[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.

                          ____________________