[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 130 (Friday, August 7, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4534-S4538]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Russia Sanctions
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I fully support taking tougher action
against Russia. They have waged a deadly, years long war on Ukraine,
and the United States must do more to tighten the screws on the Putin
war machine.
So I am fully in favor of strong sanctions, but this bill, despite
its title, is not just a sanctions bill; it gives Donald Trump massive
new tariff authority that he will use to threaten our trading partners
and raise prices on the American people. I believe Senators will come
to deeply regret voting to give Donald Trump this tariff authority.
This bill gives Trump so much discretion that he can ultimately decide
what countries to tariff or what countries to exempt. He can modify
tariffs at his will.
Over the last year and a half, Americans have seen what Donald Trump
will do with unchecked tariff authority. They have seen his tariffs
raise prices for Americans and their families on everything from food,
to housing, to health care. Americans have seen small businesses and
family farms shut down because they cannot afford massive new taxes on
machinery and merchandise.
The Trump tariffs go on again and off again, disrupting supply chains
and making it difficult for businesses to plan, invest, and hire. Our
allies, including Canada and the EU, openly question the reliability of
our nation and are looking to other countries for more stable trade
relationships.
As Trump turns the tariff dial up and down to punish or reward
countries as he likes, the process ends up being a corrupt taxing of
the American people to settle Trump's personal political scores.
If Congress passes this bill with these tariffs, Members will be
condoning the tariff chaos of the last year and a half and inviting
more. This bill gives Trump clear authority to put tariffs up to 100
percent on the goods Americans buy from major trading partners around
the globe. That includes 100 percent tariffs on things like food,
medicine, machinery, and electronics.
Congress would even be letting Trump put tariffs on allies like
Hungary, Slovakia, France, Belgium, and Japan. Donald Trump can pick
and choose even more countries to tariff every 180 days. That is
because there is no mechanism in this bill--none whatsoever--for
Congress to roll back the Trump tariffs. Trump can increase or decrease
tariffs just by notifying the Congress of his decision. He is not going
to be constrained by any kind of paperwork or rules.
Colleagues, this body has been fighting tooth and nail to stop Trump
from abusing the laws already on the books. Trump has shown us
repeatedly he won't be limited by the spirit of the law. He will use
any loophole to slap tariffs on our allies and make life more expensive
for Americans. The Trump tariffs are now raising prices, hurting our
alliances, and opening the door to corruption. This bill will further
increase the cost of living for American families when they are
struggling.
To all of my colleagues who have said ``Look, we want to hold down
the cost of living; we want to make life more affordable'': this is not
going to do that. This is going to increase the cost of living for
Americans as we go into the next few months. It would be a nightmare
for the Americans who want to see their government tackle the
affordability crisis. It would be a dangerous mistake to sign our names
on a blank check that gives Trump even more power to indiscriminately
use these tariffs.
So I urge my colleagues this morning to support the Paul-Wyden
amendment, which would strike this new tariff authority. It would make
sure that we are not giving Trump power to tax our constituents for the
things they buy from trading partners around the world. There is no
need to include this new tariff in the bill, and the fact that the
White House won't support the bill without new tariff powers should
scare every Senator in this room.
Trump has shown over the last year and a half that he can't be
trusted with unilateral power on tariffs. Everything he has done
suggests that he is going to abuse this power, and I urge my colleagues
this morning to vote yes on the Paul-Wyden amendment to prevent this
body from handing Donald Trump a new tool for inflation and corruption.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, increasing taxes on Americans will not end
Putin's war in Ukraine. The drafters of this legislation,
understandably, wish to punish Vladimir Putin and send Russian invaders
back to where they came from, but this bill was written such that the
drafters fail to see that it will not bring peace to Ukraine but rather
will deliberately make American families poorer by increasing tariffs,
which are nothing but a tax on imported goods.
To save Americans from what very well could be the largest tax
increase imposed by a Republican Congress, I offer an amendment that
strikes the authority to impose tariffs of up to 100 percent on an
ever-changing list of countries. Mark my words, this will be the
largest tax increase by a Republican Congress.
Why would Republicans, who promise you they want to lower your taxes,
be voting to raise your taxes $500 billion?
In addition, Congress should not delegate its constitutional duties
to the executive branch.
Now, my amendment does not touch the broad sanctions that are
provided by the bill, nor does it touch the specific tariffs on Russia
because I see the strong desire among Members of the Senate to use
economic warfare against Putin. But I object to economic warfare
against the American consumer.
Once upon a time, Republicans were distinguished from Democrats by
their persistent chant that the U.S. deficit was the result of a
spending problem, not a revenue problem. Yet today, many Republicans
have become the cheerleaders for more revenue.
The bill before us grants the executive branch the power to raise
nearly $500 billion in revenue--in taxes. I hope I am not the only
Republican left in Congress who is horrified by a bill that proposes to
raise taxes a half a trillion dollars.
In addition, there is the constitutional question: Can Congress
delegate its article I, section 8 authority to lay taxes and levies--
can they just give it away to the executive branch?
For 100 years or more, the Supreme Court has said we can't give away
our power. And in what world would we want to give away our power? The
power to tax and spend was given to Congress. Why would they give that
to the President? What sort of feckless Congress gives away their
constitutional power?
[[Page S4535]]
The power was divided for a reason. Montesquieu said if you bring the
legislative powers together with the executive, you will have no
liberty. The powers were divided between the legislature and the
executive so we could fight for liberty, so it would make it hard to
raise taxes.
The answer to ``Can Congress give away its power?'' is an unequivocal
``no.'' Embedded within our Constitution is something called the
nondelegation principle, which states that Congress cannot delegate its
core legislative powers to another branch of government or to private
entities. The Supreme Court used to enforce this nondelegation
doctrine, most notably in the Schechter Poultry case, but that case was
decided in 1935; and for much of the intervening years, the Supreme
Court has been a reliable ally to lazy legislators.
Up until recently, the Supreme Court effectively relieved Congress
from the hard work of legislating, but the tide is turning, frankly,
with the help of several of President Trump's nominees. Justice Gorsuch
forcefully made the case for reviving the nondelegation principle by
arguing that if Congress ``could pass off its legislative power to the
executive branch . . . legislation would risk becoming nothing more
than the will of the current President.''
The problem with this legislation is that it disobeys the clear
command of the Constitution: Taxes and levies must be determined by
Congress. Moreover, taxation bills must originate in the House of
Representatives.
Do not let sympathy for Ukraine blind you to the reality of tariffs.
Tariffs are taxes on imports that are paid by Americans. They are paid
by parents trying to provide for their families. They are paid by
students saving up to buy their first car. Tariffs are paid by anyone
who seeks to spend money on any conceivable product.
There will be those who will try to pull the wool over your eyes and
tell you that despite this persistent sticker shock, despite the
feeling that life just keeps getting more and more expensive, that
tariffs are always paid by somebody else, by some foreign country. The
Members who vote for this tax will tell you: Not to worry--these taxes
will only be levied on foreign countries.
This absurd claim is provably false. Figuring out who pays tariffs is
easy. All you have to do is look at those who are getting refunds. When
the Supreme Court struck down the tariffs, a whole bunch of people
lined up for refunds. Who is not on the list? The Chinese Government is
not on the list. Canada is not on the list. Mexico is not on the list.
American companies are getting the refunds because Americans pay
tariffs.
And do you think the company pays the tariffs? No. They pass it along
to the consumer. You are all paying higher prices. Every time you get
something through retail, you are paying higher prices.
The entities that lined up for the rebates after the Supreme Court
struck down the emergency tariffs were primarily American retailers
such as Walmart, Target, Costco, and Nike.
Let me repeat: China is not on the refund list because China doesn't
pay the tariffs. American importers and retailers pay the tariffs, and
they pass the cost of the tariffs on to the consumer.
You don't have to take my word for it. A letter was sent to the
Senate Republican and Democrat leaders by two dozen industry
associations, including the Chamber of Commerce, the Consumer
Technology Association, and the National Retail Association, warning
about the cost of tariffs imposed by this bill.
Here are some quotes from industry concerned about these new taxes:
[T]he potential of new, broad, 100% tariffs on imports from
secondary countries risks raising costs for American
businesses, workers, and consumers.
That approach would effectively tax U.S. importers and
consumers for foreign governments' energy decisions--conduct
that is outside the control of American companies.
They further say:
Tariffs of this scale would increase costs for everyday
consumer goods, manufacturing inputs and other products while
creating significant uncertainty for companies making
sourcing, pricing and inventory decisions months in advance.
It could also lead to retaliatory tariffs against U.S.
exports.
So it doesn't necessarily help exports to tax imports because the
other countries then will tax our exports.
They say:
Tariffs . . . are a blunt tool that can penalize law-
abiding U.S. companies importing legitimate goods, invite
retaliation, complicate trade negotiations and shift costs
onto American families without ensuring that pressure reaches
the intended actors.
These two dozen associations end their letter by saying:
We urge Congress to remove the tariff authority from the
bill and instead focus on targeted sanctions, stronger
enforcement against sanctions evasion and coordinated
diplomacy with countries purchasing Russian energy.
Anybody concerned with the economic well-being of American families
would come to the same conclusion, but it is not easy to find such
common sense in Congress.
Imposing a 100-percent tariff on all goods imported from countries
like China and India is the economic equivalent of shooting ourselves
in the foot.
Middle- and low-income Americans enjoy a higher quality of life when
they have more purchasing power for everyday necessities. Recent
tariffs are estimated to have already cost the average American family
$1,700, so the average American family is already paying $1,700 more
because of these taxes that are placed on the things they buy.
Now this Republican Congress, after it just gave the American people
tax cuts, is going to do the opposite. Which is it? Are we the party of
lower taxes or higher taxes? This will be the largest tax increase in
recent history, perhaps the largest tax increase that a Republican
Congress has put onto the people.
What are we going to say to the parents buying their kids new shoes
for the school year, the minimum-wage worker who needs to buy a new
part to fix their car to get to work, or the single mother buying
diapers when they notice their prices have doubled?
The cost of the tariffs is not strictly monetary; these tariffs
threaten to undermine America's strategic position in the world. Some
naively think that the tariffs will get China to distance itself from
Russia, but it might be the opposite. Recent history suggests that they
will instead push Russia and China together. China is not going to get
these 100-percent tariffs and say: Oh, we are sorry. We are no longer
going to cooperate with Russia. We have kind of forced Russia to give
us this great deal on oil and gas that we pipe into our country, but we
are sorry now, and we are going to give up on that.
No. It is going to push them closer together. The people we are
worried about are going to become more allied.
Slapping a 100-percent tariff on China may inadvertently solidify the
geopolitical alignment with Russia, as Beijing would become more, not
less, reliant on Moscow for economic and diplomatic support.
Ryan Young is a senior economist with the Competitive Enterprise
Institute. He points out that Russia is the junior partner in the
alliance with China. Young reminds us that China agreed to a second
natural gas pipeline between the two countries on the condition that
Russia sell China its gas at a lower than market rate. Do you think
China is going to give up on that? No. China will continue to buy oil
and gas from Russia after this, and they, in all likelihood, will
respond to our tariffs with tariffs of their own.
This is what is going to happen. It is not going to solve the
situation; it is going to raise American taxes, drive Russia and China
together, and then China will actually add tariffs on our goods as
well. It is a huge mistake.
Imposing tariffs on China will reignite the trade war. Beijing will
certainly retaliate with their own tariffs and export controls.
Maia Nikoladze, the deputy director of the Economic Statecraft
Initiative at the Atlantic Council, reminded us that on ``Liberation
Day,'' the tariffs placed on China in April of 2025 didn't change
Beijing's behavior. Instead, those tariffs prompted China to restrict
exports of critical rare earth elements. We already tried this once.
They responded by restricting their exports of things we need to make
batteries for cars, and then we eventually ended up negotiating lower
tariffs. Do we want to go through the same world of that again?
Likewise, imposing a 100-percent tariff on India at a time when we
are actively trying to court them to help us
[[Page S4536]]
in our competition with China is completely self-defeating. Ryan Young
with the Competitive Enterprise Institute worries that imposing tariffs
on India will alienate one of the most important strategic partners in
Asia and a potential counterweight to China. So as we try to get India
to be more aligned with us instead of with China or Russia--admiral
goals--we put tariffs on India, and what does that do? It pushes them
more toward China and more toward Russia.
It is also unclear whether tariffs could even be imposed on
individual members of the European Union, like Slovakia and Hungary,
given Europe's common trade policy.
In 2025, U.S.-EU bilateral trade was over $1 trillion. That is making
both parties rich. We have become extraordinarily rich as a country as
international trade has expanded. In fact, prosperity of the individual
and prosperity of the country are directly proportional to the amount
of trade. Think about that. Trying to tariff individual EU countries
directly undermines President Trump's recent U.S.-EU trade agreement.
Should the EU retaliate against the United States, the result would be
disastrous for both American businesses and consumers.
I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment that strips the
counterproductive tariffs from the legislation. If not adopted,
Congress should reject this strategic blunder of a bill that would do
nothing to bring peace to Ukraine but, rather, raise American prices
for American consumers, further weaken the dollar, destroy U.S.
relations around the globe, and drive our adversaries closer together.
Mr. President, I recommend a ``yes'' vote on the Paul-Wyden
amendment.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, very briefly. My colleague has hit a number
of key points. To close, I just want to make a couple of points.
The American people who are following this debate I am sure think
that stuff can be corrected, stuff can be changed. And the reality is
under this particular bill, Congress has no authority to modify this
deeply flawed piece of legislation. So the reality is in the next few
months when we have got folks who are walking an economic tightrope
here in America, balancing the food bill against the fuel bill and the
fuel bill against the rent bill and the like, they are going to come to
their elected officials and say: I am getting pounded by these new
tariffs. I am just getting hit by an economic wrecking ball. Do
something about it.
Under this legislation, Congress cannot, you know, modify this bill's
tariffs. It is just not possible. So what we are going to have to do is
make sure that the American people get some additional attention in
other areas of the economy because under this legislation and under
these tariffs, they are going to get hit by an economic wrecking ball.
It is an unforced error that doesn't have to happen.
I yield the floor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, shortly, we will vote on the Russia
sanctions bill as we have come to call it. I want to begin by thanking
my colleagues for their overwhelming support for this measure, and in
particular to thank Senators Shaheen, Britt, Wicker, Risch, Coons,
Whitehouse, Durbin, and, of course, Senators Schumer and Thune. Their
help has been invaluable as we reach this important moment.
Last week, with President Zelenskyy watching from the Gallery, this
body sent a powerful message to Vladimir Putin and all who are
supporting him with funding for his vicious, bloodthirsty, illegal war
against the brave, free people of Ukraine.
Today, President Zelenskyy is watching from Ukraine, and Putin is
watching from Moscow. I would like to think that Lindsey Graham is
watching too. And I know how proud he would be of his sister today who
has taken his place on the floor and has been such a profoundly strong
and effective advocate for this bill.
Today, we say to the people of Ukraine: You are not alone. And we say
to Vladimir Putin: You will not conquer Ukraine. You will not defeat
these free, brave people who are turning tides against your
bloodthirsty aggression.
Nearly 2 years ago, Lindsey Graham and I began working on this bill,
but really the journey began with our first trip to Ukraine together
some 4 years ago.
Robert Frost once said when he was asked how he began his poems, he
said:
A poem begins with a lump in the throat . . .
Our journey toward this bill began with a lump in our throats and
tears in our eyes when we visited Bucha, not long after the Russians
were pushed out of that small town just kilometers away from President
Zelenskyy's bunker, which we also visited on that trip just weeks after
Ukraine succeeded in pushing them out.
We saw the mass grave where Putin's military shot innocent women and
children in the back of their heads. We talked to Ukrainian troops who
lost limbs, loved ones who lost sons and daughters, fathers and
mothers. We talked to children who were kidnapped by Putin, literally
abducted and placed in education camps.
And on one of those long train rides--we took six or seven trips into
Ukraine together--we began thinking about this bill to impose
scorching, sledgehammer sanctions and tariffs on Russia to stop the
flow of money fueling Putin's war machine, money that was essential to
his slaughterous aggression against Ukraine.
And like one of those trains, the journey to this bill was filled
with a lot of bumps, a lot of stops and starts, and through it all what
sustained us, as much as anything, was Senator Graham's overwhelming
sense of optimism, his sense of humor, his belief in freedom and
democracy, his belief in America.
And so this bill is a tribute to him. We disagreed about many issues,
he and I, and I could be on the receiving end of his anger, as well as
his praise. But the partnership that we forged, I think is a lesson
without exaggerating it to perhaps the people of America that, yes, we
can work together and accomplish good things for the world.
One of Senator Graham's final acts as a Member of this body was to
reach an accord with the White House on our behalf and secure the
President's support. He died literally the next day.
I spoke to him shortly before his death, and I know as well as anyone
that this Chamber--this body--will not be the same without him. We miss
him, and this bill named in his honor carries on the work that he
believed was so important.
It will impose scorching sanctions on the Russia war machine and the
shadow fleet that sustains it. It will prevent critical resources from
flowing to the Kremlin's coffers.
It will authorize the President to impose duties and penalties on the
largest purchases of Russian crude oil and natural gas--punishing the
profiteers for buying discounted energy products and pushing them to
decrease purchases. It is a powerful deterrent against complicity in
Putin's illegal war.
And it provides a powerful pressure point in stopping buyers of
Russian oil and gas from continuing to provide the essential fuel for
that war machine.
It will give the administration the tools it needs to punish anyone
who aids Russia as they continue to evade United States sanctions and
promote stronger, stricter enforcement of those sanctions.
For years, countries have been allowed to permit bad actors to broker
deals and support the shadow fleet's movement all around the world.
They have become fabulously rich, while preaching the need for peace.
These countries will be exposed as facilitating evasion of sanctions,
and it will help us end the war.
The goal is peace. We have the power to help end this war, and we
cannot stand idly as a young, democratic nation desperately fights for
its survival against a murderous dictator.
We know from history, appeasement is a failed hope, and hope is not a
strategy. We cannot appease Putin in the hope that he will abandon his
imperialist ambitions because history shows that he will not.
And his ambition doesn't end in Donbas or Luhansk. It reaches deep
into Europe, and it threatens our national security and our allies'
security. Yes, we need our allies, and they have stepped up to aid
Ukraine in this war.
Appeasing Putin is a disservice to the brave men and women of our
military
[[Page S4537]]
who are defending our freedom all around the globe because it puts them
in greater risk if Putin thinks he can move against our NATO allies,
and then we will be required to put our sons and daughters in harm's
way.
For 4 years, Ukraine has refused to bow to Putin's will. They have
beaten back wave after wave after wave of Russian attacks. Our military
gave them maybe a few weeks, in 2022, to survive Putin's onslaught.
They pushed the Russians back in those weeks after the first wave of
assault, and they have continued a brilliant campaign of using new
technology that has amazed and awed the world, including our own
military, which is learning from Ukraine about the use of drones and
other unmanned weapons platforms.
Their ingenuity and determination are awe inspiring, even as their
stockpiles of interceptors and other air defense run dry. And we must
provide the kind of military defense aid--the interceptors, the PAC-
3s--or the Patriot system--or the THAAD platforms that are essential to
defend the Ukrainian people who are enduring--night after night after
night--missiles and drones killing civilians, aimed at schools,
hospitals, malls, civilian targets.
Putin not only abducts children, he kills them in their beds as they
sleep with missiles and drones that are aimed purposely at civilian
targets to terrorize and intimidate the people of Ukraine, but they
will not yield.
And today, they continue to stand as a beacon of hope and liberty,
shining against the darkness. Today, we cannot provide all that
military aid that they need, but we can take this step--a step to stand
with the people of Ukraine and show that their fight is our fight.
I would like to close with some brilliant, rhetorical flourish, but I
would rather just recall some of Senator Graham's last words to me.
He said: This is a big effing deal. We all did good.
Decorum prevents me on the Senate floor from saying what he actually
said, but I would like to say--looking across the Chamber where he
sat--that he is with us today and that he will be proud of what we are
doing.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Justice). The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am so pleased to come to the floor
this morning to join Senator Blumenthal, one of the sponsors of this
legislation, to remember Senator Lindsey Graham and to thank everyone
who has worked so hard on this legislation: the Lindsey O. Graham
Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act. And I so appreciate Darline Graham's
being here and her support for this.
So I am here to support the underlying bill, but I also am here to
oppose the Paul-Wyden amendment. Now, I understand the concern of some
of my colleagues on tariffs. I share those.
I co-led an amicus brief, challenging the President's illegal use of
IEEPA to impose tariffs, and appreciated Senator Wyden's partnership on
that. That argument prevailed at the Supreme Court.
I also oppose any abuse of the tariff authorities that are currently
on the books. But the authority in this bill to impose tariffs is very
narrowly scoped, and it contains clear guardrails. It explicitly says
that the only countries that can be subject to tariffs are the top five
purchasers of oil or gas--the top five--and the top five sanctions
evaders for Russian oil.
So if we are going to be successful at putting pressure on that we
need to put pressure on to get Vladimir Putin to the table, we have got
to shut down the money that he is getting from oil and gas, and that is
what this bill would do.
These tariffs have one purpose: to make it more costly for countries
to keep buying the Russian energy that funds Putin's war.
This amendment does not restore Congress' constitutional authority
over trade, which listening to the authors, you might question. And if
this amendment is adopted, President Trump's existing tariff
authorities remain exactly where they are today. The only thing that
would change would be our ability to put pressure on countries that are
still buying Russian energy. So I oppose this amendment. I urge my
colleagues to oppose it as well.
And I think one of the critical issues here is the urgency of where
we are in this war right now. The momentum is on Ukraine's side. This
is Russia's worst summer of the war yet, but we know the situation can
change quickly against Ukraine.
China is supporting Russia's efforts to regain battlefield advantage
by helping the Russians develop their own version of Starlink, one of
the things President Zelenskyy raised a concern about the last time
Senator Graham and I had a chance to meet with him in Ankara at the
NATO summit.
According to President Zelenskyy, that technology that China is
working on can be available as early as November. That would advance
Russia's drone technology to catch up with Ukraine. The battlefield
could look significantly different in the next 6 to 12 months, and that
could roll back Ukraine's advantages.
Now is the time to put more pressure on Putin. This legislation, if
it is advanced before the August recess, will be ahead of Russia's
upcoming elections. They hold their legislative elections in mid-
September. After that, Putin is likely to be required to change
conscription in response to the severe shortage of recruits because
they are losing 35,000 Russians a month.
Advancing the legislation ahead of Russia's upcoming elections will
increase pressure on Putin to seriously revisit prospects for a peace
deal.
And make no mistake: Russia is watching what we do. We have the
history of this war to show that every time the United States backs
away from putting pressure on Russia, from helping Ukraine, from
funding the war, Russia ramps up its attacks in Ukraine. It kills more
civilians.
And that is where we are. If we can't shut down the funding for the
war machine that Russia is using against Ukraine, then they are going
to keep at it. We have to show the determination that the United States
feels to support this emerging democracy that Senator Blumenthal was so
eloquent to talk about.
So that is why there is real urgency for what we are doing today, not
just to pass this underlying sanctions bill but to make sure that the
tariffs that are funding Russia's war machine can shut down the oil and
gas that is keeping that war machine going.
So I hope all of my colleagues will oppose this amendment and support
the underlying bill.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I want to join my colleague, the
distinguished ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee. We are
in the same spot on this bill and on the amendment.
Just last week, I stood in this Chamber and asked my colleagues to
join me in moving this bill forward, and many of them--from both sides
of the aisle--did so. That vote was successful with a margin of 86 to
12. That is a rare vote at this time in the Senate.
That same night that we voted in tremendous support of Ukraine, a
number of us welcomed Ukraine's President back to the Capitol, where he
gave us a fulsome update on Ukraine's battlefield successes.
He expressed how Ukraine sorely needed this sanctions legislation to
magnify the impact of Russia's battlefield losses by imposing crippling
economic costs on Russia's economy. This could finally bring Russia to
the negotiating table and end this conflict, which we all want to see
happen.
But to be clear, while this legislation would help Ukraine counter
Russian aggression, it also protects Idahoans--all Americans--but
Idahoans, who I focus on here, as all of us focus on our own
constituents, and that is always each of our priority.
Peace and stability in Europe are in America's interests. In the
interconnected world we live in, prosperity in Europe only helps us
here at home.
Like everyone here, I always view what we are doing here through the
lens of: How will this affect my constituents at home? How will it help
them? And bringing an end to this conflict will allow us to return to
issues that Idahoans care about: lowering prices, unleashing domestic
energy, protecting public lands, and building a better future for the
next generation.
This legislation brings us much closer to that end and an end to this
conflict. It will make a decisive impact
[[Page S4538]]
that goes beyond what can be achieved on the battlefield. It will cut
off the flow of cash that powers Putin's war machine.
I have worked with my colleagues on this bill for more than a year,
including my friend from New Hampshire; with Senator Blumenthal; and,
of course, with Senator Lindsey Graham, who was very focused on this
bill; and with the President.
I have worked particularly to include sanctions in this bill against
Russia's illicit shadow fleet that it uses to evade these sanctions and
prop up its energy sector.
These ships and the oil sales they facilitate directly fuel Russia's
war machine and threaten American and European security. They enrich
Russia, China, and Iran. This bill will go a long way to stopping that
shadow fleet.
I have also worked to include provisions taking aim at Russia's
defense supply chains and a number of key energy projects, causing real
pain to Putin and those who keep him in power. They will do that.
These tools will give the United States and our allies the leverage
we need to force Russia back to the negotiating table and end this
conflict.
I would be remiss if I didn't note that this bill was a culmination
of many, many hours of work from my staff, Senator Shaheen's staff,
Senator Blumenthal's staff, Senator Lindsey Graham's staff, all of them
and other staffs worked on this. And we usually don't thank them here
on the floor, but they really need thanks on this because this went on
so long and was so technical.
Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't note that this bill was a
passion project for our friend Lindsey Graham, and it is fitting that
we will see it move through the Senate today.
I hope to, once again, see a strong majority of my colleagues join us
in this bill--in passing this bill right here and right now.
____________________