Floor Statements

Madam President, I wish to commemorate the life of Judy Heumann, a leader in the disability rights movement, who passed away on March 4.

Judy was an internationally recognized leader in the disability community. She was instrumental in the development and implementation of major disability rights legislation, including the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act--IDEA--the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

She was a true public servant having served as the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services in the Department of Education from 1993 to 2001 and as the first Special Advisor for International Disability Rights at the Department of State from 2010 to 2017. In 1974, she helped develop legislation that became the IDEA while working on the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare--now the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, which I am proud to chair.

Judy became known as the ``mother of the disability rights movement'' when she fought to implement the Rehabilitation Act. Her activism was a defining moment in the disability and civil rights movement paving the way for the future legislation.

Judy changed the world for the one in four Americans living with a disability and one in six individuals with disabilities around the world. I join the disability community in honoring her contributions to the disability and civil rights movement.

Judy was feisty in her many roles fighting for disability rights. And she will be remembered for the impacts her advocacy made to improve the lives of people with disabilities.

May the memory of Judy Heumann be for a blessing.

Mr. President, in accordance with rule XXVI.2 of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I submit for publication in the Congressional Record the subcommittee assignments for the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, as unanimously adopted by the committee on February 27, 2023.

I ask unanimous consent that the subcommittee assignments be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, the vote on confirmation of the Calabretta nomination occur at 11 a.m. tomorrow, Thursday, February 16; that the cloture vote on the Martinez-Lopez nomination occur following disposition of the Reyes nomination; and if cloture is invoked on the Martinez-Lopez nomination, the confirmation vote occur following disposition of the Calabretta nomination; further, that the vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Kahn nomination be at 1:45 p.m.; finally, that following my remarks and the remarks of Senator Barrasso, the Senate stand in recess until 4 p.m.

Madam President, Senators should expect two rollcall votes at 4:30 p.m. today and three rollcall votes tomorrow.

Mr. President, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 118th Congress. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the committee rules be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I wish to commemorate the life of Robert ``Bobby'' Silverstein, a leader in the disability rights movement, who passed away on November 17, 2022.

Bobby was a true public servant having worked in the Labor Department, the Health, Education and Welfare Department, the House of Representatives, and the Senate, including as staff director and chief counsel for the Subcommittee on Disability Policy of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources--now the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. He was known as the ``behind-the-scenes architect'' of the Americans with Disabilities Act and served as a consensus-builder making bipartisan disability legislation a reality.

Bobby changed the lives of millions of people with disabilities by his work in prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability. I join former chairs of the HELP Committee in honoring his contributions to the disability and civil rights movement.

Bobby was steadfast in his many roles fighting for disability rights after his time working in Congress. He will be remembered for the significant impacts his work made to improve the lives of people with disabilities.

Finally, all who worked with Bobby tell of how kind and humble he was. He was beloved by all who knew him.

May the memory of Bobby Silverstein be for a blessing.

Mr. President, since 2010 I have sponsored a State of the Union essay contest for Vermont high school students. This contest gives students in my State the opportunity to articulate what issues they would prioritize if they were President of the United States.

This is the contest's 13th year, and I would like to congratulate the seven volunteer judges who helped choose the contest winners and finalists. The contest relies on its committed team of judges. The judges take time to review each essay and evaluate the diversity in writing that engages students and will benefit them for years to come. The judges' willingness to participate in this project reflects their dedication to both the students and our state, and for that, I graciously thank them.

The judges include:

Andrew Chobanian of Oxbow High School--participant for one

year

Lauren Conti of Stowe High School--participant for one year

Jason Gorczyk of Milton High School--participant for ten

years

Krista Huling of South Burlington High School--participant

for ten years

Mary Schell of White River Valley School--participant for

one year

Sarah Soule of Middlebury Union High School--participant

for five years

Terri Vest of Twinfield Union School & Vermont Virtual

Learning Collaborative--participant for thirteen years

I am very proud to enter the State of the Union Essay Contest judges into the Congressional Record to recognize their contributions.

Mr. President, since 2010, I have sponsored a State of the Union essay contest for Vermont high school students. This contest gives students in my State the opportunity to articulate what issues they would prioritize if they were President of the United States.

This is the contest's 13th year, and I would like to congratulate the 382 students who participated. It is truly heartening to see so many young people engaged in finding solutions for the problems that face our country. To my mind, this is what democracy is all about.

A volunteer panel of Vermont educators reviewed the essays and chose August Howe as this year's winner. August, a junior at Twinfield Union School, wrote about the impact of misinformation on our society and our democracy. J Lahue, a freshman at Burr and Burton Academy, was the second place winner. J wrote about how to address political polarization. Keenan Wallace, a junior at Twinfield Union School, was the third place winner, with an essay on unions and labor rights.

I am very proud to enter into the Congressional Record the essays submitted by August, J and Keenan:

Mr. President, I ask to have printed in the Record some of the finalists' essays written by Vermont High School students as part of the 13th Annual State of the Union Essay contest conducted by my office.

The material follows:

Finalists

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

Mr. President, I ask that the previous order with respect to the motion to discharge be vitiated.

Mr. President, I further ask that I be allowed to speak for up to 30 minutes, Senator Risch for up to 5 minutes, and Senator Menendez for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. President, this is an issue that I and a number of us Democrats and Republicans, progressives and conservatives, have been working on for a number of years.

I was disappointed that the Biden administration has announced its opposition to the resolution I am bringing forth, but we have been in communication with the administration all day, and just a few minutes ago, we have received a commitment from them that they will work with us to end the war in Yemen and bring peace to that very troubled region.

I don't know if the administration and those of us who want to go forward will end up being in agreement. If not, I assure the Members that we will be back with a resolution in the very near future, as soon as we can, because this is an issue that I and many of us feel passionately about.

To the Members, I am not going to ask for a vote tonight, but I do want to express my concerns, deep concerns, about what is going on in that region.

In 2014, with the active support of the U.S. military, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and a coalition of other countries intervened in the civil war in Yemen. The result of that intervention was the creation of the worst humanitarian crisis on the planet, and it really is almost hard to imagine what is going on in that impoverished country.

Since the war began in 2015, over 377,000 people have been killed, including at least 130,000 people who have died from indirect causes like food insecurity and lack of healthcare as a direct result of the Saudi blockade of Yemen and the humanitarian obstruction by warring parties.

Today, nearly 25 million Yemenis are in need of humanitarian assistance, 5 million are at risk of famine, and over a million are affected by cholera. According to UNICEF, by the end of this calendar year, nearly 18 million people, including over 9 million children, will lack access to safe water, sanitation, and hygiene services in Yemen, leading to regular outbreaks of preventable diseases like cholera, measles, and diphtheria.

The 8-year war in Yemen has internally displaced over 4 million people, making Yemen home to one of the largest internal displacement crises in the world, with women and children bearing the brunt of that burden.

According to the United Nations Population Fund, nearly 77 percent-- or 3 million--of those displaced in Yemen are women and children. Every 2 hours, a Yemeni woman dies during childbirth, an almost entirely preventable crisis. Furthermore, in Yemen today, more than a million pregnant and breastfeeding women are acutely malnourished, a number we may see double with rising food insecurity.

According to the international relief organization Oxfam, the threat of famine is very serious. Despite ongoing humanitarian assistance, over 17 million people in Yemen remain food insecure, a number set to rise to 19 million by the end of this year. In Yemen today, over a million pregnant or breastfeeding women and over 2 million children under 5 require treatment for acute malnutrition--acute malnutrition.

And if you think the suffering in that country cannot get any worse, unfortunately, you would be dead wrong. The United Nations reports that, if the conflict doesn't stop, the war in Yemen could lead to the deaths of 1.3 million people by the year 2030.

And let us be crystal clear: The initiators of this terrible war in Yemen were Saudi Arabia, one of the very most dangerous countries on the face of this Earth. Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship that is doing everything that it can to crush democracy in its own country. It is a brutal regime that treats women as third-class citizens and tortures civilians. It is one of the worst human rights violators in the world.

Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince, as I think many of us are familiar with, Muhammad bin Salman, ordered the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist and American resident, with a bone saw in 2018. And there is little doubt about that.

In a blatant attempt to jack up gas prices in the United States and harm our economy, Saudi Arabia agreed to partner with Vladimir Putin in the murderous war against the people of Ukraine.

At a time when children in Yemen are facing mass starvation, when that impoverished country's healthcare system is collapsing, Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman bought himself a $500 million yacht, a $300 million French chateau, and a $450 million Leonardo da Vinci painting. And he can afford to do this because their family is worth some $1.4 trillion, one of the wealthiest, if not the wealthiest, families in the entire world.

According to Freedom House, a respected human rights organization:

Saudi Arabia's absolute monarchy restricts almost all

political rights and civil liberties. No officials at the

national level are elected. The regime relies on pervasive

surveillance, the criminalization of dissent, appeals to

sectarianism and ethnicity, and public spending supported by

oil revenues to maintain power. Women and religious

minorities face extensive discrimination in law and in

practice.

According to Human Rights Watch, under the government headed by Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, ``Saudi Arabia has experienced the worst period of repression in its modern history.'' Human Rights Watch has reported that ``accounts have emerged of alleged torture of high- profile political detainees in Saudi prisons,'' including Saudi women's rights activists and others. The alleged torture included electric shocks, beatings, whippings, and sexual harassment.

Enough is enough. We must fundamentally reassess our relationship with the murderous regime of Saudi Arabia. We can and we must begin to do that by ending our support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, and that is why I have introduced a resolution that requires the United States to withdraw its forces from and involvement in the Saudi-led war in Yemen, which has not been authorized by the U.S. Congress.

This obviously is not a radical idea. In 2019, the Senate passed a similar resolution by a vote of 54 to 46. Every Democrat who was present voted for it, along with seven Republicans. The House of Representatives passed that same resolution by a vote of 247 to 175. Every Democrat in the House who was present voted for it, along with 16 Republicans. Sadly, then-President Trump vetoed it, and it did not become law.

It is long past time that we take a very hard look at our relationship with Saudi Arabia, a country whose government represents the very opposite of what we profess to believe in. Last year, President Biden and his administration did the right thing when it announced it would end U.S. support for offensive military operations led by Saudi Arabia in Yemen and named a special envoy to help bring this conflict to an end.

The good news is that, as a result of these efforts--I think as a result of the resolution passed in the House and the Senate--the Saudis have paused their deadly airstrikes in Yemen, and, in April, the United Nations brokered a truce between the warring factions.

The bad news is that this truce expired over 2 months ago, and there is now evidence that violence in Yemen is beginning to escalate.

Now, I understand that the administration is opposed to this resolution, and let me briefly respond to some of their concerns. First, the administration claims that this resolution is unnecessary because Saudi Arabia has paused its bombing campaign in Yemen. Well, Mr. President, that may be true, but--let's be clear--there is no guarantee that Saudi Arabia will not start bombing Yemen tomorrow, relying on U.S. military support and U.S.-manufactured weapons to carry out those airstrikes, which in the past have done incalculable harm to the people of Yemen. In fact, a previously announced end to U.S. offensive support did not prevent devastating and indiscriminate Saudi airstrikes in Yemen, which occurred as late as March 2022.

Passing this legislation would allow Congress to play a constructive role in the negotiation of an extension of the truce and a long-term and lasting peace. The resolution that we are debating today--we are discussing right now--will help ensure that Saudi airstrikes do not resume.

Further, while it is true that the Saudi blockade is not as severe as it has been in the past, vital commodities like fuel and medicine are still in short supply; and Saudi Arabia, to this day, still has imposed restrictions on nearly all commercial imports into Yemen, including fuel. And Saudi Arabia still has control over Yemeni airspace, which has prevented thousands of patients with medical emergencies from leaving the capital of Sana'a, according to the Quincy Institute.

This legislation that I have brought forward simply codifies what President Biden has already pledged to do by ending U.S. military assistance to the Saudi-led coalition's war in Yemen. Specifically, this resolution would achieve three important goals:

First, it would end U.S. intelligence sharing for the purpose of enabling offensive, Saudi-led coalition strikes inside Yemen.

Second, it would end U.S. logistical support for offensive, Saudi-led coalition strikes, including the provision of maintenance and spare parts to coalition members flying warplanes.

Finally, it would prohibit U.S. military personnel from being assigned to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of or accompany Saudi-led coalition forces engaged in hostilities without specific statutory authorization from the Congress.

Let us be clear. This is a narrowly targeted resolution that only affects Saudi Arabia's offensive operations in Yemen. This resolution would still allow for U.S. military support to be used to protect the territorial integrity of Saudi Arabia. In other words, nothing in this legislation prevents the United States from helping Saudi Arabia defend itself against attacks originating from Yemen. Further, this resolution would not affect America's support for Ukraine's self-defense, as some opponents of this legislation have claimed.

That is why I am proud to be joined on this resolution by some of the staunchest defenders of Ukrainian sovereignty and U.S. national security interests, who, like me, are outraged by Saudi Arabia's collaboration with Russia and open support of illegal wars of aggression. They include Senator Durbin, Senator Blumenthal, Senator Peters, Senator Warren, Senator Markey, and a number of others who support this resolution.

Passing this War Powers Resolution will send a very powerful message to Saudi Arabia that the war in Yemen must finally come to an end. There must be a peaceful resolution to this horrific conflict. Passing this resolution will also send a message to Saudi Arabia that its partnership with Russia, with respect to the war in Ukraine, is unacceptable.

In October, after Saudi Arabia agreed to cut oil production, the Biden administration recognized the need to work with Congress to reexamine the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the United States. President Biden said he wanted action from Congress. This resolution is a narrowly tailored response that will help achieve that objective.

In October, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Menendez, said:

The United States must immediately freeze all aspects of

our cooperation with Saudi Arabia, including any arms sales

and security cooperation beyond what is absolutely necessary

to defend U.S. personnel and interests.

He continued:

As Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I

will not green-light any cooperation with Riyadh until the

Kingdom reassesses its position with respect to the war in

Ukraine. Enough is enough.

I agree with that, and this resolution is our opportunity to send a powerful message to Saudi Arabia that Congress is, in fact, reexamining our relationship with that country; it is an attempt to defend the Constitution of the United States, which gives the power of making war to Congress, not to the President; and it is an effort to end our complicity in this horrendously bloody and horrible conflict.

Congress has a narrow window now to do something important. Enacting the War Powers Resolution will send a powerful message to the Saudis and to the Houthis that the United States will not be a party to this war and that the warring factions must find a sustainable peace solution.

The vote on this resolution is very important. And let me repeat: We, just a few minutes before I got to the floor, received word from the administration that they wanted to work with us in crafting language that would be mutually acceptable, and we are going to give them that opportunity. Whether we succeed or not, I don't know. And let me repeat: If we do not succeed, I will be back with many of my colleagues to bring forth this resolution, something that is very important.

What this resolution, finally, is about is that it says that the people of Yemen need more humanitarian assistance, not more bombs. It is a vote that says that the Senate believes in the Constitution of our country, which makes it clear that the Congress, not the President, determines whether and when the United States goes to war. It is a vote that tells Saudi Arabia that we will not continue to give it a blank check with respect to war and foreign intervention. And it is a vote that says: No, we will not stand with Saudi Arabia while it is actively supporting Vladimir Putin's horrific war of aggression against the people of Ukraine.

So, once again, where we are at is, I am not going to ask for a vote tonight. I look forward to working with the administration, which was opposed to this resolution, to see if we can come up with something that is strong, that is effective. And if we do not, I will be back.

With that, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I have an additional 10 minutes.

Mr. President, we are soon to be voting on the situation with the rail industry, which is an enormously important issue, not only for the 125,000 rail workers involved but for the entire country, because rail plays an enormous role in transporting very, very basic and important goods that all of us depend upon. It becomes a health issue, et cetera, et cetera.

But I want to take a half a moment to put this rail issue into a broader context and then get back to the rail situation. And that is, what polls are telling us and what I think each and every Member of the Senate sees and hears from his or her constituents is, people in this country are increasingly disgusted with the kind of selfishness and corporate greed that we are seeing.

Now, we don't talk about it much, and the media doesn't talk about it much, but there is more income and wealth inequality in America today than we have seen in at least 100 years. And the gap between the very, very rich and the middle class and everybody else is growing wider and wider.

And today, in the midst of this inflationary period, when so many of our workers are struggling to put food on the table, when they are falling behind economically, the billionaire class has literally never had it so good. These guys don't know what to do with their money. You don't know how many mansions they can own, how many islands they can have. Some of them are building spaceships to take them to Mars. They don't know what to do with their many billions of dollars. And yet, as we speak, 85 million Americans can't afford health insurance; 60,000 a year die because they don't get to a doctor on time; 45 million people dealing with student debt; families can't afford childcare for their kids. We have 600,000 people who are homeless in America, including people a few blocks away from the U.S. Capitol.

The rich are getting much richer. The middle class continues to shrink. And if you want to talk about the excesses of corporate greed, then you have got to talk about the rail industry and what is going on here right now.

Now, everybody understands that businesses sometimes have trouble. They lose money. They are in trouble. They go to their workers and say: Hey, things are tough, we all have to cut back. We understand that.

That is not the case today with the rail industry. For the rail industry, business has never been better, recordbreaking profits. This year alone, for the first three quarters, their profits are up by over $21 billion. They have so much money that they are able to give over $25 billion in stock buybacks and in dividends.

That is what is going on with the rail industry. One of the CEOs in the rail industry makes $20 million a year. Another guy makes $14 million a year. They are doing phenomenally well. But what is also going on in the rail industry is that over the last 6 years, they have cut back on their workforce by 30 percent, which means that workers in the rail industry are asked to do more with less support.

So for 3\1/2\ years, there have been negotiations between the industry and the 12 rail unions. And the end result of this is that the workers received a 24-percent increase in their wages. It sounds like a lot of money. That is for a 5-year period. They have not received a pay increase in the last 3 years. And if you average it out, that pay increase is less than inflation to date. It is not a great wage increase. It is not terrible, but it is not a great wage increase.

I have heard talk about healthcare. They wanted healthcare. They didn't win on healthcare. What the industry, unbelievably, wanted to do, despite recordbreaking profits, is ask workers to pay more for their health insurance. That was beaten back. So they remain at a status quo. Not a victory, but not a defeat.

But most egregiously, if you talk to the workers as I have--what is the issue? It is not wages. It is not benefits. Their issue is paid sick leave. They are one of the few industries in America today that have zero sick paid leave. Unbelievably, if a worker today on the rail industry gets sick, that worker gets a mark for missing work and can and--in some cases--will be fired.

Can you imagine that? Here in Congress, we all--conservatives, progressives--we have staff--all of us, and people get sick. Of course, they take time off. You don't fire them. You don't give them marks. You don't punish them because they got sick. This is America, 2022. You don't treat people--especially in the rail industry, who are doing dangerous, difficult work.

Now, I have to be honest. I know that the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Transportation have worked really hard on this issue. But I need to hear from them the willingness, which I think there will be, to demand that the industry do what has to be done, and that is to provide paid sick leave for their workers.

I will have an amendment. I assume that is coming up in a few moments. This is not a radical idea. It is a very conservative idea.

And it says, if you work in the rail industry, you will get 7 paid sick days. And I would hope that we would have strong support and the 60 votes that we need to pass this very, very important amendment that is wanted by every one of the rail unions and, I think, is overwhelmingly supported by the American people.

With that, I yield all time back.

Vote on Amendment No. 6503

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, the American people are increasingly disgusted at the level of corporate greed that we see today. We have more income and wealth inequality in America now than we have had in 100 years--billionaires getting richer, working people falling further and further behind.

And there is no clearer example of corporate greed than what we see in the rail industry today.

In the last year, that industry earned $21 billion in profits-- recordbreaking--and provided $25 billion in stock buybacks and dividends to their wealthy shareholders. And yet, today, in that industry, workers who do difficult and dangerous work have zero paid sick days. Zero. You get sick, you get a mark against you; couple of marks, you get fired. This cannot and must not happen in America in 2022.

This amendment simply says 7 paid sick days for workers in the rail industry, and I hope we can win it.

Vote on H. Con. Res. 119

I ask for the yeas and nays, and I yield back all remaining time on both sides.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 753.

I know of no further debate on the resolution.

I ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, I have risen today to ask unanimous consent for S. Res. 753, expressing the sense of the Senate on the upcoming election in Brazil.

This Sunday, October 2, Brazil will hold its Presidential election. According to many polls, it appears that the two major candidates are President Jair Bolsonaro and former President Lula da Silva. If no candidate receives over 50 percent of the vote, there will be a runoff election between the top two candidates on October 30.

Madam President, over the past several months, Brazilians from all sectors of society have publicly expressed serious concern about ongoing efforts to undermine democracy in their country, including close to 1 million Brazilians who signed an open letter released on July 26, defending the democratic institutions of Brazil and the rule of law.

And there is a very good reason why these people in Brazil signed that letter. And that is that the current President, and candidate for reelection, Mr. Bolsonaro, has made some very provocative statements which suggest that he might not accept the election results if he loses. In other words, he might attempt to destroy Brazilian democracy and remain in power no matter what the people of Brazil determine in a free, fair, and democratic election.

And let me just quote some of what Mr. Bolsonaro has been saying over the last several years. Back in September 2018, before he won his election, Bolsonaro stated:

I will not accept an election result that is not my own

victory.

On September 7, 2021, as reported by the Financial Times, Mr. Bolsonaro stated:

There are those who think they can take me from the

presidency with the mark of a pen. Well, I say to everyone I

have only three possible fates: arrest, death or victory. And

tell the bastards I'll never be arrested. Only God can take

me from the presidency.

According to Human Rights Watch, previously, President Bolsonaro had claimed, without providing any evidence, that the last two Presidential elections were fraudulent, including his own election, in which he claimed he got more votes than the final tally showed.

But it is not just Bolsonaro's words that should be of concern to those of us who believe in democracy. According to a recent survey by the Federal University of the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil is facing a 335-percent increase in violence directed against political leaders in 2022 relative to 2019.

Last month, a Workers' Party official was shot dead by a Bolsonaro supporter. Yesterday, Reuters reported that the Federal Police guarding former President Lula da Silva, who is the current frontrunner to unseat Bolsonaro, sent a classified memo to senior colleagues across Brazil calling for backup in order to protect Lula from possible assassination attempts.

It is clearly not the business of the United States to determine who the next President of Brazil is or to get involved in Brazil's Presidential elections in any way. That is a decision to be made solely by the people of Brazil through a free and fair election. But it is the business of the United States to make clear to the people of Brazil that our government will not recognize or support a government that comes to power through a military coup or the undermining of a democratic election.

In that regard, I have asked to receive unanimous consent today for a resolution that I introduced with Senator Tim Kaine, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. That resolution is also cosponsored by Senators Durbin, Leahy, Merkley, Blumenthal, and Warren.

I would also like to thank Senator Menendez, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, for allowing this resolution to come to the floor.

This resolution is very simple and straightforward. It does not take sides in Brazil's elections. All it does is express the sense of the U.S. Senate that the U.S. Government should make unequivocally clear that the continuing relationship of the United States and Brazil depends upon the commitment of the Government of Brazil to democracy and human rights.

It urges the Biden administration to make clear that the United States will not support any government that comes to power in Brazil through undemocratic means and to ensure that U.S. security assistance to Brazil remains compliant with our laws related to the peaceful and democratic transition of power. This includes longstanding legal restrictions on the provision of security assistance in the event of a military coup.

In my view, it is imperative that the U.S. Senate make it clear through this resolution that we support democracy in Brazil. It would be unacceptable for the United States to recognize a government that came to power undemocratically, and it would send a horrific message to the entire world if we did that.

It is important for the people of Brazil to know we are on their side, on the side of democracy. This resolution sent that message. And I thank my colleagues for supporting it.

With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to say a few words about the state of democracy, both in terms of the upcoming election in Brazil as well as here in the United States.

It is no great secret that, today, democracies around the world are under great threat from rightwing extremism. That obviously includes our own, as we all saw tragically on January 6, 2021, when there was an attack on this very building by those seeking to overturn our Presidential election.

One of the countries where democracy is now under threat is Brazil, the largest nation in Latin America and one of the largest democratic countries in the world. On October 2, less than 2 weeks from now, Brazil will hold its Presidential election. According to many polls, it appears that the two major candidates in that election are President Jair Bolsonaro and former President Lula da Silva. If no candidate in that election receives over 50 percent of the vote, there will be a runoff election between the top two candidates on October 30.

Mr. President, over the past many months, Brazilians from all sectors of society have publicly expressed serious concerns about ongoing efforts in that country to undermine democracy, including close to 1 million Brazilians who signed an open letter released on July 26, 2022, defending the democratic institutions of Brazil and the rule of law.

And there is, in fact, a very good reason as to why the people in Brazil are concerned about their democracy, and that is that the current President and candidate for reelection, Jair Bolsonaro, has made some very provocative statements which suggest that he might not accept the election results if he loses. In other words, Bolsonaro might attempt to destroy Brazilian democracy and remain in power no matter what the people of Brazil determine in a free and democratic election.

Here are just a few examples of what Mr. Bolsonaro has said over the years.

Back in September 2018, before he won his election, Bolsonaro stated:

I will not accept an election result that is not my own

victory.

On September 7, 2021, as reported by the Financial Times, Bolsonaro stated:

There are those who think they can take me from the

presidency with the mark of a pen. Well, I say to everyone I

have only three possible fates: Arrest, death or victory. And

tell the bastards I'll never be arrested. Only God can take

me from the presidency.

According to Human Rights Watch, previously, President Bolsonaro had claimed, without providing any evidence, that the last two Presidential elections were fraudulent, including his own election, in which he claimed he got more votes than the final tally showed.

But it is not just Bolsonaro's words that should be of concern to those of us who still believe in democracy. According to a recent survey by the Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil is experiencing a 335-percent increase in violence directed against political leaders in 2022 relative to 2019.

Mr. President, it is obviously not the business of the United States to determine who the next President of Brazil is or to get involved in Brazil's Presidential elections in any way. That is a decision to be made solely by the people of Brazil through a fair and free election. But it is the business of the United States to make clear to the people of Brazil that our government will not recognize or support a government that comes to power through a military coup or the undermining of a democratic election. That is our business.

In that regard, Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to support a resolution

that I have introduced with Senator Kaine, S. Res. 753. And Senator Kaine, of course, is the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, and that is also cosponsored by Senators Leahy, Merkley, Blumenthal, and Warren.

This resolution is very simple and straightforward. It does not take sides in Brazil's election, obviously, and that would be unacceptable. But what it does do is express the sense of the U.S. Senate that the U.S. Government will make it unequivocally clear that the continuing relationship of the United States and Brazil depends upon the commitment of the government of Brazil to democracy and human rights.

This resolution urges the Biden administration to make clear that the United States will not support any government that comes to power in Brazil through undemocratic means and to ensure U.S. security assistance to Brazil remains compliant with our laws related to the peaceful and democratic transition of power--in other words, no military aid to a military coup in Brazil.

This does not seem to be a complicated or, in my view, controversial piece of legislation. Yet--and I say this with a great deal of sadness, and maybe it tells us the state of democracy in the United States--we have not been able to get one single Republican to cosponsor this very simple, straightforward resolution.

Why is that? And the answer is, I would love for my Republican colleagues to explain to me why they cannot support and add their names to a resolution that simply supports Brazil's democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. Obviously, it would be most effective if this resolution had bipartisan support, and I hope that it will.

Mr. President, in my view, it is imperative that the U.S. Senate make it clear through this resolution that we support democracy in Brazil. It would be unacceptable to the United States to recognize a government that came to power undemocratically; and, if we did that, it would send a horrific message to the entire world. So it is important for the people of Brazil to know that we are on their side.

We are on the side of democracy, and that is what this resolution is about. I ask my colleagues, in a bipartisan way, to support it.