Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Caroline Nilsson Troy on her well-deserved retirement after more than 31 years of dedicated service to the Gem State and the students, staff, faculty, and alumni at the University of Idaho.

Caroline's deep Idaho roots have shaped her public service. A fifth- generation Idahoan, Caroline grew up in Genesse, a community built on values that define the Gem State: hard work, tending the land, and Vandal pride. After graduating from the University of Idaho, she applied the lessons learned on her family's farm and ranch to the U of I's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. There, Caroline helped develop and raise funding for educational programs that set students on the path to success.

In 2014, Caroline was elected to the Idaho House of Representatives. Over the course of four terms, she sponsored more than 100 bills and resolutions aimed at strengthening small businesses, timber, and agriculture and was a key voice in the responsible use of taxpayer dollars. Caroline remained a tireless advocate for education and her alma mater, opening doors to internships and jobs for Vandals interested in public service.

Following her time in elected office, Caroline returned home to the University of Idaho as the special assistant to the president for State and governmental relations. In this role, Caroline made a positive impact on countless lives, especially for students and families across north Idaho. I am confident

that her legacy of kindness and integrity will inspire generations to come.

It is with great pride that I recognize Caroline Nilssan Troy for her outstanding contributions to the Gem State. Thank you, Caroline, for your many years of service and commitment to making Idaho the best place to live, work, and raise a family.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, fellow Senators, we are about to vote on a War Powers Resolution, which is becoming common around here--and way too common, as a matter a fact.

But I think the first thing we ought to talk about is what we are actually doing here, from a 30,000-foot standpoint, as far as what the resolution actually says. As usual, there is a lot of setup in here, but there are 2\1/2\ lines that say what we are trying to do here--not we, but what the other side is trying to do here.

It says:

Congress hereby directs the President to terminate the use

of the United States Armed Forces for hostilities within or

against Venezuela.

Let me say that again: We are directing ``the President to terminate the use of . . . Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela.''

There isn't anybody that has any information that the President is using Armed Forces against Venezuela. He did for about 47 minutes this last weekend, but he is not in the process of doing this. And the resolution says that he should stop it. He is not doing it.

Now, if the resolution were drawn to say, ``Mr. President, you can't do this

anymore,'' that would actually have some effect or attempt to have some effect. It would be unconstitutional, unenforceable. But to tell him not to do something or to stop doing something he is not doing is nonsense.

The effect of this is to slap the President of the United States in the face. That is the only effect that this vote can have. It can have no practical effect because it is trying to stop something that isn't going on.

So we are again here considering this War Powers Resolution to remove the troops from a foreign country where they do not exist. The War Powers Act was created as a way to address the continuing deployment of U.S. forces into hostilities--or in hostilities.

There is no continuing deployment of U.S. troop forces in hostilities. The War Powers Act was never designed to remove the President's article II right to defend the United States, its interests, or its citizens; nor, indeed, could the War Powers Act do that because the Constitution absolutely directs the President of the United States to use the military might of the United States to protect it.

Indeed, the constitutional power was given to the President. We cannot change that. It is the power that he has. This vote and similar votes before it are an abuse of the War Powers Act. There are no U.S. military forces in Venezuela.

The United States conducted a limited operation to remove an indicted narcoterrorist, Nicolas Maduro, from Venezuela and brought him to the United States to face justice for his crimes.

Now, was this a good thing to do? Well, of course, it was a good thing to do. Indeed, Democrats themselves have said that it was a good thing to do.

I want to read from three different Democrats who told us that this was a good thing to do. I am not going to name them. They can step up and take credit if they want to. These are three different Democrats.

The first one said:

Obviously, we know Maduro and his cronies do not want to go

quietly into the night, but the United States needs to work

with its partners and allies in the region to ratchet up

pressure.

This was a Senator on August 2, 2024.

The same Senator says, after Maduro was removed:

It is an illegal act of war to replace Maduro.

Another Senator said--and this was back in 2019:

If Trump cared about consistency, he would make the realist

case for intervention in Venezuela (getting rid of Maduro is

good for the United States).

This Senator called for intervention in Venezuela. Do you know what he says now, after the invasion?

The invasion of Venezuela has nothing to do with American

security. Venezuela is not a security threat to the U.S.

That is what he says today.

Now, one of my favorites, this Senator said--and this was on February 5, 2020:

And the President brags about his Venezuela policy. Give us

a break. He hasn't brought an end to the Maduro regime. The

Maduro regime is more powerful today and more entrenched

today than it was when the President began.

Well, the President changed that. He removed Maduro. Do you know what that same Senator says today?

This is reckless. And the American people are just, this

morning, in fear of what's going to happen here.

That was January 4, 2026.

This is the height of hypocrisy. The purpose of this resolution is to slap the President in the face. It will do nothing that it purports to do because it can't stop something that isn't going on right now.

In addition, the President's actions in Venezuela are consistent with other Presidents' efforts to protect the American people from threats in our own backyard.

President George H. W. Bush authorized limited military operations to arrest Panama's Manuel Noriega and bring him to the United States to stand trial for drug-related charges, just as President Trump has done with Maduro. In that case, President Bush deployed more than 9,000 troops, and they fought for 2 weeks on the ground in Panama before they got their hands on Noriega. At that time, both Republican and Democrat leaders of the Senate praised this move.

Compare that to what happened here. There were only about 200 troops involved, and they were engaged for 47 minutes. And yet, all of a sudden, this is a horrendous problem.

When you are in the business of flying drugs into the United States-- drugs that kill our children and hurt our country and destabilize our hemisphere--in violation of U.S. law, and when you invite Russia, China, and Iran to set up shop right in our backyard and do the things that they are doing, there is going to be a price to pay. Maduro is paying that price today.

But unlike the former President, President Trump demonstrated he is a man of action. He was decisive and did what he promised the American people he would do, and that is to keep them safe.

Now, Democrats are reversing their position on Maduro's removal to criticize the President.

The President's decision was the right call. Let's acknowledge that fact. Let's celebrate that fact. Let's resolve that the President of the United States is to be commended for what he did.

My fellow Senators, vote no on this resolution. This is nothing more than a slap in the face to the President of the United States. It cannot accomplish something that does not exist.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues Senator Mike Crapo, Congressman Mike Simpson, and Congressman Russ Fulcher to honor Dr. Rick Waitley for his 32 years of dedicated service as the executive director of Leadership Idaho Agriculture, LIA, and more than half a century of advocating for the State's farmers and ranchers.

Founded in 1985, LIA has provided countless Idahoans with hands-on learning and experience to help keep the Gem State's agricultural communities strong. Since taking the reins in 1993, Rick has led the organization to resounding success, overseeing 37 classes and facilitating the graduation of over 1,093 individuals. Many current and former members of the LIA Board of Trustees and other industry leaders credit Rick with influencing their personal and professional journeys. Under Rick's stewardship and vision, LIA has sparked tremendous growth in the number of leaders developed within Idaho's agriculture industry, creating a lasting impact felt throughout the State.

Outside of LIA, Rick's commitment to public service is evident in his creation and involvement with organizations that advance Idaho agriculture, including Food Producers of Idaho, the Idaho Coop Council, Idaho Ag in the Classroom, and the Idaho Ag Summit. As a member of the Food Producers of Idaho, Rick plays an integral role in facilitating meetings during the State's annual legislative session and connecting local farmers and ranchers

with elected officials to discuss issues affecting the industry. Rick's efforts have also opened doors to other crucial initiatives for many aspiring leaders, including State and international exchange tours and the Washington, DC, experience.

Rick's dedication extends beyond his professional life. He is a steadfast partner to his wife Dorita, a father of two daughters, and an active member of the Valley Shepherd Nazarene Church in Meridian.

As Rick assumes his new role as executive director emeritus, we are confident that he will continue to provide invaluable support and guidance as his daughter Kendra Dustin takes the helm as executive director.

On behalf of the people of Idaho, we extend our sincere appreciation to Rick for his dedication and exemplary service to Leadership Idaho Agriculture and to our great State. His legacy will undoubtedly inspire future generations of leaders in Idaho and across the West. Thank you, Rick, for your years of service, and congratulations again on this well-deserved recognition.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.