Floor Statements

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from Virginia Senator Warner, who just addressed this very important issue, and my friend and colleague, the other Virginia Senator, Senator Kaine, who is making the motion today that we pass his Saving the Civil Service Act.

This is a critical piece of legislation to protect one of America's best innovations, which is the idea of a nonpartisan, merit-based Federal workforce--one that serves all Americans, regardless of political affiliation; one where you don't take a political test to decide whether you have the credentials for the job; you take a skills- based, knowledge-based test to decide if you are best for the job.

Our Federal workers are the air traffic controllers who ensure safe passage when Americans fly; they are the inspectors who protect our food supply; they are the folks who determine whether or not medicines put on the market are going to be both safe and do what they say they are going to do; they are the folks at the Social Security Administration in Baltimore City who make sure that people get their Social Security checks on time; they are the nurses and doctors at veterans hospitals who help our veterans; and many, many other essential functions.

Today, the only criteria for their employment is performance. It is what they know, not who they know. They are qualified to serve based on those credentials, and they do a good job protecting the American public. And they serve in those jobs regardless of what President is in the White House and what party that President may belong to. Their duty is to serve the American people.

So why are we here on the floor? Because the incoming administration has threatened to change the longtime practice of making sure we have a merit-based civil service.

At the very end of the last Trump administration, they proposed something called schedule F, which would allow them to convert merit- based positions into politically based positions--in other words, substituting political cronies for qualified merit-based Federal employees. That is a recipe for corruption.

Our predecessors, a long time ago, recognized that. That is why, back in 1883, the Congress passed the Pendleton Act to create the merit- based civil service. Prior to that, we had a spoils system, where people who worked on campaigns thought that they could get any job they wanted, regardless of their qualifications, because of their political party label.

In fact, the reason we ended up getting the Pendleton Act--one of them--was that, in 1881, one of those people, who had worked on a political campaign and thought they should have gotten a job and didn't, assassinated President Garfield. So at that time, the country was shaken, and they said: We have to get rid of the spoils system and replace it with a merit-based system.

I want to just make two other points because the incoming administration, as I said, tried this schedule F idea at the end of the last administration. This time, they are talking about doing it near the beginning of this incoming administration, which is why we are here on the floor today trying to take this action to prevent that from happening.

I want to point out that Presidents have about 4,000 political positions to fill. We are talking about the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State. Presidents have the discretion already--the power today--to nominate people for those 4,000 positions. So we are not talking about taking that away. We are saying: You can't convert thousands of other positions that today are based on merit into those political type of jobs.

Finally, we have heard a lot about the need for more government efficiency, and count me in. Count all of our colleagues from Virginia and Maryland and I think probably both sides of the aisle in on the idea of trying to make sure that we achieve greater efficiencies in government. But I will not support and we will not support something that, under the cover of the claim of government efficiency, is simply a Trojan horse to undo our merit-based system and turn it into one based on political cronyism because that leads to corruption, which will erode the public's confidence and erode the quality of service that our Federal civil servants provide.

So I want to again thank my colleague from Virginia Senator Kaine for all he has done. I want to thank my colleague from Maryland Senator Cardin, who has also been a great partner in this.

I yield to the Senator from Virginia Senator Kaine.

Mr. President, I rise to honor a member of my staff Nan Sheridan-Mann on the occasion of her retirement. Nan is retiring after over 5 and a half years as my western Maryland regional director and will be sorely missed.

Coming to my team from the Frederick County Chamber of Commerce, Nan has been instrumental in engaging with small businesses, nonprofit organizations, community leaders, and constituents alike throughout western Maryland. The daughter of a World War II veteran, she has been a champion for the veterans' community, serving as the cochair for Serving Together's Western Region Veteran Collaborative, an executive member of the Frederick County Community Veterans Engagement Board, and a member of the Veterans Advisory Council of Frederick County. Nan is tireless and always willing to lend a hand; Nan has not only been a community outreach resource but has worked to tackle individual cases for constituents across the State. Indeed, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, she helped to resolve over 1000 unemployment insurance cases and bring families security and peace of mind.

A Midwesterner by birth, we are grateful to call Nan Sheridan-Mann a Marylander and emeritus member of Team Van Hollen. We have treasured her good humor, abundant generosity, authenticity, and buoyant spirit. I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Nan for her outstanding service to Maryland and the U.S. Senate and wish her the best for a well-deserved and fulfilling retirement.

Mr. President, it is with great pride that on behalf of the Maryland congressional delegation, I pay tribute to our incredible senior Senator and thank him for his service to our State and our country and, in fact, all he has done around the world.

I want to recognize the fact that Steny Hoyer, Congressman Hoyer, is with us on the floor as well.

Thank you, Mr. Leader, for being here.

For those of you who don't know, when Ben Cardin was speaker of the Maryland House, Steny Hoyer was president of the Maryland Senate, so they have gone way back together.

Thank you, Steny, for being here.

Colleagues, I think all of us here know Ben Cardin for his many, many achievements and accomplishments and the fact that he is a wonderful colleague to work with. He has gone over some of those major highlights, so I am not going to repeat them all, but I do just want to flag a number of them, because the Magnitsky Act is the legislation that said the United States--it not only says we are going to stand up and protect fighters for human rights around the world, but we are going to create an enforcement mechanism to do exactly that.

We had a hearing just the other day in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reviewing that legislation. That legislation would not exist but for the fact that Ben Cardin made it happen--first through the original Sergei Magnitsky Act and then the Global Magnitsky Act--as a champion of human rights.

So this is why Senator Cardin is known not only for his accomplishments in Maryland and in the United States but indeed around the world, as is true with his service on the Helsinki Commission--his partner, of course, Senator Roger Wicker--which has been standing up for human rights, fighting against hate and anti-Semitism around the world, and doing more here at home. It is a fight against discrimination.

I want to thank him for his global reach but also for all he has done here in the United States when it comes to healthcare. He recounted the story of a Marylander whose name was Deamonte Driver who died because he did not get the dental care he needed. Senator Cardin worked to make sure that never happens again.

Whether it is housing or protecting the Chesapeake Bay or many other areas that are so important to our national life, Ben Cardin has been a leader.

In Maryland, we are very proud of all of those achievements, but in Maryland, Senator Cardin is known as ``our friend Ben.'' If you look at his TV commercials when he runs for reelection, you can find everyday people, whether it is a waterman on the Chesapeake Bay, whether it is a construction worker near the Port of Baltimore and others, saying: Thank you to my friend Ben. And because of his great length and quality of service, many people around the State of Maryland have had a chance to meet their friend Ben.

And he began to serve the State of Maryland when he was 22 years old. When he ran for the State delegate, he was still a law student at the University of Maryland Baltimore; and for 58 consecutive years, he has served the people of our State.

And he didn't just dream of winning elections. That was not the goal; that was the means to achieve his efforts in public service. And that ethic, as he has said, began in the Cardin family long before he first ran for office.

He is the son of Dora, a school teacher, and Meyer, a State legislator and judge. His wife Myrna and his late cousin Shoshana made their names as champions for Soviet Jewry. The Cardin family believes in America as a beacon of liberty and human rights, a beacon that first inspired Ben's grandparents to immigrate here from Russia at the turn of the last century.

So I think it is fair to say that Ben Cardin did not fall far from the Cardin tree of public service, but he has taken that family's commitment to public service to new heights, becoming, at 35 years old, the youngest ever speaker of the Maryland House of Delegates.

And I want to talk a little bit about his role here in the U.S. Senate on behalf of Team Maryland. Because he is a dear friend, there are many congressional delegations that don't have the spirit of unity that we have had in the State of Maryland, and that is a tribute to Ben Cardin's leadership. He has been the quarterback for Team Maryland, bringing us together to make sure that we work on behalf of the priorities of the people of our State--all parts of our State, from the Baltimore area to the Washington suburbs, Eastern Shore, and Western Maryland.

I could not ask for a better partner and a better friend in the U.S. Senate, somebody who welcomed me here after I served in the House of Representatives.

I do want to relay briefly to our colleagues in the Democratic caucus something that is not as well-known, but when Ben Cardin first arrived in the Senate from the House, having served previously as the speaker of the house of delegates in Maryland, he was interested in what the rules are of the Democratic caucus. It turns out, at the time, that the rules were not publicized among the Democratic Members of the caucus. Former Democratic leaders clearly viewed it as in their interest to keep them secret, to keep the Members of the caucus in the dark.

And so when Ben Cardin asked for the rules, it took a little search to find them. But it is an indication, both of his attention to detail but also his understanding of his responsibility to his colleagues and in the body, that every Member, whether they are a long-serving Member or a new Member has a chance to participate in the process. And we have since used the good work of Senator Cardin as rules, as the chairman of the Senate Caucus Rules Committee to help expand democracy, little D, in the Democratic caucus.

Finally, I just want to say that while much has changed over those 58 years that Senator Cardin has served our State, one thing has remained constant--bedrock--and that is the character of Ben Cardin. You will not find a person of greater decency, a person of greater integrity than Ben Cardin. And whether you agree or disagree with him on any particular issue, you always know that the position he has taken is one that is based in values and principles that he brings to the debate. And for that, we should all be eternally grateful.

So I know that he will be leaving this body. I have said--as I have traveled around the State, I have just been marveling at the fact that while Senator Cardin announced that he wasn't running for reelection over a year ago, he is running so hard through the finish line. It is hard to keep up with him. In fact, he just mentioned that we were at one of the Baptist Churches in Baltimore the other day--we had been on the Eastern Shore, Western Maryland, all over the State.

So I want to thank him for that deep commitment he has to our country and the State of Maryland. I want to thank his beloved partner and wife Myrna Cardin for giving him all that strength over many years. And while he will be leaving the Senate, both myself and our incoming Senator Angela Alsobrooks know he is only a phone call away. So don't turn off your phone too often, Ben Cardin.

To my colleagues, thank you all for being here to celebrate an incredible U.S. Senator, someone we are so proud of in the State of Maryland, our friend, my friend Ben Cardin.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to the remarkable life of the late Vincent ``Vince'' Leggett of Baltimore,

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss the terrible ongoing humanitarian situation in Sudan, and the atrocities that are being perpetrated against innocent civilians there every day and to discuss measures that the United States and the U.S. Senate can take to help end the suffering.

Since that brutal conflict erupted in April 2023, a staggering 11.8 million people have been displaced within Sudan or fled to neighboring countries. More than half the population--over 25 million people--face acute food insecurity, including 13 million children. And 1.5 million of them are at risk of or facing famine.

While the total casualty numbers have been difficult to determine, a new study from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine's Sudan Research Group estimates that more than 60,000 people died in the Khartoum region alone between April 2023 and June of 2024. That study found that 26,000 people have died as a result of violence. But it also highlighted another awful reality, that starvation and disease are increasingly becoming the leading causes of death reported across Sudan.

In a hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in May of this year, U.S. Special Envoy to Sudan Tom Perriello suggested that the total death toll could be as high as 150,000 people.

Given the scope and scale of this human suffering, the United States and the international community should be doing everything in our power to end the carnage and end the suffering in Sudan. Toward that end, I want to commend America's Special Envoy to Sudan Tom Perriello for his tireless shuttle diplomacy and his ongoing efforts to seek and negotiate an agreement to end the conflict that is fueling this crisis. But he can't do it alone. And his job is made much more difficult when other parts of the U.S. Government fail to effectively use our leverage to support his efforts.

One thing we should not be doing is shipping advanced American weapons to any country that is fueling the misery and suffering and killing in Sudan, and yet that is what the Biden administration is proposing to do. They are proposing to send weapons to the United Arab Emirates at a time that the UAE is reportedly supplying weapons to a vile and murderous militia group in Sudan, a group called the Rapid Support Forces, or the RSF for short.

So I am here on the floor today urging my colleagues to prevent the sale of American weapons to the UAE until and unless the Biden administration provides us--the Senate, the Congress--with credible assurances that the UAE will not, in turn, supply additional weapons to the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan.

So let me step back for a moment to put all of this in context. About 3\1/2\ years ago in May of 2021, I traveled to Khartoum, the capital of Sudan, with my colleague Senator Coons. At the time, Sudan was experiencing a difficult transition to democracy after a popular revolution in 2019 succeeded in ousting the brutal regime of the dictator Omar Bashir. It wasn't easy, but there was hope for a brighter future.

Then the Sudanese Armed Forces--or the SAF--and the Rapid Support Forces--the RSF--who had backed the popular protests in 2019 and who had helped oust the dictator Bashir usurped the newly formed civilian- led government in 2021 and then proceeded to violently suppress mass protests.

Following pressure, both from the people of Sudan but also from the international community, to restore the civilian government and merge their forces, instead, a long-simmering rivalry between the SAF and the RSF erupted in April 2023, and Sudan descended into chaos and civil war.

Now, there is plenty of blame to go around, but one of the many drivers of the collapse of the fragile democracy was the refusal of the Rapid Support Forces, that militia group, to come under the umbrella of the Sudanese Armed Forces.

And the RSF has an especially sinister lineage. They have their roots in the Janjaweed militias that former dictator Bashir used to brutally crush rebellious tribes in the western Darfur region in the early 2000s. I think many who followed those terrible days remember that the United States determined that those mass killings constituted genocide.

The current leader of the RSF goes by the name Hemedti. He is a former Janjaweed militia leader who was complicit in those atrocities in Darfur, and he hasn't changed.

In the current conflict, the United States has charged the RSF with committing ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.

Reputable human rights organizations and news outlets have also reported widespread acts of sexual violence, including rape, by the

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.

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

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

committee on finance

The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet in open executive session during the session of the Senate on Thursday, December 5, 2024, at 10 a.m., to consider a nomination.

committee on foreign relations

The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, December 5, 2024, at 10:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

committee on health, education, labor, and pensions

The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, December 5, 2024, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

committee on homeland security and governmental affairs

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, December 5, 2024, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

subcommittee on chemical safety, waste management, environmental

justice, and regulatory oversight

The Subcommittee on Chemical Safety, Waste Management, Environmental Justice, and Regulatory Oversight of the Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, December 5, 2024, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 185, S. 1868.

I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time 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 ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 513, S. 4212.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Blackburn amendment to the committee-reported substitute amendment, which is at the desk, be considered and agreed to; that the committee- reported substitute amendment, as amended, be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and 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. 523, S. 3606.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 908.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, December 9; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that following the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Johnson nomination; further, that at 5:30 p.m., the Senate vote on confirmation of the Johnson nomination as under the order of December 4; finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during Monday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Madam President, I rise in support of the joint resolutions of disapproval that the Senate is considering today on the sales of certain offensive weapons to the Netanyahu government.

To be clear, I do not support an arms embargo on Israel, but I do believe that the United States should pause the delivery of offensive weapons until the Netanyahu government meets the requirements of U.S. law and policy with respect to the delivery of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza and the use of American weapons there.

This is not about abandoning support for Israel; this is about making sure Americans' support for Israel complies with American laws and policies and values. We would not be on this floor considering these resolutions if that was happening today, and these votes will be the one opportunity that Members of the Senate have to send that message. I urge my colleagues to support them.

Following the Hamas attacks of October 7, I have, as probably every Senator has, supported Israel's right to defend itself--in fact, argued that they have a duty to defend themselves--and end Hamas's control of Gaza, and I am steadfast in that support to this moment. There must be no more October 7ths.

At the same time, U.S. taxpayer-funded assistance should not come in the form of a blank check, even to our closest allies. We need to ensure that U.S. interests, values, and priorities will be respected by foreign governments that receive U.S. assistance. That is why our security assistance to many countries includes various conditions to encourage progress on human rights.

In some cases, as in the case of Ukraine, we have limited the use of certain systems to align with U.S. national security interests. In other cases, including even some NATO allies, we have prevented the transfer of certain advance weapons systems when our policies goals do not align.

The one minimum standard that we must apply to all recipients of American security assistance is compliance with American laws, and it is compliance with that minimum standard that we are talking about here today--nothing more, nothing less. The Netanyahu government should not be exempt from that universal requirement of American law.

The United States has provided billions and billions of dollars of American taxpayer-financed bombs and other offensive weapons systems, but we have seen Prime Minister Netanyahu repeatedly violate the terms of American security assistance, disregard U.S. priorities, and ignore our requests, only to be rewarded by more bombs and more money. That pattern undermines the credibility of the United States around the world and creates an unacceptable double standard that our adversaries are exploiting.

Two of the conditions that every recipient of U.S. security assistance must meet are, one, they must facilitate and not arbitrarily restrict the delivery of humanitarian assistance into war zones where those U.S. weapons are being used--war zones like Ukraine and war zones like Gaza--and, two, they must use American-supplied weapons in accordance with international humanitarian law, which was well developed after World War II and what Senator Graham spoke to.

The Netanyahu government is violating both of these requirements in Gaza, and by refusing to take action, the President and the United States are complicit in those violations of American laws and American values.

Let's look at the unacceptable restrictions being placed by the Netanyahu government on the delivery of humanitarian aid to desperately needy civilians in Gaza right now. It has been well documented that there was some improvement in the delivery of humanitarian supplies in Gaza last April, around the time that the Biden administration had to submit the NSM-20 report to Congress, but since then, aid levels have been on a downhill slide and then a precipitous drop. The cumulative impact of severe restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid has worsened an already catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza. Senator Sanders spoke to the conditions there.

In fact, that is why President Biden directly called on Prime Minister Netanyahu to increase aid to Gaza on many occasions--most recently in an early October call--and that is why, on October 13, Secretaries Austin and Blinken expressly reminded Israeli Government officials, in a letter that I have here, of their obligations under U.S. and international law. They specifically cited section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act and National Security Memorandum 20 to facilitate and not arbitrarily restrict the delivery of humanitarian assistance.

Here is what our two Secretaries wrote in that letter:

We are particularly concerned that recent actions by the

Israeli Government--including halting commercial imports,

denying or impeding nearly 90% of humanitarian movements

between northern and southern Gaza in September--

And then they go on to list a number of other things--

are contributing to an accelerated deterioration in Gaza's

conditions.

Then Secretaries Austin and Blinken laid out a series of key measures against which they said the United States was going to measure the Netanyahu government's compliance. They mentioned enabling a minimum of 350 trucks per day to enter Gaza. They mentioned instituting adequate humanitarian pauses across Gaza to enable humanitarian activities. They mentioned reinstating a minimum of 50 to 100 commercial trucks per day. They had a long list of items.

So what do eight very respected international NGOs that conduct humanitarian relief in Gaza and monitor it have to say about whether those conditions were met? Well, they have compiled a scorecard. I have got it right here. And what they say on the specific items I mentioned was that the Netanyahu government failed. In fact, the overall report card concludes ``Israel Fails to Comply With U.S. Humanitarian Access Demands in Gaza.''

In fact, they determined that not only did the Netanyahu government fail ``to meet the U.S. criteria that would indicate support to the humanitarian response, but concurrently took actions that dramatically worsened the situation on the ground, particularly in Northern Gaza.''

They said that the situation is even more dire today than a month ago. In other words, because of those actions that were taken, the situation was worse than when Secretaries Austin and Blinken sent their letter.

Indeed, an independent Washington Post analysis found that ``Israel has largely failed to comply with the three main demands of the U.S. letter.''

In that November 12 Washington Post article, they also pointed out the following:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to

publicly disavow the plan, which calls for the military to

take control of the north by starving out the civilian

population and treating everyone who remains as combatants.

The story goes on to say:

The Israeli Defense Force says it has been given no such

orders and is focused on dismantling Hamas, but the ongoing

military operation in the north appears to have much in

common with the strategy.

It is called the ``General's Plan.''

A leading Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, editorialized with the following headline:

Netanyahu's Ethnic Cleansing in Gaza Is on Display for All

to See.

That is a view that has also been echoed by many Israeli human rights organizations, and I commend them on all the work that they do every day.

And I find it extraordinary that so many of our colleagues come to this floor to talk about human rights abuses across the world. They cite Human Rights Watch. They cite Amnesty International. But when it comes to those organizations writing reports about human rights violations conducted by the Netanyahu government--oh, no--they run away from that.

So let's look at what others have said in terms of monitoring the situation right now in Gaza.

On November 1, the principals of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee, the leaders of 15 U.N. and humanitarian organizations--including World Food Programme Executive Director Cindy McCain and UNICEF Director Catherine Russell, two American leaders of those organizations--said:

The situation unfolding in North Gaza is apocalyptic.

And they say:

The entire Palestinian population in North Gaza is at

imminent risk of dying from disease, famine and violence.

Humanitarians are not safe to do their work and are blocked

by Israeli forces and by insecurity from reaching people in

need.

They say:

Rescue teams have been deliberately attacked and thwarted

in their attempts to pull people buried under the rubble of

their homes.

Yet we keep sending more bombs.

In that statement, the U.N. and humanitarian leaders also issued this call:

Member States must use their leverage to ensure respect for

international law. That includes withholding arms transfers

where there is a clear risk that such arms will be used in

violation of international law.

So let's look at the use of American weapons. In its May 10 NSM-20 report to Congress, the Biden administration concluded:

[I]t is reasonable to assess that defense articles covered

under NSM-20 have been used by Israeli security forces since

October 7 in instances inconsistent with its [International

Humanitarian Law] obligations or with established best

practices for mitigating civilian harm.

And in that report--and I urge my colleagues to look at it--the administration identified a sampling of cases of civilian harm incidents where U.S. weapons were used. And they said there are some ongoing investigations and we are still waiting for answers from the Netanyahu government.

Well, just a few weeks ago, there was a report that we now have 500 cases of civilian harm where U.S. weapons were used under review.

And if you look at the most recent letter from Secretaries Blinken and Austin, you will see that they reference, at the bottom of their report, the following--and I want to read this because their letter says:

Lastly, it is crucial that our governments establish a new

channel to raise and discuss incidents of civilian harm. Our

previous engagements have not achieved the necessary

outcomes. We request the initial virtual meeting for this

channel to be held by the end of October.

This is more than a year into the war, and here you have the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State saying they are not getting enough information from the Netanyahu government to be able to make decisions about whether or not U.S. weapons have been used in violation of international humanitarian law. Yet, despite not getting that information, the administration has continued to send those taxpayer-financed offensive weapons.

And it is very clear that the Netanyahu government continues to conduct operations in Gaza in a way that results in large numbers of civilian casualties, and I think our colleagues know that the fact that Hamas violates international law and does despicable tactics by operating from amongst civilians does not absolve Israel or any other country involved in that kind of situation of the duty to avoid civilian harm and avoid the destruction of civilian infrastructure.

Since President Biden's recent call with Prime Minister Netanyahu last month, we have seen continued high rates of civilian deaths, and human rights organizations continue to document cases of weapons being used in violation of international humanitarian law.

Now, Madam President, that October 13 letter not only warned the Netanyahu government about unacceptable restrictions on humanitarian aid in Gaza and not only warned them about illegal use of American weapons; they also raised two other issues. One, they said that Israel is required by international law to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross access to Palestinian prisoners who were detained without any charges.

Yet, despite them sending the letter, no change there. And that means over 3,000 Palestinian prisoners who have been imprisoned without charge under administrative detention are not--the ICRC does not have access to them.

They also warned in their letter about pending legislation before the Knesset that would cripple UNRWA. And here is what Secretaries Austin and Blinken said. They warn that enactment ``of such restrictions would devastate the Gaza humanitarian response at this critical moment and deny vital educational and social services to tens of thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which could have implications under relevant U.S. law and policy.''

Within days of the U.S. Government sending that letter, two bills were passed by the Knesset to ban UNRWA.

So what we see, Madam President, is a continuing pattern. President Biden makes certain demands that are routinely ignored without consequence. In fact, they are rewarded. And this is an ineffective use of American leverage to accomplish our policy goals and ensure that American law is abided by.

I want to just mention a couple others, and Senator Sanders referenced them. But we know that Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly obstructed President Biden's plan for a ceasefire and the return of hostages.

Both in Washington and Israel, I have met with families of hostages who are experiencing unthinkable pain. I just met with the father of a soldier who is being held right now in Gaza as a hostage. They have stressed that Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly obstructed President Biden's plan to bring home their loved ones.

In fact, in his farewell address just 2 weeks ago, former Israeli Defense Minister Gallant noted that one of the key disagreements leading to his firing by Netanyahu was over ``our moral obligation and responsibility to bring our kidnapped sons and daughters back home as quickly as possible, with as many alive as possible, to their families.''

He went on to say:

Based on my role, experience, and the military achievements

of the past year, with a clear-eyed view of reality, I state

that this is achievable but involves painful compromises that

Israel can bear, and the IDF can deal with.

There is and will not be any atonement for abandoning the

captives.

This is former Defense Minister Gallant, fired by Netanyahu.

I heard Senator Graham speak a lot about the ``day after'' plan. Well, President Biden has proposed a ``day after'' plan. It is to have a reformed Palestinian Authority form the nucleus of governance in Gaza. And, indeed, the Netanyahu government, led by Smotrich, not only opposes President Biden's plan, but they have worked to systematically weaken the P.A. by withholding tax revenues that it collects on behalf of the Palestinian people.

What is more, Prime Minister Netanyahu publicly rebuked President Biden's call to create a path to a two-state solution, even bragging that he had long blocked that outcome--something I heard Senator Graham refer to as something that was needed.

So the Netanyahu government has refused to comply with other requests, as well, trying to change the rules of engagement on the West Bank in order to prevent the killing of innocent civilians, including the deaths of some American citizens. And contrary to longstanding policy in American Government, from Republicans and Democrats alike, about not having expanded settlements in the West Bank, something Secretary Blinken agreed was inconsistent with international law, we have seen a record number of settlements expanded by the Netanyahu government--in fact, one when Secretary Blinken was there in Israel.

So, Madam President, the issue here is not whether or not the United States is supporting Israel. The issue is whether or not, as we provide that support, we have a two-way street. A partnership should be a two- way street, not a one-way blank check. And, at a minimum, the Netanyahu government should comply with American law, as we have talked about today. And when they are not, we have an obligation to the American people and American taxpayers to make sure that we withhold that support until Netanyahu comes into compliance.

That is what we are saying here: Just meet the requirements of American law.

And all of us have an obligation to American taxpayers to make sure that

we are not complicit in violating American law and American values.

So, Madam President, that is why I encourage my colleagues to support these joint resolutions to send that message. This is the one opportunity we have to do so.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Jackie DeCarlo, chief executive officer of Manna Food Center, in recognition of her remarkable service to our community in Maryland. For over a decade, Jackie has been a tireless advocate in the fight against food insecurity, dedicating her career to serving the Montgomery County community and improving the lives of countless residents.

Jackie's journey of service began long before her tenure at Manna. She grew up in Atlanta, GA, where she started her career as an elementary school teacher, instilling compassion and a sense of purpose in her students. Seeking new challenges, Jackie moved to Maryland with her wife Kristen Moe, bringing her passion for advocacy and her educational expertise to tackle the pressing issue of food insecurity in our region.

Manna Food Center, founded in 1983, has been at the forefront of eliminating hunger in Montgomery County, MD. Under Jackie's leadership, the organization expanded its reach, providing essential food assistance to over 30,000 residents annually. Jackie played a pivotal role in relocating Manna's headquarters from Gaithersburg to Silver Spring, a strategic move aimed at addressing the growing needs of underserved communities in the eastern portion of the county, helped found the White House-recognized Montgomery County Farm to Food Bank and Small Business Vouchers Programs, among many others, and shepherded Manna and tens of thousands of our neighbors through the dangerous twists and turns of the COVID-19 pandemic. And during her time at the helm of Manna, Jackie has been invited to attend the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health and to address the Senate Spouses Organization at the Naval Observatory. Her commitment to the mission of Manna is a testament to her leadership and dedication to social justice.

Jackie is also an active member of other local organizations, including Leadership Montgomery and Nonprofit Montgomery, where she continues to build partnerships and champion systemic change. Her influence extends beyond the nonprofit space; she has worked to create a more equitable and compassionate community, and indeed, the ripple effects of her endeavors will carry on for generations.

As Jackie departs Manna and embarks on this new chapter, spending more time with her family and exploring new ways to engage with the public, her legacy of service will endure. Her work at Manna Food Center and her broader community involvement have left an indelible mark on Montgomery County, and we are forever grateful she has shared her buoyant spirit and visionary leadership with us. I ask my colleagues to join me in sending Jackie and Kris our deepest gratitude and best wishes.