Floor Statements

Madam President, President Biden, on June 3, 2021, issued a memorandum on ``Establishing the Fight Against Corruption as a Core United States National Security Interest.'' I want to quote from the President when he issued that memorandum. President Biden said:

Corruption threatens United States national security,

economic equity, global anti-poverty and development efforts,

and democracy itself. . . . [B]y effectively preventing and

countering corruption and demonstrating the advantages of

transparent and accountable governance, we can secure a

critical advantage for the United States and other

democracies.

Corruption is a national security core interest. Corruption is the source of Mr. Putin's resources that he uses for his international activities, including the war in Ukraine and to try to bring down democratic states.

Today, the Atlantic Council is releasing a report--the report titled ``Why the kleptocrats still win: A strategy for the United States and Europe to address weaponized corruption.'' The report points out how the kleptocrats hide their wealth in Western countries because they believe it is safer in Western countries to hide their wealth. And the report points out the need for us to coordinate efforts between the United States and Europe.

Today, I am filing legislation, the Combating Global Corruption Act. I am joined by my friend Senator Todd Young of Indiana--bipartisan legislation--to deal with the U.S. leadership in fighting global corruption. It will give the State Department and the United States an important tool. It will give the United States leadership in showing the international community the steps that need to be taken in order to counter corruption. It would require the State Department to publish a list of countries in three tiers, the highest tier being those countries that are taking the steps necessary to fight corruption; the bottom tier would be those countries that are not making the required effort to deal with corruption in their country.

The State Department will be using internationally established standards for fighting corruption that the international community has already signed off on as being the proper way to fight corruption in your particular state.

For example, it references the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, the Organization of American States--the OAS--that was passed in 1996: acknowledged procedures in our hemisphere to deal with corruption. It references the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials, international business transactions of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development--the OECD--which was adopted in 1997.

It references the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime that was agreed to in 2000 and the United Nations Convention against Corruption, which was agreed to in 2003.

These guidelines already exist and allow the United States to use those guidelines that have already been established by the global community to judge how every state is meeting their commitment to fight corruption.

Countries that are not meeting their commitment, we put a spotlight on them. That spotlight encourages them to do more. It points out ways in which they can take action to fight corruption in their own country.

Now, this is not a new strategy that we just came up with that we start giving a report on all countries on how well they are doing in fighting corruption. It is not a new concept. We have done that successfully in several other areas. One that we should take great pride in this institution--because we were ones who established this-- is the Trafficking in Persons requirements.

Today, the United States files a report on every country as to how well they are meeting their international responsibilities to protect the modern victims of slavery, trafficking in persons. It has been bipartisan. It has been very effective.

Secretary of State Blinken said, in releasing the report of this year, on July 19, 2022, he said:

Today we're releasing the 2022 Trafficking in Persons

Report. It assesses how 188 countries and territories,

including the United States, are performing in terms of

preventing trafficking, protecting victims, prosecuting

traffickers. That makes this one of the most comprehensive

sources of information anywhere on anti-trafficking efforts

by government--what works, what doesn't, and how we can

continue to do better.

We do that in preventing trafficking. We can do that in stopping corruption.

We have a country report on human rights. Again, I will quote from Secretary of State Blinken when he released this report on April 2, 2022. This is a report that judges all countries on how well they are dealing with human rights. Secretary Blinken said, in releasing that report on April 2 of last year:

For nearly five decades, the United States has issued the

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, which strive to

provide a factual and objective record on the status of human

rights worldwide--in 2021, covering 198 countries and

territories. The information contained in these reports could

not be more vital or urgent given ongoing human rights abuses

and violations in many countries, continued democratic

backsliding on several continents, and creeping

authoritarianism that threatens both human rights and

democracy--most notably, at present, with Russia's unprovoked

attack on Ukraine.

[A]nd using resources like the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, we can come closer to building a world where respect for human rights is truly universal.

That human rights report works. Putting a spotlight on what countries need to do brings about change. It promotes a core value in the United States, respect for human rights and good governance. We do that here in the United States to show global leadership.

I will mention one other report that is issued by our State Department, one on international religious freedom. Again, this was bipartisan. So on June 2 of last year, Secretary Blinken said, when he released the International Religious Freedom Report:

This report offers a thorough, fact-based review of the

state of religious freedom in nearly 200 countries and

territories around the world. We produced this document every

year since 1998. . . . Now, more than two decades later, we

have more than 35 governments and multilateral organizations

that have created offices that are dedicated to this goal.

This year's report includes several countries where we see

notable progress thanks to the work of governments, civil

society organizations, and citizens. For example, last year,

the Kingdom of Morocco launched an initiative to renovate

Jewish heritage sites like synagogues and cemeteries, and to

include Jewish history in the Moroccan public school

curriculum. . . . [T]his report is about

spreading that kind of progress to more parts of the world. .

. . Unfortunately, the report also shows that we have more

work to do.

There is value in what we do in showing the international community what works, what doesn't work, what countries are doing to make progress, whether it is on trafficking, whether it is on human rights, whether it is on religious freedom. And we need to do the same on fighting corruption. We had the model that works. And the legislation that Senator Young and I have introduced today allows us to provide such a report in fighting corruption.

The legislation also gives the Secretary of State some additional tools that could be helpful. The bill directs the Secretary of State and Treasury to evaluate whether there are foreign persons engaged in significant corruption for the purposes of potential imposition of sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act in the countries listed in tier 3. That is the lowest performing tier.

I mention that because the Magnitsky Sanctions have had a proud history in this Chamber. We initiated the Magnitsky Sanctions originally against Russia because of the torture and death of Sergei Magnitsky. We then made it global for those that are perpetrating gross violations of international human rights.

I introduced the legislation with my partner who was the late Senator McCain. The two of us said we need to include corruption as one of the basic human rights violations that would be eligible for individual sanctions. And we did.

In the last Congress, we made the Global Magnitsky Sanctions permanent. And I was proud that we were able to do that in the National Defense Authorization Act. What is unique by these sanctions is that they are individual. They are not against the country. They are personal to the individual who violates the basic rights.

And what does it do? It prevents them from getting a visa to come to America because they like to visit their wealth that is here in our country. And it prevents them from using our banking system. It works.

It was reportedly the first issue between Mr. Putin and President Trump in their first bilateral summit meeting. Mr. Putin was upset about these sanctions. Good. I am glad that he is.

This legislation that Senator Young and I have introduced allows us to look at whether we should be using these individual sanctions--these Magnitsky Sanctions--against the perpetrators of corruption who have not been held accountable in their own country.

There is lot to be said about why this legislation is so important. So I would like to just conclude by pointing out the bill that we introduced today is nearly identical to the bill that we introduced in the last Congress. It was reported out on a bipartisan basis by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

I want to thank Senator Menendez for his help and Senator Risch for his help. This is not a partisan bill. This is a bipartisan bill to promote an American value and a national security concern and that is making sure that America leads in fighting corruption so we do not have the resources going into a country like Russia, where Mr. Putin uses it to try to bring down our system of government.

I urge my colleagues to join me and Senator Young in this effort. I hope that we are able to pass this bill quickly in the U.S. Senate.

We came close to doing it in the last Congress. We can get it passed in the House and signed by the President. I think we will look back at this day when that report comes out and say that we were able to accomplish concrete improvements in making this world a better place, in promoting American values, that this report will make a difference.

Madam President, President Biden, on June 3, 2021, issued a memorandum on ``Establishing the Fight Against Corruption as a Core United States National Security Interest.'' I want to quote from the President when he issued that memorandum. President Biden said:

Corruption threatens United States national security,

economic equity, global anti-poverty and development efforts,

and democracy itself. . . . [B]y effectively preventing and

countering corruption and demonstrating the advantages of

transparent and accountable governance, we can secure a

critical advantage for the United States and other

democracies.

Corruption is a national security core interest. Corruption is the source of Mr. Putin's resources that he uses for his international activities, including the war in Ukraine and to try to bring down democratic states.

Today, the Atlantic Council is releasing a report--the report titled ``Why the kleptocrats still win: A strategy for the United States and Europe to address weaponized corruption.'' The report points out how the kleptocrats hide their wealth in Western countries because they believe it is safer in Western countries to hide their wealth. And the report points out the need for us to coordinate efforts between the United States and Europe.

Today, I am filing legislation, the Combating Global Corruption Act. I am joined by my friend Senator Todd Young of Indiana--bipartisan legislation--to deal with the U.S. leadership in fighting global corruption. It will give the State Department and the United States an important tool. It will give the United States leadership in showing the international community the steps that need to be taken in order to counter corruption. It would require the State Department to publish a list of countries in three tiers, the highest tier being those countries that are taking the steps necessary to fight corruption; the bottom tier would be those countries that are not making the required effort to deal with corruption in their country.

The State Department will be using internationally established standards for fighting corruption that the international community has already signed off on as being the proper way to fight corruption in your particular state.

For example, it references the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, the Organization of American States--the OAS--that was passed in 1996: acknowledged procedures in our hemisphere to deal with corruption. It references the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials, international business transactions of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development--the OECD--which was adopted in 1997.

It references the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime that was agreed to in 2000 and the United Nations Convention against Corruption, which was agreed to in 2003.

These guidelines already exist and allow the United States to use those guidelines that have already been established by the global community to judge how every state is meeting their commitment to fight corruption.

Countries that are not meeting their commitment, we put a spotlight on them. That spotlight encourages them to do more. It points out ways in which they can take action to fight corruption in their own country.

Now, this is not a new strategy that we just came up with that we start giving a report on all countries on how well they are doing in fighting corruption. It is not a new concept. We have done that successfully in several other areas. One that we should take great pride in this institution--because we were ones who established this-- is the Trafficking in Persons requirements.

Today, the United States files a report on every country as to how well they are meeting their international responsibilities to protect the modern victims of slavery, trafficking in persons. It has been bipartisan. It has been very effective.

Secretary of State Blinken said, in releasing the report of this year, on July 19, 2022, he said:

Today we're releasing the 2022 Trafficking in Persons

Report. It assesses how 188 countries and territories,

including the United States, are performing in terms of

preventing trafficking, protecting victims, prosecuting

traffickers. That makes this one of the most comprehensive

sources of information anywhere on anti-trafficking efforts

by government--what works, what doesn't, and how we can

continue to do better.

We do that in preventing trafficking. We can do that in stopping corruption.

We have a country report on human rights. Again, I will quote from Secretary of State Blinken when he released this report on April 2, 2022. This is a report that judges all countries on how well they are dealing with human rights. Secretary Blinken said, in releasing that report on April 2 of last year:

For nearly five decades, the United States has issued the

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, which strive to

provide a factual and objective record on the status of human

rights worldwide--in 2021, covering 198 countries and

territories. The information contained in these reports could

not be more vital or urgent given ongoing human rights abuses

and violations in many countries, continued democratic

backsliding on several continents, and creeping

authoritarianism that threatens both human rights and

democracy--most notably, at present, with Russia's unprovoked

attack on Ukraine.

[A]nd using resources like the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, we can come closer to building a world where respect for human rights is truly universal.

That human rights report works. Putting a spotlight on what countries need to do brings about change. It promotes a core value in the United States, respect for human rights and good governance. We do that here in the United States to show global leadership.

I will mention one other report that is issued by our State Department, one on international religious freedom. Again, this was bipartisan. So on June 2 of last year, Secretary Blinken said, when he released the International Religious Freedom Report:

This report offers a thorough, fact-based review of the

state of religious freedom in nearly 200 countries and

territories around the world. We produced this document every

year since 1998. . . . Now, more than two decades later, we

have more than 35 governments and multilateral organizations

that have created offices that are dedicated to this goal.

This year's report includes several countries where we see

notable progress thanks to the work of governments, civil

society organizations, and citizens. For example, last year,

the Kingdom of Morocco launched an initiative to renovate

Jewish heritage sites like synagogues and cemeteries, and to

include Jewish history in the Moroccan public school

curriculum. . . . [T]his report is about

spreading that kind of progress to more parts of the world. .

. . Unfortunately, the report also shows that we have more

work to do.

There is value in what we do in showing the international community what works, what doesn't work, what countries are doing to make progress, whether it is on trafficking, whether it is on human rights, whether it is on religious freedom. And we need to do the same on fighting corruption. We had the model that works. And the legislation that Senator Young and I have introduced today allows us to provide such a report in fighting corruption.

The legislation also gives the Secretary of State some additional tools that could be helpful. The bill directs the Secretary of State and Treasury to evaluate whether there are foreign persons engaged in significant corruption for the purposes of potential imposition of sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act in the countries listed in tier 3. That is the lowest performing tier.

I mention that because the Magnitsky Sanctions have had a proud history in this Chamber. We initiated the Magnitsky Sanctions originally against Russia because of the torture and death of Sergei Magnitsky. We then made it global for those that are perpetrating gross violations of international human rights.

I introduced the legislation with my partner who was the late Senator McCain. The two of us said we need to include corruption as one of the basic human rights violations that would be eligible for individual sanctions. And we did.

In the last Congress, we made the Global Magnitsky Sanctions permanent. And I was proud that we were able to do that in the National Defense Authorization Act. What is unique by these sanctions is that they are individual. They are not against the country. They are personal to the individual who violates the basic rights.

And what does it do? It prevents them from getting a visa to come to America because they like to visit their wealth that is here in our country. And it prevents them from using our banking system. It works.

It was reportedly the first issue between Mr. Putin and President Trump in their first bilateral summit meeting. Mr. Putin was upset about these sanctions. Good. I am glad that he is.

This legislation that Senator Young and I have introduced allows us to look at whether we should be using these individual sanctions--these Magnitsky Sanctions--against the perpetrators of corruption who have not been held accountable in their own country.

There is lot to be said about why this legislation is so important. So I would like to just conclude by pointing out the bill that we introduced today is nearly identical to the bill that we introduced in the last Congress. It was reported out on a bipartisan basis by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

I want to thank Senator Menendez for his help and Senator Risch for his help. This is not a partisan bill. This is a bipartisan bill to promote an American value and a national security concern and that is making sure that America leads in fighting corruption so we do not have the resources going into a country like Russia, where Mr. Putin uses it to try to bring down our system of government.

I urge my colleagues to join me and Senator Young in this effort. I hope that we are able to pass this bill quickly in the U.S. Senate.

We came close to doing it in the last Congress. We can get it passed in the House and signed by the President. I think we will look back at this day when that report comes out and say that we were able to accomplish concrete improvements in making this world a better place, in promoting American values, that this report will make a difference.

Mr. President, I rise today to note that, during the 117th Congress, several major legislative efforts to further U.S. foreign policy are becoming law, and I would like to highlight several here today. I feel strongly that these accomplishments merit special recognition, as they represent major advances in foreign policy that will improve our country's international engagement for years to come. I am proud to have led these efforts and would like to outline a few of the major components of these monumental bills.

As chair, of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development Management, International Operations, and Bilateral International Development, I take great pride to note that we successfully passed the State Department Authorization Act this year. To put this in context, this marks only the second time within the span of the past 16 years that a State Department Authorization Act has been enacted.

The State Department Authorization Act addresses much-needed reform that will help to strengthen our diplomatic corps and efforts on an institutional level and represents months of painstaking coordination. Modern diplomatic challenges require modern solutions, and it is my belief that provisions of this bill empower the State Department to make necessary changes in key areas that will help to revitalize and redefine our diplomatic engagement.

I will note that key to these efforts is my colleague Senator Bill Hagerty, whose team worked closely with my own, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the State Department on defining and addressing modern diplomatic challenges. This act also represents a victory of collaboration across parties and agencies, especially the Department of State, to reach this successful consensus.

First and foremost, Senator Hagerty and I led the efforts to establish a Commission on Reform and Modernization at the Department of State. This 16-member commission will seek to identify areas for improvement and modernization in the organizational structure, personnel, facilities, and policy of the State Department and make recommendations to the President and Congress.

This effort is crucial; in the ever-shifting atmosphere of modern diplomacy, this commission will provide a body of oversight that keeps a big-picture view of State Department operations and establishes a critical line of communication between Congress, the President, and the Department of State.

Secondly, the State Department Authorization Act establishes new requirements to extend the ``cooling off'' period for post-employment restrictions for certain Senate-confirmed officials. U.S. foreign policy is not for sale, nor should anyone have reason to think it is. By extending the cooling off period from 1 to 3 years, these high- ranking individuals are barred from representing foreign governments before the U.S. Government for a longer period. In doing so, we lessen the risk of perception that Ambassadors and other high-ranking officials will lose sight of U.S. interests in favor of their own near- term financial gain. Again, this important congressional oversight is yet another important step to safeguard the integrity of our foreign policy.

Third, I would like to highlight key advancements we have called for in lifelong professional development at the Foreign Service Institute. We have established a new body, the Board of Visitors, that will serve to offer recommendations to improve and modernize the Foreign Service Institute. The Board of Visitors, along with a new Provost position at the Foreign Service Institute, will work to inject new outside academic and adult learning expertise to better its operations, including the development of an evaluation system to determine how to improve the quality of training and focus it on the areas most useful to better prepare diplomats for the challenges they will encounter in 21st century diplomacy.

Additionally, we identified other professional development areas that will help to improve the State Department's operations on an institutional level. We authorized the State Department to expand the scope and number of external fellowships offered across Departments and Agencies.

These external fellowships, such as the Congressional Pearson Fellowship, which allows Foreign Service Officers the opportunity to work on the Hill for a Member or committee of Congress, expand relationships and knowledge across U.S. agencies and branches, academic institutions, and civil society organizations.

We further sought to expand professional development and trainings to address 21st century diplomacy, expanding virtual opportunities for training and extending out training to partner organizations that can offer specialized expertise for modern diplomatic challenges. In addition, we authorized the State Department to pursue curriculum to better enable Foreign Service Officers to understand the issues of press freedom and tools that are available to help protect journalists, as well as incorporate special training for officers assigned to countries significantly affected by climate change receive specific instruction on U.S. policy with respect to climate resiliency and adaptation.

Lastly, we have authorized the State Department to purse a foreign language incentive pay program that will enable our diplomatic corps to maintain our diplomats' critical language skills so that they can better serve our U.S. interests. Senselessly, in the past, there had been no mechanism to keep our highly trained diplomats up to skill in critical languages such as Chinese, Russian, Dari, and Arabic. Our current system simply trains diplomats in these languages and incentivizes their use while posted abroad, but these incentives disappear when diplomats move on to other positions--and with no incentive in place to maintain their critical languages, these language skills are usually largely lost.

While we have spent significant USG resources enabling our diplomats to engage and further our interests with foreign audiences by teaching them foreign languages, up until now, we have provided no mechanism to enable our diplomatic corps to keep these critical foreign languages skills active.

This new program will strengthen the ability of our diplomats to keep these key languages fresh, which ultimately will save the U.S. Government money by eliminating the need to retrain diplomats in the same language for a second or even third time. It will also provide for a better-prepared diplomatic corps that can be called upon when there is a pressing need for diplomats with specific language skills, such as the urgent call for Dari and Pashto speakers that the Department of State issued during the 2021 fall of Afghanistan. We will now have these diplomats ready when they are needed to best serve U.S. interests.

Finally, I am also proud of our work in this body to hold accountable authoritarian government regimes across the world. For too long, we have seen democratic backsliding, rising corruption, and human rights abuses committed at a global scale. There is perhaps no better example than in Burma, where the military initiated an illegal and unjustifiable coup d'etat in February 2021.

During and following the coup, the Burmese military has engaged in despicable human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, torture, and wrongful imprisonment. The military-led government has imprisoned over 11,000 civilians and killed over 1,400, including children. This amounts to crimes against humanity.

We cannot look the other way in the face of these grave injustices. That is why I was proud to introduce, alongside my House colleagues Representatives Meeks and Chabot, the Burma Unified through Rigorous Military Accountability Act, better known as the BURMA Act. This important bill will authorize the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development to support democracy activists, provide humanitarian assistance, and undertake reconciliation efforts in Burma. This will include support for organizations aiding political prisoners in Burma and assistance to entities investigating crimes against humanity.

The BURMA Act also requires the President to impose strict sanctions on Burmese military or government officials, as well as actors that have knowingly operated in Burma's defense sector or have undermined the nation's democratic processes. The United States must continue to stand with the people of Burma and for a civilian-led government based on the recognition of human rights and democratic principles.

To conclude, I am proud of the work we have accomplished in this Chamber during the 117th Congress. By modernizing State Department operations and pursuing an anti-corruption, human rights-focused foreign policy agenda, the United States continues to be at the forefront of global diplomacy.

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

Mr. President, in 2022, as America approaches its semiquincentennial of the independence of our Nation, the United States of America stands at a crossroads.

Disturbingly, since the January 6 insurrection of our Capitol which sought to block the peaceful transfer of power after a free and fair election, a growing number of Americans believes that violence against government can be justified, according to recently polling. We have witnessed a disturbing rise of threats against law enforcement officials from various domestic violent extremist groups as well as threats and intimidation against public officials, such as school board officials and election workers, who are simply doing their jobs. We must condemn acts of violence from all corners and prosecute

those who seek to harm public officials to the fullest extent of the law.

We also witnessed the rise of election deniers in the 2022 midterm elections who repeated the Big Lie that the 2020 election was stolen and who pledged their loyalty to a particular candidate or ideology instead of the rule of law.

We have seen a rise of violent actions--a rise of anti-Semitism, a rise of hate crimes--and it is very much connected to the assault on our democratic institutions. All of us must be defenders of the democratic institutions, which are the bedrock of America.

As we saw in the 2020 elections, different interpretations of the Electoral Count Act of 1887 can lead down a dangerous path, such as when former President Donald Trump and his enablers attempted to overthrow a free and fair election won by President Joe Biden, leading to the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol. We were there. We were in harm's way. We know exactly how violent that group of insurrectionists was.

President Trump's latest outrage is to talk about suspending the Constitution because he lost the election. Free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power are fundamental to who we are as a nation.

For this reason, several months ago, I joined a bipartisan working group of, roughly, 20 Senators to make urgent changes to our Presidential election processes. I am pleased that, in July of 2022, our group reached a bipartisan agreement to modernize the Electoral Count Act, ECA, of 1887 and to make other needed changes to improve the Presidential transition process.

Our bipartisan working group's legislative proposal, the Electoral Count Reform Act, clarifies the appropriate State and Federal roles in selecting the President and Vice President of the United States. It makes it easier for Congress to identify a single, conclusive slate of electors from each State, in part, by requiring States to follow the rules they set before the election when designating their electors.

We reiterate that the Vice President has a purely ceremonial function in the mandatory joint session of Congress to count the electoral votes. This was in direct response to President Trump's pressure campaign against Vice President Mike Pence to throw out the electoral votes from certain States, which enabled and led to the January 6 insurrection and attack on the Capitol.

We also increase the threshold needed to lodge objections against electoral votes to lessen the chance of frivolous objections in the future.

Our legislation also has a strong provision for expedited Federal judicial review to resolve legal challenges more efficiently before the electoral college meets to cast its votes.

I particularly want to thank Senators Susan Collins and Joe Manchin for leading this effort as well as the other working group members: Senators Portman, Sinema, Romney, Shaheen, Murkowski, Warner, Tillis, Murphy, Capito, Young, Coons, and Sasse. This is how the Senate should operate.

Our working group made several additional, useful recommendations as part of the Presidential Transition Improvement Act and Enhanced Election Security and Protection Act. This legislation would strengthen Presidential transitions, improve the U.S. Postal Service's handling of election mail, stiffen criminal penalties for those who threaten or intimidate election officials, and reauthorize the Election Assistance Commission.

The Election Assistance Commission helps administer grants to States and provides the best practices for election officials in various areas, including cyber security, election audits, and voting accessibility.

I am pleased that the Senate Rules Committee promptly held a hearing on our legislative proposal and that our legislation has been endorsed by a broad and diverse coalition of public interest groups.

In particular, I want to thank Chair Klobuchar and Ranking Member Blunt for making this proposal earlier this year and marking it up in their committee. I am pleased that the Senate Rules and Administration Committee reported out the legislation by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 14 to 1 in September 2022. The committee made improvements in the legislation--again, that is how the process should work--under the leadership of Senators Klobuchar and Blunt.

I am also pleased that the legislation has been cosponsored by our leaders, Leader Schumer and Leader McConnell.

It is now time for the Senate to act. Our legislation, S. 4573, now has a strong bipartisan mix of 37 cosponsors.

We must enact these reforms this month, before the 118th Congress convenes in 2023. We all know that the Presidential election cycle starts early, and we must make sure that this law is enacted before we start in 2023.

As my dear friend the late Congressman John Lewis said, ``Democracy is not a state. It is an act, and each generation must do its part.''

I urge every Marylander and American to get involved. Stand up for our democratic system of government and the rule of law.

Congress should act now to make sure that the lawful and rightful winner of the 2024 Presidential election is ultimately certified as the winner by the States and Congress. We cannot fail in this solemn duty to do everything we can to prevent another insurrection like we saw on January 6. We showed how fragile our democracy really is. We have an obligation to defend it together, as we continue our great American experiment with a democratic republic that serves as a beacon of freedom and human rights throughout the world.

With that, I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I was on the floor earlier listening to Senator Portman's farewell address to his colleagues in the U.S. Senate, and I must tell you, it brought back some very fond memories-- over three decades of friendship between Rob Portman and myself as colleagues, as partners, and as friends.

Earlier this week, we had a chance in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to express our appreciation to Senator Portman for his service on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. His wife Jane was there, and I made an observation that the sacrifice that Jane has made and that his three children--Jed, Will, and Sally--we thank them for sharing Senator Portman with us and with public service.

I think back about three decades. I first got to know Congressman Portman in 1993, when he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. An introduction came from former Congressman Bill Gradison. Bill Gradison was a Congressman from Ohio that Rob Portman succeeded in the U.S. House of Representatives.

I knew Bill Gradison from my days in the State legislature. We were friends. We had done some business--some bills--together in the House of Representatives, and he told me: You know, you are going to like this Rob Portman. He is the type of guy you are going to be able to work with. And, by the way, I have an issue I would like the two of you to take up.

It was a legacy issue for Bill Gradison, and it dealt with hospice care. There wasn't a lot of interest in hospice care in the 1990s, but Congressman

Portman and I got together and we worked on a bill, and we followed in Bill Gradison's footsteps to get that legislation accomplished. That was the beginning of a three-decade relationship that the two of us have had in pursuing legislation.

Perhaps our best known legislation is the Portman-Cardin pension reform legislation. For many years, people thought my first name was Portman because of the association with Congressman Portman at the time.

And I must tell you, we got amazing things done to expand retirement savings opportunities.

We are very proud that several bills were enacted and signed into law, but we are equally proud of the process that was used in order to put that legislation together.

We invited all stakeholders to join us. It was truly bipartisan. We wanted to get the best policy, and it was that process that led to the successful passage of the first Portman-Cardin bill that dramatically expanded retirement savings opportunities. Even though it was not in either the Democrat or Republican leadership package, we were able to get it into the Balanced Budget Act.

I mention the process because that is the process that Senator Portman--Congressman Portman--has always used. He has used the bipartisan process to try to bring us together to get the very best possible solutions to problems. It has been the bedrock of his career, and that is why he has been so successful here in the U.S. Senate, and so many of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle have expressed our gratitude for his public service.

Now, I must tell you, he used that relationship sometimes to move issues that were not necessarily his partner's top priority. As he mentioned on the floor, he got me engaged in the IRS reform bill that dealt with the nuts and bolts of the IRS.

Now, I ask you: How many people want to be known in their district for improving the IRS services for collecting their taxes?

But Rob Portman was the leader on this, and he needed a Democrat in the House, and he was very persistent, and we were able to get significant reform done in the IRS when we were both Members of the House.

Well, as you know, Rob Portman moved on to become the USTR, to become the budget director, and then returned to the U.S. Senate. And I was so pleased to be able to partner with him again when he returned to the U.S. Senate.

On the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, we talked about some of his major accomplishments. The two of us have worked together to promote the U.S.-Israel special relationship, to fight against anti- Semitism and the BDS movement, and there has been no stronger advocate in the U.S. Senate for the defense of Ukraine.

His record has been an unbelievable amount of accomplishments of getting solid legislation accomplished because he has that ability to work across party line. He is very engaged on the issues. He knows the issues. He knows the substance. He knows your concerns. So we can work it out and reach a common level of agreement so we can get a bill to the finish line.

So that is why he has such a remarkable record in getting retirement legislation enacted into law, getting trade legislation enacted into law, dealing with our National Park Service enacted into law, fighting drug addiction, which has been one of his major passions, making a huge difference on our war against drugs.

And as was pointed out earlier, and I just really want to underscore that, his values of promoting human rights.

In so many cases, he has been the key supporter, initiator, and had the ability to reach the finish line on bills that affect the basic rights of Americans going against such issues as human trafficking and so many other areas.

So I just really wanted to take this time to say to my friend Rob Portman, through the Presiding Officer, thank you so much for your many, many years of public service.

We wish Jane and you and your entire family only the best going forward. You have left the legislature once before and returned. Maybe, you will return again. We will see. But I wish you only happiness and success in what follows your Senate career. Thank you for sharing your talent with the American people.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all postcloture debate time on the Douglas nomination be considered expired and the vote on confirmation be at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 1285, 1286, 1287, and all nominations on the Secretary's desk in the Coast Guard and Foreign Service; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 1201, Shailen P. Bhatt, of Michigan, to be Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration; that the Senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 5229, introduced earlier today by Senators Cardin and Van Hollen.

I further ask that the bill be considered read three times and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I further ask that the bill be considered read three times and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 593, S. 2333.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be considered and agreed to; and that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

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

I ask that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 408, S. Res. 124.

Mr. President, I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment to the resolution be agreed to; the resolution, as amended, be agreed to; the committee-reported substitute amendment to the preamble be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.