Floor Statements

Mr. President, I come to the floor today in support of Jacob Lew to be our Ambassador to Israel. We will have a chance to vote on that in a few moments, first on cloture and then, hopefully, on the confirmation, with the cloture being imposed.

The attack by Hamas on Israel earlier this month was heinous. It was evil. It was indescribably brutal.

I was just in Israel with 10 Senators--5 Democrats, 5 Republicans-- and saw firsthand the scars and devastation. I saw the grief and the shock. We were there to make it clear that Israel has the right to defend itself; it has the obligation to defend itself.

We recognize that the ground campaign has started to eliminate Hamas. Hamas is evil. They are equivalent to ISIS and maybe, in some cases, worse. Israel's security depends upon the demise of Hamas, as does the Palestinians' future in Gaza depend upon Hamas being eliminated.

We have ongoing challenges. Two hundred-plus hostages are being held by Hamas. Their safe return is one of our highest priorities. We are all working very hard. President Biden has made it clear with the positioning of U.S. assets, as well as his engagement in the Middle East to prevent the escalation of this conflict. For those enemies of the United States and Israel trying to take advantage of the combat in Gaza to escalate the conflict, we have to make sure that does not happen.

We have a real challenge with the humanitarian assistance to the Palestinians in Gaza who are trying to escape the brutality of Hamas. We are now fortunate that we are able to start getting humanitarian trucks into Gaza. We hope to be at about 100 trucks a day through the Rafah gate. More is needed. We need to provide for the medical needs and safe passage for Palestinians trying to avoid the conflict. All of this is made much more difficult because of Hamas.

These challenges require a U.S. partnership. We need a confirmed ambassador. We need to work together on operations. We need to work together on tactics. We need to work together on strategy with Israel. It is so much more difficult for us to be able to do that without a confirmed ambassador in Jerusalem.

How are we going to diplomatically engage at the highest levels in the region if we don't have a confirmed ambassador? It makes it much more difficult. Who is going to lead our mission to help the more than half a million American citizens who live in Israel? It is made much more difficult without a confirmed ambassador.

I want to make it clear that our Charge d'Affaires in Jerusalem, Stephanie Hallett, is doing a phenomenal job, as are the men and women of our mission in Jerusalem. And they deserve our thanks, our appreciation for being on the frontline to represent America's interest. There is no question about their loyalty and their dedication to the mission. The U.S. team at Mission Israel is the best in the field, but that is no substitute for a confirmed ambassador.

Jacob Lew is eminently qualified to serve in this post. He has extensive experience. He has the political acumen that we need for our Ambassador at this time. He has the respect of the Israeli officials.

The Foreign Minister tweeted that they look forward to working with Jack Lew in ``the spirit of our close cooperation and alliance.''

The Jerusalem Post said:

Jack Lew is a worthy nominee and a mensch.

Support for his nomination ranges from the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center to the Anti-Defamation League.

Last week, he advanced out of the Foreign Relations Committee on a bipartisan vote. I want to thank my colleagues who worked so hard to get him through the committee.

Of course, this would not be the first time that Secretary Lew has had the support of the Senate. He has been nominated for a number of positions, and this body has confirmed him with overwhelming support in the past.

Now, with Israel at war, with Hamas holding hostages in their tunnels in Gaza, with the entire world watching, given the stakes of the situation, given that Israel is fighting to defend itself, given that American lives are at risk, we cannot afford any delay. Israel cannot afford a delay.

Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support cloture on Jack Lew's nomination so we can get the confirmation vote without delay. I hope that you will support these efforts.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, for the information of the Senate, when the Senate resumes consideration of H.R. 4366, the following amendments are expected to be made pending, as provided under the order of October 24: Hawley No. 1200, Cruz No. 1296, Blackburn-Warner No. 1349, and Budd No. 1243.

I further ask unanimous consent that there be up to 10 minutes debate, equally divided, prior to the vote on amendment No. 1296, with all previous provisions remaining in effect.

Mr. President, for the information of the Senate, Senators should expect four rollcall votes beginning at 2:30 p.m. today.

I ask unanimous consent that the vote scheduled for 11:30 begin immediately.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, a little over a week ago, I was in Israel with 10 U.S. Senators meeting with the Israeli leadership. I must tell you, they are very much looking forward to having a confirmed ambassador from the United States in Jerusalem to help in regard to the challenges they are now facing as a result of Hamas's terrorist attack in Israel. And they are very much looking forward to Jack Lew being that ambassador. We heard that directly.

His nomination has been welcomed by the Israelis, including Israel's Foreign Minister, who said he looks forward to working with him. The former Israeli Ambassador to the United States wrote that Lew is ``a true statesman, a passionate Jew and a mensch in every sense of the word.'' He has the support of the Jerusalem Post, the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center, the Anti-Defamation League. The list goes on and on and on. Why? Because he is so well qualified for this position. He has been confirmed by the Senate as a former Secretary of Treasury, as a Deputy Secretary of State, as an OMB Director. And the list goes on and on and on. He was confirmed by an overwhelming majority. It gives us the person as our representative to Israel who has the gravitas to stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel as the United States partners in the challenges that they are facing today.

So there is, to me, no question about his qualifications, no question about his presence being welcomed by our Israeli friends, no question about his knowledge and commitment to these issues. He has worked almost his entire life, in part, to strengthen the U.S.-Israel partnership. He knows the values. He testified to that during this confirmation hearing. And he testified in regard to the issues that my Republican friends are raising, the issues of whether he was forthright with Congress--and he was.

He pointed out that in regard to opening up the banking for Iran, it was to comply with the JCPOA that was negotiated by the Obama administration and which the Republicans were opposed to. And I opposed that agreement.

I helped work with Senator Corker, then chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--I was ranking Democrat at the time--to develop a process where we would not be surprised by these negotiations and that we would have input into these negotiations. That process passed the Senate by a near-unanimous vote.

As part of that process, we had indepth discussions with the Obama administration, including Secretary Lew, including Secretary Moniz, and others, who shared with us exactly what was being negotiated. We knew that there was going to be a transfer of funds in regards to the JCPOA. We recognized that the banking system would be open for that limited purpose.

That is not misleading us. It is telling us exactly what we knew was going to happen before we took it up under the review statute. It is just not right to say he misled us. He did not. The report they are referring to was a partisan report issued by the Republicans. There is a reason why it was not bipartisan. They were just trying to double down on their opposition to the JCPOA.

Israel needs a strong U.S. Ambassador who will represent America and be their partner in taking on one of the greatest struggles in their history--the terrorist attack by Hamas that they did on October 7. We need a confirmed ambassador who is knowledgeable as to how they could represent over half a

million Americans who are currently in Israel. We need Jack Lew's expertise to help us get the hostages back safely on the ground in Israel.

I want to thank Secretary Lew for being willing at this time, at this critical moment, to serve his country in this critically important position, and I would hope my colleagues would vote for his confirmation, recognizing that we could not have a more qualified individual to represent America as our Ambassador to Israel.

I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I oppose the Ernst telework amendment because, in general, it imposes an overly burdensome reporting requirement for Agencies--without providing additional resources--both because of the very short time allotted--30 days--and the vague language used to outline the reporting requirements. The amendment includes multiple, undefined terms, some of which do not appear in title 5--for example, ``majority of work hours''. Further, there are no parameters outlining the period of time that should be represented in the data being reported. As such, Agencies would have significant challenges defining and providing what data is actually being sought.

This reporting requirement also does not take into consideration the state of the workforce as some Agencies have a substantial number of staff that do not report to a ``building'' on a routine basis because of the nature of their mission, such as some law enforcement officers and those who work in disaster relief. Again, per the above comment, many employees legitimately reporting to and performing routine work will not be captured, skewing data, and generating lower counts. Additionally, there are more technical challenges with the amendment language. For example, subsection (b)(8) does not describe an Agency's authority in 5 CFR 531.605(d)(2) correctly.

To summarize, the vague nature of this language and the lack of context and consideration for the varying nature of positions across the workforce would result in reports that do not accurately convey the nature of telework and remote work across the Federal Government.

I received comments from three of the largest Federal employee unions opposing the Ernst amendment. Here is what I heard from the International Federal of Professional and Technical Engineers, IFPTE:

This amendment seems duplicative in some parts and counter

to what is required by the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010.

It asks agencies to consider and report actions that, if

taken, would require agencies to violate current legal

standards and regulations. The Telework Enhancement Act of

2010 also requires agencies to design telework programs that

``do not diminish employee performance or agency

operations.'' By definition, agencies (and unions, when

bargained) must create programs that work for employees and

agencies. Not working on-site does not mean not working.

(b)(1) is highly burdensome for agencies--For employees

with management-approved telework agreements, the Office of

Personnel Management (OPM) defines the official worksite/

official duty station (ODS) as the regular work location to

which they are assigned as long as the employee is reporting

``on a regular and recurring basis'' to that worksite.

Regular and recurring is defined as at least twice/pay

period. So (b)(1) is highly burdensome for agencies and asks

agencies to guess and estimate whether legal teleworking

("majority of their working hours'') in the amendment is

greater than two days per pay period).

Agencies are not legally able to carry out the cost savings

in (b)(2) and nothing is

going to be achieved by the audit in (b)(3). For example, if

an agency took action to change the ODS for an employee who

teleworks six days per pay period, they would violate OPM

regulations. If the agency reduced an employee's salary based

on this, the agency would be liable for back pay and

attorney's fees for each employee who reported at least twice

per pay period per OPM regulations but had their ODS changed.

Also, emergency conditions provide exceptions to all of this

(the agency head can take any actions necessary for

emergencies) so it is not relevant to look at periods under

the COVID-19 health and national emergencies.

The premise of (b)(7) also doesn't make much sense.

Employees are not in charge; management is, so employees do

not need to be ``enticed'' to the office, they are directed

to do so in concert with existing policies.

Reporting in (b)(7)-(10) may have a chilling effect on

telework for employees with disabilities. Many federal

employees with disabilities are legally entitled to telework

as a reasonable accommodation. In many agencies, federal

employees who have maximum telework have difficult personal

situations and disabilities and it is often the only way they

can remain in federal service.

Evaluation of environmental concerns related to

underutilized space in (b)(11) needs to be balanced. Any

evaluation of telework and space utilization needs to

consider the increased environmental burden that commuting

causes, especially in vehicles with a single occupant.

Further, many federal office spaces and worksites have better

space utilization due to telework. For example, IFPTE members

working for Navy shipyards have more productive office

workstations when on-site and when working from home, whereas

prior to the current telework levels, these employees were in

uncomfortably tight cubicles and constrained office spaces.

Here is what I heard from the National Treasury Employees Union,

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

Madam President, I rise today in support of the nomination of Matthew Maddox to be a U.S. district judge for the District of Maryland, and I urge my Senate colleagues to confirm his nomination.

I joined with Senator Van Hollen to recommend Judge Maddox to President Biden. President Biden nominated Judge Maddox to this position in March of this year in order to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Paul Grimm in December of 2022.

Senator Van Hollen and I have worked to establish a judicial selection committee in Maryland, including an open application process. In particular, we sought out a highly qualified and diverse applicant pool. Our committee interviewed several dozen applicants. Senator Van Hollen and I then personally interviewed several finalists before recommending names to the White House.

I strongly agree with President Biden's goal to nominate judges with excellent legal credentials from diverse backgrounds from both professional and demographic perspectives, and today we have such an example of an excellent nominee from Maryland.

Judge Maddox was born and raised in Maryland and lives and works in Baltimore. He graduated summa cum laude from Morgan State University, an HBCU in Baltimore, in 1999, where he majored in philosophy and religious studies and minored in psychology. After receiving his B.A. degree, Judge Maddox was a Fulbright scholar and taught high school through the Teach for America Program. Judge Maddox received his J.D. degree from Yale Law School in 2011.

After working in private practice and serving in two judicial clerkships, in 2015, Judge Maddox was appointed as an assistant U.S. attorney in the District of Maryland. In this capacity, Judge Maddox prosecuted a range of criminal cases and conducted trainings for law enforcement on the topics of human trafficking and identity theft.

In 2020, Judge Maddox was selected to serve as Deputy Chief of the Major Crimes Section in the Northern Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office.

In February 2022, Judge Maddox was sworn in as a U.S. magistrate judge and sits in Baltimore. Judge Maddox now presides over both preliminary criminal proceedings and civil lawsuits by consent of the parties.

Judge Maddox therefore also brings remarkable experience to this position, having served as a Federal prosecutor for nearly a decade and now having served as a magistrate judge for over a year and a half. If confirmed and elevated from a magistrate judge to a district judge, he would continue to serve in the same court where he now serves and has practiced for many years.

The Judiciary Committee favorably reported Judge Maddox in a bipartisan vote in September of this year, and the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary awarded Judge Maddox a unanimously ``well qualified'' rating--its highest possible rating.

I was delighted to recommend the nomination of Judge Maddox to President Biden along with Senator Van Hollen. Judicial nominees must meet the highest standards of integrity, competence, and temperament. I am confident that Judge Maddox will safeguard the rights of all Marylanders, uphold the Constitution and rule of law, and faithfully follow the judicial oath to ``do equal right to the poor and to the rich.'' Judge Maddox will serve the people of Maryland well if confirmed for this lifetime appointment. Judge Maddox has strong legal and judicial qualifications and has demonstrated a track record of public service.

Let me conclude by saying I know that public service is a family affair and sacrifice, so I particularly want to thank Judge Maddox's family for sharing him with the people of Maryland in the interest of public service.

Again, I urge my colleagues to support his confirmation.

With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I would ask consent that the vote scheduled for 5:30 p.m. start immediately.

Mr. President, I, too, also oppose this motion for the reasons that Senator Risch outlined.

Our presence there are not troops in hostility. To the contrary. We have been asked. Our African partners have asked for our support, and our European allies are looking for us to stand firm.

This is a situation where our troops are welcomed in order to prevent the terrorist activities that are taking place in that part of Africa.

We had a committee hearing on the Sahel this week. You saw the circumstances in this part of Africa. It is dangerous there. The U.S. presence is helping save lives and to contain terrorism. Our partners in Africa want us there to deal with that threat. Now is not the time to signal that we are abandoning them. This is not the time to draw down our military presence in Niger, which could directly impact their security.

Now is not the time for the United States to send a message that we cannot be relied upon. Think about what this says to our partners if we were to pull out. Think about what it says to our enemies. Russia already has a foothold in Africa, including right next door in Mali. Their presence has been absolutely devastating for the people of the countries where it operates.

Russia's affiliated forces have committed horrific human rights atrocities. Just in Mali, the Wagner mercenaries and multiple armed forces are believed to have massacred 500 people in March of 2022. That is why our presence is so valuable and so important to that region. We do not give enough attention to that part of the world. We certainly don't want to signal that we are abandoning that part of the world. If we do that, we leave a vacuum. If we leave a vacuum, Russia will fill it; the Wagner mercenaries will fill it.

I urge my colleagues to defeat the motion.

Mr. President, I just want to correct the record. It is correct that they asked the French to leave, but they want America's presence there. They have not asked America and its troops to leave. That is why it is not hostilities. We are there at their invitation, not as a hostile force.

Mr. President, I would ask unanimous consent that there be 2 minutes of debate, equally divided, prior to each rollcall vote during the consideration of H.R. 4366.

Mr. President, I would ask consent that the vote scheduled for 11:30 begin immediately.

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.

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.

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, 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.

Mr. President, first, I know that we will be voting on shortly the resolution showing our support for the State of Israel from the horrible attack by Hamas. I just really want to thank our colleagues for the cooperation in getting this resolution before us. Right after this horrific attack, I worked with Senator Risch to show bipartisan support to draft the resolution that would express our strong support for Israel, that we had their back, that

we stand shoulder to shoulder with them, and that it enjoyed the support of the U.S. Senate.

I want to thank Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell for their leadership in being able to bring this up for a vote today. It is a clear message that the United States stands with the State of Israel; that Israel has the right to defend itself; that it has the obligation to defend itself. We certainly have made it clear that if any of the enemies of Israel try to take care of this situation, they better think twice because the United States has made it clear that we will not tolerate such actions. And we have also made it clear that the hostages need to be released safely, immediately.

So it is a clear message, and we know that President Biden's presence in the Middle East was also a clear message. I want to thank the President for what he has done, and we are now hopeful that we are going to get some humanitarian assistance in to the innocent people who are being affected by this campaign.

And I must tell you, we are working very hard to make sure that we maintain the efforts toward normalization. We know that Hamas is trying to derail that. We are working very energetically to get back on track the Saudi-Israel normalization talks. But today, we have a chance in the U.S. Senate to speak with one voice.

I am proud of the action we are going to be taking this afternoon. I want our brothers and sisters in Israel to know they are not alone, that America is with them.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.