Floor Statements

Mr. President, in less than 2 hours our country will be without a Secretary of Defense at a time when we have a war going on in Afghanistan and about 70,000 troops there. We have a nuclear weapon which was detonated in North Korea a few days ago. They are threatening, as they have publicly on other occasions, but after this bomb was set off, that they are doing it to attack us. We have this situation in Iran with all their very militaristic statements against us.

All over the world America is involved in matters dealing with our military. I met the night before last in my office with the man who killed Osama bin Laden. I talked to him about his 16-year career as a SEAL and the places he went around the world protecting the interests of the United States. It wasn't just in Afghanistan, not only in Pakistan, but all over the world.

To think we have now in the Senate a situation where we are going to wind up without a Secretary of Defense at this time. We had all the talk--you know, we have some questions about Senator Hagel.

Keep in mind he is a Republican. They say: We have some questions to ask. But publicly a significant number of Republican Senators have said they would not filibuster.

Remember, there has never in the history of the country been a filibuster of a Defense Secretary nominee--never.

I needed to file cloture. Not all the shows, but a number of shows, attacked me last night. They said: We told Reid and all these people we shouldn't have agreed to the rules changes because this is what we have going on.

I am ignoring that, but it is shocking that my Republican colleagues would leave the Nation without a fully empowered Secretary of Defense during all the things we have going on in the world, including a war. Several of my colleagues requested a letter from the President. A letter was sent at their request to the chairman of the committee, which is standard procedure, with Senator Levin answering all their questions.

They said: We need that letter so we may vote. One stall after another. I am told now that the letter was sent to the chairman of the committee, and that is not good enough. They want it sent to individual Senators.

This isn't high school getting ready for a football game or some play that is being produced at high school, we are trying to confirm somebody to run the defense of our country, the military of

our country. That letter was received yesterday about 4 o'clock, and now they have indicated they want something else.

A committee of jurisdiction, the Armed Services Committee, has extensive information on Chuck Hagel. They have as much information that is available on the Benghazi situation: testimony from administration officials, from multiple committees, and from an independent review board. Secretary Clinton testified; Secretary Panetta, who is going to be leaving his job in less than 2 hours; Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey; and others have all testified regarding the attack that claimed four American lives. Chuck Hagel had nothing to do with the attack in Benghazi. Stating the administration hasn't been forthcoming is outlandish.

There are serious consequences to this delay, consequences that are occurring right now.

The President is making some important decisions about Afghanistan. He announced to the world just a day or two ago that 34,000 troops will be coming home during the next year from Afghanistan. We are negotiating with the Afghan Government regarding how we will support them beyond 2014. Negotiations are going on right now.

I heard today from former Senator John Kerry that he is headed for the Middle East. Why? Syria. That is something else the Secretary of Defense has to be concerned about.

Next week while we are on recess--while we are on recess--they are having a NATO Defense Ministers meeting in Brussels about what to do to coordinate our approach on Afghanistan and the rest of our obligations as members of NATO. It is going to be somewhat unusual that the United States isn't represented by the Secretary of Defense. We will not have one if we don't get this done this week.

I am sure they are going to focus on how to end the war responsibly in Afghanistan, how our alliance will work together through the time of transition, and how we can ensure Afghanistan doesn't become a safe haven for al-Qaida again. We need a Secretary of Defense at that meeting. It sends a terrible signal to the hundreds of thousands of troops we have around the world and the military personnel in the United States that we are not going to have a Secretary of Defense.

Republicans are telling our troops: Well, you may have a leader later. What is going on in Europe, the Brussels conference, doesn't really matter.

It sends a terrible signal not only to our military personnel but to the world.

He has answered exhaustive questions about his record. He has the support of the President of the United States.

I heard a lot of speeches from the other side saying the President should have the right to choose whomever he wants. He has the support of this body, the majority vote in this body, and this democracy. We are a nation at war. We are, whether we like it or not, the world's indispensable leader. We are.

For the sake of our national security it is time to put aside this political theater, and that is what it is. People are worried about primary elections. We know how the tea party goes after Republicans when they aren't conservative enough. Is that something they need to have on their resume: I filibustered one of the President's nominees? Is that what they want?

The filibuster of Senator Hagel's nomination is unprecedented. I repeat, not a single nominee for Secretary of Defense of our country has ever been filibustered--never, ever. As we all know, in a matter of days across-the-board cuts are going to take place, and it will affect defense to the tune of $600 billion. Wouldn't it be nice if we had a Secretary of Defense to work things out?

Leon Panetta, after more than 30 years of service to this country-- Congress, chairman of the Budget Committee, OMB, the President's Chief of Staff, head of the CIA, Secretary of Defense--after all these years has gone home to his farm, his family in California.

We do not have, as of 12 o'clock today, a Secretary of Defense. These across-the-board cuts are going to be very difficult. The Pentagon needs a leader to oversee and manage historic cuts and ensure they are made in a responsible way.

A moment about Hagel. He was an enlisted man in the Vietnam war. He didn't have to go; he enlisted. The story of Senator Hagel is not a legend, it is true. He was a heroic warrior. He was an infantryman. He saved his brother's life.

When he was a Senator here the picture he had was of him and his brother in Vietnam on a personnel carrier. He is proud of his service. He should be. He was wounded two times, an infantry squad leader, and a man of integrity and dedication who has a deep understanding of our national security establishment. This came not only from his military service but as a Senator, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, and a member of the Intelligence Committee. He has been a member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board.

At a time when America faces so many threats--I have outlined just a few of them--all across the world our Nation needs a man of Senator Hagel's combination of strategic and personal knowledge. We need a Secretary of Defense. It is tragic that they have decided to filibuster this qualified nominee. It is really unfortunate.

Madam President, at the request of the Republicans, I ask unanimous consent that at 4:15 today, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Hagel nomination; that the time until 4:15 be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. My designee is Senator Levin.

Mr. President, I enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked.

Mr. President, this will be the last vote of the day. We will have a vote Monday night and we will vote again on this matter Tuesday morning--a week from Monday and Tuesday.

I regret that Republican Senators, except the valiant four, chose to filibuster the nomination of President Obama's nominee to be Secretary of

Defense. The Republicans have made an unfortunate choice to ratchet up the level of obstruction in Washington. Just when you thought things could not get worse, it gets worse.

We need to have this vote today. Why? You know, in times like this, it is nice to have a Secretary of Defense, not a lameduck. We have a war going on in Afghanistan. The war has been going on for 10 years. The President announced on Tuesday that half the troops are going to be coming home.

North Korea earlier this week tested a nuclear weapon. Just a couple months ago, they tested a missile to deliver a warhead. They have said publicly and very openly they want to make sure they can reach the United States.

We have a conflict going on in Syria. It is a serious conflict. The Middle East is still in turmoil. Iran is threatening everyone, including us. We have a few things going on. There is a NATO defense meeting next week, where NATO Defense Ministers, including someone from the United States, whom we hoped would have been the Secretary of Defense, would attend that meeting.

A couple of my Republican colleagues said: That does not matter. Just have somebody else attend.

What does that do to our standing in the world community?

We need a Secretary of Defense on the job. No one, no one knows, especially any Senator, what foreign challenge we will face in this country, perhaps within the next 10 days. It would be nice if we had a Secretary of Defense.

There is nothing that is going to change in the next 10 days about the qualifications of Chuck Hagel.

I served with Chuck Hagel. He is a conservative Republican representing the ultraliberal State of Nebraska. He served with distinction in the Senate as a Senator. He served on the Foreign Relations Committee, Armed Services Committee, and Intelligence Committee. He is a man of quality and of courage, not just being able to come and give a speech on the Senate floor.

During the Vietnam war, he volunteered to go into combat. That is what he chose to do because he thought it was the patriotic thing to do for his country, our country. His family felt that way. He and his brother went together. They didn't go to push pencils, they carried rifles; strapped to their sides, grenades.

He was wounded twice. He was an enlisted man. He didn't walk around ordering people to do things. People were ordering him what to do-- except when it came to his brother. He saved his brother's life in combat in Vietnam.

They are filibustering him. That is what they are doing. I am going to call Chuck Hagel when I finish and say I am sorry, sorry this is happening. I am sorry for the President and I am sorry for the country and I am sorry for you. We are not going to give up on you.

We are going to vote, as I said, Tuesday, when we get back, in the morning.

I hope, I truly do hope nothing happens during the next 10 days we will not have a Secretary of Defense. We are not going to have one, and I hope nothing goes wrong and we will rue the day--more than just embarrassing the President, the Senate, and the country--in not confirming the President's nomination of this good man from Nebraska.

Mr. President, this is not a filibuster. This is not a filibuster. I would like to see what a filibuster is. This is the first time in the history of our country that a Secretary of Defense has been filibustered, filibustered successfully and probably ever filibustered, and for all this, the statement from my friend from Texas on a rant to make sure he is OK on Israel. He wants to make sure he is OK on Iran on this.

We had hearings, not singularly but plural. The Secretary of State came, the Secretary of Defense.

This has gone to the absurd. We were told by a number of Senators they would like a letter from the President's White House talking about what he did following Benghazi. Remember, Benghazi was debated at length in the Presidential election. That is over, we thought. No, it is not over.

The President said, OK, and he adhered to what he wanted and wrote in detail about calls he made right after the terrible occurrence in Benghazi and sent it to the chairman of the committee. We received reports back some of the Senators were offended because the letter was sent to the chairman and not to them. This is all foolishness.

People may say whatever they want to say, but we still have a Secretary of Defense. Leon Panetta gave his final closing, ending; it was all over with his speech yesterday. I am friendly with Leon Panetta. I have known him for 31 years. No one in the country has served with more distinction than a Member of Congress, chairman of the Budget Committee, head of the Office of Management and Budget, the President's Chief of Staff, head of the CIA, Secretary of Defense. He wants to go tomorrow, and yesterday he told everybody he was going home.

Yes, we have a Secretary of Defense. It is about as lame as a duck can be. How do you think the people in NATO feel when, I don't know who will go, I guess Ash Carter or somebody will go, but we don't have a Secretary of Defense.

I can't imagine--as I said this morning, I will just repeat, I guess to be able to run for the Senate as a Republican in most places in the country, you need to have a resume that says: I helped filibuster one of the President's nominees. Maybe that helps. Maybe that keeps a tea party guy from running against you. But this should not be politics. This should be substance, and

there is nothing wrong with Chuck Hagel.

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

I ask unanimous consent that on Monday, February 25, 2013, at 5:00 p.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 7; that there be 30 minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on the nomination; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 21 and that the Senate proceed to its consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that the Lautenberg amendment to the resolution, which is at the desk, be agreed to; the resolution, as amended, be agreed to; the preamble be agreed to; and the motions to reconsider be laid on the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 35, which was submitted earlier today.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed to S. Res. 36.

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

I ask unanimous consent that if the Senate receives an adjournment resolution from the House identical to the text which is at the desk, the concurrent resolution be considered agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that either on Monday, February 25, or Tuesday, February 26, I be permitted and the Republican leader be permitted to introduce a bill to replace the sequester required under the Budget Control Act; further, that if a leader introduces such legislation, his bill be placed directly on the legislative calendar; finally, that motions to proceed to these bills be in order the day they are introduced.

Mr. President, the purpose of this--and I have had meetings with Senator McConnell--is that we are each going to have a piece of legislation to hold the sequester from kicking in, and this is the easiest way to do it without a lot of procedural motions, and I appreciate everyone's cooperation in that regard.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the upcoming recess or adjournment of the Senate, the President pro tempore and the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards, conferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that from Friday, February 15, through Monday, February 25, Senator Levin be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions.