[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 189 (Thursday, December 19, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7187-S7192]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

   SOCIAL SECURITY FAIRNESS ACT OF 2023--MOTION TO PROCEED--Continued

  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the unfinished 
business.
  The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 693, H.R. 82, a bill to 
     amend title II of the Social Security Act to repeal the 
     Government pension offset and windfall elimination 
     provisions.


                   Recognition of the Majority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cortez Masto). The majority leader is 
recognized.


                           Government Funding

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, this morning, thanks to Republicans, we 
are less than 48 hours away from a Christmas shutdown. Unfortunately, 
it seems Republicans are in shambles over in the House. But as they try 
to piece things together, they should remember one thing: The only way 
to get things done is through bipartisanship--the only way.
  Let me repeat: The only way to get things done is through 
bipartisanship.


            Tribute to Sergeant at Arms General Karen Gibson

  Now, on the Sergeant at Arms, today, it fills me with immense 
gratitude to pay tribute and say thank you to the Senate Sergeant at 
Arms, General Karen Gibson, sitting right here.
  None of us, no matter what we do, could get through the day without 
the individual responsible for maintaining order, enforcing security, 
and keeping everyone in the Senate safe. That is what the Sergeant at 
Arms does.
  General Gibson took on this role in March of 2021, in the painful 
aftermath of the January 6 insurrection. By no means did she need to 
take this job. It was the Senate that needed her. We needed her three 
decades of leadership as an Army intelligence officer. We needed her 
steady hand and ability to change how organizations function. And, to 
this day, I thank God she answered my phone call.
  General Gibson helped us get through those difficult months after 
January 6. She was a breath of fresh air, a boost in morale, a jolt of 
much needed confidence. She transformed how the Sergeant at Arms 
operates for the better.
  Under General Gibson's watch, her team revitalized how the Senate 
approaches security and safety, from top to bottom. She increased how 
we share intelligence, communications, and planning with the rest of 
the Federal Government and State and local partners. She transformed 
the way the Senate handles moments of crisis. There is now a single 
Senate Operations Center that stands watch at all times and alerts us 
to potential threats or disruptions in realtime.
  She was a godsend for other Senate staff across the Capitol Complex, 
introducing new emergency preparedness applications, new trainings, and 
new protocols staff could adopt to keep their offices safe and 
prepared.
  Finally, she revolutionized how the Senate approaches cyber security, 
conducting the most comprehensive cyber security assessment ever. And 
every step of the way, she had a first-rate team by her side to help 
execute her vision.
  And one other thing--a bit intangible--the morale of our Capitol 
Police Force has dramatically improved after the horrible day of 
January 6, and much of that goes to what General Gibson did. She made 
them feel needed and confident and loved and well-trained and prepared. 
And I can tell just from speaking to so many Capitol Police officers 
how much they appreciate her tenure and her candor.
  So I am forever grateful to General Gibson for her four terms as our 
Sergeant at Arms. The Senate today is far more secure and far more 
prepared than the day she entered the role. My congratulations to her 
on a job well done, and the Senate thanks her--all of us, Democrat and 
Republican--for many years of service.


                          Tribute to Ann Berry

  Madam President, on Ann Berry, I also want to say thank you to our 
wonderful Secretary of the Senate, Ann

[[Page S7188]]

Berry. Of the many talented and exceptional Senate officers I had the 
privilege of nominating as majority leader, Ann is one of the very 
best.
  The job of Secretary of the Senate is one of the utmost important and 
indispensable jobs here in the Senate. In fact, just days after the 
Senate achieved its first quorum in 1789, one of its top priorities was 
to elect the very first Secretary of the Senate. Back then, the 
Senate's responsibilities were merely a fraction of what they are 
today. There is virtually nothing that happens in the Senate these 
days--legislatively, financially, administratively--that doesn't cross 
the Secretary's desk. So to hold such an extraordinary position that 
brings life to the Senate, you need an extraordinary human being who 
brings life to the job.
  Where is she? She is probably just so busy doing her job; she is not 
here.
  But, anyway, that is Ann Berry, to a tee.
  From the moment Ann was sworn in, she has carried out her 
responsibilities as Secretary with unparalleled excellence and supreme 
professionalism. And she did it while making history as the first ever 
Black woman to serve as Secretary of the Senate.
  Of course, Ann's success as Secretary came as little surprise to 
anyone who knows her background. She is a veteran of some of the most 
revered Senators to pass through this Chamber, the likes of Senators 
Leahy, Edwards, Carper, Jones, and my mentor Senator Moynihan.
  For the last nearly 4 years, Ann has been one of the most invaluable 
members of the entire Senate operation. She made our days easier, our 
operations smoother, and made the Senate work better for the American 
people. And that is perhaps the highest testament to a public servant.
  So, Ann, on behalf of a grateful Senate, a grateful Democratic 
caucus, and a grateful majority leader, we say congratulations. Thank 
you. Job well done.


                          Tribute to Dan Yoken

  Madam President, now to Dan Yoken, whom I will so dearly miss.
  Is he here somewhere? Where is Dan?
  Dan Yoken.
  Socrates said:

       The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.

  If that is true--and I think Socrates was onto something--then this 
is going to be a particularly difficult good-bye for me to get through, 
because, today, it fills me with immense gratitude but also deep 
sadness to bid farewell and thank you to one of the most knowledgeable 
and trusted members of my team, Dan Yoken.
  Officially, Dan has served as my Director of Rapid Response the 
entire time I have served in leadership, but in truth, he is far more 
than that. He is, in a word, the brain--the knowledge base--of our 
messaging and research operation. He is the truthkeeper, the facts 
sleuth, the go-to person when our team needs something figured out 
right away.
  But what sets Dan apart is that he also sees the big picture. He is 
not just looking at the little details. Anyone who excels at these 
things, by necessity, must possess a love of details--and Dan certainly 
does--but what makes him so effective is how fluidly, how effortlessly, 
how naturally he connects the details to the main thrust of what our 
team tries to do every day and to the larger picture of where we are 
headed as a caucus and as a country.
  Dan is also a craftsman. There is no speech, no press release, no 
tweet, no video that doesn't pass through his careful touch.
  A native of Nevada, Dan came to the Senate and earned his stripes as 
a young press assistant for the former leader, Harry Reid, whom we miss 
every day. Every single day, it was Dan's job to wake up early, read 
all of the news, and then brief Senator Reid personally on what was 
going on that day. If Senator Reid had a question, it was Dan's job to 
answer. If it was a specific detail he wanted, it was Dan's job to 
remember it.
  For most people right out of school, that would pretty much be a 
baptism by fire, but for Dan, it was early confirmation that he 
belonged here in the Senate. In no time, he became Leader Reid's deputy 
communications director and then joined my team as the research 
director of the DPCC. And when I became leader, there was never a 
moment of doubt that I wanted Dan to come with me.
  Running our messaging operation is not easy. It is a round-the-clock, 
7-day-a-week commitment. I call him at all hours to ask him about this 
or that. It is stressful, ever-changing, thankless--and on top of that, 
they have to deal with me. It is not so easy sometimes, but every day, 
my team succeeds, and I succeed because Dan has always been there as a 
steady and stabilizing force. His knowledge of the Senate--its history, 
its Members, its operation--gives our work shape and form. All of this 
is possible because, deep down, Dan loves this institution and loves 
this great democracy.
  Of course, anyone who knows Dan understands he loves many other good 
things as well. Just ask him, for example, about the Las Vegas Golden 
Knights and that time they came to the White House to celebrate their 
championship or ask him about the last Roots concert he went to or ask 
him about poker night or about the next time he is planning to organize 
a ``Schumerland'' outing to Audi Field. Ask him, certainly, about his 
wonderful family--about his beautiful, redheaded 2-year-old; his wife 
and his partner for so many years as well; and then ask him about their 
dog Daisy, who is a regular here in the Senate every Friday.
  Ask him about any of these things, and you will see Dan for who he 
is--someone who leads a rich life, someone who has a gifted mind, and 
someone who is loyal, kind, and thoughtful to all those he comes 
across. Having him on my team for so long has been a blessing to our 
office, to the Senate, to the country.
  So, Dan, wherever you are--he is probably working as well--thank you, 
thank you, thank you. You know how much we will miss you. You know how 
much we love you. You know how much you will always be part of our 
Schumer family, and we can't wait to see what the future holds in store 
for you.
  I yield the floor to the Republican leader.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader is recognized.


                      Tribute to Sharon Soderstrom

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, for months now, I have been calling 
the Senate's attention to the extraordinary people who have served me, 
this institution, and our Nation so well and for so long in the 
Republican leader's office.
  Today, I have reached the end of the list. My one remaining task is 
to prepare our colleagues for a Senate without Sharon Soderstrom.
  To tell the story of my chief of staff, you might start in 2010 when 
she assumed that title or in 2007 when she joined my team or, perhaps, 
back in 1999 when she set up in the Republican leader's suite for the 
first time. But if you want to make sense of the person I have been so 
fortunate to have at my right hand--the friend and counselor I have 
trusted so deeply for so long--it is worth starting at the beginning 
with the people who have made Sharon Soderstrom who she is.
  Sharon grew up in Stony Brook, NY, on the campus of the Christian 
school where her father was a teacher and headmaster. In the house on 
campus, where Karl and Jean Soderstrom raised Sharon, along with her 
brother Mark and her sister Cheryl, faith and learning were unshakable 
cornerstones. Quite literally, the windows of Sharon's bedroom looked 
out on one side to the chapel and on the other side to the classrooms. 
When you hear about Sharon's upbringing for the first time, everything 
you know about her starts to make even more sense.
  My seniormost adviser is a woman of integrity and a teacher who leads 
by example. And rather than reinvent the wheel, I think the best way to 
sum up her distinguished service is through some of the lessons that 
her favorite teacher--her dad--taught in the same way.
  Lesson No. 1: Do meaningful work for a long time among peers who 
become lifelong friends.
  A long time ago--I won't tell quite how long--Sharon began her 
meaningful work here in the Senate. As a junior legislative aide to a 
freshman Senator, the prospect of devoting her life to this institution 
might not yet have

[[Page S7189]]

crossed her mind, but the Senate was beginning to reel her in and work 
its will all the same.
  Sharon likely wouldn't have allowed herself to have imagined that, 
someday, the Senate's sharpest minds would bring their weightiest 
questions to her or that, eventually, an entire institution would come 
to lean on her voluminous legislative knowledge, her plumb-and-true 
political analysis, and her wise personal counsel. And if she had, her 
deep humility wouldn't have let it show.
  Instead, perhaps the sharpest and most singularly capable staff 
leader the Senate has ever seen chose to invest her time and talents in 
building teams, in mentoring colleagues, and in making a series of the 
highest profile principals look a lot smarter than we have deserved. 
She has spent her time in public service notching accomplishments of 
the greatest consequence on the most visible stage, all while nimbly 
deflecting the praise.
  But what Sharon hasn't been able to dodge is the admiration of 
legions of colleagues, past and present, who count standing in the 
trenches with her among the greatest honors of their careers. It is no 
mystery why Sharon's calendar fills so quickly with invitations to 
celebrate weddings and birthdays, and it is no surprise how readily she 
clears her schedule to be with friends and colleagues in moments of 
grief. Our friend--our chief--has done meaningful work for its own 
sake, but she has got the admirers to prove it.
  I will turn now to the second lesson from Mr. Soderstrom: Decide to 
live as a servant, and take every moment as an opportunity to practice.
  Public service--it is there right in the name; yet the brand of 
gracious and selfless leadership that has become Sharon's calling card 
and the thoughtful courtesy which comes naturally to her, these are 
exceedingly rare.
  I was reminded recently of an occasion years ago--at about this time 
in December--when one of the juniormost members of our front office 
team brought a familiar concern to Sharon. The cheapest flight she 
could find to get home for the holidays was nonrefundable, and it was 
looking more and more like the Senate might have to spend Christmas at 
work. What should she do?
  Sharon didn't hesitate. She told this young lady to keep her flight, 
to get home safely, and the team would make do. In fact, the team did 
make do, and Sharon was the first to volunteer to cover her shift at 
the front desk.
  I am certain that no one who knows her would be surprised to hear 
this--certainly not any of us who have watched Sharon summon the 
strength--even when her enormous professional responsibilities have 
weighed heaviest--to be a loyal sister, a loving aunt to her nephew 
Karl, and a devoted caregiver to both of her parents in their final 
years.
  May the Record reflect that the Senate's most influential staff 
leader chooses every day to live as a servant.
  The third lesson is to laugh often and, as I am sure Sharon's dad 
would add, not just when there is cause to be joyful.
  That means laughing even when you don't get the reference, as Sharon 
does good-naturedly when her colleagues use sporting analogies around 
the office. Of course, it helps that, almost invariably, such 
references are meant as compliments. It is like when they compare her 
legislative and procedural chops to Willie Mays' dual threat of speed 
and power or when a wise former colleague likened staffing the 
Republican leader's office around Sharon to building a starting lineup 
around a franchise player.
  But in a job as strenuous and demanding as Sharon's, laughing often 
means finding levity in even the most confounding circumstances--for 
example: the time she and a colleague were leaving the White House 
after a completely fruitless negotiation in the middle of a government 
shutdown. As I understand it, after walking out the wrong exit, they 
heard a guard with a machine gun yelling: ``Stop!'' Without missing a 
beat, my top adviser turned to her colleague and remarked: If we just 
keep walking, this can all be over.
  (Laughter.)
  Fortunately for me and for the entire country, even in the bleakest 
of stalemates, Sharon was just joking. Heeding these lessons isn't some 
simple, surefire formula for producing a prolific public servant in the 
mold of Sharon. Devotion to meaningful work is always good advice. And, 
yes, if more people practiced servant leadership and learned to laugh 
more, the world would be a much better place.
  But let's be absolutely clear: Sharon Soderstrom is one of one. The 
combination of unflappable calm, unassailable integrity, unwavering 
conviction, and unshakable devotion that resides in my chief of staff 
is greater than the sum of its parts.
  One of Sharon's former colleagues on that staff once described her 
office as an emergency room, where colleagues would wheel in stretchers 
heaped with big, thorny problems and a head doctor with nerves of 
absolute steel would begin to set things right.
  Invariably, Sharon's steady demeanor inspired confidence in others. 
Her resolve bolstered morale, and from the most niche institutional 
matters to the heaviest questions of national policy, her utter and 
complete competence carried the day.
  Now, I will admit I wasn't the first Member of the body to recognize 
Sharon's talents--not even the first Republican leader--but claiming 
dibs on Sharon and managing to keep her for so long have been among my 
proudest accomplishments.
  Come January, the Senate will convene again. The 119th Congress will 
bring us a new slate of weighty business, new moments of minor crisis, 
and new opportunities to better serve the Nation that we all love. But 
in the most trying moments and the most triumphant ones, a great many 
of us will feel like something is missing. We will miss having Sharon--
the 101st Senator--on the case and at our sides.
  Sharon, you have served the Senate with honor. You are the greatest 
at what you do. You have modeled the lessons of the ones you look up to 
most, and you have earned countless friends who look up to you. The 
proudest triumphs of my time in this office have been your doing, and I 
am forever in your debt.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that any Members 
or staff in the Chamber at this time be allowed to applaud for a period 
of up to 30 seconds.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (Applause.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lujan). The Republican whip.


                       Tribute to Mitch McConnell

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the longest 
serving party leader in Senate history: Republican Leader Mitch 
McConnell.
  Over the course of a political career that began with a hard-fought 
race for student council president in his junior year of high school--a 
race, I might add, that he won with what would become his signature 
blend of hard work, intelligence, and determination--Mitch has built a 
legacy that will long, long outlast his time here in the U.S. Senate.
  The day he became the longest serving party leader in Senate history, 
Leader McConnell delivered a speech discussing past Senate party 
leaders and their characteristics, from the mastery of relationships 
demonstrated by Lyndon Johnson to the ``tackle football'' of Joseph 
Taylor Robinson. It got me thinking about some of the things that have 
characterized Mitch's tenure, and there are three of them that stand 
out to me, in particular.
  First, there is Mitch's peerless knowledge of Senate procedure. I 
suspect few who have served in this body have developed the kind of 
knowledge that Mitch possesses of the most arcane details--and they are 
arcane--of Senate rules. But Mitch recognized early on that knowledge 
of Senate procedure could play a big part in success as a Senator, and 
he was right. And so, with his signature determination, he set out to 
acquire it and became an undisputed master.
  Second, to that wealth of knowledge, he has added a fierce commitment 
to the Senate as an institution, a commitment I hope to emulate when I 
take the reins as majority leader next year.
  There are a lot of people out there these days who would like to see 
the Senate turn into a copy of the House of Representatives, but that 
is not what

[[Page S7190]]

our Founders envisioned or what our country needs, and Mitch has served 
our entire country by fighting to ensure that the Senate maintains its 
institutional character.
  Finally, perhaps the aspect of Mitch's tenure that stands out to me 
the most is the work that he has done to protect the rule of law by 
filling the judiciary with judges and Justices who understand what the 
role of a judge is: to interpret the law and not make it; to call balls 
and strikes, not rewrite the rules of the game.
  During his time as majority leader, Mitch oversaw the confirmation of 
234 men and women to the Federal bench--3 of them as Supreme Court 
Justices. And the effects of that will be felt for a long time to come 
in decisions up and down the judiciary that respect the law and the 
Constitution. That is no small legacy.
  And Mitch can step down from his post knowing that no one has done 
more to preserve our legal system and the essential role that it plays 
in our Republic.
  Mitch, it has been a great honor to serve with you. And I am grateful 
that, while you are stepping down from your role as leader, you will 
still be here in the Senate, bringing your mastery of Senate procedure 
to leadership of the Senate Rules Committee. Hopefully--hopefully--you 
won't mind a few knocks on your door for advice.
  Thank you for your long and faithful service to our party, to the 
Senate, and to our country. I look forward to continuing to work with 
you in the years ahead.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.


                 Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 935

  Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, last week, Joe Biden commuted the 
sentences of nearly 1,500 convicted criminals, including drug dealers, 
fraudsters, and corrupt public officials. These are not sympathetic 
figures. These are individuals who stole from the poor and poisoned the 
sick. They tore families apart and menaced communities. They were sent 
to jail. They belong in jail.
  With this action, Joe Biden didn't just reward 1,500 criminals; he 
robbed hundreds of thousands of victims of the closure and justice they 
deserve. The cruelty of these commutations is only matched by the 
shameless incompetence of the administration that issued them. This 
administration admitted--it admitted--that Joe Biden didn't 
individually review these cases or, for that matter, did anyone else 
individually review the cases. Yet he nullified the verdict of 
thousands of jurors and judges anyway. He also disrespected the 
countless man-hours that Federal law enforcement and prosecutors 
dedicated to solving these cases.
  The whole purpose of the Presidential pardon power is to correct 
individual and limited failures of the criminal justice system. It is 
in the nature of the power in government itself. We are a legislature. 
We make generally applicable prospective laws for everyone. Can those 
laws, in certain cases, yield unjust outcomes? Yes, of course. That is 
the nature of the legislative power, and the reason an Executive has 
the pardon power, is to mitigate that injustice in specific, particular 
cases. It is not to make generally applicable pardons in a broad set of 
parameters, as White House officials have caused here--certainly not to 
blindly free hundreds of duly convicted criminals.
  These blanket commutations demonstrate a gross contempt for our legal 
system and its traditions. To put President Biden's actions in context, 
he issued more commutations in a single day than Donald Trump, George 
Bush, and Bill Clinton issued in their entire Presidencies--combined.
  Let's just talk about a few of the beneficiaries of Joe Biden's 
jailbreak: Jacqueline Mills stole $3 million that was intended for 
hungry Arkansas kids and low-income families.
  Dr. Meera Sachdeva defrauded Medicare by diluting chemotherapy drugs 
and reusing old needles on cancer patients. At least one patient--at 
least one--contracted HIV as a result.
  Fraudster Paul Burks ran a nearly $1 billion Ponzi scheme that robbed 
900,000 investors of their money.
  Drug dealer Wendy Hechtman and her husband manufactured and 
distributed superdeadly carfentanil, unleashing an epidemic of drug 
overdoses in Omaha.
  Another drug dealer, Daniel Fillerup, killed a 31-year-old relapsing 
addict by selling her fentanyl, which is 50 times stronger than the 
heroin she thought she was buying.
  Shaquan Hemingway trafficked heroin, fentanyl, cocaine, 
methamphetamine, and guns for the vicious Jalisco New Generation 
Cartel.
  Joe Biden even commuted the sentence of a serial killer, Virginia 
Gray, who is known as the ``Black Widow'' for murdering two husbands 
and a boyfriend and collecting insurance money.
  Perhaps the President would have reconsidered this decision if he 
knew anything about Ms. Gray, but he didn't because, yet again, he and 
White House officials did not review individual cases on the merits. 
They didn't pick up the case file. They didn't talk to victims or 
families.
  Then there is the parade of corrupt public officials, the worst of 
whom is Michael Conahan, the so-called ``cash for kids'' judge who 
accepted kickbacks in exchange for his role in sending more than 2,300 
children to private detention centers, including an 8-year-old. Again, 
a judge in Pennsylvania sentenced more than 2,300 children to private 
juvenile detention centers in return for cash kickbacks. One man he 
sent to jail later killed himself. He was just 23 years old. His mother 
said that she is shocked and hurt by Joe Biden's commutation. Yet 
again, the President did not review the case individually.
  President Biden also commuted the sentence of an Ohio commissioner 
who took $450,000 in bribes. He even commuted the sentence of Rita 
Crundwell, a city comptroller from Illinois who embezzled $54 million. 
Crundwell was responsible for not only the biggest city embezzlement 
scandal in the history of Illinois, she was responsible for the biggest 
municipal embezzlement scandal in the history of America up to that 
time.
  Now, I understand that we have disagreements about criminal justice, 
and the Democrats don't always share my view on these things, but for 
years, we have heard lectures about the rule of law and how Joe Biden 
and Democrats are the defenders of democracy. Yet Joe Biden is the one 
commuting the sentences of the very public officials who most threaten 
the public trust in our democracy.
  The American people also know that Joe Biden issued these 
commutations for a simple reason: It helps cover up the corrupt pardon 
that he issued to his corrupt son to protect his family.
  I think we should condemn all of these pardons and certainly condemn 
the President for not individually reviewing the merits of the cases. 
But again, I understand my Democratic colleagues don't agree with that, 
so I only offer a resolution to condemn one pardon--simply one--maybe 
the worst of them all, the commutation of Michael Conahan, the ``cash 
for kids'' judge who took cash kickbacks and bribes to sentence more 
than 2,300 kids to private detention centers--the judge who put 
American children in jail for money. Surely, the Senate can condemn 
this single act of corrupt clemency.

  Therefore, notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that 
the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 935, which is at the 
desk; further, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed 
to; that the preamble be agreed to; and that the motions to reconsider 
be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action 
or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I would 
like to clarify the record on President Biden's use of the pardon 
power, which is established in the Constitution in article II, section 
2.
  On December 12, President Biden commuted the sentences of nearly 
1,500 Americans who were placed in home confinement under a 
bipartisan--bipartisan--provision of the CARES Act. These individuals 
were all convicted of nonviolent offenses and have complied with the 
terms of home confinement for more than 1 year.
  This clemency is consistent with a long history of Presidents using a 
categorical approach to exercise the constitutional power of pardon. 
For example, President Kennedy pardoned all

[[Page S7191]]

first-time offenders convicted of violating the Narcotics Control Act 
of 1956. President Truman granted pardons to more than 1,500 men 
convicted of violating the Selected Service Act during the draft in 
World War II. President Carter provided a categorical pardon for 
hundreds of thousands of men who evaded the draft during the Vietnam 
war.
  I understand that Senator Cotton is opposed to clemency in a 
particular individual's case, but if Senator Cotton is concerned about 
undermining the rule of law and robbing victims of justice, we should 
consider just a few of President Donald Trump's pardons.
  For example, take President Trump's decision to grant clemency to at 
least 10 healthcare executives and doctors convicted in large-scale 
Medicare fraud schemes. These decisions wiped away years of prison 
sentences and restitution totaling hundreds of millions of dollars for 
some of the worst healthcare fraudsters in the history of the United 
States of America.
  Consider one--Philip Esformes, who had been sentenced to 20 years in 
prison for involving himself in the largest healthcare fraud scheme 
ever charged by the Department of Justice. Esformes received more than 
$37 million in a scheme involving $1.3 billion in fraudulent claims. 
Following his commutation from President Trump, Mr. Esformes pled 
guilty to new Medicaid fraud charges. In October, he was arrested for 
domestic violence. He was at least the seventh person pardoned by 
President Trump to be charged with a new crime.
  President Trump also used his pardon power to provide relief for his 
political loyalists, including his former campaign manager Paul 
Manafort, his National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, his former 
adviser Steve Bannon, and at least seven Republican Congressmen who had 
been convicted of crimes.
  Bannon was charged with defrauding donors of more than $1 million as 
part of a fundraising campaign reportedly aimed at supporting President 
Trump's border wall. Do you remember that? He ended up soliciting true 
loyalists and friends of Donald Trump, saying that he was going to 
raise money and build the wall that Donald Trump, as candidate, spoke 
of so frequently. Bannon actually used the money he raised to cover 
hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own personal expenses.
  President Trump has now promised that he will pardon the January 6 
rioters on day one of his new administration. He calls them ``political 
prisoners.''
  You remember January 6, Mr. President. I will bet you the Senator 
from Arkansas remembers it, too. This insurrectionist mob beat down the 
doors of the Capitol, invaded this Chamber, and took control of this 
building--to the shame of our country to allow that to happen. And then 
along comes President Trump, who says: If I am reelected, I will pardon 
them.
  I would like to ask my colleague from Arkansas if he supports 
pardoning the following individuals who were prosecuted for wrongdoing 
on January 6:
  David Dempsey, convicted of assaulting police officers by using ``his 
hands, feet, flag poles, crutches, pepper spray, broken pieces of 
furniture, and anything else he could get his hands on'' as weapons 
against the police.
  How about Shane Jenkins, who was convicted of using two tomahawk axes 
to break into this Capitol Building and assaulting police officers by 
throwing a wooden desk drawer and a flagpole at them?
  How about a Trump pardon for Kyle Fitzsimons? On January 6--he was 
convicted of five separate assaults against law enforcement, including 
one that caused career-ending, life-altering injuries to U.S. Capitol 
Police Sergeant Aquilino Gonell.
  Kenneth Bonawitz--another, perhaps, beneficiary of a Trump pardon 
when he is sworn in as President again. Mr. Bonawitz was a member of 
the so-called Proud Boys. He assaulted at least six officers, including 
placing one officer in a chokehold and lifting him up by the neck. 
Bonawitz injured one officer so severely, the officer was forced to 
retire from the police force.
  So if you want to talk about misuse of a Presidential pardon power, 
let's be fair, honest, and balanced. I don't recall the Senator from 
Arkansas or any single Republican colleague of his introducing similar 
resolutions to criticize any of President Trump's pardons, and I 
haven't heard any Senate Republican urging President-elect Trump not to 
pardon the January 6 rioters.
  President Biden's commutations--directed at a group of individuals 
who have demonstrated a commitment to rehabilitation--are far more 
defensible than President Trump's use of pardon power during his first 
term and what he is planning from the beginning--the very first day, 
the day of his dictatorial rule, as he called it--the beginning of his 
second term.
  For these reasons, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. COTTON. I heard a lot of very troubling cases from the Senator 
from Illinois. And it is true, I generally think Presidents have given 
out improvidential pardons over time, and I am not going to defend many 
of those cases of pardons. For instance, I am not going to defend Jimmy 
Carter pardoning draft dodgers indiscriminately, mostly rich and 
privileged kids who didn't do their duty, when poor kids from places 
like Yell County, AR, or south Little Rock were doing their duty in 
Vietnam like my father was.
  But we are not here to talk about Vietnam draft dodgers or who 
President Trump pardoned or who he might pardon. There is a resolution 
pending on the floor that specifically condemns Michael Conahan, the 
``cash for kids'' judge, who took cash kickbacks to sentence children 
to private juvenile detention centers.
  Some words about this judge:

       I do feel strongly that President Biden got it absolutely 
     wrong and created a lot of panic.
       Some children took their lives because of this.
       Frankly, I thought the sentence the judge got was too 
     light.
       He deserved to be behind bars, not walking as a free man.

  Strong words. Not my words. Those are the words of Pennsylvania's 
Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro who, again, called Joe Biden's 
clemency decision absolutely wrong.
  The senior Senator from Minnesota joined Governor Shapiro and said 
that she, too, disagreed with the President's decision. She said that 
she ``did not like that one.''
  Even the chairman of the West Virginia Democratic Party publicly 
condemned President Biden's commutations and specifically singled out 
the commutation of Judge Conahan, the ``cash for kids'' judge.
  This resolution is not partisan. It is not sweeping. It is common 
sense. It is about a single egregious case that happened because of 
egregiously bad judgment.
  The President and his aides set broad parameters. Apparently, those 
parameters kicked back 1,500 cases, and they didn't even have the time 
and the decency to say: Now, let's look at these cases and see if each 
one of these people deserves a pardon.
  Maybe if one was an elderly, nonviolent offender who had redeemed 
himself, whose victims had forgiven him--I could understand clemency in 
that case, not the ``cash for kids'' judge.
  It is only 1,500 cases. They have thousands of lawyers running around 
the Department of Justice. Could they not individually look at these 
cases? I guess not. It is just another example of how Democrats have 
spent 8 years of accusing Donald Trump of doing this, that, or the 
other dastardly thing when, in reality, they are doing much worse.
  We heard the Senator from Illinois talking about a pardon for 
political loyalists. Who could be more of a political loyalist than a 
President's own son? And that is what Joe Biden did. His first big 
post-election pardon--pardon his son, not just for specific crimes to 
which he had pleaded guilty or for which he had been convicted, gun 
crimes and tax crimes, but for all crimes--all crimes--that he 
committed or may have committed for 11 years. That is almost twice the 
length of a similar pardon President Ford gave to President Nixon, 
which I think, although condemned at the time, most people would now 
view as an act of political courage.
  I don't think anyone in retrospect is going to think that Joe Biden 
pardoning his son for every crime he might have committed against the

[[Page S7192]]

United States for 11 years is ever going to be seen as an act of 
political courage or if he does the same thing for his brother or any 
other members of his family before noon on January 20.
  Starting next year, I really won't have time for crocodile tears 
about President Trump's pardon decisions if the Senate can't bring 
itself today to condemn one--just one--single egregious case of abuse 
of the pardon power: the ``cash for kids'' judge who sentenced 2,300 
children to private detention centers in return for cash kickbacks.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.

                          ____________________