[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S668-S671]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                                Ukraine

  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am here to mark a solemn 
anniversary. Yesterday marked the fourth anniversary of Vladimir 
Putin's unprovoked, unjustified, brutal, full-scale invasion of 
Ukraine. He sought to extinguish a democracy. He sought to erase a 
whole people's identity, their culture, their way of life, their 
language. He sought to redraw the map of Europe by force, against all 
of the norms and accepted rules that have preserved a peace for decades 
since World War II.
  He failed.
  Four years later, Ukraine stands proudly, resolutely, bloodied, 
scarred, but unbroken. Russia is not winning. There is a false 
narrative, in fact, that Russia is prevailing because it is taking bits 
and tiny pieces of territory at humongous cost in lives and resources. 
That false narrative must be dispelled, and I am here to say to my 
colleagues, to America, to the world: We know Ukraine can win if it has 
the tools to prevail. It has the will and the determination, 
unquestionably. It has the courage and the strength. It needs the 
weapons and the economic sanctions that will enable it to prevail.
  Peace is our devout hope, but peace will be achieved only through 
strength because Vladimir Putin is unserious about peace now and will 
become serious only by demonstration--unequivocally and unambiguously--
of strength.
  I have just come back from a trip to Ukraine, both to Kyiv and to 
Odessa, meeting the engineers who are repairing the electric generation 
sources that Putin has bombed--he has bombed all of the nonnuclear 
sources--children who have been kidnapped and saved and brought back; 
they are among the 20,000 that Putin has abducted; President Zelenskyy, 
who remains absolutely firm in his determination to lead the people of 
Ukraine, to push back the Russians; and in Odessa, the frontline forces 
on the Black Sea who are not only detecting but destroying the invading 
drones and missiles; and the faith community there who have remained so 
absolutely supportive.
  The fact is that Putin is bombing not only Ukraine--civilians in 
their hospitals, homes, and education centers, schoolrooms--he is also 
bombing American businesses. Of the 600 major corporations with 
operations in Ukraine, almost half of them--300--have been damaged or 
destroyed in some way by Putin's bombing, drones, missiles. Putin is 
attacking Ukraine, but he is also attacking America, and America should 
be outraged by these attacks on American businesses.
  In the meantime, my main takeaway from this trip--my ninth--was the 
incredible endurance and resilience of the Ukrainian people. But they 
don't want our applause; they want ammunition. They need weapons. They 
want weapons, not words. And so I am here to advocate, on this fourth 
anniversary, that we give them the tools they need to prevail because 
they are fighting on.
  This conflict is the most destructive in Europe since the Second 
World War.

[[Page S669]]

Entire cities have been reduced to rubble. Tens of thousands have been 
killed. Millions have been displaced. Families sleep under the threat 
nightly of drone and missile attacks. And they are fighting not only 
for their homes and their children but for a principle that protects us 
all. We all have a stake in it. Our national security is at risk here. 
And the principle is that borders cannot be changed by tanks and 
terror, sovereignty is not negotiable, and democracy is not disposable 
through force.
  I have traveled to Ukraine--in fact, nine times--and I have met 
soldiers defending their homeland with extraordinary guts and grit. I 
have met parents who have lost sons and daughters in Russian bombing. I 
have met families whose children were kidnapped and taken across the 
border in a really grotesque campaign of abduction and indoctrination--
war crimes that stain the people of Russia, not just their leader. And 
the world has demanded accountability, designating Vladimir Putin as a 
``war criminal.''
  He is not seeking peace. He is seeking domination. He is unserious 
about the negotiations that are taking place right now. He wages war 
not only with artillery and armor but with cyber attacks, propaganda, 
disinformation, energy blackmail, systematic brutality. And he believes 
that time is his ally. He believes that democracies grow weary and that 
America will blink. And we must prove him wrong.
  The Senate has demonstrated bipartisan resolve before, and it must do 
so again now. We have proven that when freedom is under assault, this 
body will rise above partisanship. We need to sustain that unity and 
make unmistakably clear to Putin and the people of Russia that 
aggression carries consequences. That means advancing stronger 
sanctions on Russia's war economy; designating Russia a ``state sponsor 
of terrorism'' if it fails to return those abducted children; shutting 
down the Kremlin's shadow fleet transporting oil and gas to the 
countries that are buying it and fueling Russia's war machine; and, in 
fact, sanctions and even tariffs targeting those countries, focusing on 
them because they are truly enabling this slaughterous invasion by 
Vladimir Putin.
  The Russian assets that now are in bank accounts in Europe can be 
used to finance the purchasers of weapons, Tomahawks, F-16s, 
interceptors for the Patriot systems, 155s, all of the munitions and 
weaponry that Ukraine needs to win.
  We must be unified in this Chamber and so must America across this 
great land with other democracies that are under attack through the 
hybrid warfare that Putin is waging. We have reaffirmed our deep 
partnership with the Ukrainian people, their Parliament, their 
President. And as Ukraine conducts the business of democracy while 
sandbags literally line their hallways, we must be behind them.
  Four years of this unjustified invasion, and Ukraine is fighting not 
only for itself but for all of us--all democracies. Russia remains the 
most immediate and direct threat to NATO. Supporting Ukraine is not 
about charity; it is a strategy. Appeasement is not a strategy, nor is 
hope. Appeasement and reliance only on hope are the way to further 
conflict, wider war, which we must avoid.
  Ukraine has endured these 4 years standing strong for democracy, and 
they are not only in this fight for themselves; they know that peace 
going forward is also at stake. Democracy is at risk.
  I want to shift to the democracy that is at risk here at home, the 
democracy that is dependent on free and fair elections, the democracy 
that we must preserve against efforts to degrade and decimate it.
  President Trump has called for a nationalization of American 
elections. Now, Americans may ask themselves: What is nationalization 
of elections? Well, you need to look no further than the so-called SAVE 
America Act, which would create absolutely horrendous burdens for all 
Americans registering to vote and then, in fact, voting.
  It would create burdens for States which have the constitutional 
responsibility to administer elections. It would require Americans to 
use their driver's license or other governmental-issued IDs alone in 
registering to vote.
  Now, I support the requirement that voters identify themselves when 
they go to vote. It is mandated in Connecticut. I do it every time I go 
to vote, presenting my driver's license.
  But the SAVE Act is not about voter identification; it is about voter 
purges. In effect, it would require States to provide information--
private information that is not available to the public--to the Federal 
Government, which would then purge voter rolls.
  Purging voter rolls is an anathema when it relies on inaccurate ICE 
information. That is essentially what the SAVE America Act would 
require. The SAVE America Act requires voters not just to present voter 
identification; it enables voter purges and federalizes that 
requirement in a way that is antithetical to all the principles of our 
Constitution that maintain State responsibility for voting.
  I am proposing that we also protect our elections by ensuring that 
ICE cannot be used at the polls, that ICE agents and officers be barred 
from the polls. We need to make sure that there is an absence of 
intimidation and fear when voters approach the poll because, otherwise, 
they will be discouraged from voting.
  ICE has no business in front of voting booths. It has no right or 
responsibility at the polls. The discouragement of voters is happening 
in realtime, sending Tulsi Gabbard to Fulton, GA, continuing the false 
narrative that somehow there was fraud in the Georgia vote, continuing 
the false narrative that there is voting fraud rampant in the Nation. 
The statistics and facts prove that contention absolutely wrong. The 
intimidation of poll workers, the demand for voting information, all of 
it absolutely unjustified.
  President Trump is pushing Republicans in Congress to pass the SAVE 
America Act, a bill that would constitute the most significant 
restriction on the right to vote in generations. He has devoted a full 
web page to the bill on the White House website, and ironically, it 
would make it harder to vote than to buy an assault rifle. Voting by 
noncitizens, which is the issue the bill claims to address, is already 
illegal, and it has been proven time and time again: Voter fraud 
rarely, if ever, occurs.
  But while the problem is a fake, the bill would have real effect. It 
would make the sacred act of voting exponentially more difficult for 
all Americans. Over 20 million American citizens--1 in 10 voting-age 
Americans--simply don't have the access to the documentation that this 
bill would require to vote.
  Voting identification in some form ought to be required but not in 
the way that this bill does it, restrictively and discriminatorily.
  Mr. President, 250 years ago, America broke from the chains of 
monarchy and chose democracy--a government that is supposed to be by 
and for the people--but as we approach this Nation's birth date, we are 
challenged as never before to defend democracy, to defend it in Ukraine 
by supporting the brave freedom fighters there, and by supporting it 
here by defending and advocating the right of every American to vote in 
free and fair elections.
  Thankfully, we still have our democracy. It is under threat as never 
before, but as the saying goes, ``Democracy is not a spectator sport.'' 
We will have it only as long as we can keep it, as Benjamin Franklin 
said to the person who asked him about it after the Constitutional 
Convention. We have a republic only as long as we can keep it.
  We need to emulate the courage of the people of Ukraine and of our 
Founding Fathers and to fight back against President Trump's effort to 
silence us and to potentially threaten our democracy.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schmitt). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The Senator from Maine.
  (The remarks of Ms. Collins pertaining to the introduction of S. 3924 
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')

[[Page S670]]

  

  Ms. COLLINS. I 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. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                  36th Anniversary of Smoke-Free Skies

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, one of the most important votes that I 
ever cast in the House or the Senate was the result of a challenge from 
a complete stranger. The year was 1986. I was running late to the 
airport, heading back to Chicago from Phoenix, AZ.
  Now, those were the days when you could get a ticket at the airline 
counter at the last minute, but if you were too late, the good seats on 
the plane would all be gone. When I was handed my boarding pass in 
Phoenix, I saw that I was put in a middle seat in the smoking section 
at the back of the plane.
  I asked the United Airlines attendant: Isn't there something you can 
do about this?
  She looked down at my ticket and my title and said: No, but, 
Congressman, there is something you can do about it.
  I thanked her and made the flight. As I squirmed in my seat to try to 
avoid the smoke clouds, I began to look around the plane. In front of 
me, only a few rows away, was an older person. Near him was a new mom 
with a baby. I thought to myself: This makes no sense at all. These 
people are supposed to be sitting in the nonsmoking section. I am in 
the smoking section, yet they are just a few rows ahead, breathing the 
same secondhand smoke that I am breathing.
  When I got back to DC, I called my House staff together and told them 
I had an idea: I wanted to ban smoking on airplanes. My staff told me I 
was crazy. The tobacco industry was the most powerful lobby force in 
Washington, with support from the top leadership of both political 
parties.
  I can remember going through orientation in the House when a leader 
who will go unnamed on the Democratic side in the House closed the door 
to the room for all 50 new Members of the House--Democrats--and said: 
Let me explain to you about tobacco and politics. Keep your hands off 
of it.
  That was the advice.
  Here I was, a relatively new Member of Congress who wanted to take on 
the tobacco lobby. Everyone said I didn't have a shot. With the 
leadership on both sides against me, I didn't have a prayer. But this 
was personal to me and to a lot of people who served in Congress. My 
father died of lung cancer when I was 14 years old. He was 53 years 
old. He smoked two packs of Camels a day. I thought of him when I was 
sitting on that flight from Phoenix, and I remembered him as I began to 
pursue this cause.
  One thing I did have going for me was that the U.S. House of 
Representatives was, I thought, the largest frequent flyer club in the 
world. Many other Members told me privately they hated breathing in 
cigarette smoke on airplanes just as much as I did. But to pass the 
bill, we would need to overcome opposition from many of our colleagues 
who were avid smokers, including the then-chairman of the House Public 
Works Committee.
  One of those colleagues was on the Appropriations Committee, where I 
served, the late Congressman Marty Sabo of Minnesota. He had the power 
to make or break our bill, and he was a chain-smoker. I went up to him, 
and I said: Marty, what is the longest you can go without a cigarette?
  He told me: Two hours.
  So I said 2 hours it will be. We introduced a bill that would ban 
smoking on all domestic flights that were 2 hours or less so I could 
clear the hurdle of Marty Sabo. We passed the bill in the House by some 
miraculous chain of events after the Rules Committee literally defied 
the Speaker and let me offer an amendment.
  The chairman of the Rules Committee was a man named Claude Pepper. 
Claude Pepper was a legendary Congressman from Florida and a spokesman 
for senior citizens across the Nation. He had a unique way of speaking, 
and I won't try to imitate it. But when he voted for me over the 
Speaker and gave me a chance to bring my amendment to the floor, I went 
to meet with him personally afterwards and thank him. He said to me: 
You know I was a Member of the Senate at one time.
  I said: Yes, I do. And you came back after you lost running for the 
Senate to serve in the House for many years.
  He said: When I was in the Senate, I created the National Cancer 
Institute, so I wanted to give you a vote.
  Thanks to his help and the help of the late Senator Frank Lautenberg 
of New Jersey, the bill cleared the Senate shortly thereafter.
  It seems strange that major legislation can be determined by such 
minor personal details like how long a Congressman can go without a 
smoke, but the personal issue is everything in Congress. Pick any cause 
championed by myself or one of my colleagues, and there is a good 
chance there is a story behind it and a personal story it is. When we 
take the time to sit down with our fellow Members and hear their 
stories, their interests, their worries, we often can find a compromise 
that makes a difference. That is how we got the support we needed to 
ban smoking on airplanes.

  The 2-hour ban became law in 1988. Two years later, it was expanded 
to all domestic flights. People had experienced smoke-free skies, and 
they were not going back.
  Today is the 36th anniversary of that law prohibiting smoking on all 
domestic flights. It is also the anniversary of one of the biggest 
tipping points in the fight against smoking and Big Tobacco. After my 
ban passed, Americans started asking obvious questions: So if 
secondhand smoke is dangerous on an airplane, why isn't it dangerous in 
a bus or a train or an office building or a restaurant or a hospital? 
And as more Americans asked these questions, smoking disappeared 
gradually from public life.
  I used to joke that when Members of Congress were elected back in the 
1980s, one of their first stops was at the stationery store to buy a 
big, honking ashtray that they stuck on their coffee table in their 
office for all the visitors all during the day who came in with either 
a ``yes,'' a ``no,'' or a ``maybe'' and smoked their cigarettes. You 
can't even find those ashtrays anymore, thank goodness.
  In the year 2000--listen to this--almost 30 percent of high school 
students smoked cigarettes--30 percent; today, 2 percent. And thousands 
of lives have been saved from deadly disease along the way.
  This accomplishment is more than my own, and I am not taking personal 
credit for it. It is a culmination of work over decades from activists, 
lawyers, doctors, and so many other people who decided to fight Big 
Tobacco, against the odds. Their bravery and efforts deserve 
recognition. Their contributions are felt every time we take a breath 
of fresh air in public.
  I tell this story because more Americans--essentially, young people--
feel they have no control over their destiny. They see endless doom on 
social media and feel as if their lives are controlled by powerful 
sources with the money, resources, and time to dictate policy. But that 
can be overcome. It may not feel like it, but in our democracy, there 
is no limit to what we can accomplish in defense of the public good.
  The tobacco lobby was the big boy in town. They had billions of 
dollars, lawyers, politicians, and more money than friends and 
investigators who were ready to squash any threat. Yet I beat them. We 
beat them. They still lost. They lost to a group of concerned citizens 
who had fewer resources and far less power than they did, but these 
citizens had the truth, a noble cause, and resilience.
  As we confront the big battles of today, may that spirit of 
resilience and justice propel us against those hoping we sit on the 
sidelines. It was a memorable day in my career that changed America, 
and, like Malcolm Gladwell writes, it was a tipping point. I didn't 
know it was coming. I thought we were just going to make the flight on 
airplanes a lot more comfortable for most passengers, but it changed 
America.
  Now, that is not the end of the challenge. Many of those young high 
school students who no longer smoke tobacco cigarettes are into vaping 
and other things that are going to be dangerous

[[Page S671]]

to them if they become addicted to it. So let's be vigilant, let's be 
realistic, but let's never give up.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.