Floor Statements

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

Mr. President, I rise to express my support for the fiscal year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act. I am glad that we have just brought the NDAA conference report to the floor.

First, I would like to acknowledge Senator Roger Wicker, Chairman Mike Rogers, and Representative Adam Smith, whose partnership has been critical for the success of this bill.

The hallmark of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees has long been bipartisanship, and I am glad we have continued that tradition for the 63rd consecutive year.

I would also like to thank my colleagues on the Senate and House Armed Services Committees who helped produce this bill, as well as Leader Schumer, Leader McConnell, Speaker Johnson, and Leader Jeffries, who facilitated a thorough debate and enabled all Members to engage in the process. We were able to negotiate hundreds of provisions between both Chambers over the past few months--the most in many years.

This is a strong, forward-looking bill that I think we can all be proud of. This NDAA is laser-focused on the threats we face. It addresses a broad range of pressing issues, from strategic competition with China and Russia to countering threats from Iran, North Korea, violent extremists, and climate change. The bill authorizes record level investments in key technologies, like hypersonics and artificial intelligence, and makes real progress toward modernizing our ships, aircraft, and combat vehicles.

Most importantly, this NDAA provides a historic level of support for our troops and their families, including the largest pay raise in decades.

I am confident it will provide the Department of Defense and our military men and women with the resources they need to meet and overcome the national security threats we face.

I would like to take this opportunity, also, to recognize the incredible staff who have made this bill possible. Senator Wicker will, I am sure, speak on behalf of the minority staff in just a moment, but I wanted to specifically recognize the director of the Democratic staff, Elizabeth King, and the director of the Republican staff, John Keast. They did a remarkable job, and they have led their staffs with professionalism and skill.

I would also like to thank the members of the Armed Services Committee staff: Jody Bennett, Carolyn Chuhta, Jon Clark, Jenny Davis, Jonathan Epstein, Jorie Feldman, Kevin Gates, Creighton Greene, Gary Leeling, Kirk McConnell, Maggie McNamara Cooper, Bill Monahan, Meredith Werner, Mike Noblet, John Quirk, Andy Scott, Cole Stevens, Isabelle Picciotti, Alison Warner, Leah Brewer, Sean Jones, Joe Gallo, Brittany Amador, Griffin Cannon, Sofia Kamali, Chad Johnson, Julia Coulter, Vannary Kong, Noah Sisk, Zachary Volpe, and, once again, staff director Elizabeth King.

That was a long list, but it is a fraction of what they have put into this, in terms of time and effort, and we could not have accomplished this without them.

I want to thank the floor staff and the leadership for all they have done to make this possible.

Finally, I urge all my colleagues to support this excellent bill.

With that, I will yield the floor.

Thank you, Senator Murray.

Mr. President?

I would like to be recognized and reserve the right to object.

Mr. President, just a few minutes ago, my Republican colleagues voted down the National Security and Border Act. In doing so, they essentially said no to supporting Israel, no to supporting Ukraine, no to supporting Taiwan, no to humanitarian assistance, which is absolutely critical, no to rebuilding our defense industrial base, no to border security funding, and no to combating fentanyl.

These items are not the partisan demands of any one party; they are bipartisan priorities and necessities. They are the fulfillment of our commitments to our allies and to our national security.

I believe the majority of our Republican colleagues do believe this, but some may see this as leverage--as one of my colleagues put it in a discussion, leverage for extreme immigration legislation that they don't at the moment have the votes to pass.

In delaying the much needed assistance that I indicated, my Republican colleagues are indirectly, directly, or however you want to put it, giving too many opportunities or at least ideas to people like Putin and Chinese communists and others who are engaged in trying to undermine democracy throughout the world.

Speaking for myself, I hope that what we can do is begin a serious debate now--not on the one issue that I listed but on all those issues--and come to a serious, principled compromise so that we can move forward together.

It seems that my colleagues on the other side simply want us to accept their version of immigration reform, and then everything else will be OK. It is not that at all. In fact, one of the aspects of the legislation that was just voted down was a significant infusion of resources into the border area--1,300 additional Border Patrol agents, 1,000 law enforcement personnel and investigative capabilities to prevent cartels from moving fentanyl into the country, 1,600 additional asylum officers, funding to conduct robust child labor investigations and enforcement to protect vulnerable migrant children entering the United States through the southern border, and the bipartisan FEND Off Fentanyl Act, led by our colleague, Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina.

My colleagues just voted against a series of important ways to fix our problems at the border. We need them desperately, and we could have gotten them if we had moved forward procedurally.

I have been here for a couple of years, and I have seen several occasions where we have been together on a bipartisan basis. I know in 2013, led by Senator McCain and others, we passed comprehensive immigration reform, only to see it set aside by the Republican House of Representatives at the time.

So we, I think, have to do much more, and we can, but it will be on a bipartisan, cooperative basis. We have to do much more to help not just Israel--

it is critical--but also Ukraine. It has been a long time since we have had their funding request--August of this year. They made a serious request for additional resources, anticipating the attrition they would suffer over the intervening months, long before the October 7 tragedy.

It has been more than 2 months since President Zelenskyy was here in person asking us all personally for the help he needed to lead his country forward. It was at that time that Senator McConnell correctly and sincerely indicated, in his words, ``American support for Ukraine is not charity. It is in our own direct interests, not least because degrading Russia helps to deter China.'' But the foot-dragging has continued since then.

Ukraine cannot wait. The OMB Director wrote earlier this week:

[W]ithout congressional action, by the end of the year we

will run out of resources to produce more weapons and

equipment for Ukraine and to provide equipment from U.S.

military stocks.

There is no magical pot of funding available to meet this

moment. We are out of money--and nearly out of time.

So without our help, the Ukrainian people will be in a very desperate situation. We need to help them. We need to help our allies in Israel. We need to help those in Taiwan, and we need to help the innocent victims of conflict throughout the world.

So this one-shot deal doesn't cut it. We have to come together, work together, and deliver assistance to Ukraine, to Israel, to Taiwan, humanitarian aid, and aid for our borders.

With that, I will yield to Senator Klobuchar.

Mr. President, I am rejoicing in the orders that Senator Schumer read. The first thing I would like to do is apologize to the hundreds of officers--men and women who dedicated themselves to their country--and also to their families for this unusual, shall we say, disruption of their promotions to ranks they have won through their merit and effort.

I think also, too, that it is important to note the contribution of Senator Sullivan and Senator Ernst and Senator Young and Senator Graham and others. They recognized that military officers are not political pawns; that they are men and women who have dedicated themselves and their families to service, to protect the Constitution of the United States. So they joined in to ensure that, today, we could have these much delayed promotions on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

Once again, Mr. President, we have to recognize, in the future, we can never do this again; that these men and women served their lives, decades; they served with courage; they served with integrity; they have served with decency. They do it for this country--not for a political party, not for a cause or a popular emotion. They do it to defend their country. And they are aided every step of the way by their families, by their spouses, by their children. In fact, these spouses and children make as many, if not more, sacrifices than the soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and guardsmen themselves, in my view.

But let us commit that, as we go forward, we shall not view a soldier in the context of a political dynamic but in the context of his or her quality of service, her integrity, her decency, and--above all--their not only solemn obligation but complete life of preserving and defending the Constitution of the United States.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I rise today to recognize one of the hardest working public servants in my State--indeed, in any State--Mark Hayward. Mark will be retiring at the end of the year as the District Director of the Small Business Administration in the State of Rhode Island.

This is no normal retirement. Mark's commitment to public service and Rhode Island stretches back 45 years. He was first elected to the city council in his hometown of East Providence, RI, while he was still a student at Providence College. His peers on the council quickly recognized the intelligence, the compassion, and the work ethic that dominated his career. And despite his youth, they voted him mayor of the town.

After 6 years as mayor, Mark made the decision to leave Rhode Island for Washington, DC, in order to serve as Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs at the Environmental Protection Agency and later as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Territorial and International Affairs at the Department of the Interior.

But the pull to return to Rhode Island was strong. After joining SBA in 1990, Mark moved to the Rhode Island office, which he was soon appointed to lead as the District Director. In total, Mark has spent a remarkable 29 years as acting and then permanent SBA District Director for the State of Rhode Island.

Most of our small businesses have never known a world without Mark's guidance. But his story is characterized by more than longevity. It is defined by hard work and an encyclopedic knowledge of SBA programs and business opportunities. Mark's combination of dedication and knowledge has been particularly valuable during times of crisis. From snowstorms to hurricanes, to the devastating floods that struck the Ocean State in 2010, Mark has been there to orchestrate the response and help businesses and homeowners recover.

This past August, Mark was on the scene working to help small businesses recover from a devastating fire on Block Island that destroyed one of the island's landmark hotels and harmed a number of small businesses. But Mark's skill and commitment shone highest during the darkest days of the COVID-19 pandemic, when he seemed to be everywhere all at once. He was ever-present on Zoom townhalls, constantly on the phone with myself and other Members of the delegation, and always available to small business owners who needed help understanding the finer points of the Paycheck Protection Program and COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loans.

He was in demand because everybody knew that no one is better at slicing through the redtape than Mark.

It is not exaggerating to say that the loans and grants he helped Rhode Island businesses secure kept them afloat. Across his two-plus decades as permanent District Director, Mark has helped pipe $6.8 billion into Rhode Island's economy, enabling our small businesses to start, to grow, and to thrive while staying local. That is a hugely significant number, particularly for a State of Rhode Island's size.

Mark's work ethic during the pandemic was simply an extension of the work he puts in every day. Mark has long worked early mornings and been on call at all hours of the week and weekend, always ready to listen and to help.

Don't just take my word for it. SBA leadership has asked Mark to cover vacant Regional Administrator positions five times during his tenure with the Agency--a clear demonstration of the trust and respect his peers hold for him.

For Mark, this isn't just business, it is personal. It is about his dedication and commitment to public service. He is not just helping small businesses with their finances. He visits and patronizes them in his free time, embracing the mantra ``to shop local.'' And, at this point in his career, it is hard to find a Rhode Island business that he hasn't helped.

That is why we are going to miss Mark. Our entrepreneurs will miss his guidance, and I will miss his thoughtful advice and quick wit. I know he will fill his time with his family, his wife Nancy, his children--Patrick, Kelsey, and Megan--and grandchildren, Johnny and Lily. And in true Mark Hayward fashion, I also know he will find new ways to continue serving in Rhode Island.

And, I must say, this is a Rhode Island story. So the following should be obvious. Mark's grandmother and my grandmother would talk about once a week on the telephone in Portuguese, just to make sure the whole State was running properly, and, if they had to give advice, they would give advice. So he is an old family friend as well as a brilliant public servant.

Mark, congratulations on your retirement, and thank you.

Let me yield to my colleague.

Madam President, next week, the Naval War College in Newport, RI, will host the unveiling of the keel plate for the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer DDG-138, which will be named for an extraordinary American and an extraordinary Rhode Islander: Ambassador J. William Middendorf.

I won't be able to honor Ambassador Middendorf in person. So I would like to take this opportunity, along with my colleague Senator Whitehouse, to say a few words of appreciation for his contributions and public service.

Ambassador Middendorf, who now resides in the town of Little Compton, RI, was born 99 years ago, on September 24, 1924, in Baltimore, MD. He remains a person of tremendous intellect, interests, and achievement. To this day, he continues to share his strong and always interesting opinions as a frequent contributor for the Providence Journal.

I don't always agree with him, but his column always makes for a lively read, and he has been preparing an upcoming book on the way called ``On My Watch: Tyrants and Patriots.''

I would like to highlight some of Ambassador Middendorf's extensive record of achievement and patriotic accomplishments.

In the 1940s, while our Nation was at war, he served in the Navy as an engineering officer and navigator aboard the landing craft support ship USS LCS-53 and earned his bachelor of naval science from the College of the Holy Cross under the Navy's V-12 Program. After he was discharged from the Navy, he earned a bachelor of arts degree from Harvard University in 1947 and then an M.B.A. from the Stern School of Business at New York University in 1954.

Ambassador Middendorf became an investment banker and cofounded Middendorf, Colgate and Company, which became a prominent Wall Street firm, and he took on important roles in the national Republican Party.

In 1969, he left his investment firm and was appointed as U.S. Ambassador to the Netherlands and continued in that position until 1973. He then served as Under Secretary of the Navy with an appointment from President Nixon.

On April 8, 1974, Ambassador Middendorf became the 62nd Secretary of the Navy, serving through the Ford administration. During his tenure as Secretary of the Navy, he championed and oversaw the development of four major Navy programs: the Ohio-class submarine program and the accompanying Trident missiles, the Aegis surface-launched missile system, the CH-53E heavy-lift helicopter for the Marine Corps, and the F/A-18 Hornet carrier-based attack aircraft.

Ambassador Middendorf is also credited with creating the famed Marine Corps Marathon. As Secretary of the Navy, he encouraged and approved the first Marine Reserve Marathon and provided replicas of the Iwo Jima statue to be used as trophies for the male and female marathon winners.

After his tenure as Secretary of the Navy, he returned to the private sector as president and chief executive officer of Financial General Bankshares, which he reorganized and renamed as First American Bank.

In 1980, Ambassador Middendorf led the CIA transition team for President Reagan's incoming administration. He was later named the U.S. Ambassador to the Organization of American States, a post he served in until 1984, when he accepted the appointment as U.S. Representative to the European Community, which is now known as the European Union. He served in that role until 1987.

On June 10, 2022, Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro announced that the future Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer DDG-138, now under construction at Bath Iron Works shipyard in Maine, will be named the USS J. William Middendorf. The name selection follows the tradition of naming destroyers after U.S. naval leaders and heroes.

I congratulate Ambassador Middendorf on his well-deserved honor and express my gratitude to the shipbuilders and sailors who are bringing this new Arleigh Burke destroyer into the service of our Nation.

With that, I yield the floor.

Madam President, today I pay tribute to a dear friend and one of Rhode Island's most thoughtful and visionary civic leaders, Jonathan ``Jon'' Houston. After 45 years of tireless advocacy, Jon will be relinquishing his role as executive chairman of Justice Assistance, the nonprofit organization he founded both to assist victims of crime and to provide meaningful support for ex-offenders.

I have been privileged to know Jon since our time together as students at La Salle Academy in Providence, RI. After high school, Jon went on to graduate from the University of Rhode Island before completing advanced management certification programs at Harvard and Salve Regina University. He also served on a number of public safety boards and commissions in Rhode Island, but his vision in founding Justice Assistance in 1978 stands as a signature achievement in the area of criminal justice reform.

It is no small task to radically change the way we treat and look at victims of crime, nor is it easy to take on the challenges facing former offenders after they have completed their sentences, but that is why Jon has become such a respected figure in the community. He has dedicated his life to a problem that few others were stepping up to solve. And Justice Assistance has been enormously successful. According to the Providence Journal, Justice Assistance's sentencing alternative program--one of the organization's major initiatives--has collected over $5 million in restitution on behalf of victims of crime, and 90 percent of its court-referred clients successfully complete its ex- offender intervention and support programs. Justice Assistance's success is a testament to Jon's tenacity and devotion.

Rhode Islanders have been fortunate to have Jon dedicate more than four decades to strengthening our communities and developing systems of support for those who may otherwise not have had any. I, too, have experienced Jon's knowledge, insights, and humility on criminal justice reform when I worked with him to increase Federal support for innovative and transformative solutions to recidivism and for victim protection.

Jon has undoubtedly made a mark on Rhode Island. His work and advocacy have directly impacted the lives of thousands who have come in contact with our criminal justice system. Through Justice Assistance, Jon's work will continue to improve lives of victims and offenders for years to come, but this won't be the only way his mission carries on after the mantle is passed. Jon was the primary author of the ``Rights of Victims of Crime'' amendment in the State constitution, the first constitutional amendment in the Nation dedicated to protecting the rights of crime victims. In a very literal sense, Jon's passion and words have been permanently added to the foundational document of the state.

I would also like to take the time to recognize Jon's wife Pamela, his daughter Shannon, and his son Adam. I join many others in the State in thanking Jon for his service to our communities and the well-being of those impacted by crime. I wish him fulfillment and continued success in his next chapter.

Madam President, I rise to honor William Patrick ``Pat''

Towell, Ph.D., for his more than 17 years of service to Congress and the American people as a specialist in U.S. Defense Policy and Budget at the Congressional Research Service, CRS. Dr. Towell is widely recognized as a foremost defense policy expert. Senators, Members of Congress, and staff have all relied on his knowledge, expertise, and guidance at pivotal points in the development of the annual defense authorization and appropriations bills. Having served with CRS since 2006, Dr. Towell will retire at the end of this year.

Throughout his tenure at CRS, Dr. Towell has advised congressional leaders, Department of Defense civilian and military officials, and foreign dignitaries on a range of defense policy and budgetary matters. A political scientist by training, he has exhibited a profound respect for the institution of Congress and an encyclopedic knowledge of the events and political personalities that have shaped defense issues. In addition to coordinating and authoring reports on annual defense authorization and appropriations legislation, Dr. Towell has written insightfully about key strategic guidance documents such as the Quadrennial Defense Review and the National Defense Strategy. He has also provided analyses of the debates over how to best organize the Federal Government to address national security challenges, and he has closely monitored funding for post-9/11 military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Dr. Towell's vast knowledge of the history of congressional operations has been an important source of institutional memory, particularly for newer Members and staff seeking to understand the lessons that can be drawn from past debates. A gifted public speaker known for his humor, quick wit, and enthusiasm in discussing defense matters, Dr. Towell has often presented at CRS's new Member seminar, an orientation for new Members of Congress, in Williamsburg, VA. He has served as a CRS speaker or panelist for visiting delegations from the U.S. war colleges, the NATO Defense College, and foreign Parliaments sponsored by the House Democracy Partnership. Dr. Towell also has participated in a staff exchange with the European Parliamentary Research Service--EPRS--in Brussels. For many years, he helped to organize and present at CRS's annual defense budget seminar for congressional staff. Drawing on a deep professional network built over decades of experience in both journalism and policy, Dr. Towell has mentored colleagues in part by organizing internal discussions with various defense scholars and practitioners, from leading think tank experts to senior Defense Department civilian leaders.

Before joining CRS, Dr. Towell was a lecturer in political science at California State College, Bakersfield from 1972 to 1975, a defense reporter at Congressional Quarterly from 1975 to 2003, and a fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments from 2003 to 2006. He received a bachelor's degree in liberal arts from Georgetown University in Washington, DC; a master's degree in political science from Northwestern University in Evanston, IL; and a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL.

On behalf of the U.S. Senate and the American people, I express deep gratitude for the contributions of Dr. Towell during his nearly two decades at CRS. Along with his family, friends, and colleagues, I thank him and wish him and his wife K.T. all the best in retirement.

Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination

lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. President, I move that the Senate insist on its amendment, agree to the conference with the House, and authorize the Presiding Officer to appoint conferees, as provided under the previous order.

I know of no further debate on the compound motion, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Vote on Compound Motion

Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Klobuchar, I call up her motion to instruct the conferees.

I know of no further debate on the motion.

Vote on Motion to Instruct

Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Hickenlooper, I call up his motion to instruct the conferees.

I know of no further debate on the motion.

Vote on Motion to Instruct

Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Manchin, I call up his motion to instruct the conferees.

I know of no further debate on the motion.

Vote on Motion to Instruct

Mr. President, reserving my right to object, I believe we must move forward with emergency funding for our allies--all of our allies, not just the State of Israel but also Ukraine. We are in a situation where both of these countries are under tremendous stress. But it is very clear that the proposal before us, this unanimous consent request to pass the bill including only funding for Israel, is just ironically an attempt to deny funding for Ukraine. It is not really about helping Israel; it is about making sure we don't continue our support and commitment to Ukraine. That commitment is just as vitally important to us as our solemn commitment to Israel.

If we fail to support Ukraine, we will send a very unfortunate message to our adversaries: You can succeed in overrunning America's allies if you simply wait us out.

My colleagues on the other side of the debate have been spinning a false narrative that says: By providing support for Ukraine, we will deny support for Israel. The truth is that the only obstacle to providing help to both nations is them. The truth is also that the United States is already supporting the State of Israel. The United States has provided Israel with over $12.4 billion in military assistance and missile defense funding over the last 3 years. In response to the attacks of October 7, President Biden has moved two aircraft carrier strike groups into the region. He ordered marines into the region. U.S. forces have already engaged and shot down missiles from adversaries in the region. We have also suffered more than 56 injuries of American military personnel because of actions against the U.S. position in the Middle East.

We need to support Israel. We are supporting Israel. We will continue to support Israel. But we cannot abandon Ukraine. They have lost hundreds of thousands of civilians and military personnel.

The horrors of October 7 were grotesque. I was in Israel last month. I saw the images--some that have not yet been released--of the slaughter. It was traumatic for the entire State of Israel--in fact, the Jewish community worldwide. But go to Ukraine. Go to Bucha. Dig up the graves of people shot in the back of the head while their hands were tied. You want to talk about atrocities? Those were atrocities perpetrated by the Russians.

So we are fighting forces that are dark and evil in two fronts, and we have to support all of those democratic nations--Israel and Ukraine. They are struggling against the darkness.

This is not my opinion alone. Two weeks ago, Mike Pompeo, the former Secretary of State for Donald Trump and a former Congressman from Senator Marshall's home State of Kansas, wrote this about Ukraine:

Make no mistake: The outcome of this war will have a direct

impact on U.S. national security. Should Putin prevail--

whether on the battlefield or through a war of attrition that

leads to ill-conceived diplomacy--

And I would suggest that denying this aid is ill-conceived diplomacy--

the war would be felt well beyond Ukraine's borders.

Indeed, I would add that if we fail to support Ukraine with funding and equipment, then it is more likely that young American servicemembers will be called upon to fight and perhaps die and suffer in Eastern Europe because, as so many of my colleagues have suggested and as Secretary Pompeo suggested, Putin will not be satisfied with simply taking Ukraine, and we could see ourselves engaged in defending one of our NATO allies.

I have a very simple sort of notion about American military policy, having had the privilege to serve in our military. I would rather send resources to a country fighting than send American soldiers to do the fighting. And if we don't support Ukraine, that will happen.

Let me conclude by simply saying that it is time to get serious. We have 3 days before our government runs out of funding. Israel needs our support. Ukraine needs our support. American families and communities are counting on us to deliver critical disaster assistance. They need support for affordable, high-quality childcare. There are many needs we must address. We have to move now but not by isolating our Ukrainian allies. We are in the fight with them, and we will finish the fight with them.

At this point, I would yield to Senator Durbin of Illinois.

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

Mr. President, I would request that the scheduled vote be initiated.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, reserving my right to object, I, too, believe, with my colleague from Washington State, that we must move forward with emergency funding for our allies--all of our allies, not just the State of Israel but also Ukraine. I also think we have to move quickly to head off a closure or shutdown of our government next week, and we have to address the pressing needs of the American people in this process.

But it is very clear that this proposal before us--this unanimous consent to pass the bill including only funds for Israel--is just an attempt to deny assistance to Ukraine. It is not really about helping Israel. It is about making sure we don't continue to keep our commitments to Ukraine.

And we have had a debate about Ukraine. We have talked over 2 years about Ukraine, how dangerous Russian aggression can be, not just with respect to the people of Ukraine but to the rest of the world.

As my colleague said, China is watching. In fact, I think they are paying more attention to Ukraine than the current issue in Israel because Putin's imperialistic dreams of restoring the

Russian Empire resonate more closely to the Xi Jinping's imperialist dreams to reunite Taiwan to China.

So if we fail in Ukraine, I think that will send a very strong and unfortunate message to China that you can attack, wait the West out, and, eventually, they will concede. That is not good strategy or policy.

My colleagues argue that this will deny Israel getting the means to defend itself. Well, we have already been supporting the State of Israel. We have moved two aircraft carrier strike groups into the region. We are moving marines into the region. We are sending signals that we are strongly protecting them. Indeed, we have already engaged and shot down missiles from our naval forces. We have also suffered more than 40 injuries of American military personnel because of actions against the United States' positions in the Middle East because of our protection of Israel.

We cannot abandon Ukraine. They have lost hundreds of thousands of civilians and military personnel.

If you want to talk about horrors, October 7 was a horrible day. I was in Israel. I saw photographs--some that have not yet been released--of the tragedy. It was traumatic for the entire State of Israel.

But go to Ukraine. Go to Bucha. Dig up the graves of people shot in the back of the head while their hands were tied.

You want to talk about atrocities? Those were atrocities.

So we are fighting forces that are dark and evil, and we have to support all of those democratic nations--Israel and Ukraine--that are struggling against that darkness.

Now, this is not my opinion alone. Last week, Mike Pompeo, the former Secretary of State for Donald Trump and a former Congressman from Senator Marshall's home State of Kansas wrote:

Make no mistake: the outcome of this war will have a direct

impact on U.S. national security.

He was speaking of Ukraine.

Should Putin prevail--whether on the battlefield or through

a war of attrition that leads to ill-conceived diplomacy--the

war would be felt well beyond Ukraine's borders.

Indeed, I would add, if we fail to support Ukraine with funding and equipment, then it is more likely that young American servicemembers will be called upon to fight and die and suffer in Eastern Europe, because, as so many of my colleagues have suggested and as Secretary Pompeo suggested, Putin will not be satisfied with simply taking Ukraine, and we could see ourselves engaged in defending one of our NATO allies.

I have a very simple sort of notion about American military policy. I would rather send resources to a country fighting than send American soldiers to do the fighting, and, if we don't support Ukraine, that will happen.

Now, this is a situation that calls on us to do the right thing, and we have to do the right thing. But this is not something that we can do separate one from another, because, as we have all said, there is a connectivity here, and this connectivity has to be recognized.

Now, the other point I would make, too, is that this bill is paid for. Now, this to me is one of the most startling aspects of the legislation that the Senator from Kansas is promoting because they pay for it by taking money away from the Internal Revenue Service. Some would say they are using the Israeli crisis as a way to do what so many of my Republican colleagues like to do--give tax breaks to the wealthy--because when you take money away from the IRS, you go ahead and ensure that people can feel much more comfortable about not paying their taxes.

The Wall Street Journal published an article a few days ago. In 2021, the IRS failed to collect $688 billion that was owed to the United States of America. That is many times this supplemental that we are talking about. No financial institution would take money away from its bill collectors on the notion that, oh, that is OK. Only in Washington would we do that.

This bill is, thus, irresponsible in the way it is paid for and irresponsible in ignoring our commitment to Ukraine.

It is time to get serious. We have 10 days before our government runs out of funding. Israel needs our support. Ukraine needs our support. American families and communities are counting on us to deliver critical disaster assistance. They need support for affordable, high- quality childcare. They need many things that are also at a crisis level. And we don't have time--we don't have time--to entertain political gestures to send a signal to Israel and a signal to the rich in America that we are with you and neglect and leave out Ukrainians, who have been struggling and fighting against a foe that is determined to continue this fight in Europe. Ultimately, I feel if we don't respond appropriately, this forces us to send our men and women into the fight.

I commend Chair Murray and Vice Chair Collins for standing up for this country and for our allies.