Floor Statements

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, fellow Senators, while the Senate continues our important work to provide the American people with the largest tax cut in history today, we would be remiss if we did not pause for a moment and call attention to the tragic events

that happened in Coeur d'Alene, ID, yesterday.

While responding to a fire, as my colleague indicated, two of North Idaho's brave firefighters were ambushed and murdered, and one is in serious to critical condition. This evil attack on the people who dedicate their lives to protecting and serving our communities is despicable, and it is not Idaho.

I ask my Senate colleagues to join me, Senator Crapo, and all Idahoans in praying for the victims, the loved ones, and all who have been affected by this reprehensible act.

Thank you, and thank you to Washington for your help. You did send a number of first responders, which was very helpful. Thank you.

Mr. President, I rise today to oppose this unhelpful resolution. It is a clear attempt to take a slap at President Trump and nothing more.

President Trump's foreign policy successes have been several and should be celebrated not denigrated. For instance, recently his work when India and Pakistan started fighting, he got involved, and he had that shut down pretty quickly.

This morning, I had the good fortune to attend, with Secretary Rubio, an event at the State Department where a peace agreement was signed between Rwanda and the Congo. Both Rwanda and the Congo were effusive in their compliments of President Trump for negotiating the peace that happened.

So the President has been hard at work trying to be the President of peace that he really wants to be. First, I think that we ought to have a good statement from the administration as to why this resolution is not well-taken, and I am going to quote from the Executive Office of the President their statement on the policy.

S.J. Res. 59 fails to account for the dynamic security

threat posed by Iran and its proxies and our commitments to

force protection in the region.

On June 12, the International Atomic Agency Board of

Governors found that Iran had failed to comply with its

nuclear safeguards obligations. Iran immediately responded

stating that it would establish a new uranium enrichment

facility in a secure location and that other measures were

being planned.

Israel took action against Iran, an action it believed was

necessary for its self-defense. The United States' top

priority is protecting American forces in the region.

President Trump will take all necessary steps to protect our

forces, deescalate conflict, and remain in close contact with

our regional partners.

S.J. Res. 59 should be rejected also because it purports to

limit the President's article II authority under the

Constitution and could hinder the President's ability in his

constitutional role as Commander in Chief to protect the

United States from the continued threat posed by Iran and its

proxies.

S.J. Res. 59 also could hinder the President's ability to

protect the United States' forces in the region through

actions to deescalate the threat posed by Iran and its

proxies.

The operative part of this resolution that is before us

states:

Congress hereby directs the President to terminate the use

of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the

Islamic Republic of Iran.

This might be appropriate if we were at war against Iran or, indeed, if there were hostilities against Iran, but we are not, and we do not intend to. You can't terminate something that is not going on. Every American is opposed to the long, drawn-out conflicts that we have, in our history, from time to time, experienced. I assure you that President Trump feels exactly the same way. He hates those long, drawn- out conflicts. He hates any kind of kinetic action but realizes that as Commander in Chief he has to take them at times.

The President did take a single strike against Iran at carefully calculated targets and in an even more carefully calculated time, much like what he did with General Soleimani in his first term that was so successful.

The strike on Iran was a single, brief strike at three nuclear bomb facilities that ended the conflict between Israel and Iran. It was on behalf of a close ally, Israel, and on behalf of the world, which is unanimously against Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Most importantly, it ended a war; it did not start a war. If the United States or Donald Trump or any other President sought to declare war on Iran, this would be well-taken. The Constitution is clear that only this body, the Congress of the United States, can declare war, but the Constitution and statutes are equally clear that the President not only may but must act to defend America and Americans at a time or place that a threat presents itself.

Congress has also spoken on the power of the President in the War Powers Act. Now, we have heard a lot on the floor today about how important the Founding Fathers thought declaration of war was. They were absolutely right. It is just as right today as it was then. There is a lot of difference between then and now. Then we had oceans protecting us on each side, and for a war to take place, it took months to unfold and to start.

In today's world, it is the press of a button, and it happens instantaneously. That is why Congress went in and passed the War Powers Act that gave the President the opportunity to defend America, and in that act, it provided things that the President had to do. He complied with that act exactly as it was put in place by Congress when he took the single-strike act against Iran.

Also, the Justice Department has opined to Republican and Democrat Presidents and created the precedent as to when the President could use power. This strike is in full compliance with that guidance. The guidance is very simple. No. 1, if the President is going to take action, it must, No. 1, be in the national interest and, No. 2, be limited in nature, scope, and duration. And, of course, that is further modified by the action that Congress has taken in the War Powers Act.

What this President did with this single strike was in full compliance with the constitutional statutes. Both open-source reporting and the classified briefing we received demonstrated this was a brilliant tactical move, which was brilliantly planned and executed after in-depth conversations with the intelligence community and the talented array of Presidential advisers that President Trump has.

My colleague on the other side of the aisle should do what we on our side of the aisle have been doing, and that is congratulate the President and the brave men and women who conceived and executed this spectacularly successful event and thank them and recognize that this ended the conflict between Israel and Iran.

Instead what we have seen is an attempt in every way to denigrate the action, downplay it, and berate this great and glorious victory. This resolution we have before us today is another sad attempt in that regard.

I understand that the hate and vitriol against our President precipitates this kind of thinking. It is wrong. This is ill-conceived and will telegraph that we Americans do not stand with our President or with Israel. That is also wrong.

Make no mistake, Iran is all alone in this. No one is coming to help them. This body, above all, should not be the entity that provides aid and comfort to Iran.

I urge a ``no'' vote.

I yield the floor.

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, I come to the floor today to oppose the two resolutions we are about to vote on. What they are is they have to do with arms sales to Qatar and UAE.

These flawed resolutions aren't really about arms sales to our allies in Qatar and UAE. If they were, the discussion would be about how Qatar is one of our designated, major non-NATO allies, how it hosts the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East, and how it is our 12th largest foreign military sales customer. It would be about how the UAE has fought alongside the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, is a participant in the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, and is working against Iran and its terror proxies. The debate would mention that the UAE was the first Arab state to join the Abraham Accords when it normalized relations with Israel in 2020. The discussion would be about how these proposed sales will support the national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of two allies that continue to be important forces for stability in the Middle East. We would talk about how these agreements will lay the foundation for investment, innovation, and good-paying U.S. jobs that will boost our economy.

But, no, these joint resolutions do not conduct oversight or provide congressional disapproval. Instead, they make arms sales to some of our closest allies in the Middle East about partisan politics. As such, I would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and I object to the resolutions and urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. President, I yield back all time and request to proceed to the vote.

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, the Committee on Foreign Relations has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 119th Congress. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Senator Shaheen, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the Committee rules be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today, I rise to celebrate National DRAM Day and recognize the historic invention of dynamic random access memory, DRAM. Patented by Dr. Robert Dennard on June 4, 1968, DRAM revolutionized computing and shaped the digital age.

Today, DRAM is an essential component of cutting-edge technologies, such as artificial intelligence, and in everyday devices--from personal computers to cell phones. This groundbreaking American invention spurred innovation across industries, including defense and manufacturing, strengthening our Nation's global leadership in advanced technology. Furthermore, DRAM has led to the development of critical devices that have improved Americans' access to technology, enhanced our quality of life, and created millions of high-paying jobs, including many in my home State of Idaho.

In the 57 years since this remarkable achievement, DRAM has become a cornerstone of the U.S. economy. The semiconductor industry contributes $246.4 billion to the Nation's GDP and employs over 300,000 people across various roles, like chip design, electronic automation, and manufacturing. DRAM is also a vital asset to America's national security. Every fighter jet, missile defense system, and intelligence operation depends upon the reliable, secure, domestically produced memory technology inspired by Dr. Dennard's original invention.

As we celebrate National DRAM Day, we recognize the work of Dr. Dennard as well as the engineers, manufacturers, and researchers who continue to advance this critical technology. Their efforts have enhanced our technology, fueled our economy, and bolstered national security. I applaud their successes and commitment to advancing America's leadership in technology.