Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the previous order with respect to the Westercamp nomination be modified so that the confirmation vote may occur notwithstanding rule XXII and with all other provisions remaining in effect.

Mr. President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, July 20; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; further, that at 5:30 p.m. the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Flowers nomination and the cloture motion filed today ripen at that time.

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

Mr. President, Americans tend to trust Republicans more than Democrats when it comes to national security. And, boy oh boy, do Democrats seem determined to demonstrate why that is the case.

Yesterday afternoon, Democrats voted against the National Defense Authorization Act, the annual bill that authorizes spending for our Nation's defense. Their ostensible excuse was the conflict in Iran.

Well, in case they were operating under a misconception, I am happy to tell them that this year's National Defense Authorization Act is not an Iran funding supplemental. It is the annual--annual--legislation authorizing the basic needs of our military and the basic needs of our men and women in uniform, needs that exist no matter what is happening in Iran.

Let's just talk about what the Democrats voted against yesterday. They voted against a pay increase for our troops. They voted against quality-of-life improvements for our troops. They voted against the reform of the Pentagon's acquisition process.

They voted against funding for unmanned systems like drones and counter-drone measures, an essential--essential--security need in this day and age. They voted against shipbuilding efforts to strengthen our naval fleet. They voted against measures to maintain our Nation's airpower. They voted against including 38 of their own amendments. I could go on here, but you get the point.

Once again, Democrats are playing fast and loose with our Nation's security. I say ``once again'' because Democrats have been playing fast and loose with our Nation's security all year.

First, there was their recordbreaking full government shutdown last fall, which affected our military and all of our Nation's security Agencies, to say nothing of the impact that it had on air travel.

Then there was their recordbreaking shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, which lasted a staggering 76 days.

Then, after that, Democrats refused to reauthorize a critical intelligence-gathering tool, which the Democrat leader himself has described as ``a very important tool for ensuring our national security.''

And now they have blocked the Senate from considering the National Defense Authorization Act. And who knows what is next?

In either a fit of self-delusion or an attempt to distract from their actions, Democrats are trying to peddle the narrative that somehow they can't agree to anything because Republicans are trying to make things partisan. That is right. Well, let me spend just a minute correcting the record here.

The National Defense Authorization Act the Democrats voted against yesterday? Bipartisan. That is right. The National Defense Authorization Act is bipartisan legislation. Four Democrats voted for the bill--for the bill--at the committee markup.

Democrats' recordbreaking full government shutdown in the fall? Well, that was because they wouldn't accept a nonpartisan, short-term, clean government funding extension to allow bipartisan negotiations to continue.

The Democrats' recordbreaking Department of Homeland Security shutdown? Well, that was also because Democrats couldn't take yes for an answer.

Democrats and Republicans had agreed on a bipartisan DHS funding bill. Democrats reneged on that agreement because they wanted to negotiate for more, and Republicans said yes to negotiation.

And then Democrats shut down the Department anyway, even though Republicans were willing to negotiate further--even though the White House repeatedly offered a robust package of reforms.

So as I said, I don't know whether it is self-delusion or deliberate deception, but I have heard few things more ludicrous than Democrats' narrative that they can't agree to legislation because Republicans are being partisan.

Here are the facts: Democrats can't bring themselves to authorize funding for our Nation's security, whether that is security at our border, funding for our military, or paychecks for our troops. It doesn't matter how bipartisan the bill is; Democrats can't bring themselves to support our Nation's security.

Is it politics? Do Democrats think that voting against our national defense and our Nation's military will gain them points with their base or do they simply think they can afford to ignore our Nation's defense needs until some hostile actor takes advantage of our weakness?

I don't know, but I do know that our Nation is less safe because of Democrats' actions.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I understand that there are four bills at the desk due for a second reading en bloc.

In order to place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceedings en bloc.

Mr. President, before I begin my remarks this morning, I want to offer a word of welcome to the new Senator from South Carolina.

Later today, we will swear in Darline Graham to fill the seat of her brother and our friend Lindsey Graham. I know Darline will carry on Lindsey's tireless service for South Carolina, and I look forward to serving with her.

Mr. President, like many of us, I represent a State with a rich heritage of military service, and South Dakota continues to punch above its weight in our Armed Forces.

Our National Guard is frequently called up for critical deployments at home and around the world, and Ellsworth Air Force Base is a key asset to our national defense. In fact, today Ellsworth is the largest construction site in the Air Force as it prepares to host the first B- 21 bombers next year.

During the recent State work period, I was glad to welcome Air Force Secretary Troy Meink--a South Dakota native--to Ellsworth. We met with the base leadership and some of the airmen stationed there, and we saw the progress the base is making as it prepares for its important new mission.

Whether responding to a natural disaster at home or fighting our enemies abroad, the men and women in America's Armed Forces stand ready to answer the call.

They are our most important national security asset, and we have an obligation here in Congress to ensure that they have everything they need for whatever the mission may be. I know Senators on both sides of the aisle take that obligation seriously, and we must.

As I have said so often before, if you don't get national security right, the rest is just conversation.

If we don't make national security a priority here, we run the risk that Americans serving in uniform won't have what they need when they need it.

That is why the National Defense Authorization Act is one of the most important bills that we do each year. It is the bill that helps ensure our military is ready today and prepared for tomorrow, and I am proud that our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee--with the leadership of Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Reed--have reported out a strong National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2027.

For the 66th year in a row, the Armed Services Committee has produced a bipartisan NDAA. And later today, we are going to have a vote to proceed to this important bill.

We have had regular reminders over the last few years that we live in a dangerous world, that America still has enemies--enemies that want to attack us, our allies, and our interests. We have seen too how quickly warfare evolves in this day and age.

This year's NDAA will not only help ensure that America can keep pace with those challenges but also that we can outpace our adversaries.

It puts a heavy emphasis on unmanned systems, especially drones and counterdrone measures. It also continues shipbuilding efforts to strengthen our naval fleet.

As for our airpower, this year's bill will help ensure we maintain a force of at least 1,800 fighters and supports the new B-21 long-range strategic bomber.

There is a lot I could talk about in this bill--from investing in our nuclear deterrent to supporting munitions production--but I will mention just two more important aspects of this year's bill.

First, it builds on efforts in last year's NDAA to reform defense acquisition. That includes allowing multiyear procurement contracts that allow the Pentagon to do business more efficiently with greater predictability and savings for taxpayers.

I need to mention what this bill does for the men and women serving our country and their families who serve alongside them. This year's NDAA supports a 3.6 percent pay raise for our troops, and it invests in a number of quality-of-life improvements for them and their families: investments in education, housing, healthcare, and childcare.

Our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee have put forward a strong bill--a strong bill for our national security and for the men and women who defend our Nation. It is my hope that we will be able to pass this bill out of the Senate soon and begin the process of working with our counterparts in the House and with the White House on a final bill.

Republicans are ready to go. The question is: How will Democrats vote today? Are there enough Democrat Senators who support moving forward with a bipartisan--bipartisan--defense bill?

I see no reason that there shouldn't be. But then again, Democrats have allowed the politics of obstruction to determine so many of their actions for the last year and a half.

I certainly hope that Democrats won't now put politics ahead of support for our men and women in uniform, but that is up to them.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I enter a motion to reconsider.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 436, S. 4784.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 738.

Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor today with a heavy heart. I look to my right, and I see a desk which we in the Senate refer to and know as the John Calhoun desk. It is covered by a black shroud, and on top of that shroud is a bowl of white roses. That is Lindsey Graham's desk.

It is difficult to believe that Lindsey Graham is no longer here with us, that we won't run into him at a meeting today or share a joke with him at this afternoon's vote.

The halls of the Senate already feel empty without him, and I know I am not alone in that feeling. He was a friend to so many of us on both sides of the aisle. I know that I am not the only one who finds it difficult to imagine the Senate without Lindsey Graham.

The events of Lindsey's life have been well-documented over the past couple of days: his humble beginnings in South Carolina; sharing a single room with the rest of his family, behind his family's bar; his guardianship of his younger sister Darline after the untimely death of their parents; his long service in the Air Force, the South Carolina Air National Guard, and the Air Force Reserve; his career in politics, first as a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives, then as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, where I served with him for 6 years, and then in the Senate, where he was just completing his fourth term.

In the Senate, Lindsey distinguished himself as a staunch conservative--and a fierce advocate for South Carolina--but also as someone who was willing to work across the aisle to find common ground and to reach solutions.

A lawyer by trade, he served as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee from 2019 to 2021, where he helped confirm a Supreme Court Justice and numerous Federal judges--the kind of judges who believe in following the law and the Constitution, instead of legislating policy from the bench.

Most of all, of course, Lindsey was known for his national security and foreign policy work. There was no bigger believer in America's role in the world. He was confident that the United States could be a force for good, and he gave everything he had to ensuring that we would be.

He was a friend and defender of freedom-loving peoples all over the world. He stood with the Ukrainian people in their fight against Russian aggression, and he died with his boots on, having just returned from a trip to Ukraine, his 10th.

He believed fiercely in the importance of a strong national defense-- in ensuring that our country and our military men and women were always prepared to deter and defeat any threat.

But while there was always a lot made of his support for American hard power, he was also a big believer in the use of soft power: economic, diplomatic, and political solutions to the world's problems.

I was fortunate to travel with him all over the world, including to Israel after Hamas' October 7 attack. And I saw firsthand the work that he did to promote American security and the security of freedom-loving peoples around the globe.

And, of course, I don't need to tell anyone in this body that Lindsey was fearless in his commitment to the causes that he espoused. It didn't matter to him whether he would catch flack on an issue. He was undaunted by the politics if he believed he was right on the principle.

Senator, warrior, patriot, statesman--words that will be written about Lindsey. But for me, most of all, he was my friend. ``Without friends''--Aristotle said--``no one would choose to live, [although] he had all other goods.''

And it is difficult to count the ways in which Lindsey's friendship made this job richer and its burdens lighter. Lindsey was as loyal as they come and a trusted adviser. I could always rely on him for straight-talking advice. He never minced words or pulled punches. I could also rely on him for a steady flow of humor and encouragement. He always could make me laugh--always.

In the last couple of years, he came to South Dakota twice, and, twice, we sat on the deck and watched the sun go down on Lake Oahe--a familiar scene to me but new to him.

And as the stars came out, you could see the Milky Way overhead, and you could hear coyotes howling and rooster pheasants cackling down below.

Lindsey's wit punctuated all of it, and I will cherish those memories for a long time to come.

If there is any light to be found in this grief, it is this: that as a Christian like Lindsey, I know that death is not the end. The Apostle Paul writes:

Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed

about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve

like the rest of mankind, who have no hope. For we believe

that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God

will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.

Whereas another Graham once put it:

Someday you will read or hear that Billy Graham is dead.

Don't you believe a word of it. I shall be more alive than I

am now. I will just have changed my address. I will have gone

into the presence of God.

I will miss Lindsey's friendship more than I can say. We pray for his staff and for his family, whom he loved dearly and who loved him dearly in return.

But I am comforted by the knowledge that in the end, he has just changed his address and that one day we will laugh together again.

I yield the floor.