[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 187 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7079-S7085]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CLARIFYING JURISDICTION WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
PUMPED STORAGE DEVELOPMENT
The bill (H.R. 1607) to clarify jurisdiction with respect to certain
Bureau of Reclamation pumped storage development, and for other
purposes, was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and
passed.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, first, I want to thank Senator Cassidy for
his cooperation in putting together this package. It is a package of
bills that were favorably considered by the committee. They are
noncontroversial. I want to thank also Senator Kelly for his help in
putting together this package.
Let me just, if I might, talk about two of the issues we just passed:
First, H.R. 6826, to designate the visitor and education center at Fort
McHenry National Monument and Historic Shrine as the Paul S. Sarbanes
Visitor and Education Center.
I want to first acknowledge Congressman Sarbanes, who is on the
floor, who has represented me so well in the House of Representatives.
He has also decided not to run for reelection and served for 18 years
in the House of Representatives.
[[Page S7080]]
Mr. President, I hold the Sarbanes seat in the U.S. Senate. Paul
Sarbanes was a dear friend. He was a Senator's Senator. He was deeply
respected by all Members of this body. I think it is particularly
appropriate that he is honored with the naming of the Fort McHenry
National Monument and Historic Shrine visitor center and education
center.
The late Paul Sarbanes was a tireless advocate to preserve Fort
McHenry in Baltimore, MD. Senator Sarbanes worked to honor the site and
elevate the history of the War of 1812 in the national consciousness
throughout his career.
I got to know Senator Sarbanes when we were both elected at the same
time to the Maryland House of Delegates many years ago. He would go on
to serve in the House of Representatives on the Judiciary Committee,
which was given the responsibility of the first Article of Impeachment
against President Nixon during the Watergate scandal.
Later, while serving in the Senate in the aftermath of the 2002 Enron
scandal, Sarbanes worked in a bipartisan manner to pass the Sarbanes-
Oxley legislation. Then-President George W. Bush called the Sarbanes-
Oxley bill ``the most far-reaching reforms of American business
practices since the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.''
He had a long and distinguished career of public service to the
Nation, and, throughout, he never forgot his Baltimore roots. He saw
Fort McHenry as a national treasure in the city and a site worth
celebrating. This legislation acknowledges his long-term advocacy for
the preservation of the site and the improvement of the visitor
experience by designating the visitor and education center the Paul S.
Sarbanes Visitor and Education Center. It is a fitting tribute to name
the visitor center at Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic
Shrine after a true American hero: Paul S. Sarbanes.
Mr. President, I also would like to call my colleagues' attention to
H.R. 1727, the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park
Commission Extension Act, which we just approved.
I am proud to have worked together with Representative Trone and
Senators Capito, Van Hollen, Manchin, Warner, and Kaine on this
legislation. The C&O Canal National Historic Park is 184.5 miles long
and covers 20,000 acres, winding north and west along the Potomac
River, from the heart of Washington, DC, to Cumberland, MD. The park
includes a canal and contiguous towpath that provides runners,
cyclists, and backpackers access to hundreds of historic structures
that tell a story of this critical economic artery.
The Advisory Commission was established in 1971, and it has been
reauthorized at nominal cost by Congress every 10 years for the past
three decades with overwhelming bipartisan support. There is no better
wealth of knowledge of the unique issues the C&O Canal and its
resources face than the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical
Park Advisory Commission. Government works better when policymakers
listen to the people who know them best, and this commission ensures
that all surrounding communities have a voice in shaping their future.
I am proud to work together with my neighboring delegations to keep
this commission running strong.
So, Mr. President, once again, I want to thank my colleagues for
their cooperation in getting this done, and I particularly want to
acknowledge, as earlier, Representative John Sarbanes. He has worked
his entire career on good governance, and there is no stronger need in
our society than an advocate for good governance in our community. He
has done a great job in the House of Representatives.
He is also known for his work on the Chesapeake Bay, as the leader of
No Child Left Inside, getting young people to understand the importance
of Chesapeake Bay so we have advocates for the future. I congratulate
John Sarbanes for his incredible record in the House of Representatives
and wish him the best.
I thank the Presiding Officer for the courtesies that were just
extended.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. President, I rise to support H.R. 6843, which is
part of this package, the Atchafalaya National Heritage Area Boundary
Remodification Act.
I want to take just a moment to talk about the Atchafalaya. Le Grand
Derangement--my French is off, but stay with me.
When the British kicked the Acadians out of Canada and they migrated
down to Louisiana and along the gulf coast, the Atchafalaya basin was
where many of them settled, and their culture spread out from there.
And if you think of our culture with the etouffee, the jambalaya, the
crawfish, it all began in the Atchafalaya basin and built out from
there.
And if you look at a map, where the Mississippi comes down, draining
most of the continental United States, and then the Red River comes
down, which drains Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas--they meet, and the
Atchafalaya is born.
Prehistorically, the Atchafalaya River was an outlet for the
Mississippi River. And if it were not for human engineering, it would
once again be the outlet for the Mississippi. It is 1.4 million acres
of swamps and wetlands and rivers--the largest wetlands in the United
States.
And I say this because this culture, this Acadian culture--one of the
most unique, if not the most unique, in our country--began here. In our
boundary modification, we extend the footprint of this, acknowledging
that the Cajuns that came from Canada, finding refuge in the United
States, putting a unique imprint--a unique imprint on our country.
And I hesitate because I'm thinking. For example, Breaux Bridge, LA,
has the crawfish capital of the world. Now, we are the only State, I am
sure, that has the crawfish capital of the world.
But to show where that goes, yesterday, I am at a truck stop in
Arkansas, and I stop and they are selling crispy, crunchy chicken. And
with the crispy, crunchy chicken, I can get a side. It is jambalaya, it
is red beans and rice, and it is something else. I said: This is
Louisiana day. The guy laughed. He goes: It sure is. So the food that
began when those Acadians settled there has spread out.
What this does is it expands that footprint. It allows more of a
celebration of that culture, a preservation of the sportsmen's
paradise. And along the way, it created a lot of jobs. It has support
across Louisiana, including from the original 14 parishes within the
national heritage area.
So I thank my colleagues for getting this across the line. I am very
pleased about it, and I look forward to the Atchafalaya National
Heritage Area educating even more Americans as to the wonders of my
State.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KELLY. Mr. President, this bipartisan bill, H.R. 1607, the pumped
hydro storage bill, is about delivering affordable and reliable energy
to our growing State by expanding hydropower storage.
The way it does that is pretty simple. It clarifies the Bureau of
Reclamation's jurisdiction with respect to the future development of
pumped storage along the Salt River in Arizona, and it expands an
existing withdrawal south of the river from 1 to 2 miles, allowing the
Salt River Project to explore developing sites identified in a 2014
Bureau of Reclamation study. This could ultimately bring upwards of
2,000 megawatts of energy storage capacity to the State of Arizona,
providing clean energy and improving grid reliability as the demand for
energy grows in the coming years.
Representatives Schweikert and Stanton introduced this bill in the
House, and it passed the Chamber last year by a vote of 384 to 1. I
appreciate the work of my colleagues on the Energy and National
Resources Committee to ensure that our bill received a hearing and a
markup.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Reforming Emergency Powers to Uphold the Balances and Limitations
Inherent in the Constitution Act
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, we are currently considering the Defense
authorization bill. We have considered this most years annually for
many decades. Typically, though, we will have a robust debate, we will
have amendments offered, and we will try to have participation by
Senators from all over the
[[Page S7081]]
United States geographically represented in the debate.
That won't happen this year. There will be no debate. It will be very
controlled and circumscribed, and there won't be amendments. This is
disappointing to me because I think there are some very important
issues that need to be brought up, and one of those is emergency
powers.
Our Founding Fathers understood that it was very important to divide
these powers between the executive branch, the legislative branch, or
the judiciary. Over the past hundred years though, we have had a
gradual evolution of these powers toward the executive branch. And we
now have a very, very strong executive branch that, in many ways, is
able to control the narrative and ultimately to control the country.
In the 1970s, Frank Church wrote these words, which I think represent
a problem that existed then and even more so now. He wrote:
Hundreds of statutes clothe the President with virtually
unchecked powers with which he can affect the lives of
American citizens in a host of all-encompassing ways. This
vast range of powers, taken together, confers enough
authority on the President to rule the country without
reference to normal constitutional processes.
Under the authority delegated by these statutes, the
President may: seize property; organize and control the means
of production; seize commodities; institute martial law;
seize and control all transportation and communication;
regulate the operation of private enterprises; restrict
travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the
lives of all American citizens.
These words were written by Senator Frank Church in a 1977 law review
article, but they are still true to this day and even more worrisome.
The Church Committee's investigatory work famously convinced many in
Congress that the time had come to reassert congressional checks and
balances on the Executive that had become all too powerful.
It is ironic that the powers-that-be still conspire to this day to
hide the work of the Church Committee. I have been trying for over a
year to read the classified version of the Church Committee. All right.
This is not some sort of new document; this is a document from 1976.
But the powers-that-be have prevented me for over a year from reading
the classified report. You got to wonder--does that mean they have
something to hide or does that mean they love power so much that they
don't want to share it?
The National Emergencies Act of 1976 was supposed to be a reform of
Presidential emergencies. It was supposed to limit the power of
Presidents. In that act, they actually gave a legislative veto. If an
emergency were invoked by a President and the majority of Congress
voted it, they would be legislatively able to reject that emergency.
The Court ultimately ruled, though, that that would have to be signed
by the President, effectively meaning that if a President declares an
emergency, a majority of us say ``We don't think that should be
declared,'' and he vetoes it, it now takes two-thirds of us to overcome
a Presidential emergency. This is a very high bar and makes it nearly
impossible to stop a Presidential emergency.
Essentially, the National Emergency's Act enforcement mechanism
became toothless when the Court got rid of the legislative veto.
Subsequently, Congress must muster this veto-proof or two-thirds vote.
To thwart a rogue President, it currently takes a two-thirds majority
vote in both Houses to overturn a veto. This is a very high bar.
Consequently, we live in a country Frank Church would barely recognize.
In some ways, the United States of America is a monarchy in disguise.
The United States maintains the veneer of a constitutional republic but
often operates as an elected monarchy in which the President exercises
awesome and unchecked power by decree and in perpetuity.
If you look at the emergencies on the books, some of them have been
on the books for 50 years. If you look at the potential emergencies
that could be declared, you would be shocked.
This dangerous imbalance of the constitutional separation of powers
is not simply aggrandizement by the executive branch; it is something
that Congress has actually been complicit with. Congress has
essentially made itself a feckless branch of the Federal Government by
granting the President so many emergency powers and refusing to
regularly vote on the termination of national emergencies, as required
by current law. The emergencies go on and on.
Our concern should not merely be to restore Congress to its proper
role in our Madisonian system of government; rather, our true focus
should be to restore the Founders' vision of a government of limited
and diffuse powers that is devoted to securing our inalienable rights.
A government that disperses power among separate, distinct, and
competing branches is a government that is less likely to violate our
liberties.
We owe the people nothing less than the restoration of the
constitutional principles of separation of powers and of checks and
balances among the branches of the Federal Government.
I have offered a significant step towards revivifying the Founders'
vision. I have introduced a bill called the REPUBLIC Act, which is an
amendment to this bill but likely will not be considered because the
powers-that-be don't want debate or amendments. But this amendment,
were it considered, would restore Congress's role in governance by
requiring that declarations of national emergency expire after 30 days.
The President would still have the power to declare an emergency, but
it would expire after 30 days unless approved affirmatively by
Congress. What this does is essentially switches the role we currently
have. Currently, it takes two-thirds of Congress to stop an emergency;
now it would take 50 percent of Congress to affirm an emergency.
We did this in my State for our Governor. It is a good reform and
goes a long way towards restoring the faith that people have in the
separation of powers and the limitation of powers.
This simple reform allows the President to respond to genuine crises
but ensures that the Executive cannot rule by unchecked perpetual
emergency.
My bill includes other reforms that are designed to safeguard the
country from emergency rule. My bill would repeal the provisions of the
Communications Act of 1934--also known as the internet kill switch--
that allow the President, if he declares an emergency, to take over all
communications.
Now, this emergency fortunately has never been declared, but simply
having this on the book for so long is a threat that someday a
President might occur who says: I am going to take over all
communications, and I will shut them down. That is a power so ominous,
no President of either party should ever have that power, and this bill
would remove that power.
Today, though, with the power still in place, with the stroke of a
pen, the President could use this power to monitor emails, restrict
access to the internet, control computer systems, television, radio
broadcast, and cellphones. Longstanding use of this power would
effectively eviscerate the First Amendment.
If the REPUBLIC Act, my amendment today, were accepted, the President
would no longer be able to utilize this power--at least would have
limited power during a limited time, and a majority of Congress would
have to affirm the continued use of this emergency.
Emergency powers were not the type of rule our Founders anticipated
for our country. The other name for emergency rule is ``martial law.''
It is something all of us should object to and say that this should
only happen in an exceptional case, be very limited, and have the
ability of Congress to overturn.
If anyone doubts that emergency powers can be abused, just look to
Canada. Gene Healy of the Cato Institute wrote:
America's neighbor to the north offers a cautionary tale
about the risks that broad emergency powers could be turned
inward against political dissent. In early 2022, Canadian
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau faced a mass protest against
COVID-19 restrictions, in which Canadian truckers obstructed
key border crossings and effectively shut down the capital
city with their rigs. Instead of simply clearing out the
protesters and punishing them via conventional legal means,
Trudeau invoked emergency powers broad enough to permit the
financial ``un-personing'' of anyone participating in the
protests.
He went to their bank accounts and took their money. When people
raised
[[Page S7082]]
money voluntarily through crowd financing to help these truckers, he
stole that money as well through martial rule. Without any rule of law,
he took the money. No transaction with the protesters; he took their
money. People were locked up under martial law.
Canada's 1988 Emergencies Act gave the Trudeau government
staggering powers to subject individual protesters to ``de-
banking'' without due process.
This is the danger of Presidential power--of excessive Presidential
power. It isn't about any individual President; it is about all
Presidents of either party because men and women will succumb to the
desire for power. It is inherent in all. That is why we must have
checks and balances.
Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland put it
this way in describing Trudeau's martial law in a February 2022 warning
to the truckers:
As of today, a bank or other financial service provider
will be able to immediately freeze or suspend an account
without a court order.
The Government of Canada--essentially Trudeau--could freeze a bank
account without a court order, without due process of law.
We are today serving notice: If your truck is being used in
these protests, your corporate accounts will be frozen. The
insurance on your vehicle will be suspended. Send your . . .
trailers home.
While native-born Americans may think that emergency powers are to be
used to target others, I would venture to guess that the Canadian
truckers protesting COVID-era mandates didn't expect that their
government would treat them as foreign adversaries and freeze their
accounts.
If it can happen in Canada, it can happen in the United States.
Expansive emergency powers do not end there. Today in the United
States--a country that owes its very existence to tax revolt--the
President can unilaterally impose and raise taxes on foreign imports.
Now, some of that power, unfortunately, Congress gave to the President,
but it was a mistake, and we should take the power back.
The rallying cry of our American Revolution--``no taxation without
representation''--was not just a protest of the past, it is a core
principle of American governance. Yet Congress, in its feckless desire
to abscond on all responsibilities, said to the President: You can have
it; we don't want it. You can raise taxes anytime you want without a
vote of Congress.
Terrible idea. Our Constitution was designed to prevent any branch
from overstepping its bounds.
Unchecked Executive actions--enacting tariffs on our citizens without
a vote of Congress threatens our economy, raises prices on everyday
goods, and erodes the system of checks and balances that our Founders
so carefully crafted.
The REPUBLIC Act, the reform of emergency powers, the limitation of
emergency powers, would correct this. We end up saying to the
President: You can't declare an emergency to raise a tax.
Our Founding Fathers were very specific. Not only did taxes have to
originate in Congress, they had to originate in the House before coming
to the Senate because the House was seen as being closer to the people.
Yet here we are talking about vast taxes being levied by one person
through emergency powers. We should not let this stand.
Finally, the REPUBLIC Act, my reform, requires the President to
disclose Presidential emergency action documents to the Congress. What
are these? These are Executive orders that are prepared in anticipation
of a wide range of emergency scenarios. These documents are kept
secret, and Congress has historically had little oversight or insight
into how many exist, what they say, and what are the powers that the
President anticipates taking in an emergency.
Although the documents have never been made public, there have
reportedly been emergency orders designed to unilaterally suspend
habeas corpus, impose censorship, and seize property without warrants.
We don't know for certain because they will not reveal these Executive
orders, but we do know that they exist. Congress desperately needs to
see these documents to conduct oversight of these secret plans that can
threaten basic constitutional rights.
We do not have to accept as inevitable or as an inevitability the
degeneration of a republic into rule by an all-powerful Executive. We
do not have to live in a monarchy disguised as a republic.
We would do well to remember Montesquieu, who wrote that ``when the
executive and legislative powers are combined into one branch, no
liberty will remain.''
It is time to reclaim the authority of Congress and protect the
liberties of people by paring back the vast emergency powers delegated
to the President.
I hope the powers-that-be will change their mind and see fit to allow
a vote on this amendment. There is significant bipartisan support. We
passed it out of committee I believe 13 to 1. The Democrat chairman is
a cosponsor of this bill. I think this is a bill that really should
bring both sides together.
There used to be pride in our country, pride in the legislative
branch to hold firm against usurpation of power by the other branches.
This was a pride that went beyond party label and brought legislators
together. In recent years, it has been disappointing.
Some people are for reform of Presidential emergencies when their
party is not in power, and some people are for it until they are
against it when their guy or their woman is in power.
I can tell you this: I have been for this emergency reform under the
previous President. I am for this emergency reform under the next
President because this is about power. It is about the dispersion of
power. It is about decentralizing power. It is about the constitutional
separation of powers. It is about checks and balances.
It is important enough that it should be considered. I think it would
pass were it considered. But the American people need to know that
important debates like this will only occur if the powers-that-be allow
the vote to occur. So I would beseech the powers-to-be to allow a vote
on this amendment and for my colleagues to vote yes.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cortez Masto). The Senator from North
Dakota.
H.R. 5009
Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, I come to the floor today to talk about
the National Defense Authorization Act. The act that is called the NDAA
covers a wide range of topics, but, overall, it helps us chart a course
to defend our country during these very dangerous times.
Russia, China, and Iran are working together to undermine U.S.
interests across the globe. A world led by those nations is, in fact, a
very dangerous world. And it is a world where the economic well-being
of ordinary Americans suffer.
I have visited key U.S. allies and partners in recent years, and I am
convinced that when we are strong--when the United States is strong--as
a nation, we attract like-minded partners who will work with us to push
back on our adversaries and defend freedom, not only here for our
country but across the globe. And the NDAA is about bolstering our
defenses and strengthening those very partnerships.
This bill, for example, establishes a Taiwan Security Cooperation
Initiative. Now, that is modeled after the Indo-Pacific and Ukraine's
security assistance initiatives, and it is designed to enable Taiwan to
maintain sufficient self-defense capabilities, vitally important in the
Pacific and vitally important that we not work just with Taiwan but
with all our allies in the Pacific: Japan, Australia, New Zealand,
South Korea, and others.
And also, this pact requires the Department of Defense to provide
Israel with intelligence and advice in support of their war effort in
the Middle East against Hamas and other terrorist organizations,
including the largest sponsor of state terrorism in the world, Iran.
In addition, the NDAA supports a handful of missions that are both
critical to our security around the globe and of particular interest to
my State.
First, for example, UAS and counter-UAS. It is a huge issue right
now, not only in terms of the battlefield, what we are seeing in
Ukraine, in the Middle East, and other places, but even here in our own
country, civilian uses of drones and counter-drones is certainly very
much at the forefront of the
[[Page S7083]]
public's attention. And we have real problems with UAS threats across
all of the areas that we operate, here at home and overseas.
Now, we still have a patchwork approach that has grown out of an ad
hoc response to specific threats to domestic military installations.
The Department of Defense very much needs a coherent strategy and clear
guidance when it comes to drones and countering drones.
This bill takes a number of important steps toward addressing the
issue, including: directing the Secretary of Defense to develop a
strategy for countering unmanned aerial systems and the threats they
pose to Department of Defense facilities, personnel, and assets. And
that means not only here at home but across the globe where we have
personnel and where we have military installations.
So having that strategy for drones and counter-drones is very, very
important right now. And it is very complex, as we are seeing.
This legislation also requires standing up a counter-UAS--unmanned
aerial system--drone task force to review and update all of DOD
guidances to provide clarity and expedited decision-making processes
and information processes so that the public knows what we are doing
and has confidence in what we are doing.
In North Dakota, we have a UAS ecosystem that is ready to support
this initiative, both in the military aspects and in the civilian
aspects. And we have had that focus on UAS technology going back all
the way to 2005.
And again, I think we are one of the only air bases in the country,
at the Grand Forks Air Force Base, where we operate military and
civilian, manned and unmanned aircraft, all at the same base, as well
as our connection to the lower orbit satellites through the Space
Defense Agency.
So we have established what we call their Project ULTRA. Project
ULTRA is specifically designed to move unmanned aerial systems and to
counter unmanned aerial systems from the drawing board to the
warfighter. As I say, we have been at that for almost 20 years.
As DOD contemplates this counter-UAS strategy, we are ready to bring
industry partners, and I mean some of the leading industry partners
like Northrup Grumman, like General Atomics, like Raytheon, and many
others as well. They are already operating. They are in the Grand Sky
Technology Park on the Grand Forks Air Force Base. And we are ready to
bring those partnerships--those companies that have developed these
technologies--together with the Department of Defense under the
directive in this legislation to defend, like I say, not only our
military installations but to do more in the civilian airspace so that
the public can have confidence that when they see a drone flying in our
national airspace, that it has been accounted for and properly dealt
with.
Second, the second huge issue in the NDAA is nuclear modernization.
Our nuclear deterrent is the foundation of global stability and is
prerequisite for the success of our conventional forces.
If we have a nuclear deterrent that no adversary ever questions, then
they will never go beyond conventional forces. We have the finest
military in the world. Our conventional forces are more than a match
for anyone in the world. And so that could create the temptation for
somebody to actually use nuclear forces. But if they know our deterrent
is so strong, then they will never actually challenge us. So it is the
bedrock or the foundation on which our conventional forces reside. We
are facing an increasingly dangerous nuclear world where we must deter
multiple nuclear powers at the same time.
Now, several years ago, I led efforts to ensure that the Department
of Defense kept our inventory of silos for our intercontinental
ballistic missiles and preserve a full deployment of these missiles to
support deterrence.
Today, we need those missiles to support deterrence against China,
which is building up its forces incredibly, as well as Russia and North
Korea.
This NDAA continues to carry language preserving the number of ICBMs
that we deploy. It also creates a new Assistant Secretary of Defense to
oversee nuclear deterrence policies and programs across the Department
of Defense.
And most importantly--most importantly--it authorizes the next steps
in modernizing not only the ICBM force but all three legs of the
nuclear triad--bombers, the missiles, and submarines. It provides more
than $5.6 billion in authorizations for modernizing these programs; for
example, Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, which is the only dual
nuclear base that we have, both the bombers and the missiles. But it
also updates the aircraft, the Sentinel, which is the new missile
program, the LRSO, long-range stand-off, which is the new air-launched
cruise missile, which is part of the bomber fleet; the B-52s, the new
B-2 bombers, as well as our other long-range stand-off missile
programs.
All of those things, as well as our submarines, form the nuclear
deterrent that is the bedrock of our military forces. With the
evolution of technology, the environment, and our own ambitions--the
military environment I am talking about--and the near-peer challenges
that we face with Russia and particularly with China, we have no choice
but to make sure that we are updating and modernizing our nuclear
forces so that no one ever challenges the United States or our ability
to defend ourselves and our allies.
Space Development Agency--I mentioned that just a minute ago--another
area of emphasis that is very important in this legislation. We know
that space is an increasingly important part of defending our Nation
and our interests around the globe. When we look at Russia, when we
look at China and what they are doing in space, we must not only keep
up, we must continue to exceed what they are doing. It is vitally
important to making sure that our nuclear forces have the best
technology and a technological advantage in warfare over our
adversaries.
This legislation authorizes more than $4 billion for the Space
Development Agency, including how the Low Earth Orbit Satellite Program
is operated. This program is significant and will fundamentally
change--the low Earth orbit satellites, which we are putting out in
space now, and we will have many of them, I mean, hundreds of them.
This program is significant and will fundamentally change the way our
forces operate around the globe.
Every soldier, every weapon system, and every mission will benefit
from getting information from these low Earth orbit satellites. And we
are taking steps in this bill and in the appropriations processes to do
just that.
And so when you look at SpaceX, sending those rockets in space, many
of those have low Earth orbit satellites that we are already putting
out in space.
Those low Earth orbit satellites will be controlled from one Army
base and from one Air Force base. The Army base is the Redstone Army
base in Alabama. And the Air Force base is the Grand Forks Air Force
Base in my State.
Some other provisions that I want to mention are noteworthy as well.
First, greenhouse gas emissions. This NDAA extends a prohibition that
we passed last year on any rules that would force contractors to report
on greenhouse gas emissions.
I fought hard against these types of regulations, which would add
unnecessary redtape and delays, drive up costs, and provide no benefit
to the warfighter.
The purpose of our weapons systems must be to make sure that our
forces have a superior advantage to any other forces in the world in
lethality. And that is exactly how they need to be designed. And that
is what this provision is designed to ensure.
Support for our servicemembers, this bill includes a number of
provisions that I have heard about in regard to strongly supporting our
servicemembers and their families; for example, pay increases. It
authorizes a 14.5-percent pay increase for junior enlisted
servicemembers, E-4 and below, and a 4.5-percent basic pay increase for
all other servicemembers.
Second, access to mental health. The bill improves access to services
for mental health, making it easier for telehealth providers to offer
services and expand accreditation opportunities for behavioral health
providers, which is a big need.
Specialty care travel allowances. The bill includes a provision I
supported to require the Secretary to reassess the
[[Page S7084]]
travel and transportation allowances provided to servicemembers and
dependents seeking specialty care--healthcare, within a hundred miles
of their duty station.
Military spouse professional licensing permanently grants authority
to the Department of Defense to make transferring professional licenses
between States easier for military spouses.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion: It is important that our military
members can put mission first, and this bill eliminates authorizations
for a range of disruptive DEI programs while establishing a 1-year
freeze on hiring for DEI work at the Department of Defense.
Like I said at the beginning of my remarks, the NDAA helps us chart a
course to defend our country during these dangerous times. With the
passage of the NDAA, we will have the authorization for these important
programs, and as a member of the Senate Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee, we are ready--I and others are ready--to get to work to
fund these important programs for our Nation's defense. We have the
finest military in the world, and we must do all that we can to support
our men and women in uniform.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Warnock). The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, may we have order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order.
Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you, Mr. President.
I am laughing because it was Senator Hoeven over there probably
talking about you and me, Mr. President, and I just couldn't let that
go unchallenged.
Tribute to Paloma Chacon
Mr. President, with me today is one of my able colleagues from my
Senate office, Ms. Paloma Chacon. Behind my back, some of my staffers
call Paloma ``Kennedy's brain.'' They think I don't know that they are
saying that, but it is probably true, and I want to thank her for her
good judgment, counsel, and advice.
New Orleans Mass Shooting
Mr. President, what I want to talk about briefly tonight breaks my
heart, but it also makes me mad. But it does break my heart.
On Thursday, November 21, we had another mass shooting in New
Orleans--this time in the French Quarter. It happened at the corner of
Iberville and Royal Streets, across from Dickie Brennan's Steakhouse.
Three masked men pulled up in a car and started firing. Bystanders
testified they fired about 40 rounds. One person was killed. Three
others were injured.
Some people, particularly back home, are probably thinking: OK. What
else is new? Another mass shooting in Louisiana and in New Orleans. But
this one was preventable.
One of the shooters, who was arrested--his name is Nicholas Miorana.
Mr. Miorana is 28 years old. He has spent most of his adult life in
prison. He is, based on his record, a career criminal. He served 7
years in prison for armed robbery. He got out. Shortly thereafter, in
2023, Miorana was arrested for a bunch of things: domestic battery,
child endangerment, a series of gun charges, including being a felon
with a firearm.
What happened next is disgusting.
In January of 2024, our district attorney offered Mr. Miorana a
really sweet deal. Forget about the child endangerment. Forget about
the domestic battery. Forget about all the gun charges.
The DA said: You can plead guilty.
He said this to Mr. Miorana: You can plead guilty to attempted
possession of a firearm by a felon--attempted possession of a firearm
by a felon.
What? Attempted possession?
I don't mean to be metaphysical here or teleological, but you either
possess a firearm or you don't. I don't understand the ``attempted''
possession of a firearm. Maybe it was because, had Mr. Miorana been
offered a deal--take it or leave it--for possession of a firearm as
opposed to attempted possession of a firearm, which I didn't even know
exists, it would have carried a 5-year sentence. Obviously, Mr. Miorana
took the deal, and he appeared before Judge Leon Roche in our criminal
court in New Orleans. Mr. Roche gave him probation.
Eight months later, while he was on probation, Mr. Miorana violated
his probation, and his probation officer sought to revoke his
probation. Then, 1 month later--nobody did anything about revoking his
probation. So, 1 month later, Miorana was arrested for domestic abuse
battery. He went back before Judge Roche. Judge Roche didn't revoke his
probation. He just gave him house arrest and told him he had to wear an
ankle monitor. That was in September of 2024. Then, a little bit later,
Judge Roche decided to lighten even those conditions. He allowed Mr.
Miorana to be free every day from 9 to 6--every day from 9 to 6--
supposedly, to go to work.
Beginning on October 8, Mr. Miorana violated the judge's orders every
single day--every single day for 45 days. How do we know this? He had
on an ankle monitor, and the monitor company reported to the district
attorney and to Judge Roche that Mr. Miorana was violating the terms of
his house arrest and ankle monitoring--45 days.
Do you know what the district attorney did? Do you know what Judge
Roche did? Nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada. I have already told you how this
story ends. Allegedly--I have to say ``allegedly''--he has been
arrested for it anyway. Mr. Miorana and three of his buddies put on a
mask, got in a Honda, killed somebody in the French Quarter, and shot
three others. Mr. Miorana was caught. Do you know how he was caught? He
had on an ankle monitor. He was caught within hours. This was a system
failure.
I love New Orleans. I used to live in New Orleans. I earned a living
in New Orleans. I met my wife in New Orleans. My son lived the first
couple of years of his life in New Orleans. I love New Orleans.
What did Tennessee Williams say? ``America has only three cities: New
York, San Francisco, and New Orleans. Everything else,'' Tennessee
Williams said, ``is Cleveland.''
Now, before my friends in Cleveland get mad at me, I didn't say it;
Tennessee Williams said it. But I think what Mr. Williams was trying to
convey is what an extraordinary, unique, city New Orleans is. Every
other State in America would kill to have a New Orleans. Twenty million
people from all over the world come to visit the city in America which
is perhaps the most European city and the most diverse city in our
country. And I love New Orleans. But New Orleans deserves better.
I wish this hadn't happened. I wish there weren't more people in this
world like Mr. Miorana. But there are some people in this world who
just habitually, consistently hurt other people, and they take other
people's stuff. I wish they wouldn't, but they do. I don't know why
they do. If I make it to Heaven, I am going to ask. But they do, and
they have got to be separated from society. And our judges and our
district attorneys are not doing anybody--anybody--in New Orleans a
favor by not putting those folks into jail. It breaks my heart. It also
makes me mad.
Turkiye
Mr. President, the second thing I want to just mention briefly, and I
say this gently--respectfully, but gently--to President Erdogan, the
distinguished President of Turkiye: Leave the Kurds alone. Leave the
Kurds alone.
The Kurds, as you know, are wonderful people. There are probably 30
to 40 million Kurds throughout the world. Some we are blessed to have
here in the United States. They live mostly in Turkiye, Iran, northern
Iraq, and Syria. The Kurds are a distinct ethnic group. They are sort
of a stateless country because they are spread all over the world.
The Kurds are America's friends. It hadn't been that many years ago
since ISIS was rising high. ISIS had established a caliphate in the
Middle East. That is a fancy word for a country. They established their
own country in the Middle East, and America and other countries beat
them back. We destroyed ISIS. They are still there, but we destroyed
their caliphate.
The people most responsible for helping us, most responsible for
destroying ISIS, were the Kurds. We lost less than 20 American lives in
destroying ISIS in the Middle East. Our friends the Kurds lost over
10,000--10,000--fighting alongside of us. Over 30,000 Kurds were
wounded. Without the Kurds, ISIS would still be there.
[[Page S7085]]
Now, Mr. Erdogan, the President of Turkiye, does not like the Kurds.
I am not going to go into why. He is entitled to his opinion. But,
right now, Mr. Erdogan has troops and tanks and weapons marshaled on
the border between Turkiye and Syria.
As we know, the people in Syria finally had enough, and they
overthrew Mr. Assad, their President. Predictably, Assad, who we think
stole billions of dollars from the good people of Syria, is now,
predictably, living in Russia. We are going to try to find his money.
Mr. Assad, like his father, is a butcher. He killed tens and tens of
thousands of Syrians, and many of them he hurt the entire time they
were dying.
To keep power and his money--a lot of which he made by dealing
drugs--he used chemical weapons against his own people. And now the
people in Syria are free of him.
Everybody else, stay out of Syria. President Trump has already talked
about it. It doesn't mean we can't offer our advice, but we all need to
stay out of Syria.
The defeat of Mr. Assad in Syria would not have happened but for
Israel. We know that. You don't have to be a graduate of Cal Tech to
know that. Israel destroyed Hezbollah, which was working with Iran,
which was working with Russia to keep Assad in power.
Russia and Iran and Hezbollah were on the side of the butcher. But
Russia is tied up in Ukraine. Hezbollah was holding down the fort while
Russia was tied up in Ukraine. And Israel ignored the advice of many
and just went out and destroyed Hezbollah.
Thank you, Israel.
But that is why the people of Syria today are free, and they are
entitled to self-determination.
Mr. Erdogan in Turkiye, I worry, is going to invade Syria. I am not
accusing him of anything, but I worry that he is because we have
intelligence that he has many soldiers and many tanks and much
equipment and many weapons right now stationed on the border between
Turkiye and Syria. And our Kurd friends are afraid that Mr. Erdogan,
because of his hatred for the Kurds, is going to attack now. The Kurds
live very peacefully in northeast Syria.
My message today is: President Erdogan, I don't want to mess in the
affairs of your country, but don't do it. Leave the Kurds alone. Leave
the people of Syria alone.
Turkiye has problems now. Turkiye is supposed to be our friend.
Turkiye is a member of NATO. Lately, they haven't been acting like our
friend. Turkiye has its own problems. If we think interest rates are
high in America, they are close to 50 percent in Turkiye. Some people
think they are in a recession. Their inflation is between 40 and 50
percent.
If you invade Syria and touch a hair on the head of the Kurds, I am
going to ask this U.S. Congress to do something, and our sanctions are
not going to help the economy of Turkiye. I don't want to do that.
Leave the Kurds alone.
My work here is done. I will show myself to the door, and I will
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________