Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Leslie Ashton and Cami Pease, Government Accountability Office detailees to the Senate Armed Services Committee, have floor privileges during consideration of the fiscal year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 144, H.R. 4350 occur now.

Madam President, I rise to join Chairman Leahy in calling on our Republican colleagues to negotiate a final agreement on fiscal year 2022 appropriations bills. Just as we need to complete work on the National Defense Authorization Act--a position I have

been urging repeatedly on our leadership--we need to complete work on the appropriations bills. They are complementary, to say the least, and they have to be done.

Under Chairman Leahy's leadership, Democrats have put forth a responsible top-line number and subcommittee allocations that address our defense and nondefense funding needs alike. The defense funding levels in the appropriations bills are consistent with the bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act bill that we passed in the Armed Services Committee in July.

I would like to point out that the defense spending level in the Senate NDAA bill, which is pending floor action, was set by an amendment offered by my colleague, the ranking member, Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, and supported by every Republican on the Armed Services Committee. I was pleased to work with Senator Inhofe and to cosponsor the amendment, which provides an additional $25 billion in funding for specific items, most of which are unfunded requirements submitted by the services and the combatant commands.

But Republicans put all this good work and all this good will we built up and established in the NDAA process in jeopardy if they force us into a yearlong continuing resolution by refusing to negotiate on the 12 appropriations bills.

A yearlong CR would be shortsighted and damaging to our national defense.

First, defense spending will be about $36 billion lower than the levels set out in the Senate's NDAA and appropriations bills.

I must also point out that, following our lead, the House Armed Services Committee passed a bill with the same top line--an additional $25 billion. That was brought to the floor of the House. It passed. In fact, an amendment to reduce the funding was defeated.

So there is a strong bipartisan commitment to vigorously fund the Department of Defense, and if we do not do that, if we fall into the trap of a CR, as I have indicated, we will be taking money away from the Department of Defense.

Second, we will be tied, as Senator Leahy pointed out, to funding priorities from a year ago even though circumstances have changed remarkably. As he pointed out, we have funding in last year's legislation that would provide support to Afghan forces who have been dissipated by the events of August. We would have a situation where there were significant amounts of money intended to assist Afghan security concerns that could not be effectively used and would detract from the current needs that we have.

Third, a CR would prevent DOD from effectively modernizing and reinventing and reinvesting in its programs. Since new starts--new programs--aren't allowed under a CR, DOD could be forced into funding legacy systems that are outdated and inefficient, and that is simply congressionally mandated waste. Meanwhile, important new initiatives and acquisitions could be delayed. For example, we may not have the ability to fund the three additional ships and the seven more Joint Strike Fighters in the Navy's 2022 budget. As we shift our focus to the Pacific, as we deal with potential contingencies involving Taiwan and other areas, it becomes a shift in the Navy. They need these platforms. They need them as soon as we can get them, and they won't be able to get them if we are stuck with a CR.

CRs are also terribly disruptive just to the normal operation of the Department of Defense and also to their partners in the private sector and academia, since CRs inject uncertainty, instability, and cost to the R&D and acquisition processes.

The impact is not just felt on the defense side of the ledger, as Chairman Leahy pointed out. Nondefense priorities have been neglected for over a decade. This year, we finally have a chance to make up for lost time.

For example, we have a chance to double the Federal commitment to public education under the title I program and make important investments in adult education and job training.

At a time when the American people are clamoring for more mental health service, particularly for children, we have funding to help train more pediatric mental health specialists.

We also have funding to help establish a national suicide prevention lifeline and a three-digit phone number that Congress approved last year. We are in the midst, sadly, of an epidemic of suicides throughout this country, and they particularly affect, as we pointed out, veterans who have served their country with great valor and sacrifice and yet are plagued by mental health problems.

As the chairman of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee, I will note that we have funding to help the Capitol Police, who have been stretched to their limits in the aftermath of the January 6 assault on this Capitol. In the Senate bill, we have funding for new officers, overtime and retention payments, as well as resources for officer wellness and mental health support. After what they have done for us, literally saving us, we owe it to the men and women of the Capitol Police to provide this assistance. It cannot be done under a continuing resolution.

Chairman Leahy has bent over backwards to engage our Republican colleagues, and we have to engage. We have to move forward. He is willing to do that, but we have not seen a comparable response from the other side. It is time to get down to business, the business of the American people. It is time to provide our military with the resources and the priorities for today, not for last year. It is time to recognize the emerging problems in this country of this moment, not of the past.

We need our colleagues on the Republican side to come to the table, not with preconditions and redlines but a willingness to negotiate on behalf of all the American people. Otherwise, we will risk a continuing resolution that will harm everyone, all the American people.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

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, 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 rise today to join my colleagues in supporting S. 2747, the Freedom to Vote Act; and S. 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act; and S. 2615, the Right to Vote Act.

As some States and political operatives around the country seek to roll back voter protection laws and gerrymander voting districts, Congress must act to strengthen the freedom to vote and ensure elections are safe and accessible.

Since its original passage in 1965, the Voting Rights Act safeguarded the rights of historically marginalized voters at the polls.

Sadly, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2013 ruling in Shelby County v. Holder gutted key Voting Rights Act protections. Earlier this year, in July 2021, the Supreme Court issued another split ruling further weakening the law in its decision in Brnovich v. DNC, making it more difficult to challenge discriminatory voting laws under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Over the years, this democracy has seen a crisis in access to the polls, and it has been worsened recently as Republican-led State legislatures have implemented policies that disproportionately suppress the voting rights of people of color, the elderly, college students, and those living in rural areas, among others. Those same political operatives have repeatedly weaponized false claims of election fraud, like those perpetuated by former President Trump, to try to overturn the will of the people.

The right to vote is a fundamental right guaranteed by our Constitution and our desired responsibility to protect it. In the United States of America, a beacon of democracy, our elections must be open and transparent and follow a process and procedure that all Americans can trust. It is more important than ever for Congress to affirm that voters have a right to free and fair elections.

The Freedom to Vote Act fulfills this constitutional responsibility by improving access to the ballot, advancing commonsense election integrity reforms, and protecting our democracy from emerging threats from cyber attacks to misinformation bots. It is not the job of government to make it hard to vote; rather, it is our responsibility to balance the convenience of voters with the security of their ballots. This legislation does just that.

I also support the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, which will repair the damage done by the Supreme Court's decisions by restoring the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division's oversight over historically discriminatory States when they change voting laws and legislative districts.

The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would provide needed Federal oversight and serve as a check on communities that have engaged in a pattern of restricting voting rights and making it harder for minority voters to be counted.

Finally, I support the Right to Vote Act, which would establish the first-

ever statutory right to vote in Federal elections, therefore allowing Americans to enforce that right by challenging in court any policy that restricts ballot access.

This legislation takes an enshrined right and empowers the people with the tools to defend it. This way, States attempting to restrict voting access will have to meet a high bar to justify any policy that makes it harder for U.S. citizens to participate in Federal elections.

Restricting the ability of Americans to freely and fairly cast their ballots threatens the very core of our Nation's founding democratic principles.

As Americans deal with the ongoing effects of COVID-19 and prepare for elections in the coming months and years, we should be removing-- not adding--unnecessary barriers to voting.

While efforts to pass voting rights legislation have been stymied by Senate Republicans, you can be assured that I will continue to stand ready and willing to work with my colleagues in Congress to defend Americans' right to vote, end partisan gerrymandering, and prevent voter suppression.

The vote today will allow us to begin a much-needed debate on the topic of voting rights. I ask my Republican colleagues to come to the table and join us in this conversation about how we can protect our elections and safeguard American democracy.

I urge all my colleagues to support these important bills that would protect and advance voting rights in our country.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, in reserving my right to object, on August 24, the Secretary of Defense determined that the mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 was necessary to

protect the force and defend the American people.

Vaccination is not mandatory for any servicemember who has a legitimate medical or religious reason for not being vaccinated.

Mandatory vaccinations are limited to only FDA-approved vaccines. All FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines have been determined to be safe and effective.

According to press reports, as of October 4, Active-Duty vaccination rates are as follows: the Army, 81 percent; the Navy, 90 percent; the Air Force, 80.9 percent; and the Marine Corps, 76.5 percent.

Mandatory vaccination is not a new issue for military personnel. Mandatory vaccinations for critical illnesses are mission critical, and requiring vaccination is almost as old as the military itself. I can personally verify that point. Indeed, servicemembers are currently required to get 17 different vaccinations when they enter the military or before deploying overseas, including for measles, mumps, diphtheria, hepatitis, smallpox, and the flu.

We need a healthy and ready force. We saw what happened when Navy ships were contaminated with COVID. They weren't ready to deploy. They couldn't deploy. They were tied up. Their effectiveness and ability to defend the country were marginalized, to say the least. I think this is absolutely incongruent with the practice and mission of the military.

One other thing I would say is that one of the most fundamental ethics of the military is that every soldier, sailor, marine, airman, and guardian is prepared to sacrifice for their fellow servicemember, and the idea that one would put their own personal feelings ahead of the potential for contaminating or sickening another servicemember and affecting the unit is something that I don't think squares with the ethic of the U.S. military or the effectiveness of the force.

I agree with the Secretary of Defense; therefore, I object.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Dr. Katherine Quinn, an American Institute of Physics Congressional Science Fellow through the American Association of Advancement of Science, who is serving in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the remainder of the Congress.

Madam President, today I honor one of the most dedicated, selfless, and accomplished leaders I have known, my late classmate, COL Jeff Jones.

Jeff passed away in 2010 after a heroic battle with brain cancer, but his legacy will be engraved in steel this November when the Army names its new Psychological Operations Headquarters Building in Fort Bragg, NC, for him. Colonel Jones dedicated his life and career to our national defense, and this tribute could not be more fitting.

Jeff and I were classmates at West Point. When you first met Jeff, you knew he had special talents. While my other classmates and I were struggling just to pass inspection, Jeff was leading rifle drill and ceremony to perfection, honed by his years of military academy upbringing in Georgia. He was a natural, inspiring leader, and we all looked up to him. As cadets and later as officers, Jeff exemplified everything we strived to be as members of the Long Grey Line, always representing what was best and most noble about West Point, the Army, and America. He was the epitome of ``Duty, Honor, Country.''

We graduated together in 1971, and Jeff began his career as an infantry officer in the 509th Airborne in Germany, where he climbed the Matterhorn and trained with British and French airborne troops. He later commanded an infantry company at Fort Ord, CA, and met his wonderful wife Pamela along the way. His career moved swiftly, serving as aide-de-camp to some of the top generals of the day and earning advanced degrees from prestigious institutions. Presciently, while serving on the staff of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, he authored the study recommending the creation of U.S. Central Command.

Jeff also embarked on several international tours, including with the U.N. Truce Supervision Organization in Lebanon following the Beirut bombings and working with the U.S.-Soviet Nuclear Arms Control and Space Negotiations in Geneva in the 1980s.

He especially imparted his leadership through his command of the 8th Psychological Operations Battalion and later the 4th PSYOP Group, both at Fort Bragg. Under his command, military and civilian teams deployed across more than 60 countries on six continents, gathering key intelligence throughout peacetime, crisis, war, humanitarian, refugee, and counterdrug operations.

Jeff finally retired from Active Duty in 2001, after his final assignment as a defense attache in Paris, but his retirement was short- lived as 9/11 struck just months later. He was requested to serve on the NSC in a civilian capacity in the Office of Combating Terrorism and subsequently in the Defense Policy and Arms Control Directorate, and he served with distinction.

In 2006, Jeff was diagnosed with brain cancer. He battled for years, even as he continued to work and contribute to our national security. With Pam by his side, he passed away in 2010 and was posthumously inducted into the Special Operations Command's Commando Hall of Honor in 2013.

Jeff had a quiet, fearless strength that was powerful when you were in his presence. I consider myself extremely fortunate to have served alongside him and to have learned from his intellect, skill, character, and his love and devotion to Pam. And I am proud to have known him as my friend.

The Army's new ``Colonel Jeffrey Jones Psychological Operations Headquarters'' bears the name of a great man, and I know great things will be achieved there.

I am proud to honor the legacy of Colonel Jones, and I know the Members of the Senate will join me in recognizing the incredible contributions he made for our Nation.

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, on behalf of myself and Mr. Inhofe, as the chair and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the cochairs of the Senate Army Caucus, it is our honor to pay tribute to a great leader and exceptional advocate for the U.S. Army, GEN Carter F. Ham, U.S. Army, Retired, as he retires from his current position as the president and chief executive officer of the Association of the United States Army, AUSA. General Ham exemplifies a lifetime of service.

Carter enlisted as a private and ultimately joined only a small group of soldiers in the history of the Army by earning the rank of Four-Star general, leading at every level in the Army, from platoon to geographic combatant command, along the way. His Army career began as an enlisted infantry soldier in the 82nd Airborne Division and culminated as the Commander of United States Africa Command. His service took him to Italy, Germany, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Macedonia, Qatar, Iraq, and over 40 African countries, and his commands included the 1st Infantry Division, the legendary ``Big Red One,'' and U.S. Army Europe. As the second commander of United States Africa Command, he led all U.S. military activities on the African continent ranging from combat operations in Libya to hostage rescue operations in Somalia, as well as training and security assistance activities across 54 complex and diverse African nations. His leadership was compassionate and inclusive and left the Army better from his service.

General Ham retired from the Army in June of 2013 after nearly 38 years, but his service continued. In the years after retirement from Active Duty, he served as the chairman of the National Commission on the Future of the Army, an eight-member panel tasked by Congress with making recommendations on the size, force structure, and capabilities of the Total Army. Since 2016, he has served admirably as the president and CEO of AUSA, carrying out its mission to support soldiers, their families, and Army civilians; provide a voice for the Army; and honor those who have served.

Established to educate, inform, and connect, General Ham guided AUSA through a period of unprecedented growth of membership, creating an environment for industry and international partners to build their relationships with the U.S. Army. With ingenuity and perseverance while navigating through the COVID-19 pandemic, he kept the professional and education-centered association operating smoothly without decreasing any staffing, all while finding new opportunities and formats to support the Army. General Ham provided steady leadership in his advocacy with Congress supporting the Army--Regular, Guard, and Reserve--as well as Army families, civilians, retirees, and veterans. He embraced the Army's ``People First'' mission while advocating for readiness and modernization with a balanced perspective; he ardently supported the Army while respecting and working with the other military services. Through his vision for the future and commitment to honor all who served in the past, General Ham and AUSA enabled the Army, its soldiers and veterans, and the American people, to realize a National Museum of the U.S. Army. He has served the United States, the Army, and the Association of the United States Army with great distinction and exceptional leadership, wisdom, and humility.

On behalf of Congress and the United States of America, we thank General Ham, his wife Christi, and their entire family for their commitment, sacrifice, and contributions to this great Nation. We join our colleagues in wishing him the long and joyful retirement he so richly deserves.

Mr. President, today I want to honor a former First Lady of Rhode Island, Mrs. Dorothy Shirley

Licht, as she celebrates her 100th birthday on Monday, September 27, 2021.

Dorothy Shirley Krauss was born in Providence, RI, in 1921. She spent much of her life dedicated to others--raising three children, working to enrich her community, and supporting her late husband, the former Governor of Rhode Island Frank Licht, in his political and judicial endeavors.

In 1949, she married Frank Licht, a Rhode Islander who graduated from Brown University and Harvard Law School and served as a State senator in Rhode Island from 1949 until being sworn in as an associate justice of the Rhode Island Superior Court in 1956.

After 12 steadfast years on the bench, Licht thrust himself into an uphill gubernatorial fight against the incumbent Governor and my former colleague, the late Senator John Chafee. Following a hard-fought campaign, Licht secured an underdog win in 1968, and with Dorothy at his side, he became the first Jewish Governor in Rhode Island's history. During Governor Licht's time in office, he focused on advancing mental healthcare, strong environmental protections, and bold economic reforms. With strong conviction and courage, he pushed through an unpopular tax plan that would help guide Rhode Island out of a devastating financial crisis.

No public servant can be successful without the strong support of their loved ones. Through tough races, long hours, and challenging times, Dorothy gifted to the people of Rhode Island a model for strong and eloquent leadership. During her time as First Lady and in the decades since, Dorothy held the advancement of the arts and humanities close to her heart. Her work to elevate art and culture across our community is exemplified by her past service on the boards of the Rhode Island State Council on the Arts, the New England Foundation for the Arts, and the Rhode Island Symphony. Dorothy's compassion for helping those in need is perhaps best shown through her role as an honorary board member of the Rhode Island Food Bank, a role she still holds today.

Through all of the highs of Dorothy's life, she has not been immune to loss. She has endured the immeasurable burden of burying both her loving husband Frank many years ago, as well as her eldest daughter Beth, who passed unexpectedly earlier this year. Still, Dorothy is strengthened and supported by her beloved family who join with me to celebrate this milestone, including her two surviving daughters Carol and Judy, her eight grandchildren, and her four great-grandchildren, as well as her nephew, former Lieutenant Governor Richard Licht.

It is my distinct honor to recognize Dorothy for her life of service to Rhode Island, her commitment to her family, and this momentous occasion of her 100th birthday.

Mr. President, this is well-intended because there are always needs for national defense, but I would like to point out that the Armed Services Committee, on a bipartisan basis, raised the top line of the Defense bill this year by $25 billion, allowing us to cover the unfunded requirements of the Department of Defense. This was not only a bipartisan effort; it was overwhelmingly approved by the committee. So we are not reneging on a commitment to fully fund the Department of Defense.

I know this amendment originated as an attempt to amend the infrastructure bill, but as it is written, this amendment would provide over $50 billion in funding for unspecified uses--it could be infrastructure; it could be military platforms; it could be a host of things--and the fund would extend from 2022 to 2031, which is beyond this Congress and beyond the current administration.

I think we should adhere to the rules, the regular order, which has been conducted in the Armed Services Committee. I think we have well- positioned ourselves for an adequate budget and determination of spending this year.

For that reason, I would urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Vote on Amendment No. 3293