Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to urge this body to reconsider the objection that was just made by my colleagues.

The rule of law, the system of ordered liberty for which so many Americans have served and sacrificed at home and abroad, is a fragile thing. It is, at times, a mere tissue, and it is held together by the confidence of our people in the ethics and integrity of those whom they elect or who are appointed, nominated, and confirmed to serve them.

We have seen a number of challenging chapters around ethics and integrity in public service recently, but, tonight, we are on this floor to speak about our Supreme Court and a simply shocking series of revelations about ways in which Justices have accepted, over years, huge amounts of gifts.

The suggestion has been made by a number of my colleagues that this is just Democrats, that this is just a partisan attack on a few Justices to try and roll back or undermine decisions they have made that we dislike or their legitimacy. Well, I can give you a compelling counterpoint.

My friend and colleague Senator Cornyn and I have seen a whole series of stories in the Wall Street Journal in 2021 that revealed that there were dozens of Federal judges who had stock holdings in companies where issues before them implicated the value of that company. It moved us to introduce the bipartisan Courthouse Ethics and Transparency Act.

Your typical bill takes 6, 7, 8 years to become law here in the Senate. This one moved faster than almost any other. On the Senate Judiciary Committee and here on the floor of the Senate, nobody argued that the Supreme Court needed to be above it all. Nobody argued that the Justices of the Supreme Court shouldn't be required to disclose their stock holdings and be accountable for their failures to recuse or disclose. In fact, that bill passed unanimously. Why, then, is this one not similarly situated?

Every Federal judge is subject to a binding code of ethics. Every Senator and virtually every Federal employee in a senior decision- making role is bound by a code of ethics. That is how the American people know that, if there is some sleight or false, some self-dealing or some action that creates the appearance of impropriety, action will be taken.

After months and months and months of reports of misconduct, failure to disclose, questionable conduct by a Justice or two of the Supreme Court, a recent poll by Marquette shows that a majority of the American people have lost faith in this institution and no longer have confidence in the political independence and the ethics of our Supreme Court.

Mr. Chief Justice, I hope you listen or watch. We believe you to be concerned about the legitimacy of this important institution.

The Supreme Court is the only Federal Court not bound by a code of conduct that is enforceable and where these disclosures and their consequences cannot be acted upon.

The highest Court in our land should not have the lowest ethical standards, and we should take a vote on this bill, the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act. It should not be

controversial or partisan. This isn't about attacking one Justice or another.

As someone who clerked for a Federal judge, as someone whose chief counsel clerked for a Federal judge--many of us are lawyers in this body and clerked for Federal judges. We know the importance of having an independent judiciary, of having a nonpartisan judiciary.

The most powerful court in the land is the Supreme Court. When it issued landmark decisions unanimously, it moved the arc of history. Today, it issues decisions after decisions that are 5-4 and that are producing challenging secondary waves in our body politic.

If the Supreme Court is to hold the role that our Framers intended, it must do so above reproach. That is not where we are today.

Our Supreme Court must make itself accountable to the American people. We shouldn't read disclosure after disclosure in the press to learn about the conduct of the Justices.

Just a few moments ago, earlier this evening, along with the rest of the Delaware delegation, I had the honor of meeting with the newest nominees to our Nation's service academies--young men and women who are raising their right hand and volunteering to serve our Nation, who will be granted the opportunity of a free education, in exchange for which they sign on the dotted line and agree to go serve our Nation at home and abroad and to defend our Nation and our Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic.

I have just completed a trip to the South Pacific, where I visited Manila. There, there is a World War II cemetery. It includes crosses marking the graves of 17,000 Americans who served and sacrificed in the convulsion that was the Second World War.

Those crosses do not have marked on them ``Democrat'' or ``Republican.'' The freedom for which they fought, the system of justice, the rule of law, the Constitution for which they took up arms against Imperial Japan, and worked so tirelessly alongside our allies to free a world under assault from fascism and imperialism--they did not do so based on a sense of partisan principles but out of a commitment to our Nation. We should honor those who served and sacrificed in a generation or two ago and those who are willing to serve and sacrifice today going forward by restoring ethics and transparency to the U.S. Supreme Court.

They have cast a shameful shadow, not just the appearance of impropriety but a genuine conflict. It can be resolved. We must help them take the action they should take and resolve it. We should pass this bill.

With that, I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I come to the floor today to speak for a few moments about the urgent--the pressing--matter of Americans held hostage or wrongfully detained abroad and about a specific positive recent development to make sure that when they are released and freed, they are welcomed home in a positive and meaningful way.

Today, there is somewhere between 30 and 40 Americans wrongfully detained abroad, and they range all over from their backgrounds to the countries in which they are held.

I have met repeatedly with Rachel and Jon, who are the parents of Hersh Goldberg-Polin, an American Israeli who was attending a music festival in Israel when he was attacked, badly injured, kidnapped by Hamas terrorists, and dragged to Gaza where he is still today hostage beneath Gaza in tunnels.

Ryan Corbett has been held in Afghanistan for years, an NGO worker who was abducted by the Taliban.

Mark Swidan has been held in China on narcotics trafficking charges, a sentence upheld recently but not yet imposed.

And, of course, Evan Gershkovich, a Wall Street Journal reporter currently imprisoned in Russia whose mother I met with recently and who I join with his family in continuing to pray and work for his release.

There has recently been a positive step forward in how we welcome home these hostages.

First, I have to tell you something disturbing about how we have long welcomed home hostages. Jason Rezaian is a Washington Post reporter who was taken prisoner in Iran and, ultimately, served a year and a half-- 544 days--in prison in Tehran before he was released. And I want you to guess what was the first thing Jason got from the U.S. Government when he returned home? It was a tax bill with fines and penalties for his failure to file and pay his taxes on time.

Jason came to meet with me and recounted to me that when he pointed out to the IRS that it was front-page news in the Washington Post that he was unjustly imprisoned--of course, he couldn't pay his taxes on time--they said: We would like to help you, Mr. Rezaian, but Congress needs to act in order for us to stop imposing tax penalties on American hostages.

So today I am here to celebrate that my dear friend Mike Rounds, Republican Senator, and I have introduced and the Senate has now passed a bill with a catchy title, Stop Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act. It cleared unanimously--thank you. We now await House action.

This is the latest in a number of actions several of us have taken together. There is now a National Hostage and Wrongful Detainee Day. It was recognized by a bill that was passed in the Defense authorization bill last year and signed into law by President Biden. That was March 9.

We are also working on legislation to repair the credit score of those who are wrongfully imprisoned, held hostage, or detained. As you can imagine, if you spend years in prison in Russia or in Iran or being held captive in Afghanistan or in Gaza and you aren't making payments on your bills, your credit score suffers. Senator Tillis and I are next hoping to move the Fair Credit for American Hostages Act.

Let me conclude by saying this: We have to do more together to deter hostage-taking, to restore to the United States those who have been wrongfully detained, to cooperate across our government.

I am grateful that the Biden administration has increased its focus on this urgent moral issue and that 47 wrongfully detained Americans have been brought home so far under the present administration. But, frankly, all of us should be working together to hold in our prayers and thoughts those who are hostages, those who are wrongful detainees and their loved ones, and to work together, as Senator Rounds and I have in recent weeks and as the Congress as a whole will in coming days.

The Senator will so yield.

Madam President, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to what is a pressing concern for so many of us.

I will simply reflect on my last in-person meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant in Israel, now many weeks ago. It was part of a visit I made to a number of countries in the region. I spoke directly to this, and I believe what I am saying also reflects the views of the administration.

Of course, the United States stands strongly behind Israel and its defense and its security. Secretary of Defense Austin, when asked this same question about what it might mean if there were pauses or reviews of weapons deliveries--what that might mean. Just yesterday, he said that the administration, the United States, retains an ironclad commitment to Israel's security and defense, as just demonstrated a few weeks ago when we worked together with Israel, with the UK, with France, with Saudi Kingdom, and with Jordan to provide their defense against 300 missiles and drones launched at Israel by Iran.

So what is it that we are saying with regard to Rafah? What I said to the Prime Minister was: You don't just have the right to defend the Israeli people against Hamas; you have the obligation. After October 7, you have to restore a sense of security and deterrence against this terrorist organization that massacred more Jews, more civilians--1,200 people of a wide range of backgrounds, in fact. It is the worst day for Jews since the Holocaust. But many who are still held captive in Gaza by Hamas are from a dozen different nations, languages, and religions.

You have to go after them and finish the job. You have to go into Rafah, go

after these four remaining battalions, and you have to secure Gaza and make certain Hamas does not reemerge as a fighting force that can ever threaten Israel again.

And given that there are a million civilian refugees who have flown down to the very bottom of Gaza and are now up against the hard border with Egypt, and given that Egypt will not allow any of them into Egypt, you have to provide a pathway for civilians to leave Rafah before you go in at scale with a bombing campaign--a ground campaign--to minimize civilian injuries and deaths. If there are 10,000 or so Hamas fighters remaining in Rafah, and if the multiplier--to use a crass term--has been 2-to-1 civilian deaths for every Hamas fighter killed, to contemplate 20 or 30,000 more civilian deaths in Rafah is to contemplate a horrifying outcome.

But it is not acceptable to leave Hamas in control of a segment of Gaza and capable of returning.

So what is it I am hoping and expecting Israel will do? To relocate all of the civilians in Rafah, north in Gaza, screen them so that none of the leaders of Hamas or the fighters of Hamas escape; to provide for humanitarian aid and for shelter in another part of Gaza; and then to go in in scale, get into the tunnels, secure the release of the hostages, if possible, and finish the job. That is difficult but, in my view, doable.

For us to ignore the consequences of using American weapons at scale in a very heavily concentrated place where there are a million refugees there because they were told to move south, as the IDF carried out its justified campaign against Hamas over the last 6 months, would be to undertake a tragic loss of life that is needless.

Madam President, at this point, I am inclined to yield unless the Senator has a follow-up question for me.

Madam President, if I might extend my remarks briefly, then conclude.

There is another path a bipartisan group of us worked hard to support, and I hope is still possible. This path forward, which I also discussed directly with Prime Minister Netanyahu, was given real life just 2 weeks ago--3 weeks ago--when Iran attacked Israel.

Israel's defense against these Iranian missiles and drones was, yes, primarily provided by missile systems and by Israeli jets but also by the cooperation and assistance of the Saudis, the Jordanians, the Americans, and the British.

There is another path forward where ending Hamas in Gaza and the region is the joint project of the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Jordanians, and that there is an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict. It was exactly that prospect that helped precipitate the Hamas attack of October 7.

Yes, Hamas is a hateful terrorist organization dedicated to eradicating Israel and killing Jews. But the timing, the timing of the October 7 attack was very closely aligned to when a final next step in the Saudi-Israel reconciliation was about to move forward. They have been determined to prevent peace.

There is a way forward whereby Hamas may be eliminated from having any role in Gaza and the West Bank and, in the future, of the region by a regional cooperation which could be facilitated by achieving peace. That is also much to be hoped for and worked for.

I yield the floor and thank my colleague.

Mr. President, volunteerism and service have long defined the very heart of the American spirit.

It was Alexis de Tocqueville, in the middle of the 19th century, at really the dawn of the modern American Republic, who observed that it was the willingness to take initiative, to get engaged, to roll up your sleeves and get to work helping to build your community that distinguished the people of this new continent from the Old World. And I will say I have seen it myself.

I am here to celebrate the 30th anniversary of America's national service program, something called AmeriCorps. It was created in a bipartisan effort at the end of the George W. Bush administration and at the beginning of the Bill Clinton administration. There was a concerted bipartisan effort to recognize that models around the country that showed the impact on young Americans of spending a year of their lives in service to others were worth expanding and replicating.

This week, actually, happens to be AmeriCorps Week--March 10 to March 16--and we are celebrating 30 years of service.

I have just introduced a bipartisan and bicameral resolution with Senator Cassidy, Congresswoman Matsui, and Congressman Graves. And, as I mentioned, AmeriCorps has been bipartisan from the start, and I look forward to continuing its future in a bipartisan way.

I have long had a connection to AmeriCorps, going back to one of the first national direct AmeriCorps programs that I ran with the ``I Have a Dream'' Foundation in the mid-1990s. When I was working for ``I Have a Dream,'' we had 150 AmeriCorps members serving in 10 cities, doing afterschool programming and summer programming for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. It is one of many ways in which young Americans participating in AmeriCorps have contributed to their community, have developed their skills, and have earned money for college.

Years later, when I was a county executive, I launched the New Castle County Emergency Services Corps to help strengthen the volunteer fire service in my home community. There are dozens of volunteer fire companies in Delaware, and they have often served as the backbone not just of the first responder community but of every community.

I grew up in a very small town named Hockessin, and that siren going off in the middle of the night from our volunteer fire company was a reminder to me of the call that is at the very foundation of our Nation, to get up in the middle of the night, to jump in your truck, and to drive down to the fire hall and to take on the risk of serving and saving your neighbor.

Recruiting, training, and supporting AmeriCorps members through the ``I Have a Dream'' Program was one of the most rewarding opportunities in my life. I, actually, for many years, served on the commission that directs and oversees AmeriCorps in Delaware, and it was through that service that I met my wife.

Over 1 million Americans have served in AmeriCorps since 1994. Delaware, today, alone has more than 361 traditional AmeriCorps members and more than 900 AmeriCorps seniors, and they do a wide range of things: from tutoring children to responding to disasters, improving and rebuilding housing, helping veterans, and much more.

Let me briefly mention two currently serving members of AmeriCorps in Delaware:

Sharron, an adult literacy instructor who works with Literacy Delaware, teaches English to our newest Americans. She spoke of the joy an immigrant mother felt when the school administrator called to tell her about her son--and to communicate something positive about his progress in school--and she could understand everything for the first time, as she was coming to master English without an interpreter.

Shristi, an academic coach at TeenSHARP, a college access program for underrepresented high school students, spoke of how fulfilling it was to help young men and women in Delaware, just as she herself had benefited from similar mentoring and tutoring.

These two examples are a reminder of what more than 1 million AmeriCorps members over 30 years have experienced--that service brings America together. It helps us bridge our divides.

AmeriCorps has organized, for decades now, an annual 9/11 Day of Service that brings people of all backgrounds together to be reminded of what citizenship means in our Nation: service to others.

As we reflect on 30 years, I think it needs to be a call for all of us to engage in the work of service; to take up the challenge of reauthorizing, strengthening, and expanding AmeriCorps as a program; and to recognize that the best thing we can do for our Nation is to get committed to each other through national service.

Congratulations to all who have served in AmeriCorps over the last 30 years and to the millions more Americans whose future will be enlivened, brightened, and strengthened through the opportunity to serve.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of the national security supplemental appropriations bill that is the business before this body.

After a disappointing failure to move ahead with a bill that included critical border security provisions, we now have before us a chance to pass and send to the House a bill that would invest tens of billions of dollars in the men and women of Ukraine who continue to fight tirelessly in the depths of winter on the frontlines of freedom; to spend billions more on coming to the aid of Israel as it continues to battle Hamas; and $10 billion invested in humanitarian aid that will provide critical support to those facing starvation and deprivation in Gaza, in Ukraine, in Sudan, in Somalia, and in a dozen other countries around the world; and to invest in our partners in the Indo-Pacific.

It is absolutely critical that we continue to fund Ukraine's response to the brutal Russian invasion. In 2014, Russia invaded and seized Crimea. But it was in 2022 that Putin sent in hundreds of thousands of soldiers to attack Ukraine from the north, from the east, and to occupy 20 percent of Ukraine's land.

Many predicted Ukraine would fall within a matter of days. Yet they still fight on bravely today, showing what is possible with faith and persistence, determination, and perseverance--and the support of 50 countries from around the world.

Our President has assembled a remarkable coalition, and together they have contributed more than we have to Ukraine's security and defense.

I was in Europe at a conference just a few weeks ago. I traveled with my friend and colleague Republican Senator Rounds of South Dakota. We went to Poland, to Slovakia, and to this conference in Switzerland, where we met with leaders from all over Europe. I had the chance to meet with President Zelenskyy and his Foreign Defense Minister to hear about how their economy is reviving; how they are exporting more grain now than they did before the war; how, with American investments through USAID, they have brought critical parts of their economy back. But I also heard that without these funds, without the munitions, without the budget support, without the humanitarian aid, President Zelenskyy predicted that Putin will ultimately win.

I cannot imagine--I do not want to imagine--the tragedy that will befall Europe and our place in the world should we allow this to happen. Putin will only stop when we together stop it.

When we were in Poland, Senator Rounds and I had heard loud and clear from their leadership the confidence that if Putin were to succeed in ultimately subjugating the Ukrainian people, he will be knocking on the door of Poland, our NATO ally, next.

Just last week, here in the Capitol, I met with the Speakers of the Parliaments of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, three Baltic States long occupied by the Russians--by the Soviets--today free and members of NATO. Their leaders are convinced that should Putin be allowed to succeed in Ukraine, they will be next. His forces will be knocking on their door.

And, folks, to be clear, either we come to their defense at scale and in force and with American troops or NATO is dead, and our role as leader of the free world is over.

I have listened here on the floor and in person, on television, at caucus lunches, and at meetings as my Republican colleagues have said over and over that they support Ukraine strongly. Now we have a chance to prove it and to show it.

I had the honor of taking the Liberty Medal from the National Constitution Center to Kyiv with our former colleague, Senator Rob Portman, of Ohio, now retired. It was a harrowing but uplifting journey, a chance to meet with President Zelenskyy and his whole core national security leadership team. To get into his office is quite a journey, through a maze of tunnels and sandbags of larger and larger men with more and more severe weapons, in darker and darker corridors. But to see the spirit, the determination, the persistence with which Zelenskyy, his team, their troops, and the people of Ukraine continue this fight is to be challenged to your very soul, to know what it looks like when people who have tasted freedom are willing to risk their very lives, to defend their country from the aggressions and the predations of the Russians. I don't need to tell you, but it is probably worth repeating that the horrific human rights violations committed by Russian troops against Ukrainian civilians must also be answered.

I had the chance to meet with Ukrainian refugees, both in Kyiv on that former trip and in Poland just a few weeks ago. And to hear from Ukrainian women what was done to them, what happened to their husbands, to their children, to their hometowns is a reminder of the savagery of this war and the necessity of our standing firm with Ukraine.

Ukraine is running out of ammunition and running out of time. And the hope that they have in the United States, as the Nation that is the indispensable country leading the free world, will run out if we fail to come to their defense at this moment.

I will close with something that I heard from my parents when I was a child. There was a song popularized on the radio not long after Pearl Harbor. And in this song, a chaplain is reflecting on what he saw and what must be done next. The lyrics of the song go:

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition

And we'll all stay free

And this song by Frank Loesser, penned by an American not long after we were attacked at Pearl Harbor, he concludes: I can't afford to be a politician. We are all between perdition and the deep blue sea. So praise the Lord and pass the ammunition, and we will all stay free.

To the men and women of this Senate, I can only hope and pray that you will pass the ammunition forward.

To those who stand on the frontlines of freedom, who are facing relentless Russian attacks, and who even today, in the depths of winter, watch the debates on this floor to see whether this Nation will stand, whether we can be counted on--when our President says we will be with you to the end, that commitment must mean something. We must pass this supplemental.

Absolutely. I yield.

I am.

Yes.

We will.

The answer will be given by this body in the coming few hours and days--because I went to Europe with my friend and colleague Senator Rounds just a few weeks ago and in Poland and Slovakia and at a conference in Switzerland gave the answer: We are confident we will fund Ukraine.

Today, I am not certain. And in this question, in how we answer it, in how this body acts hangs the answer to whether the United States continues to lead the free world or is willing to be America first, America alone, and surrender to Putin.

Not with the significance and severity of this moment, for a couple of reasons. One, because all of the world is engaged in watching or in supporting.

As I mentioned before, 50 nations are contributing munitions, financial support to Ukraine's fight. This is as global a fight as we have had since--well, the Second World War. And the clarity of the aggression by Russia against a sovereign, peaceful nation that in no way precipitated this conflict is as sharp and clear as any conflict in our lifetime.

I cannot imagine the consequences for our reputation, not just at a conference in Europe but in history, were we to abandon Ukraine now.

I think that would weaken the United States. I think it would weaken NATO. I think it would weaken the whole concept of collective security.

The Finns and the Swedes have a long history in this region. The Finns know better than any nation what it means to stand alone against Russian aggression, to fight hard, to stand tall, and to push them back. Their memory of the Winter War of 1939, 1940 is critical to their national identity, and they have a capable and sophisticated military. The Swedes were a regional power of dominant military centuries ago, but they remained neutral even in the Second World War.

For the Swedes and Finns to see Russia's aggression against Ukraine and extend their hand to all of NATO and say ``we want in'' shows that they appreciate the significance of this moment.

By adding Finland to NATO, we have doubled Russia's border with NATO. We have brought into NATO two very capable nations and militaries, but we have also increased, I think, our moral commitment to stand firm and to stand strong.

NATO has only invoked article V once, in our defense, after the attack of 9/11; and NATO came with us for 20 years to Afghanistan.

I have stood with the leaders of countries most Americans don't think about every day. Take, for example, Denmark, a small nation that fought alongside us for decades in Afghanistan that lost dozens and dozens of their soldiers. They met their pledge for collective security in NATO. We need to honor that pledge.

It says to the people of Poland, to the people of Lithuania, to the people of Latvia, to the people of Estonia--nations that long knew the boot of Soviet occupation and oppression--that they should be afraid; that they cannot count on the United States; that they must provide for their own security.

In the trip I just took to Poland, Polish leadership said: Even though there has been a change in their election, they will not change. They are committing 4 percent of their GDP to their national defense-- the highest of any NATO nation. They are welcoming Americans to participate.

As you well remember, my colleague from Chicago--from Illinois--we went to Poland, and we went to Lithuania together, just before Russia launched its second broad-scale invasion of Ukraine. We saw Americans training alongside Pols at the Lask Air Force Base. We saw Americans training alongside other Baltic nations, right on the border with Belarus. And then the war began.

The sense of the urgency of history was thick in the air as we got on a flight to come back to the United States, as the missiles and bullets were flying, as Russia's invasion of Ukraine began at full scale, and we did not know what would happen.

In every meeting, in every conversation, the folks we met with said it was crucial that the United States be the guarantor of NATO, be the backbone of this collective alliance that has kept us safe and free.

And with one last reference to history, the one previous time ``America first'' was a watch word spoken across this Nation was in 1939 and 1940 when Charles Lindbergh, a respected aviator, joined a nationwide isolationist movement to say we should stay out of the wars of Europe. As you ably pointed out, the lesson was nearly tragic, as Hitler's armies advanced across Europe, without the United States coming to the rescue of our allies. We waited and we waited and we waited until Japan attacked us.

It is only because Germany declared war on us that we got in the war in Europe. We waited too long. We could have saved millions of lives. We could have stopped the march of Nazism years before it got out of control. Many of us were raised on the lessons of that chapter of our history. We should not forget that.

Thank you.

If I could conclude on this point: The lessons of history are thick not just in this Chamber, where the debates that formed NATO took place, not just in the capitals of Europe but around the world, where other authoritarians are watching to see whether we will stand, whether we will defend, and whether we can be counted on. We must pass this supplemental.

Remembering David Bulluck Brown

Mr. President, I rise to offer remarks in honor of a dear friend who passed recently: David Bulluck Brown, an attorney of the State of Delaware, a leader in our bench and our community, a neighbor and a friend; born in Wilmington, DE, 1946; David passed on January 22; devoted to his family, a tireless servant of our community. He was a tireless servant of our community, the sort of example of a life of humble leadership that makes our world better because David was in it.

He went to the same high school as my brother, A.I. duPont High School. He was a basketball and track star. He attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa. He went to the University of Virginia Law School.

He worked here in Washington as an attorney before returning home and joining Potter Anderson & Corroon, a firm he later served as chair. David mentored junior associates and championed the firm's growing ranks of female lawyers. Kathleen McDonough, a dear friend and former chair of the firm, said David made everyone--from someone working in the mailroom to the most senior partner--feel heard, seen, and valued.

Through an incredible, lifelong commitment to pro bono work and volunteerism, a commitment to social justice and equal rights for Delawareans, David showed the rest of us in the bar what we are obligated to do as lawyers. He didn't just do a little pro bono service here and there; he was a lion of the law and a leader of our community.

He cofounded and long-served as chair of Delaware Volunteer Legal Services. He was the keeper of the institutional knowledge at DVLS and respected for his clear-eyed assessment of new projects. The current executive director of DVLS, Janine Howard-O'Rangers, said David was skilled at high-level vision-setting and equally skilled at sweating the details of specific causes and cases. He was always ready to greet the staff at DVLS with a hug or encouraging word and to give them his undivided attention.

David was also chair of Planned Parenthood of Delaware, chair of the Combined Campaign for Justice, and a board member of the Delaware Historical Society. In fact, he helped champion the creation of the historic Mitchell Center of African American Heritage at our Historical Society. He was on so many boards, I could take an hour and could not list them all: Delaware Theater Company, Downtown Wilmington Improvement Corporation, the Music School of Delaware.

For his service, he was appreciated, honored, and recognized by so many of us in the First State. He received the Governor's Volunteer of the Year Award. He received the distinguished Bar Association's Christopher White Award--Chris White, who is a personal friend and an example of service to justice.

David was a devoted family man who loved riding horses with his grandchildren, fishing with siblings at a family cottage in Wrightsville Beach in North Carolina, and who was a gracious, thoughtful, kind, brilliant, capable neighbor, friend, citizen, and attorney.

David is survived by his beloved wife Gwen and their family: Ellie, Hannah, Tim, Francis, Sophie, Max, and River.

On behalf of all of us in the State of Delaware, I simply wanted to convey my heartfelt condolences and my deep thanks for how many times David took time away from family and took time away from the productive practice of law to contribute to our community, to make a difference in our society, and to make our world a better place.

I will deeply miss David Brown, and I hope you know how much of a difference he made to all of us with his life of dedicated service.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent, for myself as chairman of the Select Committee on Ethics and for Senator Lankford, vice chairman of the committee, that the annual report of the Select Committee on Ethics for calendar year 2023 be printed in the Record.

The committee issued this report on January 31, 2024, as required by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled vote proceed immediately.

Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I rise, along with Senator Tom Carper of Delaware and Representative Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware, to honor BG Karen A. Berry, a Delawarean who has provided exemplary service to the National Guard.

With more than three decades of distinguished military career service dedicated to the National Guard, BG Karen Berry has represented Delaware in a variety of leadership capacities, including company command of the HHC 280th Signal Battalion and Officer Candidate School, 193rd Regional Institute, and the 261st Tactical Theater Signal Brigade. She completed a yearlong deployment serving as the deputy commander of the 335th Signal Command in Afghanistan, acting as the senior communications officer and providing essential guidance for the communications network theater. Moreover, in 2019, she transferred to the Connecticut National Guard, serving in two key leadership positions: assistant to the Adjutant General Army and the Director of the Joint Staff. There, she oversaw the training and deployments of the Connecticut Army National Guard and ensured mission readiness and support to State and Partnership Programs between Connecticut and its partner Uruguay, a role critical to the success of countless overseas missions.

Brigadier General Berry has built on her extensive experience to lead with practical knowledge. Her educational background includes a bachelor of science in agricultural engineering and technology from the University of Delaware, a master's degree in education from Salisbury University, and a master's degree in strategic studies from the U.S. Army War College. Her promotions and list of major awards over the years are extensive and include National Defense Service Medals, Army Commendation Medals, and Delaware National Guard Medals for Military Merit, just to name a few.

Brigadier General Berry is also the first female Army guardsman to hold a brigade command in the Delaware Army National Guard, as well as the first female in the Delaware Army National Guard promoted to the general office rank of brigadier general. Brigadier General Berry has opened the door for countless others to follow, serving as an example of strong leadership, phenomenal work ethic, and service before self.

Brigadier General Berry has provided reasoned, invaluable, and experienced counsel while serving as chair of my Military Service Academy Board since my arrival in the Senate. A hallmark of Brigadier General Berry's leadership has been her high regard for the servicemembers she leads and their families. Brigadier General Berry has also been instrumental in forging enduring relationships with local community members and organizations. These bonds will serve the Delaware National Guard and Delaware communities well for years to come.

The values of hard work and serving others are second nature to the Berry family. Karen, her husband MG Michael Berry, and the entire family are known throughout the State of Delaware for their generosity and support of education and local community initiatives, sowing seeds of success for the future. We are truly grateful for all they have done to inspire the next generation of military leaders in Delaware and beyond.

We wholeheartedly congratulate BG Karen Berry on over three decades of service in the National Guard. Your strong dedication and leadership serve as a phenomenal example for many others. We wish you and your family the very best. Thank you.

Mr. President, my colleagues from Kansas, Ohio, and Missouri have raised a raft of questions to which I will offer a few timely and simple answers: Look up. Look back. Look ahead.

To my colleague from Kansas, his predecessor Bob Dole, a Senator who was a great leader in this Chamber, was a champion for the power of humanitarian aid around the world. And I will not yield without speaking to a piece of this supplemental that has been largely ignored: the critical role of humanitarian aid in sustaining our partners and allies, in averting humanitarian catastrophe, and, yes, in sustaining both Ukraine and Israeli national security.

But, first, if I might, let's look back for a moment to history. My colleague from Ohio complained that we somehow had not thoroughly debated Ukraine. I believe we have, but I am happy to have us engage for hours more because there are critical lessons from the past that inform the strong, broad, and bipartisan support for aid to Ukraine.

The last time I went to Kyiv, I traveled with his predecessor, Senator Rob Portman--a cochair of the Ukraine Caucus in this body and a determined and committed supporter of Ukraine's. Why? Let's look back for a moment.

In the runup to the Second World War, a famous American aviator, Charles Lindbergh--a man who was decorated for his exploits and his exploration--joined a nationwide movement whose slogan was ``America First.'' ``America First'' seemed to say that we should stay out of the roiling conflicts in the Pacific and in Europe; that we should step back and allow the armies of the Nazis to advance across Western Europe and allow the armies of imperial Japan to advance across Asia because those were not our concerns. In fact, he gave a publicized speech in favor of neutrality just on the eve of the attack on Pearl Harbor.

History proved that ``America First'' almost risked ``America Alone'' in a world overcome by authoritarians.

I will tell you, that mistake is a mistake my colleagues risk making now. If they want to make America weak again, they can go back to the arguments of the isolationist Republicans on the verge of the Second World War.

But to my colleague from Kansas, I will say you don't really have a debate with us. You have a debate with your own leadership. I have heard on this floor clear, forceful, focused speeches in defense of Ukraine--the critical role of our support for Ukraine--not from Democrats alone but from some of the most seasoned and capable and leading Members of the Republican caucus, including my colleagues from Texas and from Kentucky.

There is broad support for Ukraine. I, frankly, think, to answer the question of my colleague from Ohio: How are these possibly connected, the attack of Hamas on Israeli civilians, the attack of Russia on Ukrainian civilians?

I say, you would need only look up. What is that sound? It is Iranian drones and missiles raining death on innocent civilians in Israel and Ukraine. These conflicts are profoundly connected.

My colleague from Ohio suggested that President Biden has thrown the world into chaos. I do not have the time to fully rebut this ill- informed point, but I will suggest that Vladimir Putin's aggression in Ukraine and, in particular, the terrorism of Hamas in Israel is not the cause--of that, President Biden is not the cause but, in fact, has been a forceful, timely, and responsive leader. His response to the attack on Israel, I hope, has earned broad bipartisan support because it was personal, forceful, and timely.

All of us here are standing, calling for the release of hostages by Hamas, standing in strong support of Israel, and insisting that we advance at the same time the aid that is desperately needed by our close allies.

My colleague from Kansas asked a critical question: Will we show the United States is a fair-weather friend? To my colleague I will say: Sir, that is exactly why I join my colleagues in objecting to this narrow, Israel-only aid package, because we cannot show that we will fail to aid Ukraine.

Last, it was asked by several of my colleagues: Why would we send humanitarian aid into Gaza? It will inevitably all fall into the hands of Hamas, who support this.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record, if I might, a letter from the Israeli Embassy to the Congress of the United States.

Who supports humanitarian aid into Gaza with appropriate measures of inspection? The Israeli Government. They say it is critical to bolstering their national security.

Look up. Look back. Look forward. Look up; you will see the missiles and drones of Iran raining down on innocent civilians. Look back; you will see the mistakes of isolationism. Look forward, and you will see there is a bipartisan path to supporting humanitarian relief globally, to supporting aid to Israel against Hamas, to investing in border security, and to taking up and passing a robust supplemental, as we can and as we should.

For that reason, I join my colleagues in opposing the motion made by my colleague from Kansas.

I yield the floor to my colleague from Minnesota.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I join my colleagues in standing to speak against a proposal brought to the floor by my

colleague from Kansas--a proposal that would move aid to Israel swiftly but ignore the urgency and the importance of humanitarian aid to countries around the world, of investments to secure our own border, of critical aid to Ukraine.

As my colleague has just spoken eloquently, we have all been inspired by the tens of thousands of Ukrainians who, hearing the urgency of the call to fight for their nation, to fight for their freedom, have laid down their lives, have worked to restructure their society and to aim towards freedom.

I have a hard time countenancing the idea that we today, on this floor, in this Senate, would walk away from this moment of challenge. As many colleagues have said and as I will briefly point out, the proposal that has come over from the House is not serious. It uses the tragedy, the horror of Hamas and its attack on innocent civilians in Israel, killing dozens of Americans, 1,400 in all--the brutality of that and the urgency of this moment--to advance a pay-for under the cloak of fiscal responsibility that would add $27 billion to our national deficit.

Many of us have already dismissed this proposal as not serious, but this is a serious moment. As my colleague from Ohio has said, we need a serious debate about our path forward, about where we are going and why.

I want to speak briefly to two components of this bill and then close.

Our President's supplemental proposal includes $13.6 billion to secure our border. The last serious, bipartisan proposal on border security, which was the King-Rounds bill we took up in 2018, invested $25 billion over 10 years, $2.5 billion a year. This supplemental would put $13 billion in 1 year into hiring thousands of new border agents-- CBP and Border Patrol; thousands of new staff--attorneys, folks who can move the asylum process quickly; money for detention and deportation; and nearly a billion-dollar investment in scanning everything coming across our border to end human trafficking and the importation of fentanyl. This is a serious proposal that deserves serious support.

Last, the humanitarian piece of this overall supplement would not just help ease the suffering in Ukraine, in Gaza, but in dozens of countries around the world facing a collapse due to a global calamity of hunger.

Let me conclude. It is right now--right now--twilight, dusk in Kyiv. It is right now as we debate on this floor twilight, dusk in Jerusalem. I am confident there are members of the Ukrainian Government, there are members of the leadership of Ukrainian forces, there are individuals on the frontline in Ukraine listening to this debate, urgently wondering: Will we stand? Will this Senate that invited President Zelenskyy to address us in the Old Senate Chamber just 6 weeks ago keep our word? Will we stand or will we fall? This is a moment that will test our Nation. This is a moment that tests this body. Will we allow ourselves to be distracted by moments of comfort or ease or will we take up the hard work with the leadership of this talented and capable pair, the chair and vice chair of our Appropriations Committee? Will we negotiate? Will we compromise? Will we take up the challenge laid before us to be the indispensable Nation that will care for those in need, that will secure our own border, that will defend Israel, that will defend Ukraine, that will look and face this moment and say: We are the indispensable Nation.

Will we stand, Mr. President?

It is my prayer that we have, we must, and we will.

With that, I yield the floor to my colleague from the State of Washington.

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

Mr. President, I ask that I be permitted to complete my comments before we proceed to the next vote.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the nomination of the Honorable Jennifer Hall to be our next district court judge for the District of Delaware.

One of the very busiest dockets in the entire Nation, the District of Delaware handles a remarkable amount of complex patent cases and cutting-edge commercial litigation. It takes a special judge to serve in this court, and Judge Hall's unique background and extensive legal experience make her an ideal candidate.

My colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee agreed, advancing her nomination to this floor by a strong bipartisan vote of 16 to 5. Judge Hall received support from half of the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, including Ranking Member Graham and Senators Grassley, Cornyn, Lee, and Tillis.

She already knows the District of Delaware very well, serving as a magistrate judge since 2019. She has proven herself a legal powerhouse and, time and time again, has handled a high volume of the most complex cases.

Her legal experience before assuming the bench is just as impressive: 8 years as an assistant U.S. attorney in the District of Delaware, where she was chief of the civil division, leading hundreds of cases on behalf of our Federal Government. Prior to that, she practiced law at Fish & Richardson, P.C., where she litigated intellectual property and complex commercial cases.

A graduate of Penn Law, she clerked for Judge Kent Jordan on the Third Circuit and Judge Sharon Prost on the Federal Circuit. Before enrolling at Penn, she earned a Ph.D. in molecular biophysics and molecular biochemistry at Yale, an education and background that will aid her as she decides complex patent and IP law cases.

You can see why the American Bar Association unanimously rated Judge Hall as ``well qualified'' to serve on the District of Delaware bench.

Mr. President, I know Judge Hall to be a balanced and thoughtful jurist, a skilled lawyer, and a compassionate human being--not just a great judge but a loving wife to her husband David and a devoted mother to their children. Judge Hall's exceptional qualifications, strong character, and even temperament will make her an asset to the District of Delaware.

Yesterday, we voted by a margin of 63 to 26 to invoke cloture. I am hopeful for an even stronger vote just now. I support her nomination without reservation and urge my colleagues to do the same.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to answer a simple but a complex question and, in doing so, to acknowledge and to honor the work of one of the most dedicated, gracious, thoughtful, decent public servants I have ever known: my chief of staff, Jonathan Stahler.

The question I am answering is: Who is this man, this Jonathan Stahler; and why was I so blessed to have the years I have enjoyed, to serve alongside him; and what has his impact been on my office, my State, this Senate, and me?

After close to 18 years in the Senate--5 years with former Senator Bayh of Indiana and nearly 13 in my office--Jonathan is embarking on a new journey. He is headed to the north to serve at the United Nations as Chief of Staff to our Ambassadors there, and his last day with this institution and my team is fast approaching.

I have given other floor speeches. I have had other departing dedicated and talented staff. Jonathan hired nearly all of them. Jonathan, uniquely, among those I have thanked and honored, has played an absolutely central--a central--role in shaping my office, in transforming the culture, and in delivering a harmonious, productive, supportive team. He hired, mentored, and motivated great leaders. My team is immeasurably better because of Jonathan's values, his commitment to public service, and his focus on others.

Let's take a little biographical tour first. Jonathan is from Newton, MA, from a blessed State in New England--not Delaware but still a wonderful State--that has produced many talented members of this body. He received his degree from an outstanding institution--Washington University in St. Louis--where he studied political science and government.

And informed by the boundless optimism and idealism, the dedication to make right what is wrong about our Nation and to improve our world that his mother gave him as an animating spirit, he moved here 20 years ago to work for the Children's Defense Fund, a remarkable organization led by a talented woman, known as one of Washington's most effective and tireless antipoverty, antiracist, oriented toward progress, data- driven change organizations.

Having arrived here 20 years ago to begin that work, he then decided he was in love with this institution and started just a few years later, initially as a legislative correspondent for Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana. He rose to be an LA and then a deputy LD and was a well- trained, well-prepared legislative team leader when I arrived here late in 2010 having won a special election, looking for someone who could help shape my then-ill-formed legislative ideas.

I was fortunate enough to recruit and hire Jonathan Stahler to be my legislative director. It was one of the best choices I have made in my entire career.

As LD, Jon was famous for having an open-door policy, for welcoming anyone who needed time and a listening ear, comfort, encouragement, direction, reassurance. He built relationships across the aisle. He listened to and often acted on some of my brilliant and insightful and talented legislative initiatives, and he also tolerated and often delivered on some of my whacky or whimsical insights or ideas.

In 2018, after 5 years in which he shaped and led and inspired my policy team, I was grateful he accepted my offer to become my chief of staff. And he realized that my world was more than just legislation: It was Delaware and Washington; it was international and domestic; it was personal and political. And I am so grateful for the contributions he has made.

To better understand why, I think it is best to know the family that shaped him and the values that anchor him.

His stepfather Harold, a lawyer in Boston, said that ``For Jonathan, it was always a thrill to be involved in the work of the Senate and''-- this is one of his great traits--``he never lost a sense of wonder and enthusiasm about his job.''

No matter how late in the night, no matter how inconvenient or grinding the schedule, no matter how concerning the antics in the other Chamber or even occasionally here, Jonathan never lost that sense of wonder at this place.

Stepsister Lizzie suggested that a passion for politics might have started before he arrived here. In fact, ``In high school,'' she recounted, ``Jonathan had a life-sized cardboard cutout of Bill Clinton in his room--perhaps the earliest indication of where his career may land.''

Jake, his stepbrother, said that Jonathan is also, in addition to passionate about politics, in the personal, he is dedicated. He is ``an incredible uncle who keeps his promises,'' taking a niece to Disney World and going to enormous lengths to deliver on a kindergarten speech.

Jonathan's remarkable, big-hearted mother, Dale, was a powerful force in his life--kind and giving, someone who listened and made folks feel like they were the most important person in the room, a counselor and a guide. She was an important presence in our office and, I know, a central feature in his life, and we all miss her.

``Dale had a way of making every single person she met . . . feel like they were the center of the universe--a characteristic,'' Lizzie said, ``Jonathan has mastered.''

His Aunt Barbara shared with us that ``Dale was immensely proud of the work Jon was doing. Dale was passionate about politics, too, and'' as I said, `` . . . cared about making things better.''

She would be so proud of Jonathan's service and legacy here, as are we all.

Let me also give some feedback, if I can, from his colleagues in the office--those who he served with for years--and what they had to say about their boss, their chief of staff.

``Jonathan,'' one colleague said, ``is one of the most self-effacing, humble

individuals.'' Not just in Washington but in our world. ``His dedication to supporting others--his endless supply of energy and empathy . . . is remarkable.''

I will ratify this one: ``He was here for the right reasons--he wanted to serve. He saw each day as [a chance] to solve problems.''

Another said, ``Jonathan was always willing to provide some `chain momentum' by chiming-in on an email thread in order to ensure we moved toward the desired outcome.''

I regret I have rarely provided chain momentum.

Another former colleague said that Jonathan is the rarest of specimens in DC: ``authentic, empathetic, smart, funny, and a great softball player. The proverbial 5-tool player.''

Another trusted colleague said, ``Jonathan has a keen ability to know what a person needs before they themselves know it. Whether that be guidance, laughter, cheering up, strategy, or a `full cone,'''--a ``full cone of silence,'' apparently, ``to listen.''

And I would say that Jonathan fights harder for others than he does for himself. That is the very definition of servant leadership.

As we were talking through family and colleague memories, I was reminded that you have never seen Jonathan more focused and determined than when asked by his niece to present about government to a fifth grade class. He went supersonic. He had a whole series of conversations with her to discuss his vision. This is a fifth grade class, I will remind you. He brushed up on specific policy knowledge, and he put together an interactive PowerPoint for 10-year-olds and held several practice runs with staff to ensure his delivery was the best possible for his niece.

While I may make light of it, that sort of intensity, that sort of heartfelt dedication to family, is one of his most charming qualities.

Trinity is one of his most beloved colleagues, our deputy chief. Whenever a niece or nephew of Trinity's would visit our office, Jonathan would inevitably offer some fun or unexpected behind-the- scenes experience in the Capitol Complex.

And he was not just serious and heartfelt but also fun, dedicated to team-building through things like paintball competitions or trips to the DC car show--apparently without the Senator.

He also had some quirks. Jonathan is fond of asking about what the dew point is rather than the temperature in order to assess the proper attire for an event, something with which I was unfamiliar.

Although incredibly unsafe and unwise, he prefers, frequently, to use a scooter, whenever possible, and never missed a chance to connect with the most infamous of Delawareans, one James Francis Paoli, a denizen of the Starboard in Dewey.

Jonathan, gradually, through Jim's tutelage, has become not just tolerant of but a true fan of Orange Crush at Friday morning breakfast.

Jonathan was, in some ways, a superhero of this place. He used his chief of staff powers for good, whether it was an urgent passport matter to save a family vacation or someone who needed access to lifesaving medical care. He always made time to do the little things that make a big impact for staff and constituents and sometimes the big things that can literally change the course of a life.

He enjoyed sharing everything, from embassy events to, literally, tours of the Capitol Dome conducted in person.

As I mentioned before, his mother was a trained therapist, and, from that, Jonathan gained really important tools. One well known to the practitioners of the dark arts of organizational development is the Myers-Briggs test. Jonathan is a Myers-Briggs expert. He uses it as his decoder ring to better understand his colleagues and, even on occasion, me.

Jonathan is an INFP. I am an ENFP. To those of you who have endured the rigors of Myers-Briggs testing, you know that is enough in common that we are both ``diplomats,'' individuals known for their empathy, passionate idealism, and diplomatic skills, which I hope will serve him well in New York.

Jonathan knew that I get energy by talking to people--extrovert--and that I make decisions about issues by talking to people. As his family and friends will tell you, Jonathan is someone who doesn't, who prefers text messages and rarely, if ever, answers a ringing phone. In fact, you would often find him with noise-canceling headphones on in his office, a very polite but very real ``do not disturb'' signal. We often say he isn't always there when you call, but he is always on time.

Jonathan also has exceptionally good taste in whiskey, something we have enjoyed together on a few occasions, and I, hopefully, look forward to enjoying again tonight.

We went through many different periods, many different chapters here in the Senate, in my home State, and in our lives. We comforted each other on the loss of our parents. We consoled each other when a bill failed. And we celebrated together when legislation made it to the President's desk.

In the very long period that was the pandemic, when so many of the offices of the Senate and so much of the work, the business that happens here, the steady parade of constituents, and the constant noise in the halls dimmed, quieted, Jonathan and a small group gathered day after day after day, dedicated to be that 224-A team that carried us through the pandemic. And I will never forget some of those long but very good days together.

Some say being a Senate chief of staff is the highest calling of any public servant here. Being a chief, frankly, is a very demanding, often thankless job that requires 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, attending to the demands of constituents, the needs of staff, and, yes, the whims of Members and the challenges that they so often create, sometimes daily.

Jonathan has given so much to our team, to our office, to his colleagues, and to me. He is and has been the ideal chief of staff.

I have been incredibly lucky, Jonathan, to have your guidance and support for 13 years together and to work through, together, times that were interesting, grave, genuinely scary, sometimes fun, sometimes hysterical, and certainly historic.

We have had times of concern and alarm, of hope and optimism, and overall of accomplishment. It has been a long and sometimes strange trip together, but, Jonathan, you should be confident in the team you built, the culture you have cultivated, the LD whom you have helped mentor and bring along to succeed you, and the remarkable legacy of accomplishment you are leaving behind.

The heartfelt idealism, the overbrimming optimism, the determination to make a difference that first brought you to this our Nation's Capital--you leave this place with those qualities undimmed, that capability strengthened, and that forward trajectory made more sure.

As Juliet says to Romeo, in Shakespeare--I think it is act II, scene II--``Parting is such sweet sorrow.'' It is an ancient but modern way to remind us that good-byes are painful.

But this is not good-bye. This is good luck. This is: Know that you go with my thanks and the blessings of my office and my family and my State for your next chapter of public service.

Our Ambassador in New York, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, and the entire team at our U.N. Ambassador's office will be blessed to have you, and I am excited for your new adventure to serve alongside another great public servant.

My office, my State, our Senate, and our Nation are immeasurably better because of your kindness, your generosity, and your dedication to public service, and I cannot thank you enough.

With that, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to reflect on and remember a dear friend and colleague, someone who served this Nation in this body for 30 years, someone who has already been remembered by many others as a trailblazer, someone who left a lasting one on this Senate, on her State of California, on our Nation.

When I first came to this Senate, now 13 years ago, Senator Feinstein was someone whose career I had long followed and long admired. She was elected to this body when I was a law student, in the Year of the Woman, when, following a contentious hearing, there was a concerted effort made to recruit some of the strongest, most capable potential candidates to join this body, and Senator Feinstein was certainly among those incredible leaders.

I had the honor, the blessing, of being in small rooms in negotiations with her within my first few years, and I saw behind the scenes what anyone who followed her publicly got to know about Senator Feinstein. She was tough. She was fierce. She was determined. She was prepared. She had always done the reading. She studied the details of every bill, every piece of legislation, everything we voted on.

When I had the chance to join the Appropriations Committee, and I approached her once here on the floor to ask her consent to amend the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee bill she was floor managing, she turned, stopped, and said: Are you asking my permission to file an amendment to my bill?

And somewhat haltingly, being still a very junior Senator, I said: Yes, ma'am, that is exactly what I am doing.

She smiled and laughed and said: Oh, aren't you nice.

I said: Doesn't every Senator ask your permission before they attempt to amend your bill?

She goes: No, they no longer do. But they should.

She was always dressed to the nines. She was always gracious and dignified. She exuded a quiet power that in critical moments in the history of this institution and our Nation, our country and world got to see: the chair of the Intelligence Committee, determined to make public a tectonic struggle between this body and its role and the history of interrogation techniques that she and many of us concluded were inappropriate and broke the boundaries, determined to defend the prerogatives of the Senate, even in a very difficult and charged environment.

Given her early experience in San Francisco and the tragedy that brought her from council president to mayor, she was a focused, persistent, and effective advocate for gun safety.

My friend and predecessor in this seat--now our President--President Joe Biden, served alongside Senator Feinstein for many, many years. Together, they worked hard to advance the Violence Against Women Act, the assault weapons ban, and dozens of other pieces of important legislation to help make our country more equitable, more inclusive, safer, and more just.

I was reflecting this morning, when I got the hard news about Dianne's passing last night, on the very first time I met her. I was a young man. I was just a year out of law school. I was living and working in New York City for the I Have A Dream Foundation, and I happened to have a car. A friend, who I think was working for Mayor Dinkins, called and asked if I would drive out to Teterboro Airport and pick up Senator Feinstein of California. I couldn't believe my luck, as a young man in his early twenties, to get a chance to speak for even a moment or two to a U.S. Senator.

I drove out there and was sure to be on time and waited diligently. I had been told by some of the campaign staff to not expect that she would even speak to me.

She insisted on sitting in the front seat next to me, and we chatted for almost an hour and a half as we made our way back into downtown Manhattan in heavy traffic. I had the chance to listen to then-new Senator Feinstein talk about her experience as mayor, make observations about how the city of New York was being run and what the issues were, and then to ask her a few questions about public service, about what motivated her, about why she worked so hard. As a very young man, that experience, that conversation stayed with me for years.

When I first came to this body and had a chance to sit near her on this floor and to serve down the dais from her on Judiciary, I approached her and repeated that story.

She said: Young man, what I want you to remember is that every time you have a chance--whether with a page or an intern, with a campaign volunteer--you also have the opportunity and the obligation to remind them whom we serve and why we serve.

Senator Feinstein was a giant here. She showed what public service means. She was determined. She was capable. She was dedicated.

Her last vote was yesterday. I cannot imagine the loss that her family and staff are feeling, the enormous gap this will leave for the State of California and for this institution today and into the future as we mark, as we mourn the passing of this incredible trailblazer and as we prayerfully reflect on her incredible legacy.

Thank you, Dianne, for your decades of loyal and loving service to this, our great Nation.

With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to share with my colleagues and with our country my enthusiastic support for Julie Su, my gratitude for her ongoing work as Acting Secretary of Labor, and my support for President Biden's nomination of Julie Su to lead the Department of Labor.

Throughout her career, Julie has worked tirelessly to level the playing field for American workers as an advocate for trafficked garment workers, running our Nation's largest State-level labor department.

Two years ago, this Senate confirmed her to serve as Deputy Secretary of Labor. And as Deputy to Secretary Marty Walsh, Julie helped lead a resurgence in workforce training: expanding apprenticeships in in- demand industries like trucking, teaching, and cyber security; building pathways to jobs and advanced manufacturing and clean energy technology and semiconductors; ensuring that our country has the workforce we need to meet the needs of our economy and ensuring that those jobs are good jobs.

Julie has now led the Department for 5 months and has continued her focus on creating good jobs, empowering workers, and enforcing our labor laws.

Last month, she worked tirelessly to help avert a strike at our west coast ports, bringing labor and management together to reach an agreement that kept our ports up and running and our economy moving forward.

This is the kind of leadership that we need on labor issues, in the Department of Labor and across our country. Someone who will persevere through difficult, tense negotiations. Someone who will work through challenging issues and drive outcomes that are good for workers, businesses, and our country.

Julie has done this hard work even while facing unwarranted attacks on her record--a coordinated campaign of misrepresentation about a dedicated public servant. I am confident that her toughness and drive to serve will allow her to endure this opposition and continue to do right by the American people and American workers.

In her time as Deputy Secretary, and now as Acting Secretary, Julie Su has proven to this Senator and to the Senate as a whole that it was wise for President Biden to nominate her and for the Senate to confirm her 2 years ago.

I urge my Senate colleagues to once again support Julie Su and empower her to lead the Department with the experience, expertise, and deeply held values she brings to the job.

Mr. President, I rise this evening to speak about 17 nominees who will be confirmed in the wrap-up of this evening's session--17 nominees to serve as Ambassadors for the United States around the world or to represent us in international organizations.

I am grateful that we have been able to reach an agreement with those Senators who have been blocking their confirmation. I, frankly, wish we had been able to clear even further. There are 38 ambassadorial or senior position nominees waiting for action on this floor, and it is my hope that when we return in September, we will clear the remaining ones.

But this evening, I wanted to speak about one nominee in particular, the Honorable Jack Markell, who has been nominated and will this evening be confirmed to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Italy and San Marino.

I have known Jack and his wife Carla for more than three decades. As Jack liked to say when he was Governor, Delaware is a ``State of neighbors,'' and no one better epitomizes that friendly attitude, that commitment to one another's well-being more than our former Governor Jack Markell.

As treasurer, as Governor, as a businessman, now as Ambassador to the OECD--the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development--Jack is used to working cooperatively with others to get things done and to do things the right way.

As Governor, he steered our State through an incredibly difficult and demanding fiscal crisis, getting us back on track. Along the way, he expanded opportunities for people with intellectual disabilities. He created a national model for workplace experience and college credit opportunities, and he launched a much lauded kindergarten language immersion program.

As the White House Coordinator for Operation Allies worldwide, he facilitated the vetting and resettlement of Afghans who served alongside us during 20 years of conflict; and now as ambassador to the OECD, he has worked with our partner nations to emphasize energy security, sustainable development goals, and to support Ukraine against a brutal Russian invasion.

Italy is, obviously, a key NATO ally. And Italy is facing some of its biggest challenges in decades and has come out the stronger for it. Italy is a committed partner in NATO to the United States and to Ukraine as a nation fighting on the front lines of freedom.

Earlier today, I had the honor of joining our leader Senator Schumer and the Republican Leader Senator McConnell in a meeting with Prime Minister Meloni of Italy during her visit to the United States, on a day when she met with our President, Joe Biden, to talk about how we can further deepen and strengthen the transatlantic alliance.

And I was grateful to hear the strong bipartisan support of this Chamber's two leaders for the continued effort to arm, to equip, to support Ukraine in its important fight against Russian aggression.

I am also thrilled that in just a few moments, this Chamber will confirm the nomination of Jack Markell to serve as our ambassador to Italy and San Marino. This position has been vacant for more than 2 years, and we cannot ignore such a vital post any longer. In these uncertain times, the United States has found greater strength in allies and partner nations, and Jack is the consummate bridge-builder who understands how important alliances are.

He will bring a little bit of the ``Delaware Way'' of working across the aisle, of finding commonsense solutions, and of solving real problems to his new post in Rome. So to a dedicated and capable public servant with experience to match, to a friend of decades, congratulations to Governor Markell, Ambassador Markell, as you embark on this next chapter in service to our Nation.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, just about 2 years ago, roughly 76,000 Afghans--those who served alongside American forces during two decades of conflict--and their families were evacuated here to the United States on military planes and given 2 years of humanitarian parole. The Biden administration has worked to extend that parole, but we have to ask ourselves: To what end?

These are our allies, those who served and fought alongside our troops, those who supported our mission and our engagement in Afghanistan and who worked an incredible array of jobs--interpreters, medics, security guards, mechanics, intelligence officers, journalists, bomb technicians, and pilots.

And I know that today one family in Newark, DE, is waiting urgently to hear that we have taken up and passed this amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act. The head of household served as a bomb technician, as an EOD specialist in the Afghan forces, and I had the chance to have the blessing of meeting the mother of a Delaware soldier whose life he saved.

I have heard over and over from our veterans, from our veterans' families, from Afghans and from their families that we have to pass this bill so that they have certainty, so that the strengths and talents that they have brought to our country they can use to put down roots and to have a foundation on which to build a family in peace in our Nation.

An interpreter--an Afghan interpreter--now living in North Carolina has said:

Permanent residency is linked to everything. What will

happen [to my family] if our status fails? How will I provide

for my family [in this new country]?

Another interpreter living now in Nebraska describes their current situation as being ``trapped like in a prison.''

This uncertainty, this lack of clear status, harms the ability of our Afghan partners and friends to advance their careers, to put down roots, to start their new lives here in America with confidence. This uncertainty must end.

These are folks who believe in the promise of America and who came here confident we would keep our word. On my phone, I was just looking a moment ago at a family celebration that I joined with Sher and Shkira in Newark, DE. I don't want to give more details on them, other than to say that I remember that they and their children are waiting and watching to see what we will do here in the Senate.

I want to thank my colleagues Senators Klobuchar, Moran, and Blumenthal and many others--Senators Graham, Shaheen, Murkowski, Durbin, Wicker, and Tillis--who have been cosponsors of this bill from the last Congress. It also has support from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Blue Star Families, the American Legion, and many other veterans groups; and from some of the most prominent leaders in the American military: Mike Mullen, Jim Stavridis, Stan McChrystal, William McRaven. Forgive me for skipping their titles and ranks, but some of the most respected leaders in our military have endorsed this legislation.

If you are worried, as some of our colleagues have said, that the folks brought here by the American military were not thoroughly vetted, this is the way to address it. It requires in-person interviews, oversight, and consultations that will ensure that everyone currently here comes back in for one more in-person interview, vetting, and clearing.

It also expands the opportunities for SIV visas for Afghan combatants. It helps those still stuck in a hell outside our country. That would allow families to be reunited.

At the end of the day, I just have to thank two people and make one plea. I have to thank the family in Delaware who continues to inspire me and push me to support Senator Klobuchar in her tireless work to get this bill the vote it deserves. I want to thank my colleague Senator Klobuchar for hearing the voices of American veterans, for hearing the voices of Afghans now in our country who deserve legal status, and I join her in demanding a vote on this amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

I yield the floor.