Floor Statements

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Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

I ask unanimous consent that the vote that was scheduled to begin in 3 minutes start immediately.

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 available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Madam President, I come to the floor today to express my deep appreciation and gratitude for human rights defenders. They are the core of free, democratic societies. They risk their lives and freedom to hold governments and the private sector accountable. They advocate for human rights and political freedom. They protect our environment and fight corruption.

Despite very real threats to their lives and safety, they have achieved incredible victories. Because of their tireless efforts, from Colombia to Mexico, nations across Latin America expanded reproductive rights; Argentina passed a law to prevent gender-based violence online and hold perpetrators accountable; the EU reached an agreement to require companies to address the human rights and environmental harms of their operations; and Malaysia and Ghana took steps to abolish the death penalty. We celebrate these victories.

But I also must underline a deep sense of urgency today. Attacks against human rights defenders are on the rise across the globe. Hundreds are killed each year, and thousands more are attacked, threatened, or imprisoned: the Russian investigative journalist who was brutally attacked for exposing human rights abuses in the Northern Caucuses; the Guatemalan judge forced into exile after holding human rights abusers accountable for their actions during the brutal civil war; the taxi driver and human rights defender in Turkmenistan serving a 22-year sentence in a penal colony for documenting the torture of ethnic minorities; the 28-year-old human rights defender in Sudan who was killed, along with his parents and his four brothers; or one of the hundreds of human rights defenders killed by armed groups vying for control of Colombia's drug trafficking routes.

Not only are attacks growing in scale, today's oppressors use sophisticated surveillance technology to target their enemies, even those living in exile.

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders has said:

Governments claim that all this repression is about

national security. In reality it is about power and money.

They want to maintain power so they control information.

As a result, those who stand for freedom and justice often face death threats, harassment, arbitrary detention, and torture.

Women human rights defenders and those working on environmental protection, climate change, LBGTQI+ community issues, and indigenous rights face especially high levels of violence.

I am pleased that the Biden administration has made protecting human rights defenders a priority for American foreign policy. Human rights defenders are heroes in the fight for democracy and freedom, and the United States must stand in solidarity with them.

But we all need to do more. That is why I introduced the Human Rights Defenders Protection Act. This bill enhances our government's ability to prevent and respond to attacks on human rights defenders. It requires the administration to come up with a whole-of-government global strategy for human rights defenders. It creates a new, limited visa category for at-risk human rights defenders. It elevates the State Department's human rights officers in countries facing democracy and human rights crises. It trains Foreign Service officers on the protection of human rights defenders. It expands fellowships to allow human rights defenders to conduct research, outreach, and exchanges in the United States.

My grandparents came to America in 1902 from Lithuania, where there were pogroms against Jews across Russia and Eastern Europe. The defense of human rights has always been profoundly important to me and my family.

For many decades in my life, the Soviet Union was one of the greatest threats to human rights on Earth, and it seemed indestructible. But I remember standing with my wife at the Berlin Wall in 1987--a symbol of totalitarianism suffering. My wife and I hammered at the concrete that was covered in graffiti, showing a crossed-out hammer and sickle. Chipping away at the Berlin Wall was a reminder of the good we can achieve if only we have faith.

So to everyone who cares about justice, to everyone who fights for freedom, to everyone who defends human rights against all odds, don't give up. Let us continue to advocate for those human rights defenders behind bars. Let us champion their efforts across the globe. Let us have faith that we can overcome oppression and violence and assassinations. Let us keep hope alive that we can build a world that is safe and peaceful and prosperous.

With that, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation I filed.

Nomination of Lisa W. Wang

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled vote for 1:45 p.m. begin immediately.

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.

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.

Madam President, as the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I come to the floor to advise our colleagues about the urgency for us to take up and pass the supplemental appropriations bill that contains many important provisions, but I am going to start with the most urgent, and that is providing assistance to Ukraine to defend itself from the brutal attack by the Russian Federation.

Vladimir Putin could change the equation in Ukraine in a matter of weeks. His tanks could be rolling through Ukraine. His forces could be arresting Zelenskyy and his Cabinet. The Russian flag could be flying over Ukraine's capital. This could happen in a matter of weeks if the United States does not act.

A few days ago, I was in the White House for a meeting about this. President Biden could not have been clearer: We are out of money to support Ukraine in this fight. Think about how that sounds to the Ukrainians fighting on the frontlines.

One Ukrainian soldier said:

The guys are tired, very tired. They are still motivated,

many people understand that they have no other choice. But

you can't win a war only on motivation.

Ukrainian soldiers have had to ration artillery shells. One unit had to go from firing as many as 90 shells a day to just 10 to 20 shells a day.

Mr. Putin has made it clear. He is investing in a long war. The New York Times reported:

Nearly a third of the country's spending next year--roughly

$109 billion--will be devoted to ``national defense,''

according to a budget he signed into law.

Russian TV commentators are celebrating our gridlock. As one European Ambassador reportedly said, he can ``hear those champagne bottle corks popping in Moscow.''

President Putin knows that if Congress does not act, he will be able to break Ukraine. If he succeeds, he will be signaling to the world that he can invade his neighbors whenever he wants to, erase the nation of Ukraine and our allies in Europe, in the Middle East, in Africa, and in Asia, and we are ourselves, the United States, will be in greater danger.

A group of NATO parliamentarians was in Washington last week, concerned about Congress's inability to pass the supplemental funding.

One of my counterparts, the chair of the Lithuanian Foreign Affairs Committee, asked:

Who is next? Balkans, Taiwan, Korea, the Baltics. . . . It

takes years to wake up Washington, so please guys, wake up.

He is right. We need to wake up.

If Putin wins in Ukraine, he will not stop there. That is why this isn't a choice between sending funding to Ukraine or not sending funding to Ukraine. The choice is between sending American dollars to fight Putin now or sending American soldiers to fight him later.

If we want to preserve America's credibility with our allies, it is up to us. If we want to show our partners we will be there to help when times are tough, it is up to us. If we want to make sure the United States stands on the right side of history, it is up to us.

Russia is one of our most dangerous adversaries and an enemy of democracy everywhere. This is money that will strengthen the United States' security.

Ukraine needs money for air defenses, money for drones, money for arming the brave Ukrainians on the frontlines and, of course, direct budgetary support and humanitarian assistance.

People around the world are depending on the United States for the humanitarian assistance in the supplemental funding request. Without money for food, children and mothers, from Africa to the Middle East to Eastern Europe, will go hungry.

It is up to us. It is up to us.

Finally, I want to underline that there is strong bipartisan agreement on the need to support Ukraine.

We must not let this be the end of Ukraine. We must not give in to Russian aggression. We must not stand idly by as this dictator does what he likes to his neighbors. We must vote

for the supplemental funding that supports Ukrainians' struggle for freedom. Time is running out. We need to act now.

With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I have three requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. President, for the Committee on Foreign Relations I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the RECORDS on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

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

Mr. President, shortly, we are going to be voting on an amendment authored by our colleague from Kentucky, Senator Paul, that deals with restrictions on U.S. support in regard to the Middle East. I want to urge my colleagues to vote against that amendment.

Our ally Israel is at war to destroy Hamas terrorists, not at war against the Palestinian people, but this amendment by my colleague threatens U.S. efforts that support stability and security efforts and that serve Israeli and U.S. interests. What it would do is put certain restrictions on what funds America can make available in the region, particularly in regard to the Palestinians. It would undermine the United States' ability to work in lockstep with Israel on critical security cooperation and on counterterrorism efforts with the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

Today, we have a partnership in regard to security on the West Bank. The United States is helping in regard to the training of Palestinian security forces.

Mr. President, one of the pleasant surprises, I would say, is during this war between Israel and Hamas, we have seen relative peace in the West Bank. The security forces are doing their job. It is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. There is too much violence taking place everywhere. But the security forces have been successful in providing more stability in the region. That would be compromised or eliminated under the Paul amendment.

It would prohibit the United States from meeting longstanding commitments to providing lifesaving assistance for hospitals, vaccines for children, and water treatment facilities. This goes beyond Taylor Force in cutting off potential funds to the Palestinians for their lifesaving type of activities, from hospitals to water treatment facility plants.

It would also prohibit future assistance--including humanitarian assistance--to any governing entity for innocent Palestinians the day after Israel has destroyed Hamas, undermining the United States' ability to work toward a political horizon for Palestinians that protects Israel's security needs.

We are all concerned about what happens after the war ends with Hamas, after Hamas is destroyed. We need to have an entity that has the credibility among the Palestinians, and that will require us all to have partnerships to make a lasting peace so we can have lasting peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The Paul amendment compromises that from being able to be done. It would restrict what we can do in partnership to make that a reality.

We know the tragedy of this war with Hamas, but we hope coming out of it will give us a new opportunity for peace in the region, and that will require us to be able to help deal with the crisis that has been created through Hamas's attack, particularly with the Palestinian people, and to work to make sure there is a future with the Palestinian people living in peace with Israel.

So this amendment does not serve our national security interests. It compromises our ability to have a successful conclusion after Hamas has been destroyed. It compromises our current abilities to keep peace in the region, particularly in the West Bank. It compromises what we need to do in regard to the humanitarian needs of the region.

For all those reasons, I would urge my colleagues to reject the amendment.

Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the Paul amendment.

I ask unanimous consent that we begin the vote on the amendment.

Vote on Amendment No. 1384

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, could we just have an estimate of how much longer the Senator is going to be?

I would not object to 5 minutes.

Mr. President, I have a great deal of respect for my two colleagues. I think every one of us is concerned about what we see in regards to the crisis in Gaza, what we see in regards to the need for humanitarian assistance for innocent Gazans being caught in this battle. But the resolution that is being presented here today is the wrong vehicle to deal with this issue.

So let me start by saying that the resolution does a lot more than requesting information. For the information from those partners that get security assistance from the United States, the State Department today must provide the information of their compliance with our laws. That report is already required for all recipients of security aid.

What this resolution requires is a report within 30 days on specific issues concerning conduct in Gaza, and it is very specific as to what the State Department must provide. I will just give you one example, and there are many, many other examples here. They have to certify that no unit of Israel security forces that received U.S. assistance since January 1, 2018, has committed any gross violation of human rights. Now they have got to do that within 30 days or aid is suspended. And once they give a report, it triggers privileged resolutions on this floor to cut off aid to Israel.

I strongly disagree with my colleagues. 502B was never intended to be used against an ally during a war. It has never been used for that purpose. That is not the right vehicle to deal with this.

Mr. President, this is the 102nd day since Hamas's brutal attack against Israel; 102 days that hostages have been held. Our thoughts and prayers are with the hostages, and we all agree that Israel has the right to defend itself.

The challenges are made much more difficult because they are going against an enemy that has sworn to destroy the nation Israel and they still believe that and they are still conducting themselves with a threat to Israel's sovereignty and safety.

Missiles are still available to be shot into Israel. They are still there in Gaza.

We know what the Houthis are doing in the Red Sea. We know what Iran is doing in Iraq. We know the problems on Israel's northern border by Hezbollah. Over 80,000 Israelis have had to evacuate their homes in northern Israel; 100,000 in the southern part. There is a war going on, and it is made much more difficult because Hamas, sworn to destroy Israel, embeds its operations within the civilian population; has a tunneling network to try to protect its military assets, making it very difficult for Israel to be able to eliminate the threat.

At the same time, we know how much military might was in Gaza on October 7. We were supposed to have had border security to make sure that didn't get into Gaza. There was supposed to be inspections. It didn't work.

I understand why the Israelis are concerned by the way in which the supplies get into Gaza, because there is a concern of ill use and supplying the terrorists in their efforts to destroy Israel. These are all very challenging issues that we have to deal with.

Now, this resolution, as I said before, is much more than requesting information. Its passage would be a gift to Hamas, a gift to Iran. It would show a division between Israel and the United States. It is an indictment against Israel, make no mistake about it. It makes it more challenging with sensitive negotiations taking place, as we are here, on additional hostages being released. It makes it more difficult for us to deal with preventing the escalation of the conflict.

If Iran believes that the United States is not with Israel, believe me, it makes it more likely we are going to see additional attacks in that region.

The Biden administration is seeking to contain this conflict and not to see it spread and grow out of control. It is pressing for a shift to a more targeted campaign against Hamas military infrastructure and the perpetrators of the October 7 attacks. It is pressing to get more humanitarian assistance into Gaza. And, yes, we can and should continue to position toward a targeted prosecution of the war against Hamas and Gaza. But passing this resolution does not do that. In fact, I would say, it is counterproductive to it.

Make no mistake, our passing the resolution triggers this. This is not a resolution that goes to the House and is signed by the President. If we pass this, the process is triggered to cut off aid to Israel during war.

Motion to Table

For those reasons, Mr. President, I move to table the motion to discharge S. Res. 504, and I ask for the yeas and nays.