our AI Insight Forums, we will continue
our work with our eighth and ninth bipartisan AI forums. The morning's
Insight Forum will begin at 10:30 a.m. and focus on long-term risks
associated with AI and how we can guard against AI doomsday scenarios.
This afternoon's Insight Forum will begin at 3 p.m. and focus on one
of the most critical and urgent areas of AI national security. We will
discuss the opportunities AI presents to bolster our national security
and the risks if we fall behind the Chinese Government. It is in the
Kennedy Caucus Room.
Federal Trade Commission
Mr. President, finally, on the FTC investigation of Exxon, last
month, I wrote a letter, along with 20 other of my colleagues, urging
the FTC to investigate Exxon's $60 billion blockbuster merger with
Pioneer, one of the largest mergers in the energy industry in two
decades. Having the largest oil company merge with the largest oil
producer in the Permian Basin is only going to do one thing: raise
prices for the average consumer.
Well, I have good news. The FTC heeded our warning and announced
yesterday that the FTC will closely review Exxon's proposed acquisition
of Pioneer. It is welcome news for the American people because if the
merger were to proceed, it would result in higher gas prices for
families across the country. Profits for these big oil companies would
soar, fueling stock buybacks, while everyday Americans struggle to fill
up their tanks.
So this merger between Exxon and Pioneer has all the hallmarks of
harmful anti-competitive effects, and I am glad the FTC is moving
forward.
[[Page S5769]]
I yield the floor.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is
recognized.
National Security
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, later today, Senate Republicans are
going to deny cloture on a bill that fails to address America's top
national security priorities in a serious way. As we have said for
weeks, legislation that doesn't include policy changes to secure our
borders will not pass the Senate.
The situation unfolding at our southern border on President Biden's
watch is a crisis of historic proportions. It is glaring, it is acute,
and it is undermining America's national security.
President Obama's DHS Secretary used to say that 1,000 border
crossings a day ``overwhelms the system.'' Today, they are reporting
encountering over--listen to this--10,000 people a day down at the
border--a large town's worth of illegal aliens each day. Thanks to a
broken asylum and parole system, the vast majority of them are admitted
into the country before their legal status is even determined.
Mr. President, 10,000 arrivals a day would mean a population the size
of a middle-sized town in Kentucky every month--every month. The sheer
volume has forced officials in the Tucson, AZ, sector, which has
recently accounted for nearly 3,000 of those daily arrivals by itself,
to shut down one port of entry altogether.
This is the crisis undermining America's national security right here
at home, and today, some of our Democratic colleagues are showing just
how little they want to do anything about it.
Senate Republicans know this isn't an either-or proposition. We know
that national security begins with border security.
I have spent months highlighting the undeniable links between the
threats we face in Europe, in the Middle East, and in the Indo-Pacific,
but Democratic leadership appears to be telling us today that they are
willing to risk each of these urgent priorities to avoid--avoid--fixing
our own borders right here at home. Apparently, some of our colleagues
would rather let Russia trample a sovereign nation in Europe than do
what it takes to enforce America's own sovereign borders.
Now, it wasn't always like this. Democrats didn't always have such a
hard time following the logic that national security begins right here
at home.
I am reminded of the commission President Reagan set up in the mid-
1980s to assess the importance of peace and security in the Western
Hemisphere. It was a bipartisan exercise that included everyone from
Henry Kissinger to the former chair of the DNC and the president of the
AFL-CIO. The commission concluded that America's security in the world
``depends on the inherent security of its land borders'' and that our
adversaries would reap ``a major strategic coup to impose on the United
States the burden of defending our southern approaches.''
``[A] major strategic coup'' for our adversaries. A past generation
of Democrats understood the logic implicitly when it pertained to the
threat of Soviet influence. Well, that logic applies even more today to
the instability, cartel violence, terror, and drugs pouring over our
southern border.
But in today's Democratic Party, some of our colleagues appear to be
so terrified of their radical base that they are convinced open borders
are worth jeopardizing U.S. security around the world, that securing
America's borders is less urgent than helping our partners defend
theirs.
The Democratic leader has insisted repeatedly that border security is
an important issue, but whatever our colleagues want to call the issue,
their actions suggest they are not at all interested in actually
solving it.
Demanding serious border policy changes isn't injecting an unrelated
issue into the conversation. President Biden's own request wanted us to
throw billions of dollars at this exact problem. Fixing a badly broken
asylum and parole system isn't hijacking the supplemental; it is
strengthening it. Securing our southern border isn't extraneous to our
national security; it is essential.
I know some of our Democratic colleagues understand this. I know not
all of them are beholden to the same radical base that demands open
borders at home and supports an intifada abroad. I invite them to work
with Republicans on meaningful, lasting border security.
But if today's vote is what it takes for the Democratic leader to
recognize that Senate Republicans mean what we say, then let's vote,
and then let's finally start meeting America's national security
priorities, including right here at home.
Coal
Mr. President, now on another matter, for millions of Americans,
expensive heating bills and rolling blackouts are becoming the hallmark
of the holiday season under President Biden. So it came as no small
surprise when the Biden administration's climate czar, John Kerry,
proclaimed this week that no coal plants should be ``permitted anywhere
in the world''--``anywhere in the world.'' Goodness. Our former
colleague may have bought himself applause from the jet-set crowd
assembled at the conference, but his ban on coal would make energy even
less reliable and affordable here at home.
As my colleague from West Virginia, Senator Capito, pointed out
yesterday, many States in Middle America still rely on coal to keep
their lights on. Kentucky, West Virginia, Wyoming, Missouri, Utah,
North Dakota, Indiana, and Nebraska all use coal to generate over 50
percent of their electricity.
President Biden's handling of the economy is turning in dismal marks
from working Americans. But the climate activists in his administration
continue to wage war on the most affordable forms of American energy
they rely on.
Unfortunately, Middle America is used to footing the bill for
Washington's radical climate agenda. For 8 years under President Obama,
Kentuckians watched the War on Coal kill jobs and cripple communities
across Appalachia. These same communities continue to pay dearly under
President Biden. Kentucky coal miner employment has never--never--
recovered from the Obama-era coal purge. Hasty plans to phase out
fossil fuels only force more miners into early retirement in Kentucky
and threaten the livelihood of Middle America.
The sort of power grid failures we have seen in California, Texas,
and Kentucky will become even more common if Democrats' full-speed-
ahead climate strategy continues. Meanwhile, our top strategic
adversary is scaling up coal production. Despite the Biden
administration's pleading, China continues to forge ahead with new coal
projects and resurrect retired plants. Time and again, the President's
climate czar has happily accepted empty climate pledges from our
adversaries at the expense of American jobs and job creators.
So Democrats can repeat their tired green energy talking points until
the cows come home, but the reality for Americans is all the same: less
reliable and more expensive energy this winter.
____________________