Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, first, let me thank Senator Kyl for his leadership on this issue. He knows I share his views on the global aspect of the legislation. I wish to thank him for his extraordinary leadership as we have been working this issue. We have worked it hard to try to get as far as we possibly could. He will be missed in the next Congress.

We will take up this cause again, but I wanted to thank Senator Kyl for his commitment on this issue and finding a way that we could advance this bill to the floor. I do look forward to the day we will make this bill global.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

We have not yet gotten to the bill. I believe we are now prepared to go to H.R. 6156. I know the Senator from Connecticut would like to speak for 5 minutes, and I was hoping we could get some time where we could go back and forth and talk about the Magnitsky aspects of that legislation now.

Am I correct, Mr. President, that the bill has not yet been reported or it will be reported now and that perhaps we can enter into a consent agreement as to the next 30 or 40 minutes?

I think my initial comments would be about 10 minutes.

Mr. President, first, let me thank Senator McCain for not just working this out but for his leadership on this issue. He has provided the moral leadership we need on dealing with human rights issues. He is a cosponsor of the Sergei Magnitsky Accountability Act, and I thank him for that.

Today we close a chapter in the U.S. history on the advancing of human rights with the repeal basically of Jackson-Vanik. It served its purpose. Today, we open a new chapter in U.S. leadership for human rights with the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act.

As the Presiding Officer has heard, this involves a lawyer named Sergei Magnitsky who had U.S. interests that he was representing in Russia. He discovered the largest tax fraud in Russia's history. He did what a lawyer should do: He brought it to the attention of the authorities.

As a result of his bringing this corruption in local government to the authorities, he was arrested. He was tortured because they wanted him to recant what he had said. They wanted him to basically not tell the truth. He refused to do that. He needed medical attention; he was denied medical attention; and on November 16, 2009, he lost his life in a Russian prison, being denied the opportunity to get needed health care. He was 37 years old, with a wife and two children. Those who were responsible for his death and those who were responsible for the coverup have never been brought to justice. They have gone unpunished, and in some cases they have even been promoted.

The facts are well known. These are not hidden facts. The international community knows the people who were involved, knows about the coverup, and knows that they have not been held accountable, and this has gained international attention. That is why I filed legislation aimed at the individuals responsible for the Magnitsky tragedy. It says, quite clearly, that those involved would be held accountable by being denied certain international rights.

It also includes those involved in extrajudicial killings, torture, or violations of internationally recognized human rights. The legislation says, Look, we are not going to let you have the fruits of your corruption. We are going to deny you the opportunity to hold your illegal gains in our banking system--which is where they prefer; they don't want to hold rubles, they want to hold dollars--and that we will not let you have a visa, a privilege, to visit our country, to visit your property in our country or your family in this country. It targets the individuals who committed the gross human rights violation, and it recognizes the failure of the host country to deal with those violations.

I want to thank all those who have been involved in the development of this legislation. Senator McCain has been one of the great leaders on these human rights issues. This is not a partisan division. We have strong bipartisan support. I have already acknowledged Senator Kyl, who recently spoke. I know Senator Wicker took the floor a little earlier and I thank him, the ranking member on the Helsinki Commission. I want to thank Senator Shaheen, the chair of the European Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for her work, and Senator Bob Menendez on the Foreign Relations Committee. All those individuals were very instrumental in dealing with this. Senator Durbin has been a real champion on human rights. I want to acknowledge Kyle Parker, staff person from the Helsinki Commission, who was very instrumental in the development of this legislation. I want to also acknowledge Senator Lieberman's work. I know he will be speaking in a few minutes.

It was Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain, and myself who first suggested that we should pass the Magnitsky bill. It is the right thing to do, but we certainly shouldn't let PNTR go without attaching the Magnitsky bill. I thank Senator Lieberman and Senator McCain for raising that connection. It was the right thing to do. First, it allowed us to get this human rights tool enacted. Secondly, I think it gave us the best chance to get the PNTR bill done in the right form. So I thank both of them for their leadership.

In 1974, we passed the Jackson-Vanik law that dealt with the failure of the Soviet Union to allow for the emigration of its citizens, affecting mainly Soviet Jews. It was controversial in its time. People said, Why are we connecting human rights to trade? Why is the United States doing that? After all, trade is so important.

Well, we did it. It made a huge difference, and we were able to get Soviet Jews out of the Soviet Union. We spoke for Western values in our trade legislation. We protected the rights of individuals who refused this.

When I first came to Congress 26 years ago, I joined the congressional caucus for Soviet Jewry. I wore the wrist bands of refuseniks, joined by many of our colleagues. Twenty-five years ago, I marched in Washington, a march for Soviet Jews. We stood for basic rights, and we changed the landscape on this issue. I had a chance to

be with Natan Sharansky and celebrate what he meant to people who loved freedom around the world. We initiated that with Jackson-Vanik. It was a proud chapter in American history.

Today we end that chapter, because Jackson-Vanik is no longer relevant to the human rights challenges of our time. But with the passage of the Sergei Magnitsky Accountability Act, we meet the challenges of our time. We meet those individuals who are committing gross human rights violations. This act is a global standard for the advancement of human rights.

Unfortunately, the Magnitsky tragedy is not unique within Russia. We know of other circumstances within the country. We saw the results of last year's elections and the attitude of government toward journalists. We need the protection of the Magnitsky standards for human rights violations within Russia.

But it doesn't end with Russia. Human rights violations are global, and we should have these tools available globally. We need to prevent Russia and other countries from regressing on their commitments to human rights.

I must tell you, when you take a look at the legislation that came out of our two committees, S. 1039, coming out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and coming out of the Senate Finance Committee--I serve on both of those committees--it says very clearly that the law would apply to those responsible for extrajudicial killings, torture, or other gross violations of internationally recognized human rights committed against individuals seeking to obtain, exercise, defend, or promote internationally recognized human rights and freedoms, such as the freedom of religion, expression, association, assembly, and the rights to a fair trial and democratic elections anywhere in the world. That was the legislation we reported in two of our committees. And I might tell you, there was overwhelming support that we should make it global. Senator Kyl talked about that, and I am sure others will also.

In H.R. 6156, you will see the exact language we have in our Magnitsky bill with one exception: ``Anywhere in the world'' is changed to ``Russia.'' I am disappointed in that, and I join with Senator Kyl in that disappointment. I think it would have been much better if we would have incorporated the international standards and global provisions.

I think it is very important Congress pass this bill. I strongly support it. I support the effort to get this to the President as quickly as possible. But there is a clear message here: This bill is our standard. We will be holding countries to this standard. We will look for other opportunities to attach these provisions to other trade bills. We will look for other opportunities to reinstitute the global application of the Magnitsky standards. It is the right thing. The world is on notice. Other countries are following our leadership. We expect other countries will be acting with similar standards.

I might point out, as I did over 2 years ago, there is existing authority within the State Department to deny visas to human rights violators. I think we should make that very clear and we should enact a law that makes it clear. We have to pass the Magnitsky law as relates to Russia. But there is authority, and we expect the administration will follow that authority.

I am hopeful people understand that although the language of the law is not as broad as we would like it to be, many of us consider this to be the international standard, and we will be asking to hold other countries accountable for violators of human rights that that country does not deal with in denying them the right to visit our country or to use our banking system.

One last point. There are some who say, Well, aren't we interfering with the internal affairs of a sovereign country? Nothing could be further from the truth. We have a right--I would say a responsibility-- to challenge internationally recognized human rights violations in other countries. It is well established. Both Russia and the United States are members of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. I had the honor of a senate chair in the Helsinki Commission, our implementing arm. That organization gives us the right to raise human rights problems in other countries. We have used that to advance efforts to stop human trafficking, to deal with antisemiticism, to deal with corruption issues in other countries. We have that right. We have that responsibility. And our actions today are for the Russian people and for its government.

I have heard from so many human rights activists in Russia, from Russian business leaders to ordinary citizens, who tell me Russia can do better, and they urge us to move forward with the Magnitsky Accountability Act.

The United States, by the passage of this bill, will be on the right side of history. It will deepen our relationship with the Russian people. Yes, we are ending a chapter with the repeal of Jackson-Vanik, but we are starting a new chapter on human rights--one which we can be proud of where America once again is establishing a basic principle that we will not tolerate those who violate internationally recognized human rights standards. We will not let them go without being held accountable. And we certainly will not let them have the privileges of our country if they violate internationally recognized human rights standards.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Madam President, I compliment the Senator from Arizona on the moral clarity of his statement. I think the Senator is absolutely right. The moral clarity here is clear: Those who commit gross violations of internationally recognized human rights are on notice. As the Senator pointed out, this legislation applies beyond the Magnitsky tragedy, it applies to Russia, and it is a standard that we intend to use for other opportunities whether it is trade bills or other legislation.

I hope we will make this statutorily global. We will have that debate at a later point. We will have other opportunities to make it clear that those who violate human rights are internationally recognized, that the clarity here is clear, and that there will be repercussions on the rights of our own country.

We cannot determine how Russia will treat its violators under their laws; they will have to handle that. But we have the moral certainty that we are not going to assist those violators and deny their opportunities to come to America and use our banking system.

Mr. President, I thank Senator Shaheen for her leadership on this issue. We have had many discussions about how to advance human rights and what is the best strategy to get the Magnitsky bill enacted into law. She has been a real champion with her leadership on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Europe and her leadership on the Helsinki Commission. I thank her for her good advice for allowing us to be able to get to this day.

I am convinced tomorrow the Senate will pass this legislation, the President is going to sign it, and we will achieve a great victory for human rights.

I thank the Senator for her observations as we were talking about how to move forward with this bill in connection with PNTR for Russia. I know Senator Lieberman talked about it a little bit earlier. I am convinced, as important as this bill was, that the Magnitsky bill by itself would have been extremely difficult for us to get through to the President and for the President to sign into law and that in combining it with PNTR, we got it done. I also believe that PNTR without Magnitsky would not have gotten done. So I think the marriage of these two bills was the right choice. They allow us to move forward, as Senator Levin said, repealing a provision that is not relevant for Russia, while also allowing us to make a new standard for Russia that is relevant for our problems we are confronting not just in Russia but throughout the globe.

I wish to comment a little bit about Senator Levin's point. Senator Levin raised the issue of why couldn't we make this global. As Senator McCain said, countries are on notice, particularly those countries that are known for their human rights violations. They now know what the standard is, and they know what action the United States will take if they don't meet that standard.

The standard is very clear. I will just read it into the Record one more time so every country knows and every individual knows we will be taking action against those who violate human rights. It says any individual who ``is responsible for extrajudicial killings, torture, or other gross violations of internationally recognized human rights committed against individual seeking . . . to obtain, exercise, defend, or promote internationally recognized human rights. . . . ''

That is the standard. That is what is in this bill. That is what we will be voting on tomorrow. That is what has been approved by the House of Representatives and I believe will be approved tomorrow by this body and will be signed into law by the President of the United States. We are establishing the standard that will be used to deny human rights violators the right to visit our country, to obtain a visa, and to use our banking system.

Senator Levin is absolutely correct. The bill that came out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Finance Committee made it crystal clear by statute that it applied globally. I strongly supported that. I support that now. I would love to see that in our bill, but we need to get this bill done. I would have preferred to see us take up the amendment, hopefully pass the amendment, and work it out with the House. However, it was the collective wisdom that in order to get this bill done, particularly with the administration's position on it--they did not support the global legislative solution at this point--that it was unlikely we would reach the finish line and get that done.

That doesn't diminish the global impact of this bill. I need to underscore that. It does not diminish the global impact of this bill. Senator McCain is right. Countries and individuals are on notice. I can tell my colleagues that as a Member of this body, I will be monitoring, and if there are individual people who have committed these gross violations and who are seeking to come to America and use our banking system, I am going to take action. It may be filing additional legislation. I hope we get it done. I hope we will find an opportunity to get the Senate language into law, that the legislative standard specifically applies globally.

Let me point out we already have authority. The Secretary of State already has authority to deny human rights violators the right to come to America. Before I filed the Magnitsky bill, I sent a letter to the Secretary of State saying we know who the perpetrators of the crimes against Mr. Magnitsky are; deny them the right. They want to come to America. They are planning to come to America. Don't let them. We went back and forth a little bit as to what they were going to do.

What is interesting is that I filed this legislation with Senator McCain and many others. Secretary Clinton took action. She said we will deny them the opportunity of coming to America; we have that authority. The Secretary of the Treasury has certain authorities to deny the rights of our banking system. So we have--our agencies have the inherent authority to block human rights violators from coming to America or using our banking system. Should we legislate to make that clear? Absolutely. Should we pass legislation that is global? Absolutely. I hope we will do that.

Today we have the opportunity to make a major advancement to establish the standard in statute that we expect will be honored internationally, globally, to provide the tools to act against Russia because this is a PNTR Russia bill. We will be able to do that. We also have the tools in place to be able to take further action.

So what I said earlier I think is absolutely true. This isn't an end of a chapter of U.S. leadership. I can tell my colleagues when Senator Jackson and Congressman Vanik suggested the use of trade as a leverage to block trade with countries if they didn't respect the basic human right of allowing their

people to leave, there were many people who said: Why are you doing that? Can't we just talk it out? That bill produced incredible results not only on the individuals who were able to leave the Soviet Union, but it spoke to America's leadership.

I honestly believe it helped establish the principles where the United States used trade to open and eliminate the apartheid government of South Africa. We were the leaders on that. We have been very strong on protecting human rights and saying: We will use every tool at our disposal to protect people's basic rights. We did that in South Africa and we did that in the Soviet Union and we are doing it again today. That is where America's leadership shines. That is where America's leadership will be followed by other countries. We are already seeing other European capitals pass similar legislation as the Magnitsky bill to make this clear. We are ending a chapter with Jackson-Vanik and we should be very proud of what America stood for, what we stand for today, and our leadership in the lives of real people and how it has helped keep people safer.

Now we are starting a new chapter and that new chapter is not just Russia. That new chapter is global. We are putting the international community on notice that we will not tolerate individuals who violate basic human rights, and we will use every tool at our disposal, including trade, including the right to come to America, including the right to use our banking system, including putting as much pressure as we possibly can on countries to take action against those who violate rights.

We respect the rights of individual countries. We want to work with those countries, but America will not give up its values and on promoting these values internationally. That is what this legislation is.

I understand the disappointment that we don't have everything in this bill we would like. I am certainly disappointed. I fought hard. I spoke to so many Members in both the House and the Senate about trying to make this bill even better. I am proud of how far we were able to get, and I can tell my colleagues this: The activists who are risking their lives today in countries around the world to protect the rights of citizens, to question the actions of their government, to dare to say we should have competitive elections, we should respect the religious freedoms of individuals, we should be able to speak out, these people are putting their lives at risk. They are looking at what the Senate is doing today, and they are looking at us and saying: Pass this bill. Pass this bill because it gives us hope. It lets our countries know America will stand for us, that America's leadership will be there to keep us safe.

I know we have had a spirited discussion this evening. We will have a chance tomorrow to vote on this bill. I do believe we will have the opportunity to show America's leadership will be continuing to advance human rights. This legislation will make a difference not just in the trade relationships between Russia and the United States--it will help that--but it will help advance international respect for human rights. I am proud to be part of that effort.

With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an intern from

Senator Merkley's office, Phillip Hah, be granted privileges of the floor for the remainder of the day.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on Thursday, December 6, 2012, at 11:45 a.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 761 and 828; that there be 15 minutes for debate equally divided in the usual form; that following the period of debate on the nominations, the Senate proceed to legislative session to resume consideration of H.R. 6156, as provided under the previous order, and following the disposition of H.R. 6156, the Senate resume executive session and proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on Calendar Nos. 761 and 828 in that order; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that any related statements be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 539, S. 3331.

I further ask unanimous consent that the Kerry amendment, which is at the desk, be agreed to, and the Senate proceed to a voice vote on passage of the bill, as amended.

I further ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements relating to the measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 609, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. President, 2 days ago--December 3, 2012--marked the third anniversary of Alan Gross' arrest by the Cuban Government. Over the past 3 years, Alan's case has been of deep personal concern to me and many in my State. Alan, an American citizen and Marylander, was in Cuba to help the small Jewish community there establish improved access to the Internet, which would allow the community to go online without fear of censorship or monitoring. After being held for 14 months without charge and then a cursory 2-day trial, he was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison. In August 2012, a petition to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention was filed on his behalf.

Last week, officials with the Cuban Ministry for Foreign Affairs claimed that Alan Gross is in good health. But the Cuban Government has not allowed Mr. Gross to receive an independent medical evaluation. To date, Alan has lost 105 pounds, suffers from degenerative arthritis, and has a mass behind his shoulder. Alan also suffers from severe mental anguish because of the separation from his family.

To say that the Gross family has been on a rollercoaster would be an understatement. His mother and daughter are both battling cancer. His wife Judy is struggling to make ends meet. Judy Gross has fought for Alan's release every day for the last 3 years. Judy has called, e- mailed, and met with everyone imaginable. She has been on news programs and written letters. Judy has never given up hope; she has remained strong for her family and for Alan. As many of our colleagues will attest, she will stop at nothing to see Alan return home. Due in no small part to Judy's perseverance, the U.S. Senate has been actively involved in this matter.

Over the past 3 years, U.S. officials have traveled to Cuba, we have written to numerous Cuban dignitaries, and we have employed other creative means to encourage Mr. Gross' release. In September, my colleague Senator Moran and I, along with a bipartisan group of 44 Senators, sent a letter to Raul Castro urging the Cuban Government in the strongest possible terms to release Alan Gross immediately and unconditionally. But these attempts have been futile. Alan Gross remains in prison, caught in the middle of a conflict between two nations with a complex, often frustrating relationship.

Tonight, the Senate is adopting a resolution unanimously, a resolution Senator Moran and I have submitted with a long list of bipartisan sponsors. The resolution calls for Mr. Gross' immediate and unconditional release and urges the Cuban Government to address his medical issues, including allowing an independent medical examination to be completed. Alan's personal freedoms are being violated every day that he continues to be incarcerated, and we can no longer tolerate his being denied an independent medical evaluation. Alan Gross should no longer be forced to suffer the consequences of political gamesmanship. Enough is enough.

Today the Senate has spoken once again. Alan Gross is a husband, a father, a son, and an American. We call on the Cuban Government to release Alan Gross immediately.

Mr. President, I know of no further debate on this measure.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to the matter be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 573 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 595 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any statements be printed in the Record as if read.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 610 submitted earlier today by Senators Rockefeller and Hutchison.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the Record as if read.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, December 6, 2012; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; that following the leader remarks, the Senate be in a period of morning business until 11:45 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the previous order regarding retirement speeches remaining in effect; and that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session under the previous order.

Mr. President, the time from 10 a.m. until 11 a.m. tomorrow will be for speeches by our retiring Senators. At approximately 12:10 p.m., there will be two rollcall votes, the first on the passage of H.R. 6156, the Russia trade bill and the Magnitsky bill, and the second on confirmation of the Walker nomination.