[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9560-9563]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

NOMINATION OF MATTHEW T. McGUIRE TO BE UNITED STATES EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 
      OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT

                                 ______
                                 

 NOMINATION OF GENTRY O. SMITH, A CAREER MEMBER OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN 
 SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF 
FOREIGN MISSIONS, AND TO HAVE THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR DURING HIS TENURE 
                               OF SERVICE

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en 
bloc, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read the nominations of 
Matthew T. McGuire, of the District of Columbia, to be United States 
Executive Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and 
Development for a term of two years; and Gentry O. Smith, of North 
Carolina, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of 
Minister-Counselor, to be Director of the Office of Foreign Missions, 
and to have the rank of Ambassador during his tenure of service.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 30 
minutes of debate, equally divided in the usual form.
  Mrs. ERNST. Mr. President, 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. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, shortly our colleagues will have an 
opportunity to vote on two nominations that are being recommended by 
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I see that Senator Corker is on 
the floor, and I thank him for his help in bringing these two 
confirmations to the floor of the Senate. Both of these individuals are 
well qualified, and I urge our colleagues to support both nominations.
  One is the nomination of Matthew McGuire to be United States Director 
of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The other 
is the nomination of Gentry Smith to be Director of the Office of 
Foreign Missions.
  Mr. McGuire is the Assistant to the Secretary and Director of the 
Office of Business Liaison at the Department of Commerce, where he 
leads engagement with the business community, works to strengthen the 
international economic position of the United States, and advocates for 
U.S. trade and investment. Prior to joining the U.S. Government, Mr. 
McGuire worked as a senior executive in the financial services industry 
for more than 8 years, but he also has been active with nonprofit and 
civic organizations throughout his career, working on a range of public 
policy issues across the country and around the world.
  In a world where global health, environmental resources, and security 
challenges far outstrip any one country's ability to respond, it is in 
our clear interest to have strong U.S. leadership in the World Bank--
the foremost international organization promoting economic development, 
poverty alleviation, and good governance around the world.
  Prominent Members of the House of Representatives emphasized this 
critical role of the World Bank in their May 15 letter supporting Mr. 
McGuire's nomination. Representatives Meeks, Clay, Murphy, Sewell, 
Meng, Rangel, and others stated that Mr. McGuire's senior executive 
experience in the financial services industry and leadership roles with 
nonprofit and civic organizations working on public policy issues 
around the world ``make him distinctly qualified for this position.'' 
Mr. McGuire's highly relevant experience in his current position at the 
Department of Commerce, added to his extensive background working in 
both for-profit and nonprofit sectors, make him an excellent choice to 
represent the United States at this institution that is so crucial for 
global stability. I am confident he will serve with distinction.
  Gentry O. Smith is currently a Senior Advisor at the Bureau of 
Diplomatic Security. The Office of Foreign Missions assists and 
regulates services for foreign missions in the United States, 
negotiates with foreign diplomatic representatives to improve operating 
conditions for U.S. diplomatic missions and personnel abroad, ensures 
that U.S. diplomatic missions abroad receive equivalent treatment with 
respect to benefits, privileges, and immunities accorded by the host 
countries, and, as necessary, adjusts the benefits accorded to foreign 
missions in the United States on the basis of the principle of 
reciprocity.
  Mr. Smith has an exemplary record of serving his country for well 
over a quarter of a century, starting with his service as a Raleigh 
police officer. Mr. Smith's thorough and highly relevant experience as 
a Regional Security Officer for American Embassies in Egypt, Japan, and 
Burma, and his employment with the Bureau of Diplomatic Security as 
Director of Physical Security Programs, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Countermeasures, and Senior Advisor gives him the expertise and 
fortitude to head the agency responsible for both improving the 
operating conditions for U.S. diplomatic missions and for adjusting the 
benefits accorded to foreign missions if our missions abroad face 
mistreatment.
  Mr. Smith is a proven leader with extensive management experience and 
skills, and I am confident he will be an excellent Director of the 
Office of Foreign Missions.
  Let me also point out that I know our committee has been very, very 
busy. We have been able to successfully steer towards enactment the 
bill for congressional review of the Iranian nuclear agreement. We 
recently were able to report out in a 19-to-0 vote State Department 
authorization. I must say that not a day goes by that our committee is 
not doing some work on behalf of the Senate and the American people.
  But I need to point out that we need to pay more attention to getting 
the President's nominees to the floor with recommendations from our 
committee. If we complete these two nominations tonight--and I assume 
that we will--I believe that will make four nominees on which we have 
completed our work in confirmation that the President has sent to us. 
There are nine other recommendations, five of which are career 
officers, that have been reported out of the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee and have yet to be brought to the floor. Five of those nine 
are career people, and yet we have had no action on the floor of the 
Senate. Of more concern, there are 35 nominees currently pending before 
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Of these 35, only 4

[[Page 9561]]

have had hearings, and 22 of the 35 are career diplomats.
  I understand we have had an extremely busy schedule within the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Corker and I have talked about 
this, and I know we will use our best efforts to get these nominations 
moving forward. I just really wanted to report that because I think we 
need to work--not only our committee but the leadership of the Senate--
to make sure the President's nominees are timely considered and are 
timely brought forward to the full Senate. I know Senator Corker has 
been a true advocate of that process and certainly worked very well in 
the last Congress to make sure our committee acted in a timely way. I 
look forward to working with Senator Corker in this Congress to advance 
those nominees.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I rise in support of these two 
nominations. I appreciate the distinguished ranking member, Senator 
Cardin, for reading out their bios. They are Foreign Service officers 
and have been in government service for some time. I applaud their 
desire to serve at this level and certainly plan to support them here 
at our 5:30 vote and hope other Members of the Senate will.
  As to the point regarding nominations, I think our committee last 
year couldn't have acted in a more speedy fashion in getting nominees 
out. I know we are starting a new Congress, and there is a little 
backlog that takes place. But I can assure the Senator and others on 
the committee and others in this body that I have no desire to hold up 
especially Foreign Service officers who have committed their lives to 
the Foreign Service and have handled themselves in such a professional 
manner nor, actually, other nominees. So I do look forward to working 
with Senator Cardin to clear some folks through. I know we have had 
conversations today regarding moving them across the Senate floor. I 
know every time there is a recess, typically a large swath of people 
are actually moved out right before recess. Hopefully, that will be the 
case as it relates to some of the Foreign Service nominations that are 
here.
  But I appreciate the Senator raising it. I appreciate the way he 
works with me, and I look forward to things picking up speed now that 
the backlog of the first-of-the-year beginning and some of the many 
activities that have been under way have been completed. So I thank the 
Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, again, let me thank Senator Corker. It has 
been a real pleasure to work with him on the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee. He has put the interest of the Senate and our Nation as the 
principle guiding force and the appropriate role for the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee.
  In that regard, there is an amendment pending that we will be voting 
on tomorrow on the National Defense Authorization Act. It comes under 
the jurisdiction of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Let me 
comment on that, if I might. That is an amendment offered by Senator 
Ernst, and her amendment would provide temporary authority to provide 
arms directly to the Kurds, the Kurdish regional government's security 
forces, outside the process established with coordinating all U.S. 
weapons deliveries and training with the Government of Iraq and 
Baghdad. Not only is it the U.S. policy to ensure that all armed 
transfers are coordinated and approved by the Government of Iraq, it is 
also the law of our country.
  I very much oppose this amendment, and I just want my colleagues to 
understand why I hope they will reject this amendment. I know it is 
well intended, but it would undermine the authority of the central 
government. What we are looking for, how we are going to ultimately be 
able to bring stability to Iraq, we need to have a central government 
that represents all the communities of Iraq, that represents the Shias, 
represents the Sunnis, represents the Kurds. If the central government 
cannot be the coordinating entity, then we are going to have a void in 
that country which only fuels the ability of organizations such as ISIS 
to be able to get recruits and resources for their terrorist 
activities.
  We are sending military advisers, funding, and arms to the Iraqis and 
leading a global coalition and working every day with the Iraqi leaders 
and communities at all levels because we have an interest in a stable, 
unified, and Federal Iraq. To achieve this goal, we must have the 
confidence of all of the Iraqi leaders, and that is why it is important 
for us to coordinate our strategy through a central government.
  I want to make one other point absolutely clear. There is absolutely 
no evidence that the Baghdad government is delaying or denying arms to 
the Kurds. To date, the United States and the anti-ISIL coalition has 
provided over 47 million rounds of ammunition, thousands of artillery 
pieces and rifles, 1,000 AT4 shoulder-fired, anti-armor systems, 
hundreds of vehicles, including Mine Resistant Ambush Protected 
vehicles, known as the MRAPs, and European missiles to counter vehicle-
borne improvised explosive devices. They have been receiving arms.
  We have received letters, both the Senate Armed Services Committee 
and the Foreign Relations Committee, from Secretary of State Kerry and 
Secretary of Defense Carter in opposition to the Ernst amendment.
  If I might quote from Secretary Kerry, where he said:

       Any language that calls for preferred treatment for one 
     region of Iraq strengthens voices that have been working 
     against the pragmatic reconciliation policies advocated by 
     Prime Minister Abadi. . . . It also reinforces Iran's 
     narrative that the United States seeks Iraq's partition and 
     that Iran is Iraq's only true and reliable partner. The 
     result, therefore, is the precise opposite of what may have 
     been intended: the language strengthens ISIL and other 
     extremists, weakens Iraqi voices committed to working with 
     the Coalition to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL, 
     increased Iran's prominence, and erodes state authority at a 
     time when such authority is vitally needed to isolate and 
     defeat extremist actors.

  What Secretary Kerry is saying is--it should be pretty obvious--that 
in order to diminish Iran's influence in Iraq, you need a central 
government that has the confidence of the Sunni population and the 
Kurdish population. If, on the other hand, we are talking about trying 
to divide the country, that we are going to deal differently with the 
Kurdish defense and not through the central defense, then it feeds into 
the point that the United States is not serious about developing a 
unified Iraqi authority. We must have that if we are going to be able 
to succeed in Iraq.
  What Secretary Carter said, Secretary of Defense:

       Directly arming the Kurds or other groups within Iraq is 
     inconsistent with the longstanding U.S. foreign policy of 
     working to maintain a stable, unified, Iraq. . . . 
     Legislative language of this type risks undermining the 
     Government of Iraq and undercutting ongoing coalition 
     military operations that are conducting in coordination with 
     the Government of Iraq to degrade, destroy, and ultimately 
     defeat ISIL.

  Once again, we have our two top individuals both telling us this 
would be counterproductive. I know my colleague is well intentioned 
with her amendment, but the fact is that the only way we are going to 
succeed in Iraq is if we can have a Government of Iraq that has the 
confidence of all the communities and an Iraqi Government that believes 
the United States is not picking sides among the ethnic communities in 
Iraq and that Iraq does not have to rely on Iran for its security 
needs.
  That means this amendment could be counterproductive to those very 
goals, our very goals in Iraq. When this amendment comes up for vote 
tomorrow, I urge my colleagues to vote against it.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page 9562]]


  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I will be supporting the nominee who is 
going to be shortly voted on.


                    3rd Anniversary of DACA Program

  Mr. President, I take this opportunity to rise on the third 
anniversary of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program for 
all of the young men and women it has helped--young men and women who 
came to this country as young children through no choice of their own. 
Their parents made that decision for them. The only country they have 
ever known is that of the United States. The only flag they pledge 
allegiance to is the American flag. The only national anthem they know 
is ``The Star-Spangled Banner.'' And because of the Deferred Action for 
Childhood Arrivals Program, they have had temporary deportation relief 
and work authorizations so they could achieve their full potential as 
young Americans.
  I celebrate what we call this program, DACA, Deferred Action for 
Childhood Arrivals Program, with great pride because I pushed very hard 
to make it a reality. I spoke to the President many times about 
granting long overdue administrative relief to DREAMers, who are 
Americans in every way except for a piece of paper. And 3 years ago 
with the tireless advocacy of DREAMers, the immigrant community, 
community leaders in cities and towns across America, and with the help 
of countless Members of Congress, the President took action and changed 
the lives of millions of young men and women living in this country, 
allowing them to fully contribute to the country they call home.
  Today, the dream is still very much alive. This Deferred Action for 
Childhood Arrivals Program has harnessed the talent of hundreds of 
thousands of young Americans in immeasurable ways since its successful 
inception, and it is a success because of the bold Executive actions 
taken in June of 2012.
  In an immigration system that is as flawed as ours, the Deferred 
Action for Childhood Arrivals Program has been a beacon of hope, one 
step toward a more fair and just reality for immigrants in our great 
country. The numbers tell the story.
  The action gave 700,000 young immigrants a chance at a better life. 
It has strengthened our economy and has generated roughly $422 million 
in application fees over the last 3 years. It has allowed young 
Americans to open bank accounts, get a driver's license, get a new job, 
prepare for the future with a growing sense of stability, economic 
security, and financial solvency.
  This program has been a model of success, shaped by the courageous 
individuals who have decided to come forward, register with the 
government, pass a criminal background check, work hard, and take 
advantage of the opportunities the deferred action program provides.
  In my home State of New Jersey alone, more than 25,000 young people 
have been granted the peace of mind that comes with temporary 
protection from deportation and the ability to work. We are talking 
about young people who attend our schools, serve our communities, 
people who dream just like all children dream of becoming doctors or 
teachers, artists, and entrepreneurs with a full stake in America.
  We are talking about people like Deyanira Aldana, who graduated from 
Essex County College just this past May. She came to the United States 
when she was 4 years old. She now works and lives in New Jersey with 
her mom and dad and older brother and sister who are also DACA 
recipients. She plans on becoming a substitute teacher and is grateful 
to the doors the deferred action program has opened to her.
  Deyanira, like other new Americans and future Americans, is part of 
the rich fabric that forms New Jersey's and America's histories and 
destiny. Her family represents who we are as a nation. They embody the 
spirit of American life, which has always been shaped by the hopes, 
dreams, and courage of those who have made it to this country and 
called it their home.
  It is appropriate that these deferred action beneficiaries--the 
children of immigrants we refer to as DREAMers--have the chance to 
fully contribute their talents and live the American dream because of 
the deferred action program. In the absence of comprehensive 
immigration reform, DACA allows them to live with dignity and fulfill 
their full potential. Because of the Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals Program, hundreds of thousands of DREAMers no longer have the 
fear of deportation and family separation hanging over their heads and 
now are our newest college students, teachers, and small business 
owners. If we look closely at who those individuals are, we see that 
this program is about families like Deyanira's. By removing the fear of 
deportation, of being unnecessarily torn from your loved ones at a 
moment's notice, more families can now live in peace, with dignity, and 
with real hopes of building a stronger future together.
  Three years later, we see how our Nation's dreams and aspirations are 
more attainable when DREAMers can achieve their full potential. The 
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program is living proof that all 
of America benefits when an undocumented individual steps out of the 
shadows and is able to fully contribute to the economy through their 
ingenuity, skills, and hard work.
  We need to build upon programs like DACA, not turn our backs on 
extending opportunities to those who are willing to work hard for them. 
It is long past time for us to replace the lingering anxiety and fear 
in immigrant communities with smart policies that make good on 
America's promise to provide opportunity and freedom for all.
  For many, the dream began with the Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals Program. For others, that dream is still delayed. I look 
forward to the day the President's more recent Executive actions 
announcing the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability Program and 
expanded DACA are implemented.
  Despite the obstructionism of some, I am confident justice will 
ultimately prevail, and the President's actions will be upheld by our 
courts. I will continue to fight not just for the DACA recipients but 
for their parents, other DREAMers, and for every immigrant family. I 
will continue to fight for comprehensive immigration reform that will 
fix our Nation's broken immigration system once and for all, not just 
because it makes good economic sense but because it is the right thing 
to do.
  I am not alone. Seventy-two percent of Americans believe undocumented 
immigrants who currently live in the United States should have a path 
toward permanent residency and ultimately to legal citizenship. 
Americans continue to overwhelmingly support fixing our broken system, 
and the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program's success should 
further encourage Congress to move forward, fortified by the conviction 
that comprehensive immigration reform is a fight worth fighting for.
  Let me close by saying, in the meantime, I join my colleagues in 
commemorating DACA's anniversary as a day that marks 3 years of smart 
and successful policy, as a step in the right direction, and as a 
foundation upon which we can continue to build. It is an opportunity 
for the American dream to be realized by some of the youngest and best 
and brightest whom we have in the Nation. Many of these young men and 
women--I have met them--are valedictorians, salutatorians, and we need 
to use their intellect, energy, and creative talents to build a better 
America.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       Vote on McGuire Nomination

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
  Under the previous order, the question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of Matthew T. McGuire, of the District of 
Columbia,

[[Page 9563]]

to be United States Executive Director of the International Bank for 
Reconstruction and Development for a term of two years?
  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the Senator from Mississippi 
(Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Crapo), the Senator from 
Texas (Mr. Cruz), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the 
Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee), 
the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. 
Murkowski), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), the Senator from 
Alabama (Mr. Sessions), the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Shelby), and the 
Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer) 
is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lankford). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 62, nays 24, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 208 Ex.]

                                YEAS--62

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Flake
     Franken
     Gardner
     Gillibrand
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Hirono
     Johnson
     Kaine
     King
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Tillis
     Udall
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--24

     Barrasso
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Capito
     Daines
     Enzi
     Fischer
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Isakson
     Lankford
     McConnell
     Moran
     Paul
     Perdue
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Sasse
     Scott
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Toomey
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Boxer
     Burr
     Cochran
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Graham
     Inhofe
     Lee
     McCain
     Murkowski
     Rubio
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Vitter
  The nomination was confirmed.


                        Vote on Smith Nomination

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of Gentry O. Smith, of North Carolina, a 
Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-
Counselor, to be Director of the Office of Foreign Missions, and to 
have the rank of Ambassador during his tenure of service?
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motions to 
reconsider are considered made and laid upon the table and the 
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's actions.

                          ____________________