Floor Statements

Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent

to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, first I have got to acknowledge that I am not objective when it comes to Margaret Taylor, since I have had a chance to work with her. When I was the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, she was the legal counsel for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the Democrats. She was well respected in the legal advice that she gave us, both to Republicans and Democrats, and well respected by all Members of our committee. She is an outstanding public servant and is desperately needed to have a confirmed position for legal counsel in the State Department.

And, I must tell you, it is no surprise that all of the living former Legal Advisers, from Reagan to Trump--40 years, Democrats and Republicans--wrote to our committee to strongly endorse her and urge her prompt confirmation.

In regards to the two points that Senator Risch has raised, one in regards to the interpretation of reproductive rights, she advised full compliance with U.S. law, including relating to statutory restrictions on foreign assistance related to reproductive health. It is the same advice that was given by general counsel to the Trump administration. There was no difference between the two administrations.

And as for the issue concerning Mr. Malley, that issue was 6 months before this nomination was considered.

This nomination needs to be confirmed. We need to have a confirmed person in this position. There has been no substantive argument as to why she should not be confirmed. She is highly qualified.

I urge my colleagues to support the nomination.

I yield the floor.

I want to thank Senator Ernst for arranging this time. This is a critical moment. We are close to having a deal where the hostages can be released. It is important that we all speak out. I want to thank Senator Ernst for arranging this time.

To Senator Rosen, thank you for your incredible leadership on this issue. I thank you for your comments. I certainly concur in those comments.

We just left a meeting with the hostage families that are here. I have been meeting with the hostage families regularly since October 7. I first want to acknowledge their courage for putting a face on these issues and motivating us to do more.

I made a commitment when I was in Israel in October that I would do everything in my power to get the hostages released. And, every day, I look at opportunities and I ask my staff to look for opportunities so we can get the hostages released.

Let me make this clear. Hamas is responsible for the hostages. They have taken them. They never should have. Some died under their custody, and there are still hostages who haven't been released after 291 days.

I had the opportunity to be in Buenos Aires last week, representing the United States at the 30th commemoration of the AMIA bombing, the Jewish community center where 85 lost their lives. It was a very moving ceremony in which the families of the victims of the Jewish community center bombing spoke. They want to make sure we never forget the names of those 85.

And they demanded justice. It has been 30 years, and justice still has not been handed down to Hezbollah and Hamas and Iran, who are responsible for those attacks.

We are demanding the release of the hostages that were taken on October 7, and we will not forget their names--the eight Americans who have not yet been accounted for.

Omer--I just met his family--a 22-year-old born leader, grew up in Long Island. He was the regional president of the United Synagogue Youth and captain of many sports teams. He is being held by Hamas.

You heard about the others: Itay, Edan, Hersh, Sagui, Keith, Judith, and Gadi. They are just the eight Americans that are being held. All the hostages need to be released, and they need to be released now. Two hundred ninety-one days--it is outrageous.

Mr. President, I wanted to join Senator Ernst today to make it clear that there is no justification for the holding of the hostages. We have an opportunity to reach an agreement. Let's do this. Let's get it done. Let's get the hostages home. Let's hold the perpetrators accountable for the atrocities that they have perpetrated. And let's find a path for real security and peace in the Middle East, for the Palestinians and the Israelis.

There is no room for peace in the Middle East with Hamas. They need to be held accountable for these atrocities, and the hostages need to be released today. Let us all join together in unity to get the hostages home.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, just to alert our colleagues, it is my intention at the end of this debate to make a point of order that this joint resolution is not entitled to privilege under 50 U.S.C. 1546a due to U.S. troops not being engaged in hostilities, but in order to allow the debate to continue, I will withhold that motion until the end of discussions.

This resolution that is before us would be an unprecedented invocation of the expedited procedures in the War Powers Resolution. I am a strong supporter of the War Powers. I think it is an appropriate use of oversight on our power to commit our troops to harm's way. This resolution does not seek to remove U.S. forces from hostilities but, rather, to end a specific mission. The War Powers is to deal with our military troops, not to deal with tactical military and nonmilitary actions. The Senate should not allow the privileged vehicles intended for entirely different purposes to be used as a backdoor effort to stop humanitarian assistance.

Let me be clear about this. American boots are not on the ground in Gaza. The U.S. troops who are operating the pier in question are not engaged in hostilities or in carrying out a mission that requires the authorization of the use of military force. They are facilitating the delivery of food, water, and other basic humanitarian assistance. The supplies are not even being delivered by U.S. forces.

Let me just call to our colleagues' attention what is included in the War Powers Act itself. It deals with U.S. Armed Forces when they are ``[i]nto hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.'' That is not what we have here in regards to the pier, so this is not the appropriate use of the War Powers Act.

I might tell you, this is somewhat moot because we expect, by the end of this month, for the pier operations to cease.

In any event, I think it is important for this body to make clear that we support the War Powers. This is not an appropriate use of the War Powers. For that reason, I will be making a motion, at the end, of a point of order.

I understand some of my other colleagues have some points, so I will yield the floor, but I will ask for the floor before the end of the debate.

Mr. President, let me thank my colleague from West Virginia.

I think my colleague is going about it the right way in dealing with the substance of the issue through a resolution and not by invoking the authorities we have for expedited procedures under the War Powers Act.

For that reason, I later intend to make a point of order.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, there is no dispute that there is active hostility in Gaza. That is not the issue. The question is whether American troops have been engaged in that hostility, and they are not. That is when the War Powers Act is triggered.

American presence through missions are common in areas surrounding active hostilities. That is not unusual. So the use of the War Powers Act in this circumstance would be unprecedented.

I would urge my colleagues to recognize there are other ways we can express ourselves. I thank Senator Manchin for giving us that opportunity. But this is the wrong procedure to use.

And if all time is yielded back--

I yield the floor.

In a brief rebuttal, I will tell you a mission dealing with humanitarian assistance is not introducing our soldiers.

Point of Order

Mr. President, I yield back our time, and I make a point of order that this joint resolution is not entitled to privilege under 50 U.S.C. 1546a due to U.S. troops not being engaged in hostilities.

Vote on Point of Order

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, it is interesting. Earlier today, there was a large bipartisan group of Senators that met with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine. We expressed our bipartisan support for the United States continuing to support Ukraine's efforts to repeal the outrageous attack to their sovereignty by Mr. Putin and Russia. There was bipartisan support for Ukraine because we recognized that Ukraine is the frontline in the defense of our democracy. Ukraine is not asking us for our soldiers; they are asking us for our support.

So I want to start, in my concerns of the unanimous consent request offered by the Senator from Utah, in that the support for the defense of Ukraine enjoys overwhelming bipartisan support here in the U.S. Senate. That is why I was pleased to join Senator Wicker on the floor. When the supplemental funding bill came up for a vote, 79 Senators-- Republicans and Democrats alike--backed it.

Why is that? It is because most Senators understand what is at stake. It is because we understand that Ukraine is not only fighting for themselves; they are fighting for the entire Western World. It is because we understand, if Putin is successful in Ukraine, it will endanger our security interests and those of some of our closest European allies.

Yes, they are asking for financial and military support. Their success--Ukraine's success--will help make it possible for our soldiers not to be in another war in Europe. So supporting Ukraine in this fight against one of the most dangerous adversaries in the world is clearly in the national security interests of the United States.

I also want to address one of the arguments offered by my colleague from Utah: the idea that this Executive agreement should have no effect unless submitted to the Senate for advice and consent. Multiple administrations have used Executive agreements to advance diplomatic goals that are in the U.S.'s national security interests. Along with my colleagues, I support this bilateral agreement because it does just that; it advances Ukraine's interests and our own interests in national security.

Unlike other administrations, in the case of this agreement, the Biden administration proactively reached out to Members and staff in both Chambers of both parties to share the parameters of the negotiations while they were underway. They solicited reactions and input from Congress, and they took some of our input in regards to the final negotiations. Unlike the practices of previous administrations, the Biden administration posted the text of the agreement on the State Department's website the day it was signed.

We in Congress were kept up to date on parallel negotiations with Ukraine by 31 other nations. They were negotiating with 31 countries in bilateral security agreements so that we could give comprehensive help to Ukraine in its defense of democracy. Many are in NATO, but there are also other countries that the U.S. has rallied to support Ukraine. So far, Ukraine has signed 20 bilateral security deals. They include concrete provisions on long-term military and financial aid. They include the training of Ukrainian troops. They include weapons delivery.

I want to be clear: They do not include the deployment of foreign soldiers to fight in Ukraine. It is envisioned that 32 nations will enter into bilateral security agreements with Ukraine. While they will vary to some extent, they will create a robust commitment of support for Ukraine. I would also add that these agreements--and specifically the United States' bilateral agreement with Ukraine-- include commitments by Ukraine to continue its consolidation of democratic governance and anti-corruption initiatives.

It is absolutely critical we send a clear message to Vladimir Putin that, no matter who is in the White House, the United States will stand by Ukraine in its fight to maintain its sovereignty.

Finally, this is not charity. It serves our national security interests. It is because future wars will be different from prior conflicts. They will now involve modern technology. Right now, Ukraine is experimenting with how to be effective in such a war, and Ukraine is adapting in realtime. With this bilateral agreement, Ukraine will be sharing information with the United States on everything they are learning on the battlefield. They will give our soldiers and military planners the ability to develop creative ways to use these new technologies.

This agreement strengthens our national security; it strengthens Ukraine; and it strengthens the resolve of allies looking to the United States for leadership on the global stage.

For all of these reasons, I object to the unanimous consent request.

Mr. President, 75 years ago, a brutal Russian dictator had pushed Russia to the brink of war. Soviet-sponsored coups had removed democratically elected governments in Eastern Europe. Communist revolutionaries were trying to seek control of Greece. Authoritarian forces threatened American Allies across Europe. The peace that we fought so hard to secure during World War II was in jeopardy.

To meet these challenges, the United States and nations on both sides of the Atlantic that shared a democratic, free, and prosperous vision of the world came together and formed an alliance, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. President Truman signed the treaty, along with representatives from Canada, Belgium, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and the United Kingdom.

The heart of this treaty has always been article 5. It states that ``the Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.''

Despite the incredible changes we have seen in the world over the past 75 years, as the NATO alliance comes together for a summit here in Washington this week, the power of our solemn promise of solidarity is just as important as ever.

Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine has laid bare the danger Russia once again poses to Europe. From the Baltic States and Poland to Romania and Bulgaria, NATO member countries have seen what Mr. Putin's army is capable of doing in Ukraine--targeting maternity wards and kindergartens, kidnapping and forcing children to relocate to Russia, executing innocent civilians with their hands tied behind their backs.

For those people living in Moscow's shadow, the only thing standing between a Russian invasion and such horrific war crimes is NATO. This makes the strength of our alliance vitally important.

I want to thank Secretary General Stoltenberg for his tireless efforts to guide the alliance through the last decade.

The alliance is stronger today thanks to the recent additions of Finland and Sweden; thanks to the important financial contributions of member states, especially on the eastern flank; and thanks to the leadership of the Biden administration--in particular, Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin.

Because of the hard work of our military and political leaders on both sides of the Atlantic, today, NATO is more unified, but there are concerns. Whether it is the former President of the United States who tells Russia to ``do whatever the hell they want'' or the delays in getting supplemental security funding for Ukraine passed in the House of Representatives earlier this year, diplomats on both sides of the Atlantic are asking legitimate questions: Where is our alliance headed? Can Putin be stopped in Ukraine? Will NATO continue to have our backs?

As the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I want to be crystal clear: The answer is and must be yes.

NATO has been there for the United States in tough times, whether it is defending our skies after 9/11 or providing food and medical supplies to the people of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Now more than ever, I believe the United States must stand shoulder to shoulder with our European allies. That is why I backed efforts to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia. That is why I never gave up pushing for the passage of the supplemental security assistance and was glad that it was finally enacted. That is why I am supportive of the recent bilateral security agreement between the United States and Ukraine. It is also why I support plans for NATO to take an expanded role in coordinating the defense of Ukraine, because no matter who is in the Oval Office, assistance to Ukraine must continue, defense of Europe against Russian aggression must continue, and strengthening of the NATO alliance must continue. Above all, we must not give up hope that we can succeed.

Seventy-five years ago at the NATO treaty signing, President Truman said:

For us, war is not inevitable. We do not believe there are

blind tides of history which sweep men one way or another. In

our own time we have seen brave men overcome obstacles that

seemed insurmountable and forces that seem overwhelming. Men

with courage and vision can still determine their own

destiny.

I am confident that NATO's leaders--men and women meeting here in Washington this week--possess both courage and vision. There may be debates about how NATO can best engage with our allies in the Indo- Pacific, like Japan and South Korea and Australia, or how to best posture ourselves on NATO's eastern flank, but I am optimistic that NATO's future is bright because there is no question that what brings us together is our commitment to keeping authoritarian governments at bay, our commitment to democratic institutions and the protection of human rights, our commitment to peace and prosperity, and our commitment to our values.

So as we welcome NATO leaders to Washington this week and celebrate

the 75th anniversary of the NATO alliance, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support and protect NATO's military alliance that has made our world a safer place for over seven decades. Let us work together to build a future that is free and secure and peaceful for generations to come.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider with respect to the Sullivan nomination be considered made and laid upon the table, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's actions.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise today in recognition of the 54th anniversary of Pride Month. I would first like to take a moment to acknowledge how much progress has been made in the span of just a half century.

The first Pride was born out of the Stonewall Uprising, which took place in 1969 after police conducted a violent raid at the Stonewall Inn, a New York City bar known as a place of refuge for members of the LGBTQ+ community. The raid and the ensuing riot in response nearly destroyed the Stonewall Inn and sparked a series of protests against the police's brutality that night.

In the face of such violence and discrimination, a group of gay rights organizers responded by commemorating the first anniversary of the uprising with a march to celebrate the resilience of the LGBTQ+ community. Five decades later, we continue to strive toward equality and inclusion for this community in all aspects of life. While we have many victories to celebrate, such as the 2015 Supreme Court Obergefell decision guaranteeing marriage equality, we still have much to do.

I am proud to represent a State that is known to be welcoming to members of the LGBTQ+ community. Last year, Maryland Governor Wes Moore issued an executive order to protect access to gender-affirming care, a huge win for transgender and nonbinary Marylanders.

This year, Maryland is hosting over a dozen local Pride parades and celebrations, from Hagerstown to Salisbury and everywhere in between. And this past weekend, we celebrated Pride in my home city of Baltimore, which has one of the longest running Pride celebrations in the nation.

However, I am dismayed by a growing movement across the country to suppress the rights of LGBTQ+ people and reverse our Nation's hard-won progress. We have a responsibility to uphold the rights and freedoms of all Americans. Therefore, we must not stand by idly as legislative attacks on this community increase across the country. Laws that aim to codify hate and discrimination are despicable. We must challenge this hate not only with our hearts, but through the proactive protection of civil rights.

In particular, we must defend transgender children, their parents, and the right to access gender-affirming care and other support services.

There have been recent efforts by some Members of Congress to use the annual appropriations bill as a vehicle to ban the use of Federal funds for gender-affirming care and DEI initiatives. I urge my colleagues to remember the commitment we have to our Nation to ensure liberty and justice for all. Attacks on personal autonomy that use the mantle of religious freedom to

sanction official discrimination are unacceptable. In 2024, we as the U.S. Congress must rebuke these efforts not only with words, but with action.

The energy with which an alarming number of local and State legislators craft legislation that targets transgender individuals should be channeled into other efforts that would help, not harm, our people.

I am proud to support several pieces of legislation that would expand LGBTQ+ individuals' access to a wide range of resources and protections. I am particularly proud to be a cosponsor of Senator Murray's Therapeutic Fraud Prevention Act. We hear a lot of talk about the importance of protecting our children but have yet to take serious action to hold so-called ``conversion therapy providers'' accountable for abuse and fraud.

The scientific literature increasingly agrees that ``conversion therapy,'' which claims to be able to change a person's sexual or gender identity through various interventions, simply does not work.

Furthermore, these practices are strongly associated with adverse mental health effects, such as anxiety, depression, and suicide, in people who have been through conversion programs. With Senator Murray's Bill, we can--and will--prevent further traumatization of our LGBTQ+ youth and their families.

Another bill I am proud to support is the bipartisan Safe Schools Improvement Act, led by Senator Casey, that would ensure K-12 students across America could receive age-appropriate education to prevent all forms of bullying and harassment. Bullying can lead to tragic outcomes like the loss of Nex Benedict, a nonbinary teenager who died this March after being severely bullied at school for their gender identity.

We already know statistically that LGBTQ+ children and teens across America are at disproportionate risk of depression, anxiety, and suicidality. Instead of enabling the discrimination that is so damaging to our kids' mental health, we should be working to turn those statistics around so that more children, like Nex, get the chance to grow up and pursue their dreams.

Eradicating homophobia in our Nation starts with an honest education on the past and present of the LGBTQ+ community. Senator Casey's bill presents an opportunity to protect our youth from ignorance and its dire consequences.

I am also proud to cosponsor the Equality Act, offered by Senator Merkley. This legislation would prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, or gender identify with respect to businesses, employment, housing, federally funded programs, and other settings.

All Americans should be treated equally under the law--no matter who they love or how they identify. LGBTQ+ individuals deserve to be afforded every right and protection granted to their neighbors. Members of this community should feel safe enough to be themselves and are entitled to the respect and recognition we expect for every human being.

I am a proud ally who will continue to fight all forms of attack against the LGBTQ+ community. No hate crimes or State-sanctioned discrimination will ever be tolerated by myself, and I expect the same of my colleagues and fellow Americans. The U.S. Senate must challenge intolerance and safeguard civil rights for LGBTQ+ individuals everywhere.

Our Nation must not allow individual opinions to derail the right to dignity to which every American is entitled. It is imperative the United States of America uphold the values of tolerance, compassion, and freedom upon which we claim to stand.

And we certainly cannot overshadow the bravery, joy, and resistance to societal regression that so many LGBTQ+ individuals and activists have demonstrated. I am committed to growing Federal support and increasing resources to safeguard civil rights for this community. I believe that I have an obligation, not just as a Senator from Maryland, but as a human being, to do so. And I look forward to continuing to work, not just this Pride Month but every day of the year, toward equality for all.

Madam President, today on World Refugee Day, I am here to honor the tens of millions of people worldwide who have been forced to flee their homes. World Refugee Day was first held in June of 2001 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the 1951 Refugee Convention and to shine a light on the needs and rights of refugees while giving voice to their aspirations.

At that time, in 2001, the number of forcibly displaced persons globally was close to 20 million. Today that number stands at 120 million people, according to the U.N. Refugee Agency. This staggering figure, the highest in recorded history, means that 1.5 percent of the entire world's population has been forced to flee their homes as a result of persecution, conflict, violence, or natural disasters like drought, crop failures, or famine.

In the past 10 years, the number of forcibly displaced persons has more than doubled as new conflicts have arisen and longstanding crises have gone unresolved, made worse by the impacts of climate change, food insecurity, and poverty.

Of this 120 million, there are more than 31 million refugees who have crossed international borders to seek safety in another country--31 million people who are not safe from prosecution in their own country of origin. There are more than 68 million internally displaced persons, the majority of whom are women and children, forced from their homes but still within the country's borders.

In every region of the world, we see people pushed from their homes: in the Sudan, where the brutal and altogether avoidable conflict between the Rapid

Support Forces and Sudan Armed Forces has forced more than 9 million people to flee their homes, and without a ceasefire and sustainable peace agreement, these numbers will only continue to grow; in Ukraine, where Putin's illegal full-scale invasion has pushed nearly 10 million Ukrainians from their homes, including more than 6 million refugees; in Gaza, where approximately 75 percent of the population--1.7 million people--has been displaced and displaced multiple times since last October; and in Haiti, where widespread violence has uprooted more than 360,000 people in the past year.

Even as crises fades from the headlines, the impact to people's lives do not: for nearly 14 million displaced Syrians representing over half the country's population to the estimated 6.5 million Afghan refugees around the world, to the more than 6 million Venezuelan refugees, the long tail of conflict and crisis has left millions displaced year after year.

Behind every number is a story of a life uprooted, but there is also a story of courage, of resilience and hope for a brighter future, the hope of a refugee mother for her child to receive an education, the hope of a refugee woman to someday become a doctor, the hope of a family caught in the crosshairs of war to return to their homes and live in peace.

Achieving this brighter future requires urgent and sustained support from the United States and the international community. Massive cuts proposed by House colleagues to the Migration and Refugee Assistance accounts for fiscal year 2025 would turn our back and imperil the lives of those most at risk.

That is why this day I will be introducing, along with 21 of my Senate colleagues, a resolution reaffirming the importance of promoting the safety, health, and well-being of refugees and displaced persons in the United States and around the world.

This means upholding the long history of the United States welcoming people from around the world who have been oppressed and persecuted. Our U.S. Refugee Admission Program, established in 1980, remains a lifesaving pillar for resettling the most vulnerable refugees.

It means further tapping into the deep generosity of Americans, as demonstrated by the U.S. Government's welcome tour through which private citizens are supporting newly arrived refugees themselves.

It means supporting host communities, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, where 75 percent of all refugees are hosted while advocating for refugee inclusion. It means continuing U.S. leadership by the State Department, USAID, and NGO partners in responding to displacement crises with humanitarian assistance and protection for forcibly displaced persons that are at risk of gender- based violence, human trafficking, and other human rights abuses.

It means working in partnership with the international community to resolve conflicts, to address climate change that is destroying lands and livelihoods, and to hold human rights abusers accountable so that people can return to their homes.

In taking these steps, we will not only uplift the lives of vulnerable people around the world, we will also promote regional stability and strengthen U.S. national security.

So on World Refugee Day, let us all join together to mitigate the causes that have forced refugees to leave their homes and help these individuals who are displaced to have an opportunity for a peaceful future.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Madam President, I rise today to recognize June as National Oral Health Month. This month provides us an opportunity to reflect on the significant role oral health plays in overall health and to recommit our efforts to ensure that Americans have access to quality oral health care.

While oral diseases alone contribute to negative outcomes, there are proven relationships between poor oral health and other medical conditions like cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, cancers, pneumonia, premature birth, and infectious diseases. The World Health Organization estimates economic productivity losses from oral diseases at $323 billion in 2022.

Oral disease affects Americans of all ages. For children, dental cavities remain one of the most common chronic diseases. About one in four preschool children experienced caries in primary teeth and at least one in six children aged 6 to 11 years experienced dental cavities in permanent teeth. According to the CDC, 34 million school hours are lost each year--on average--because of emergency dental care.

In Maryland, like many other States, we have witnessed firsthand the consequences of neglecting the oral health of young people. Deamonte Driver, a 12-year-old Prince George's County resident, tragically died in 2007 due to a lack of comprehensive dental services. Deamonte's death was particularly heartbreaking because it was entirely preventable. What started out as a toothache turned into a severe brain infection that could have been prevented by an $80 extraction. After multiple surgeries and a lengthy hospital stay, sadly, Deamonte passed away.

We must ensure everyone has timely, affordable access to oral health care.

In recent years, dentists nationwide have seen a significant decrease in operating room access for dental procedures. This problem has primarily impacted children and adults with disabilities who are in need of urgent dental care and cannot access it in an office-based setting, necessitating care in an operating room. Earlier this Congress, Senator Blackburn and I sent a letter to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services urging them to include the recently established code for dental surgical services in the 2024 Medicare Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System. I am glad to say that the code was included in CMS's final rule to expand access to these critical procedures and shorten the waitlists to receive care under general anesthesia in operating rooms.

I am proud to say that we have since made significant progress in improving access to pediatric dental care in our country and in Maryland. In 2009, Congress reauthorized the Children's Health Insurance Program--CHIP--with an important addition: a guaranteed pediatric dental benefit. Research shows that CHIP generally offers more comprehensive benefits at a much lower cost to families than private coverage. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act--ACA--has significantly improved access to affordable dental care for millions of Americans by requiring most insurers to cover essential health benefits.

Providing dental coverage for adults also improves outcomes for their children. A 2021 study found that Medicaid adult dental coverage was associated with a reduction in the prevalence of untreated tooth decay among children after parents had access to coverage for at least 1 year. The study found that all children saw improvements in oral health, and non-Hispanic Black children experienced larger and more persistent improvements than non-Hispanic White children. A Medicaid dental benefit for adults would enhance the progress for children and provide much needed dental care and improve oral health outcomes for adults, showing the interconnectedness in outcomes for all ages.

Earlier this Congress, I introduced the Medicare Dental Benefit Act. This legislation would require Medicare coverage to include dental and oral health services, such as routine diagnostic and preventive services, basic and major dental services, and emergency care. By including these services in Medicare, more than 65 million seniors and people with disabilities would have access to affordable dental care.

I have also worked with Senator Stabenow to introduce the Medicaid Dental Benefit Act. This bill would extend comprehensive dental health benefits to tens of millions of low-income Americans on Medicaid. The legislation would provide States with a 100 percent Federal match for the dental benefit for 3 years. This investment of Federal funds would support States to set up or improve their dental benefit and assist in provider education and outreach efforts to better connect enrollees to oral health care.

Last year, I held a hearing in the Senate Finance Health Care Subcommittee to focus on these issues. The hearing highlighted disparities in access to oral health care, which have persisted and have serious consequences for children, adults, families, and communities. I was proud to have Dr. Warren Brill, a distinguished pediatric dentist from Maryland who has long provided care to low- income children serve as a witness. Dr. Brill was able to provide valuable insights for our conversation and gave Senators an on-the- ground perspective of someone doing this important work.

It is also important that we support research focused on empowering dentists and advancing oral health for all. I am proud to have the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, one of the National Institutes of Health, in Maryland and I was glad to pass a resolution this Congress to recognize their 75th anniversary and highlight the important work they do.

While we will continue to work on combating oral disease in Maryland and the United States, we must also realize that it is a global challenge that requires cooperation from partners around the world to address effectively.

Oral diseases, such as tooth decay and gum disease, are globally the most common health conditions, impacting over 3.5 billion people as of 2019. Despite the widespread nature of oral diseases, many go untreated as health systems around the world are often not properly equipped to deliver appropriate oral health care.

In light of these concerning figures, I am glad to see that the World Health Organization, FDI World Dental Federation, and National Institutes of Health have all issued landmark oral health reports in 2021 and 2022 as well as the World Health Assembly having adopted a global strategy on oral health in 2022. Our coordinated efforts with global partners are essential to overcoming this widespread issue.

It is important that we reiterate that oral health is a crucial part of overall health and accessing care should not be a luxury reserved for the most privileged. Ensuring affordable, quality care not only helps to combat widespread issues like dental caries and gum disease, but also can work to the significant health disparities that exist in America. As we recognize the progress we have made on this issue, we must recommit to expanding access to oral health services, reducing disparities and emphasizing a preventative approach. I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort.