Floor Statements

Mr. President, I come to the floor this evening on behalf of the more than 1 million people who are serving this country and who rely on this Senate to put national security ahead of policy disagreements.

With the overturning of Roe v. Wade, millions of Americans, including tens of thousands of U.S. servicemembers, lost access to reproductive care overnight. And I would just remind us all that the military relies on almost 18 percent of its makeup on women. Most of those women are of reproductive age.

Since the Dobbs decision, more and more States have put in place prohibitions on reproductive care--care that was previously the right of all Americans. Now, according to a recent RAND Corporation study, at least 46 percent of female servicemembers no longer have unrestricted access to care.

Now, as we all know, servicemembers and their families are stationed based not on the needs of themselves and their families--so not personal preference--but based on the needs of the Nation. And their sacrifice and commitment to serve means that they are uniquely affected by the restrictive healthcare laws that have come into effect in the post-Roe era.

To address the harm that these healthcare prohibitions have on servicemembers and military families, the Secretary of Defense issued commonsense guidance that protects the readiness of the force and family. And it is guidance that, I will remind everybody, the Secretary of Defense is legally empowered to issue and implement and, as Senator King so rightly pointed out, that has been in place for male members of our military for years, as long as we remember.

But the senior Senator from Alabama has chosen to break with precedent, to break with the decorum of this Chamber, and to hold 273 noncontroversial military nominations just because he disagrees--he personally disagrees--with this policy. And as Senator King and Senator Reed so eloquently pointed out, our servicemembers should not be used as bargaining chips in policy debates.

Senator Tuberville's actions are jeopardizing our national security; they are harming military families; and they are causing a whole generation of senior military leaders to question whether they want to stay in the military.

Worst of all, the Senator from Alabama knows exactly what the impact is of these holds because he serves with all of us on the Armed Services Committee. So he can't say this is not having an impact. He is hearing, as part of the committee, what the impact is. He knows that the unprecedented nature of his actions and the grave harm they pose to our country and the military are real.

For those who don't sit on the Armed Services Committee, I want to highlight some of the most grievous consequences of Senator Tuberville's actions.

Military families are not able to enroll their children into new schools on time. So we have a whole group of families with young children who--during the summertime would be the time they would be moving. They would be looking to get their children into new schools, and they are on hold.

Military spouses can't go to the next assignment and find a job.

What is particularly concerning for many of these families is that servicemembers are paid less than what they have earned. Just to give you some idea, 22 officers who have been selected for their first star will have to assume the duties of the higher grade while serving as a field grade officer, not a flag officer, and these officers are losing about $2,600 a month through no fault of their own. The last time I talked to members of our military, they weren't making enough money to be able to sacrifice an additional $2,600 a month. Twenty officers selected to the grade of O-8 are two stars. They will assume the duties of the higher grade while remaining in their current grade, and these officers are losing nearly $2,000 a month while this blockade continues.

Contrary to the misinformation that the Senator from Alabama has said on this floor, there will be no backpay for these officers. Their pay is tied to their rank, which is tied to their appointment to that rank, and that can't occur until the Senate provides its consent. They ought to be charging Senator Tuberville for this additional money they are losing because it is on his back, these additional costs that families are incurring.

Some of our most critical national security positions, like the Commandant of the Marine Corps, are also unfilled, and this comes at a time when we know that Russia is waging war in Europe and the People's Republic of China continues to threaten our interests across the globe.

What is so incredibly hard to understand is that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle I know are concerned about the PRC and the influence of China. Yet they are not willing to call their colleague out for what he is doing that provides a real opportunity for the PRC. With every vacancy in our ranks, our adversaries are gaining an advantage over us.

These holds affect real people who have dedicated their lives to preserving our freedoms in this country. Those people who are affected have earned more than being used as political pawns.

I want to take just a moment because we are here tonight to talk about those 273 officers who are being held up. I want to talk about some of those really incredible individuals whom the senior Senator from Alabama is blocking.

The first is a colonel whom I met when I went to Lithuania for the NATO summit. We went up to the base in Lithuania, Pabrade, and the Deputy Commander of EUCOM pointed out that COL Kareem Montague, who is currently the Deputy Commander of the 4th Infantry Division out of Fort Carson, who is deployed temporarily to Lithuania, was one of those general officers whose promotions are on hold.

The colonel has 28 years of service. He has been Executive Officer to the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army. He has been the Commander of the 5th Battlefield Coordination Detachment of U.S. Army Pacific, Joint Base Pearl Harbor, in Hickam, HI. He has been the Commander of the 1st Battalion, 321st Airborne Field Artillery Regiment, 18th Fires Brigade, 82nd Airborne, out of Fort Bragg. He has earned the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star, and the Defense Meritorious Service Medals. The colonel doesn't deserve to be held up because the Senator from Alabama has a personal beef with Secretary Austin's policy.

Then we have eight officers from the Marine Corps who have been nominated to the rank of brigadier general. The first is Col. David Everly. He is currently serving as Chief of Staff of the II Marine Expeditionary Force. He has 28 years of service. He has been the Chief of Staff to the 2d Marine Expeditionary Brigade. He has been the Commanding Officer of Command Element, 2d Marine Expeditionary Brigade. He has been the Commanding Officer of the Basic School Training Command. He has multiple combat and contingency operation deployments. He has received the Defense Superior Service Medal and the Bronze Star Medal. Colonel Everly doesn't deserve to be held up.

Neither does Col. Kelvin Gallman, also in the Marine Corps, currently serving as Senior Military Adviser to the Secretary of the Navy. He has 29 years of service. He has been the Division Chief, Deputy Division Chief, Joint Capabilities Division, J-8, Joint Staff. He has been Commanding Officer of Personnel Support Detachment. He has multiple combat and contingency deployments, and he has received the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit Medal, and the Bronze Star.

Col. Adolfo Garcia, also with the Marine Corps, is currently serving as the House Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs. Some of us may have run into him in that capacity. He has 30 years of service in. He has been the Military Secretary to the Commandant of the Marine Corps. He has been the Assistant Chief of Staff to I Marine Expeditionary Force, the Commanding Officer of the 14th Marine Regiment, 4th Marine Division. He has multiple combat tours. He has earned the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star, and the Defense Meritorious Service Medal. Again, he is on hold.

Then there is Col. Matt Good. Many of us know Colonel Good because we traveled with him because most recently he served as Director, Senate Liaison, Office of Legislative Affairs. I can tell you, having taken a number of trips with Colonel Good, what a great job he does, how committed he is, how committed he is to this Chamber, to the people serving in the Senate. To have Senator Tuberville do to Colonel Good and all of these members what he is doing is just unconscionable. Colonel Good has 27 years of service. He has been the Commanding Officer of the 7th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, and commanding officer of the 3d Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 1st Marine Division. He has been Chief of Plans and Chief of the Security Cooperation Division of Joint Task Force North, U.S. Northern Command. He has had multiple combat and contingency deployments. He has earned the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star, and the Defense Meritorious Service Medal.

Like all of these marines, like all of the people we are talking about today, they have stellar records of serving this country, and what does Senator Tuberville do to them? He puts their nominations on hold. He denies them funding. He denies them the ability to get on with their lives.

Col. Trevor Hall, U.S. Marine Corps, is currently serving as Chief of Staff to the Marine Corps Forces Command. He has 29 years of service. He was Commanding Officer for the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit; Branch Chief, Trans-regional synchronization, U.S. Special Operations Command; Commanding Officer, Division Training Officer, 3d Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment, 2d Marine Division. He has multiple combat and contingency deployments. He earned the Legion of Merit Medal, the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, and the Meritorious Service Medal.

Col. Richard Joyce, also in the Marine Corps, is currently serving as Commanding Officer, Marine Aircraft Group 29, 2d Marine Aircraft Wing, with 28 years of service. He has been the Branch Head of the Expeditionary Air Warfare N98, Office of Chief Naval Operations; Commanding Officer, Special Projects Officer, Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadron 469, Marine Aircraft Group 39, 3d Marine Aircraft Wing. He has had multiple combat and contingency deployments. He has received the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, and the Distinguished Flying Cross.

Col. Omar Randall--also U.S. Marine Corps--is currently serving as Director of Logistics, Combat Element Integration Division, Combat Development and Integration. He has 27 years of service. He has been the Branch Head, Futures Branch, Installations and Logistics, Headquarters Marine Corps; Commanding Officer of Combat Logistics Regiment 37, 3d Marine Logistics Group. He has had multiple combat and contingency deployments. He has earned the Legion of Merit, the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, and the Meritorious Service Medal.

Then there is Col. Robert Weiler from the U.S. Marine Corps, who is currently serving as Military Secretary to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, with 28 years of service. He has been the Commanding Officer of the 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division; Director of Inspections; Commanding Officer of the 2d Battalion, 4th Marines; Senior Military Adviser, Force Development, Office of the Secretary of Defense--Policy. He has had multiple combat and contingency deployments. He received a Purple Heart, a Silver Star, and a Legion of Merit. Senator Tuberville wants to hold up his promotion.

Then I want to cite two people from the Navy who have been nominated for appointments to the grade of rear admiral.

The first is CAPT Brian Anderson, who is currently serving as Assistant Commander, Supply Chain Policy and Management, Naval Supply Systems Command in Mechanicsburg, PA. He has 28 years of service. He has been the Assistant Chief of Staff for Force Logistics Naval Air Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet, San Diego; Chief, Current Operations-Joint Operations Officer; deployed to CENTCOM AOR, Camp African, Kuwait; and Pakistan Liaison Officer. He has been assigned to the Defense Logistics Agency in Fort Belvoir. He earned the Legion of Merit and the Meritorious Service Medal.

Then there is CAPT Julie Mary Treanor. She is currently serving as Chief of Staff in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, with 29 years of service. She has been Commanding Officer of Naval Supply Systems Command Fleet Logistics Center in Norfolk; Naval Sea Systems Command, Director of Industrial Supply Operations, Naval Sea Systems. She also earned the Legion of Merit and the Meritorious Service Medal.

Both Captains Treanor and Anderson have been nominated to the grade of rear admiral. Yet Senator Tuberville has them on hold.

I am going to stop with that list. We have a lot of folks on the floor. We are going to continue to pick up the names of the people who are on hold.

But simply put, it is not acceptable to turn policy disputes into political brinksmanship when it comes to our servicemembers. As we have all said, we are happy to debate our colleagues on policy any day of the week, but that is not what we are doing. Instead, what we have is the senior Senator from Alabama singlehandedly holding military promotions hostage, using our servicemembers as political bargaining chips for his own benefit. His actions undermine our military's greatest strength--our people.

When he is asked about it, he says: Oh, it is playing really well at home.

Well, that is not what this is about. This is about making sure that we treat those people who serve in our military the way we ought to be treating them and that we defend our Nation and trust those folks who serve to make their own decisions about their own healthcare, just as I believe our constituents sent us to Washington to debate policy defenses, not to threaten the health and safety and welfare of those in uniform or to hold our security interests hostage.

So I hope that Senator Tuberville will hear us tonight, that he will let these qualified military officers get back to their work of defending the American people.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor the city of Portsmouth, NH, on the 400th anniversary of its first European settlement.

Historians trace Portsmouth's earliest New World beginnings to the 1623 arrival of David Thomson. With a 6,000-acre land patent in hand from the Council for New England, David and his wife Amias Cole Thomson stepped ashore and constructed a settlement known as Pannaway Plantation. The name is thought to mean ``place where the water spreads out'' in the language of the Abenaki, one of the many Tribes that inhabited, hunted, and farmed the land and fished local waters long before the Thomsons arrived in Little Harbor. Pannaway found success as a fishing outpost; however, the Thomsons and their crew left for another settlement in Boston Harbor just a few short years later. A new group of settlers directed by Captain John Mason and led by Captain Walter Neale would return in 1630 and establish a colony along the Piscataqua River known as Strawbery Banke. The port facilitated trade that served fishing, lumber, and shipbuilding interests. It was officially incorporated as the town of Portsmouth in 1653, an homage to the English town in Hampshire County where Captain Mason lived.

In these early years, Portsmouth rose to prominence as a major center for commerce and government. It was the colonial capital of New Hampshire, and its dwellings housed wealthy merchants as well as hunters, trappers, fishermen, shipbuilders, and other skilled crafters. Portsmouth also played a pivotal role in our country's fight for independence. Four months before shots were fired in Lexington and Concord, a group of local men captured Fort William and Mary, a military post that guarded access to the waters of Portsmouth Harbor and the Piscataqua River, and distributed its gunpowder to towns around the colony. Many historians consider the raid as one of the first acts of overt defiance in the American Revolution.

The new Nation also relied on Portsmouth's expertise in shipbuilding to build vessels for the Continental Navy. Captain John Paul Jones lived in Portsmouth while supervising construction of the USS Ranger. The first ship to fly the American flag into battle, the USS Raleigh was built on nearby Badger's Island. The Raleigh is proudly depicted on New Hampshire's State flag and the Great Seal of the State of New Hampshire.

The area's rich heritage of shipbuilding as well as the deep, ice- free waters of Portsmouth Harbor made it an ideal location for a Federal navy yard. In 1800, President John Adams established the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. It is the U.S. Navy's oldest continuously operating shipyard in the country, and its current workforce is responsible for overhauling and repairing America's modern submarine fleet. In the early 20th century, the shipyard and the city welcomed delegates from Russia and Japan to negotiate an end to the countries' year-and-a-half-long conflict. They arrived in Portsmouth in August 1905 at the suggestion of President Theodore Roosevelt, who received a Nobel Prize for his efforts to broker an end to the Russo-Japanese War. In Portsmouth, President Roosevelt could count on both the naval shipyard to observe diplomatic protocols and the people of the city to act as gracious hosts to both delegations. The friendly, relaxed environment proved conducive to securing the first international treaty to be signed on U.S. soil and an agreement that set the tone for Pacific relations in the century to follow.

Portsmouth has witnessed so much since its first European settlement, and city residents understand the social, cultural, and economic benefits of preserving and celebrating this history. Its charming downtown retains and blends four centuries of unique buildings, architecture, landmarks, and community spaces, including the 1695 Sherburne House at Strawbery Banke Museum, the 1716 Warner House, the 1784 Governor John Langdon House, the 1855 reconstruction of the iconic North Church, the 1878 rebuilding of the Music Hall, and 1954 creation of Prescott Park. Efforts to sustain these treasures and more have positioned the city as a popular heritage tourism destination with a thriving arts and culture scene, boutique shops, and a variety of local restaurants and cafes. They have also reinvigorated a sense of community among Portsmouth residents by bringing to light their shared history and the city's distinct local character.

Within these efforts, city residents devote special attention to giving voice to the generations of people who contributed to Portsmouth's long, complex story with little or no recognition in previous town histories. They carefully consider and pay respect to the Native Tribes--the Abenaki, the Pennacook, the Wabanaki peoples, and more--who inhabited the area for thousands of years prior to European contact. Local museums share the experiences and perspectives of immigrants across the centuries who were drawn to Portsmouth with prospects for a better life. The city is home to the Black Heritage Trail of New Hampshire, an organization that strives to build communities that are more inclusive by promoting awareness and appreciation of African-American history, as well as the Portsmouth African Burying Ground. After years of discussion and deliberation by a city-organized committee, the 18th

century gravesite was rededicated in 2015 as a park titled ``We Stand In Honor of Those Forgotten.'' The site is now a sobering memorial that encourages reflection on the full, unvarnished history of the region.

Around the 300th anniversary of its first European settlement, the city of Portsmouth worked alongside the local chamber of commerce to create a new slogan that would attract new industry and accentuate the high quality of life for residents of the community. They settled on ``The City of the Open Door,'' an expression that conveys optimism and invites people of every faith, every culture, and every background to the city to help write the next memorable chapter of Portsmouth's long and impressive story. City residents continue to exemplify this ethos a full century later. I congratulate the city of Portsmouth on this important milestone and wish the community all the best as it celebrates its past and looks forward to its bright future.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor the city of Dover, NH, on the 400th anniversary of its first settlement.

In 1623, brothers Edward and William Hilton, two fishmongers from London, sailed up the Piscataqua River and set up their Cochecho Plantation near Pomeroy Cove. The name of the settlement changed in the early years, first to Bristol, then to Dover, then to Northam, then back to Dover. But the settlers remained, which leads many historians to contend that Dover is the oldest continuously settled city or town in New Hampshire. It is also among the oldest cities in all of the United States.

The city of Dover's nickname, The Garrison City, has its roots in these early years. Its settlers took advantage of the area's abundant forestlands to fell trees for use in heavily fortified houses called ``garrisons.'' Made with sturdy logs and slits in the walls for rifles and muskets, these structures provided protection and a sense of security in cases of emergency or attack. Most of Dover's garrisons were destroyed in the late 1600s, but modern day residents and visitors can see for themselves the intact Damm Garrison at the local Woodman Museum. It is a symbol of the common threads of resilience, grit, and solidarity that are woven into the long and proud history of Dover.

The city of Dover has hosted many thriving industries over the past four centuries, including agriculture and shipbuilding in the 1700s and brickmaking in the 1800s. Yet anyone who takes a short stroll down Central Avenue can see the remnants of an industry that catapulted Dover to national prominence in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Textile manufacturers used the currents of the Cochecho River to power a sprawling mill complex that at one time employed over 2,000 workers. The Cocheco Manufacturing Company, its name the product of a clerical misspelling on incorporation documents, was one of the leading national producers of printed cotton and generated millions of yards of textiles annually. In 1828, it was the site of the first all-women strike in the United States when hundreds of ``mill girls'' marched off the job and through city streets in protest of meager wages. The nearby Sawyer Woolen Mills on the Bellamy

River also grew into the largest manufacturer of woolens in all of New Hampshire. Like many textile manufacturing giants of the Northeast, these enterprises closed their operations in the mid-1900s. Their expansive brick buildings sat dormant for years; however, city leaders have worked tirelessly in recent decades to repurpose them for modern use. They are now home to the Children's Museum of New Hampshire, restaurants, barbershops, toy stores, candy stores, small businesses, and apartments. They are once again the focal point of a vibrant downtown.

Throughout these many changes, challenges, and opportunities, Dover residents have remained determined to write their own distinct chapters in our American story. Many notable Granite Staters have called Dover home, including several Olympic athletes like swimmer Jenny Thompson and the first woman to be accepted into the bar and run for Governor of New Hampshire, Marilla Ricker. Many more are responsible for creating and sustaining a community that embodies the quintessential small town in New Hampshire, one bound together by nature, history, and--most important--its people.

My husband is a native of Dover, and we raised our family in the neighboring town of Madbury. We have always felt so welcomed by the city and its residents, and we look forward to joining our friends and neighbors in celebration of the Garrison City's 400th anniversary. I congratulate the city of Dover on this important milestone and wish the community all the best in its future endeavors.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to support the nomination of Ambassador Elizabeth Richard to be Coordinator for Counterterrorism.

Ambassador Richard is an eminently qualified candidate to lead the State Department's Bureau of Counterterrorism, and it is well past time that we confirm her nomination. Having already served our country as U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon, Ambassador Richard is deeply familiar with the geostrategic and counterterrorism issues facing the Middle East.

Throughout her career, she has worked across the region to advance U.S. national security interests and support the safety of the American people. That is why I believe she is exceptionally qualified to serve as the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, and it is a role that needs to be filled urgently.

The counterterrorism challenges that we currently face and could face in the future are crystalized in the detention and displaced person camps in Syria. Mingled together in camps across northeastern Syria are an estimated 12,000 suspected ISIS fighters and 60,000 women and children who have possible ISIS affiliation. The humanitarian conditions in those detainee camps are dire. And compounding the pressure of ISIS extremists are inadequate medical facilities, insufficient sanitation, and lack of access to schooling.

Last fall, the Syrian Democratic Forces, supported by U.S. troops, completed the 24-day security operation which yielded 300 ISIS operative terrorists and freed 6 women from slavery.

This is a crisis waiting to happen.

I have heard very directly from General Kurilla, who is the head of CENTCOM, about his concerns at the detainee camps. This is another reason why we urgently need a senior official in place to lead the U.S. Government's efforts to work toward closing the camps, to address the humanitarian and security concerns in the camps, and to coalesce the international support that is needed to achieve the enduring defeat of

Mr. President, I am very disappointed that Senator Cruz continues to hold up a nomination that is so critical to our national security.

We need a counterterrorism coordinator in place. We need that to ensure that the complex issues that require a whole-of-government approach have the attention and focus that are needed to advance U.S. policy and to protect this country.

This isn't a partisan issue. As you pointed out, I voted with the majority to condemn Soleimani and to support the strike that took him out. But we have been without a Senate-confirmed coordinator for over 2 years, and it is past time that we confirm Ambassador Richard.

I think my colleague is punishing Ambassador Richard, who served for most of her tenure under a Republican administration, under former President Trump. So if you didn't agree with what she was doing, that was the Trump administration that was in place during most of her years.

I am very familiar with the tragic case of Amer Fakhoury, who was a constituent of mine, and his family I still continue to be in touch with. I worked very hard with his family, with Robert O'Brien, the National Security Advisor under the Trump administration, and I appreciated Senator Cruz's help on that sanctions legislation. But I don't remember Senator Cruz on all of those calls we had almost weekly with Ambassador Richard to talk about what else we might be able to do to be able to free Amer Fakhoury.

It is a tragic case, but punishing a former ambassador for U.S. policy in Lebanon is not the way to empower future diplomats to do what we need to have them do. It is ensuring that they get into their position and that they support the policies.

I am afraid that your opposition--just like all of the opposition that we are hearing from our colleague Senator Tuberville on the military promotions and that we are hearing from our colleague J.D. Vance on holding up judicial appointments--is going to have a chilling effect on the ability of our diplomats to do what they need to do.

In fact, on Ambassador Richard's watch, the United States imposed more sanctions designations on Hezbollah individuals and entities than it had ever done previously.

I am just going to read some of these because I think they are telling, as you talk about how weak she was on terrorists.

In January 9, 2017, Ali Damush and Mustafa Mughniyeh were sanctioned for support for Hezbollah.

On February 3--I am going to have trouble reading all of these names--Hasan Deghan Ebrahimi, who is an IRGC official who was based in Lebanon at the time, Muhammad Farhat, Yahya al-Hajj, and several affiliated companies in Lebanon were sanctioned for operating a support network for the IRGC-QF.

On May 16, Barly Offshore, a Lebanese-based front company to support transactions from Syria, was sanctioned.

On May 19, Hashem Safieddine was sanctioned for serving as a senior leader in Hezbollah.

On November 1, the Department maintained and amended a prior designation of the Azzam Brigades as a foreign terrorist organization, citing its role in the 2014 attack in Lebanon. That was in 2017.

In 2018, on February 2, Lebanon-based Jihad Muhammad Qansu, Ali Muhammad Qansu, Issam Ahmad Saad, Nabil Mahmoud Assaf, and Iraq-based Abdul Latif Saad and Muhammad Badr-Al-Din for acting for or on behalf of Hezbollah member and financier Adham Tabaja or his company, Al-Inmaa Engineering and Contracting, were sanctioned.

On April 18, Barakat transnational criminal organization--also known as Barakat alien smuggling organization--Syria, Lebanon, United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, Venezuela, Panama, Mexico, for smuggling Syrians and Lebanese into the United States across the southwestern U.S. border.

On May 15, Qasir Muhammad--Mohammed Jaafar; AKA Fadi; AKA Gholi, Hossein; AKA Majid; AKA Salah, Shaykh--for acting on behalf of Hezbollah and working with the IRGC-QF to transfer funds.

On May 16, Hassan Nasrallah--I am sure you remember that--the secretary-general of Hezbollah, alongside Naim Qasim, Muhammad Yazbak, Husayn Al-Khalil, and Ibrahim al-Amin al-Sayyid, for their roles in Hezbollah's Shura Council, the primary decision-making body in Hezbollah, were sanctioned.

On May 17--I mean, these go on for three more pages, all of the designations of sanctions that were made during Ambassador Richard's tenure.

So I think the Senator from Texas has a different understanding of what happened in Lebanon. I don't think these are the actions of someone who is soft on Hezbollah.

But, as I said earlier, unfortunately, Ambassador Richard's nomination is not an outlier. Around the world, the United States faces reduced diplomatic influence because of partisan obstruction by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

When Ambassadors are not in place to advance U.S. interests, it is the American people who pay the price because without confirmed Ambassadors, we cannot effectively advocate on behalf of U.S. businesses that need support or advance democratic reform agendas to secure investments overseas. Without confirmed Ambassadors, we cannot advance our national security interests. Some countries refuse to speak to U.S. representatives without an ambassador in place. Without confirmed Ambassadors, we cannot effectively help detained or imprisoned Americans overseas.

Ambassador Richard did everything in her capacity to secure the release of my constituent, Mr. Fakhoury. As I said, Senator Cruz may not recognize this because he wasn't on those calls that we did with the Ambassador on a regular basis. But I can tell Senator Cruz that she did everything she could amid a challenging political environment to bring Mr. Fakhoury home.

But now, instead of confirming Ambassadors, Senator Cruz would rather prevent American diplomats from doing their jobs.

I would add one other very concerning trend about all of these Ambassadors who are on hold, and that is that so many of them are women.

At one point earlier in the administration, Senator Cruz was holding the nominations of 23 women, including those nominated to be Ambassadors to France, Spain, and NATO, as well as the heads of the Near East Affairs and Educational and Cultural Affairs Bureaus, at a time when we should be swiftly confirming our Ambassadors.

We just had a hearing in the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee, and we were talking about the challenges that we face competing with the PRC and China as we look at their Belt and Road Initiative, as we look at the money they have to spend around the world. One of the points our colleague from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, made--he quoted General Mattis, the former Secretary of Defense, who pointed out that if we don't have soft power, if we don't have these Ambassadors in place--that is my addition--then we need more bullets because we don't have the capability to do the diplomacy that deters conflict. That is why we need this nominee in place. That is why we need to move forward, and that is why we need to ensure that we protect the national security of the United States.

I am disappointed because, as my colleague points out, he and I have worked together on a number of issues around national security. So I would have hoped that he would be more supportive of getting a nominee in place who could address counterterrorism.

So, Mr. President, with that, I will yield the floor and continue to come

down to support efforts to put in place the Ambassadors we need to fight back against our adversaries around the world.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to express my excitement and support that the Senate voted to take another step closer to confirming Dr. Geeta Rao Gupta to serve as Ambassador at Large for Global Women's Issues.

Today's vote has been a long time in the making, but it moves us one step closer to ensuring that we have a functioning Office of Global Women's Issues that has a Senate-confirmed leader. This is really critical, particularly right now given what is happening around the world, because around the world, women are under attack.

In Iran, thousands of girls and young women have been the victims of chemical attacks in classrooms. We still don't know what the cause of those attacks are, but we do know who has been at risk and who has been suffering, and that is, girls and young women--girls and young women who are the future of Iran, and they are forced to go to school worrying about their safety. Their families are forced to consider if their education is worth risking their lives, and their communities are forced to reckon with a government that is unmoved by the senseless attacks on its girls.

In the Ukraine, Russian forces have used mass rape as a weapon of war in their unprovoked war on Ukraine. Children and their mothers have been reported to be sexually assaulted while their family members are forced to watch.

In Latin America, a woman is killed every 2 hours because of her gender. That is 12 women a day dying simply because they are women.

In Sudan, we see another disturbing but sadly expected pattern. Women are disproportionately affected by the conflict there. They are forced from their homes. They are forced to share their homes with soldiers. They face sexual and gender-based violence and human trafficking. As violence shutters hospitals across that country because of the civil war, roughly 219,000 pregnant women are at risk for lack of medical care.

And, of course, in Afghanistan, the situation is maybe even worse. The de facto Taliban authorities have normalized the systematic violation of the rights of women and girls, to the point that the United Nations warns that ``discriminatory denial of women and girls' fundamental human rights may amount to gender persecution, a crime against humanity.''

These horrible examples humanize the plight that women around the world are facing, but another troubling set of statistics underscores why this plight is not isolated to one country. It is a global challenge that does not stop at the border of one nation.

Thirty percent of women and girls 15 and older have experienced physical or sexual violence at the hands of a partner. The majority of the world's poor are women, who globally earn 24 percent less than men and who face some form of job restrictions--so some form of job discrimination--in 84 countries.

It is a sad reality that in 2023, there is not really a single country that has achieved gender equality. In fact, the progress of the last several decades has been set back by the COVID-19 pandemic and authoritarian trends around the world.

So Dr. Gupta, as she takes over--hopefully, once she is confirmed next week--as she takes over that Office of Global Women's Issues, she has a huge responsibility. She will head an office of smart, engaged, and dedicated staff who have devoted their careers to the rights and empowerment of women and girls.

I would be remiss today if I didn't mention Katrina Fotovat, who has served as the senior official at the Office of Global Women's Issues since January of 2021. Kat has led the Office as it implements the Biden-Harris administration's policies on women, peace, and security, countering violent extremism and promoting economic quality, and combating gender-based violence. Her leadership has been invaluable, and she exemplifies what it means to be a public servant.

For those people who question why we need an Office of Global Women's Issues to be a lens for our foreign policy, I think it is important to remind everyone that empowering women and achieving gender equality is not just a moral imperative; it is also a strategic imperative.

The evidence routinely demonstrates that women's empowerment is integral to achieving greater security and stability around the world. Simply put, those societies, those countries that empower women are more stable, and they are more likely to be democracies.

When women work--even when they make less than men for the same job-- they invest 90 percent of their income back into their families and communities. That is compared with only 35 percent for men. Closing the gender gap in education adds half a percent to a country's per capita gross national product. We have excellent data that shows that a peace agreement in conflict areas is 35 percent more likely to last at least 15 years if women participate in the development of the peace agreement.

These are tangible benefits that show that empowering women benefits whole communities, women and men alike.

We have seen that the work of the Office of Global Women's Issues has shown that change is possible. We can leave a better future for our daughters and granddaughters.

Around the world, more women are in government at all levels today than they were a generation ago, and not coincidentally, more countries are also creating laws to achieve gender equality and women's empowerment. Rates of child early and forced marriage are down, while more girls are staying in school. Clearly, the women of the world have not been cowed by violence, oppression, and inequality. They are fighting back, and they are demanding equality and equity.

In 2017, we passed the Women, Peace, and Security Act, ensuring that women's voices and participation are included in conflict resolution and decision-making processes. When I travel around the world, I have been heartened to hear about the effect of the U.S. leadership on women, peace, and security, which is an important part of the mandate of the Office of Global Women's Issues.

Our efforts to encourage the inclusion and empowerment of women are making an impact, despite the huge challenges they face on a daily basis.

Around the world, we are seeing women fighting for their rights. In Iran, women have faced down a brutal dictatorship. They have defied state-sanctioned violence to lead marches in the streets that demand justice for the senseless death of Mahsa Amini.

In Ukraine, women have taken up arms against the invading Russian force while also leading their families and communities to safety.

And across Latin America, women have demanded that their governments do more to stop the senseless gender-based violence and to hold those who commit violence accountable.

Women have long been at the forefront of the pro-democracy movement in Sudan, leading efforts to hold the military and ruling elites to account and demanding that their voices are heard.

And in Afghanistan, in the face of overwhelming odds, women are defying the Taliban's strict decrees to actively protest for their rights. They have not given up. They continue to risk beatings, detention, and death to demand their rights. Their peaceful demonstrations have been met with military force, and yet they continue to protest.

So we cannot stand idly by. These women are why we need a strong U.S. policy that supports the equality and empowerment of women. They are why we need an engaged Office of Global Women's Issues, and they are why we need to confirm Dr. Geeta Rao Gupta as Ambassador at Large as soon as we can next week so that she can take over in that critical position.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Collins and I are allowed to complete our remarks before the vote that is scheduled for 5:30.

Mr. President, I am really pleased to be able to come to the floor today with my cochair in the Diabetes Caucus and friend and colleague Senator Collins to discuss an issue that is near and dear to both of us and to the entire Diabetes Caucus, and that is what Congress can do to improve the lives of those living with this chronic disease.

More than 37 million Americans live with diabetes, and millions more are at risk for developing it. I think most people in this Chamber probably know someone who has been affected by this chronic disease, and they get a chance to see very briefly the challenges that those with diabetes face every day.

I understand those personal struggles all too well because my granddaughter Elle was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes in 2007, shortly after her 8th birthday. As a type 1 diabetic, she needs daily access to insulin. Maintaining healthy glucose levels is a worry that has kept her and her mother--her whole family--up too many nights. Without insulin, Elle would not be here because there is no alternative treatment.

There is no cure that can free her from those daily injections. Insulin truly is a lifesaving drug, and it has been for over 100 years. The 100th anniversary of insulin was 2 years ago.

When the Canadian researchers who discovered insulin realized what they had--a drug that would turn a death sentence into a manageable, chronic condition--they decided to sell the patent for $1 each.

They knew the drug they had was revolutionary, and they chose not to chase profits over the good of humankind. Unfortunately, that is not the reality that we live with today. Over the last several decades, insulin prices have skyrocketed beyond the reach of too many Americans.

I hear from far too many people about how they have to ration their needed insulin until the next paycheck or until their insurance coverage kicks in.

Let's be clear about what this means. Americans are literally risking their lives to stretch their insulin as far as possible because the costs are so great. And the cost burden is even heavier for uninsured Americans who have to pay fully out of pocket.

These costs quickly number into the thousands of dollars. The challenges

aren't new, but, fortunately, we are making some progress. Congress last year capped Medicare beneficiaries' insulin costs at $35 a month. And, recently, the three largest insulin manufacturers announced they will finally lower their list prices.

Now, Senator Collins and I have commended those manufacturers for finally taking steps to make their insulins more affordable. But until patients are given true financial security and certainty with insulin pricing, the work remains unfinished. Those manufacturers could, at any time, decide again to raise the price of insulin.

There have to be mechanisms in place to systemically address the full scope of this issue. We need to lower costs, and we need to be able to keep those costs down. Insulin costs must be addressed across the board. We must address the root causes of the high cost of insulin.

That is what brings me to the floor today, to discuss legislation that Senator Collins and I recently introduced: the Improving Needed Safeguards for Users of Lifesaving Insulin Now--or INSULIN--Act.

First, I want to thank my friend and colleague Senator Collins for her longstanding partnership and leadership. Senator Collins and I cochair the Diabetes Caucus, but it was Senator Collins who founded the caucus in 1997, years before I got here, and there is no more fearless and relentless advocate for those living with diabetes than Senator Collins.

We began working on the INSULIN Act in 2019, recognizing that without a comprehensive bill to address the root causes of skyrocketing insulin prices, patients would never have long-term relief. At that time, unfortunately, there weren't a lot of people in Congress who were advocating for comprehensive insulin pricing reforms.

Since then, more and more Members of Congress have begun pressing for insulin reform legislation. That is encouraging. And it is a message of the commitment in this Chamber to finally get something done on this issue.

I am glad the issue is finally getting the attention it deserves, because we are long past time for Congress to act. Our INSULIN Act takes an across-the-board approach to insulin pricing.

First, our bill caps insulin out-of-pocket costs at $35 or 25 percent of list price monthly. That means that a patient could see monthly costs capped for as little as $15 to $20.

And that provision, which we did for Medicare last year, was actually something that has been promoted by the diabetes community, the JDRF-- Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation--and other diabetes advocacy groups.

Second, our bill addresses one of the root causes of insulin price increases--ever-growing rebates collected by pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs. Our bill mandates that PBMs pass 100 percent of rebates negotiated on the plan sponsors. So that benefits patients by lowering premiums.

Finally, our bill takes several steps to increase biosimilar competition, which is proven to lower list prices and improve patient access to their medications.

That includes legislation that I have championed for several years, the Ensuring Timely Access to Generics Act, which is designed to prevent pharmaceutical manufacturers from gaming the FDA's citizen petition process to delay generic drug approvals.

Now, Senator Collins and I have developed what we believe is a good piece of bipartisan legislation, and it has been done in consultation with drug-pricing experts and with the diabetes advocacy community.

Since 2019, we have been working on this. Last year, we invited input from lawmakers, stakeholders, and advocates, including the members of this Chamber.

This bipartisan bill is the product of countless conversations and negotiations to produce a bill that will be the most effective in lowering costs and keeping them there. And it will entice, we believe, the broadest coalition of lawmakers to get behind it.

In particular, I want to thank the American Diabetes Association, the JDRF, and the Endocrine Society for their input and for their endorsement of our legislation.

I look forward to working with the diabetes community, with Senator Collins, and with the rest of the Members of this Chamber and Congress to finally pass this comprehensive bill to give financial relief to all Americans living with diabetes. There is no more time to waste. And I urge the HELP Committee and Senate leadership to bring this bill to the floor as soon as possible.

I yield the floor.

I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 33, H.J. Res. 7, and that at 5:45 p.m. today it be considered read a third time, and the Senate vote on passage of the joint resolution without any intervening action or debate.

PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?

Without objection, it is so ordered.

The clerk will report the joint resolution by title.

Mr. President, I now get to the reason that I came to the floor today, which is to recognize and express appreciation for a member of my staff, my legislative director, Dr. Ariel Marshall. Ariel will be leaving for a new opportunity next month, and I can't let her go without thanking her for her service and sharing how much she has meant to me, to her colleagues, and to the State of New Hampshire over the past 8 years. And all you have to do is look at all of our staff from our DC office who are here on the floor as part of this recognition of Ariel.

Ariel came to my Senate office in 2015 through a congressional fellowship for scientists and engineers with an interest in public policy. As a chemist with a Ph.D. in hand, Ariel approached policymaking as if it were a research topic or an experiment. She asked questions. She identified problems. She dove into research to understand different subjects and issue areas and their relationship to one another. She formed theories based on her observations. She looked for creative ways to test her ideas and analyze her findings, and she eagerly shared her conclusions with her colleagues and with an open mind on how the process could be improved.

With her background, it is no surprise that Ariel quickly developed a reputation as a capable and friendly team player. As her fellowship came to an end, Ariel made the decision to stay on staff as a legislative assistant with a focus on energy and environmental issues.

Her responsibilities grew in a very short time when she became a senior domestic policy adviser. And when the legislative director position opened on my team, Ariel was a natural fit, and she accepted her new leadership role with her trademark positivity, grace, and good humor.

Over the last 8 years, there have been historic moments that I know will be the cornerstone of Ariel's memories in the Senate. At the top of that list--for me, anyway--is Ariel's success in getting the Shaheen-Portman--Portman-Shaheen energy efficiency bill across the finish line and signed into law.

Her steady, unwavering efforts to move that bill forward, year after year, piece by piece, should be taught to every incoming legislative staffer in the Senate. It is a study in perseverance and effectiveness.

Her work on Shaheen-Portman--and the work of others before her--is making a huge difference in the global fight against climate change.

Ariel was also instrumental during one of the most difficult, most intense, and most important crises this body has had to face--the fight against COVID. Ariel led our legislative team at a time of great uncertainty here in the Senate. She was a key negotiator of the Senate's legislative response, including the historic CARES Act. Ariel's work on that bill, particularly on the small business provisions and the PPP program--in the midst of a nationwide pandemic and a potential economic collapse--helped to save millions of jobs around the country. Her efforts kept workers employed and food on the table for countless concerned families across this country.

Finally, Ariel was also our leading negotiator throughout the bipartisan infrastructure debate during the summer and fall of 2021. Ariel was particularly integral to both the water infrastructure and broadband investments, and she spent countless late nights--and had numerous slices of cold pizza--with me, with Senator Collins, and with the other bipartisan members of that group.

The infrastructure bill is a huge legislative achievement. It is one that will bring countless benefits to Americans for years to come. One of its most important accomplishments was proving that Republicans and Democrats could still work together to get big things done even in this difficult political climate. This would not have happened without the work of people like Ariel, who is tough, patient, effective, and focused on making a difference.

I am proud of all of the legislative work we have accomplished over these last 8 years in my office, and Ariel's leadership has been integral to these successes.

The legislation, the negotiating, the policymaking--that is just one measure of Ariel's impact. With her background in research and chemistry, Ariel knows that it is a community, or a team, that finds innovations and makes discoveries. That much is clear in her leadership of our legislative staff. She has shaped a team that approaches issues and problems just as she would: by asking the right questions, by searching for solutions, by evaluating all of the options, by getting the job done.

All who work with Ariel view her not only as a wealth of knowledge but also as a dear colleague, a sympathetic ear, and a treasured friend. The relationships she has built and the values she has instilled in her team--I think that is an equal part of her legacy and long tenure on my staff.

These last few weeks have been bittersweet because, while all of us are excited about what is ahead for Ariel, we will also miss her wisdom, her counsel, her can-do attitude, her humor, and her infectious laugh.

Thank you, Ariel, for giving so much to me, to your colleagues, to New Hampshire, and to the country during your service in the U.S. Senate.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that my Defense fellow, Quentin Miller, and my foreign policy fellow, Alicia Edwards, be given floor privileges for the remainder of the 118th Congress.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, March 29; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that following the conclusion of morning business, the Senate resume consideration of Calendar No. 25, S. 316, postcloture; further, that at 11:30 a.m., all postcloture time be considered expired, the pending amendment be withdrawn, no further amendments or motions be in order to the bill, the bill be considered read a third time, and the Senate vote on passage of S. 316; that following disposition of the bill, the Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 28, S. 870; finally, that there be 2 minutes, equally divided, prior to each rollcall vote.

For the information of the Senate, we hope to line up additional rollcall votes during Wednesday's session.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 129, submitted earlier today.

I know of no further debate on the resolution.

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