Floor Statements

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, here we are 6 months since the last foreign policy disaster into which this administration led this country, the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan: 13 servicemembers killed, including 1 from my home State of Missouri; dozens more wounded; hundreds--hundreds--of civilians killed; hundreds more, maybe thousands, of American civilians left behind enemy lines to terrorists, to fend for themselves; still hundreds of Americans stranded there in Afghanistan as we speak.

And what accountability has there been in this time? Who has been relieved of duty? Who has been shown the door? What have we learned?

The answer is there has been no accountability. No one has been relieved of duty. No one has been shown the door.

And now this administration has bumbled to the brink of another foreign policy crisis that they have helped create, having denied Ukraine military aid, lethal aid, when it asked for it last spring; having stuffed dollars in Vladimir Putin's pockets by greenlighting the Nord Stream 2 energy pipeline. And now here they are, on the verge of another foreign policy crisis, and still we have no answers, still we have no accountability.

I will say this, though. We did learn a few interesting details this week about what happened in Afghanistan. And by the way, if you think that Vladimir Putin and the other dictators around this world weren't emboldened by this administration's weakness, by their utter failure in Afghanistan, then you have got another thing coming.

But what have we learned this week about Afghanistan? What have we learned? Actually, a couple of interesting things, a number of interesting things. We learned that, in fact, the White House and the State Department were warned for months on end--months on end--that their failure to evacuate civilians would result in disaster; that the Afghan Government was on the verge of collapse. They were told over and over.

One servicemember who was in Kabul told investigators ``the writing was on the wall. The country and its government were actively collapsing,'' and ``we should not have waited [to start evacuations] until every provincial capital had fallen except for Kabul.''

Yet that is exactly what the administration did. Our top military commander in Kabul tried to get the Ambassador on the ground to see the security threat for what it was but to no avail. As one military official told investigators--we learned this week--``The Embassy needed to position for withdrawal.'' Yet they weren't doing it.

Why weren't they doing it? Why weren't civilians evacuated in a timely manner? Why wasn't the White House prepared? Because the White House wasn't taking it seriously.

According to Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Farrell Sullivan, as late as August 6, ``the National Security Council was not seriously planning for an evacuation.'' Mind you, by this point, our military presence is gone. We have withdrawn militarily from the country. Here we are in August, and the National Security Council--the White House--was not seriously planning for an evacuation.

The State Department hadn't even put a team together that was responsible for informing individuals, including American citizens, that they were eligible for evacuation or started collecting the information they would need to put those Americans on flights to safety.

And it wasn't as if the White House and the State Department didn't know better. Our top military commander on the ground in Afghanistan warned as early as March--as early as March, he has testified--that he said the security situation in Afghanistan was dire and collapse could come quickly; when the United States withdrew, collapse could come quickly. He said it in March. By July, our troops were gone. In August, the administration still hadn't started planning.

Here is what the top commander in Kabul said. He said:

I think we could have been much better prepared to conduct

a more orderly [civilian evacuation]--

That is what a NEO is--

if policy makers had paid attention to the indicators of what

was happening on the ground, and the time lines associated

with the Taliban advance, and the Taliban intent to conduct a

military takeover.

That is what we learned this week: that the White House was told over and over and over again and did nothing; in fact--worse than that-- rejected the counsel of military commanders on the ground, saying that the situation was urgent, saying that civilians needed to be evacuated, saying that there needed to be other steps taken, new measures taken. And the White House drug their feet, did nothing.

So what was the consequence of that? Well, we also learned this week that the consequence was a rapid, chaotic

rush for the exits once the White House suddenly and belatedly realized they had bumbled into a crisis--once they realized that they had left American civilians with nowhere to go, once they realized that they had a collapse on their hands that they had not planned for, despite being warned repeatedly.

As the CENTCOM found--Central Command found--and we learned this week, ``Commanders at each gate [around the airport] exercised authority to open or close their respective gates, as they deemed appropriate, according to the situation on the ground. . . . However, there was tremendous pressure from the strategic level,'' meaning the Combatant Command, the Joint Staff, and, yes, the White House, ``to continue to process and evacuate civilians to the maximum extent possible, so gate closures were done rarely, locally, and temporarily.''

In other words, it was a rush--a mad rush--to the exits once the administration realized that, in fact, the government was collapsing; realized they hadn't done the preparation they needed to do; realized that hundreds, if not thousands, of American civilians were in grave danger.

And we know the result of that. The result is 13 servicemembers were killed, hundreds of civilians were killed, and hundreds of Americans-- maybe more--were left behind to the enemy.

Now, I said we learned all this this week. You might wonder, well, where did we learn it? I mean, maybe at least we are making some progress. We are getting some accountability. We learned something.

Did we learn it in an oversight hearing before this body? Did we learn it in sworn testimony given in public on the evacuation of Afghanistan? No, no. Oh, no. We learned it from a press report. We learned it because the Washington Post obtained what were previously confidential, unpublished, nonpublic reports from within the military-- from within Central Command in particular--and the Washington Post published them.

In what has become an all-too-typical scenario, we learned nothing from any hearings this body is doing because they aren't doing any in public. What we have learned is entirely from leaked reports, secondhand sources--the public having been shut out, having been denied access.

You know, we had multiple hearings, actually--or briefings--on Afghanistan and the security situations in Ukraine last week. Did that happen in public? No. Was there testimony taken in public? No. Were there questions asked by Senators in public? No.

I am willing to come to this floor as long as it takes and insist on regular order as long as it takes until there is accountability for what this administration has done in Afghanistan and now what it is bumbling towards in Ukraine. We have got to get answers.

Why is it that commanders on the ground warn over and over that disaster is imminent and the White House does nothing? Why is it that the White House and the State Department denied a request for a civilian evacuation? Why is it that we are still here all these months later, and the only answers we can get are from leaked reports in the press? Why has not this body done its job to conduct rigorous and serious oversight hearings in public for the American people to see?

I will come to this floor and insist on regular order, insist that this body do its job and vote on Defense Department nominees until we get accountability, until there are public hearings, and until we can learn what actually happened in Afghanistan and who is responsible.

I will tell you this: I wasn't alive for Vietnam, but I am not willing to participate in the kind of coverup that happened for years in the Vietnam war. I am not willing to kick this oversight responsibility off to some Commission that won't report for years from now most of its findings, probably in a classified annex. And by that point, somebody will say: Oh, well, it is just too late to do anything about it.

The American public was lied to for years on the Vietnam war. It has been lied to for years on Afghanistan. It is time to get answers. So, yes, I will be here insisting on those answers, insisting on oversight, and insisting on accountability until we get it. Until that time, it is not too much to ask the Senate to do its job.

I believe the majority leader said just the other day that the Senate is here to vote; that is what the Senate is here to do. Well, that is an apt phrase, and for once, I agree very much with the Senate majority leader.

For those reasons, I object.

Mr. President, had I been present, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Scott A. Nathan, of Massachusetts, to be Chief Executive Officer of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation.

Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Andrew Philip Hunter, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Air Force.

Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Gabriel Camarillo, of Texas, to be Under Secretary of the Army.

Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the motion to lay before the Senate the House Message to accompany H.R. 5746.

Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted ``No'' on S. Res. 490, ``a resolution recognizing the essential work of United States Capitol personnel on the anniversary of the insurrectionist attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.''

I am grateful for the service of all Capitol personnel who come to work every day to help operate the workings of Congress and keep Members safe. However, this resolution has been written to score cheap partisan political points. It attacks Republicans for their response to COVID-19, and it contains falsehoods, such as the incorrect assertion that the riot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021 was perpetuated by ``violent insurrectionists.'' Not a single person from that day has been charged with the crime of insurrection. If we are going to honor Capitol Hill workers--and we should--we must do so in a manner that focuses on their service to their nation, not on false narratives that are meant to divide us.

I support Capitol personnel but oppose this resolution as written.

Madam President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmations of Executive Calendar No. 489, Armando O. Bonilla, of the District of Columbia, to be a Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years and No. 490, Carolyn N. Lerner, of Maryland, to be a Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.

Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 608, Adm. Christopher W. Grady, for appointment in the United States Navy to the grade indicated while assigned to a position of importance and responsibility under title 10, U.S.C., sections 154 and 601.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 239, Michele Jeanne Sison, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Secretary of State (International Organization Affairs).

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 320, Rufus Gifford, of Massachusetts, to be Chief of Protocol, and to have the rank of Ambassador.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 323, Marcela Escobari, of Massachusetts, to be an Assistant Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 440, Claire D. Cronin, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Ireland.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 442, Bathsheba Nell Crocker, of the District of Columbia, to be Representative of the United States of America to the Office of the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva, with the rank of Ambassador.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 446, Jack A. Markell, of Delaware, to be Representative of the United States of America to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, with the rank of Ambassador.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 447, Denise Campbell Bauer, of California, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the French Republic, and to serve concurrently and without additional compensation as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Principality of Monaco.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 454, Mark Gitenstein, of Washington, to be Representative of the United States of America to the European Union, with the rank and status of Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 519, Julissa Reynoso Pantaleon, of New York, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Kingdom of Spain, and to serve concurrently and without additional compensation as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Principality of Andorra.

Had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 625, John R. Bass, of New York, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Career Minister, to be an Under Secretary of State (Management), vice Brian J. Bulatao.

I object.

Madam President, it is now December. It has been nearly 4 months since the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Thirteen servicemembers lost their lives in the attack on Abbey Gate along with hundreds of civilians. As a result of the botched evacuation operation, hundreds, if not thousands, of American civilians were left behind to the enemy.

We hear from our friends on the other side of the aisle that my insistence that we actually vote on nominees is unprecedented. I would humbly suggest that the crisis into which this President has led this country is unprecedented. In my lifetime, it is unprecedented.

And who has been held accountable for this disaster? No one. Who has the President fired? Who has offered their resignation? Which of the planners at the Department of State or the Department of Defense or the National Security Council have been relieved of duty? No one.

Until there is accountability, I am going to ask that the Senate do the simple task of its job, which is to actually vote on these nominees. The least we could do is observe regular order and vote on these leadership positions at the Department of State and at the Department of Defense.

My colleagues say that we have got to put national security first. I agree with them about that. But I believe that begins at the top, with the President of the United States and the leadership of the Department of Defense and the Department of State. I, for one, am not going to stand by and look the other way while this administration systematically endangers our national security, imperils the American people, and watches the sacrifice of our soldiers go by without any accountability, without any change in direction.

I am not willing to look the other way and just pretend that Afghanistan didn't happen, which seems to be the posture that many in this body have adopted. I am not willing to do that. I can't do that because I promised the parents of the fallen that I wouldn't do that.

I am going to discharge my responsibility. And as long as it takes, I will continue to draw attention to what happened at Abbey Gate and to demand accountability for the disaster that this administration has pushed upon this country and upon the people of my State.

Mr. President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 606, Dawn N. Ison, of Michigan, to be United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan for the term of four years.

Mr. President, I object.

It is now December. It has been nearly four months since the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Thirteen servicemembers lost their lives in the attack on Abbey Gate along with hundreds of civilians. As a result of the botched evacuation operation, hundreds, if not thousands, of American civilians were left behind to the enemy.

We hear from our friends on the other side of the aisle that my insistence that we actually vote on nominees is unprecedented. I would humbly suggest that the crisis into which this President has led this country is unprecedented. In my lifetime, it is unprecedented.

It is unprecedented for an American President to watch 13 servicemembers lose their lives in an evacuation for which he is responsible and then to celebrate that operation as ``an unqualified success'' or ``an extraordinary success.'' I believe those were President Biden's words.

Really, an extraordinary success? Thirteen servicemembers dead, hundreds of civilians dead, hundreds of Americans left behind to the enemy--that is success? No, that is a failure. That is unacceptable.

And who has been held accountable for this disaster? No one. Who has the President fired? Who has offered their resignation? Which of the planners at the Department of State or the Department of Defense or the National Security Council has been relieved of duty? No one.

Until there is accountability, I am going to ask that the Senate do the simple task of its job, which is to actually vote on these nominees. The least we could do is observe regular order and vote on these leadership positions at the Department of State and at the Department of Defense.

My colleagues say that we have got to put national security first. I agree with them about that. But I believe that begins at the top, with the President of the United States and the leadership of the Department of Defense and the Department of State. I, for one, am not going to stand by and look the other way while this administration systematically endangers our national security, imperils the American people, and watches the sacrifice of our soldiers go by without any accountability, without any change in direction.

I am not willing to look the other way and just pretend that Afghanistan didn't happen, which seems to be the posture that many in this body have adopted. I am not willing to do that. I can't do that because I promised the parents of the fallen that I wouldn't do that.

I am going to discharge my responsibility. And as long as it takes, I will continue to draw attention to what happened at Abbey Gate and to demand accountability for the disaster that this administration has pushed upon this country and upon the people of my State.

Mr. President.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, approximately 24 hours after the attack at Abbey Gate in Kabul, I had the privilege to speak with the father of one of the marines who lost his life there, a young marine from the State of Missouri, St. Charles County, named Jared Schmitz.

His father, whose name is Mark, told me of the devastation of losing his son. He later spoke in public about his son in this way. He said:

I am very honored--

This is Mark talking about his boy Jared.

I'm very honored that I could call him my son. His life

meant so much more. I'm so incredibly devastated that I won't

be able to see the man that he was very quickly growing into

becoming.

Thirteen servicemembers lost their lives on that day and hundreds of civilians. As a result of the botched evacuation operation, hundreds, if not thousands, of American civilians were left behind to the enemy, where hundreds still remain.

Now, I am not going to reveal the contents of my conversation with Mr. Schmitz, except to say something that he asked me, something that he told me. He told me, ``Go fight like hell,'' and that is exactly what I am going to do until there is accountability for the worst foreign policy crisis this country has suffered since the Vietnam war.

We hear from our friends on the other side of the aisle that our insistence that we actually vote on nominees is unprecedented. I would humbly suggest that the crisis into which this President has led this country is unprecedented. In my lifetime, it is unprecedented.

It is unprecedented for an American President to watch 13 servicemembers lose their lives in an evacuation for which he is responsible and then to celebrate that operation as ``an unqualified success,'' ``an extraordinary success,'' I believe were President Biden's words.

Really, an extraordinary success? Thirteen servicemembers dead, hundreds of civilians dead, hundreds of Americans left behind to the enemy--that is success? No, that is a failure. That is unacceptable.

And who has been held accountable for this disaster? No one. Who has the President fired? Who has offered their resignation? Which of the planners at the Department of State or the Department of Defense or the National Security Council has been relieved of duty? No one.

We have seen this movie before. Back to Vietnam. In Vietnam, we watched as the experts in Washington sent thousands and thousands of Americans to die, concealing the true state of the war, lying to the American people.

And what happened to the people who planned that disastrous war over all those years? Nothing. They went on to their board seats. They went on to collect their fat pension checks. They went on to be celebrated. And who was left to pick up the pieces? It was the families of the fallen. It was those who lost their lives.

Well, I, for one, am not willing to stand by and participate in that kind of theater again. I am not going to go back to the families of the fallen in my State and say that I didn't do anything while people in this body looked the other way. It is time that there was accountability.

So is this a protest that I am launching by asking the Senate to actually vote on these nominees? You bet it is. You bet it is because we don't need more leadership of the same kind in the State Department. We don't need more leadership of the same kind in the Department of Defense. We need a different kind of leadership. We need a different direction for this country.

Until there is accountability, I am going to ask that the Senate do the simple task of its job, which is to actually vote on these nominees. The least we could do is observe regular order and vote on these leadership positions at the Department of State and at the Department of Defense.

My colleague from Maryland says--and I think he is right--that we have got to put national security first. I agree with him about that. That begins at the top, with the President of the United States and the leadership of the Department of Defense and the Department of State. But I, for one, am not going to stand by and look the other way while this administration systematically endangers our national security, imperils the American people, and watches the sacrifice of our soldiers go by without any accountability, without any change in direction.

I am not willing to look the other way and just pretend it didn't happen, which seems to be the posture that many in this body have adopted. I am not willing to do that. Frankly, I can't do that because I promised the parents of the fallen that I wouldn't do that.

So I am going to discharge my responsibility. And as long as it takes, I will continue to draw attention to what happened at Abbey Gate and to demand accountability for it.

If I am still here on the floor doing this in 2023, so be it; 2024, so be it, until somebody is held accountable. I don't care who the President is. I don't care what administration it is. I want to see accountability for what has happened in Afghanistan, what happened to those servicemembers, and what happened to those hundreds of civilians who are even now left behind enemy lines to the enemy.

I would just note one other thing about the situation we are in, vis- a-vis these nominees. While I can ask that there be a vote on the floor of the Senate, I certainly can't prevent that vote. So you might ask yourself: Why in the world, if these nominations are so important--and, by the way, I agree that these are leadership positions. That is, in fact, why I am asking for a vote. These are leadership positions to the Department of State, in this case, the Department of Defense in other cases. But why in the world we haven't voted? I can't prevent a vote. None of my colleagues can prevent a vote.

The answer is, ask Senator Schumer. My friends control the floor. Senator Schumer is the majority leader of the U.S. Senate, and what has he had the Senate doing? Well, not much.

Last week, over a 3-day period--3 days--how many votes did the U.S. Senate take? One. For 2 full days, we were in session. How many votes did the U.S. Senate take on any subject? Zero. If these were such pressing priorities, why isn't the Senate majority leader putting them on the floor for a vote? I have no earthly idea other than, apparently, he just can't get his act together to do it.

Here we are. It is 2:15 in the afternoon on a Thursday.

Are we voting?

No.

How many votes have we taken today?

One.

Will we be voting tomorrow?

I doubt it.

Will we be voting next week?

Who knows. Apparently it is not that much of a priority.

So Senator Schumer has a lot to answer for in many regards, not the least of which is his defense of the indefensible Afghanistan debacle and the loss of life there. But he also should take a look in the mirror. And I humbly suggest that my colleagues across the aisle might want to question him as to why these nominations that they insist are so important aren't being put on the floor to be voted on.

I would be happy to vote on them anytime, but I am not going to consent to waving them through and waiving regular order until there is some accountability for the disaster that this administration has pushed upon this country and upon the people of my State.

Now, I have one other--before I object--and I am going to object, Mr. President. Before I do, I want to pick up one piece of bookkeeping item, bookkeeping issue with my colleague, the Senator from Maryland. Let me just say this while I am on that subject. The Senator from Maryland is across the aisle. I want to be clear about this with my colleague, the Senator from Maryland, whom I have worked with many times before.

I don't doubt for a moment his sincerity or his earnestness on this issue. And I know that he thinks that these nominations are pressing and that they are important, and I agree with him. And I am sure that he is frustrated by the fact that we disagree on the right way to get accountability in Afghanistan. I acknowledge that. It is an honest disagreement.

So I don't want my remarks in any way to suggest in any fashion that I question the integrity or the uprightness or the sincerity of my colleague from Maryland, and I just wanted to say to him that two of the nominations that he read out I don't have any objection to: Adam Scheinman and Jack Markell. So if the Senator were willing to reoffer those separately, I think he certainly would encounter no objection from me.

But with all of that, Mr. President, I object.

Madam President, I rise to make a very simple point, which is that Medicare is too important to be held hostage to political games, and that is what is going on here now. We need to have a clean bill to fully fund and protect Medicare for the millions of Americans who rely on it, including over 1 million just in the State of Missouri.

And that is why I am supporting Senator Kennedy's bill to fully protect and

secure Medicare, and I will support every amendment and bill and clean amendment and bill to fully protect and secure Medicare, including, I think, Senator Graham's that he's going to be offering shortly, which I am also privileged to cosponsor.

And I would just say this: I call on the Members of both parties-- both parties--to stop using Medicare as a pawn in a political game. Let's fund Medicare. Let's do it on its own. Let's not hold it hostage to other agendas. Let's not hold it hostage to other programs. Let's not hold it hostage to others' individual ambitions, whatever they may be.

But let's take the opportunity now with this bill to fully protect Medicare for our seniors all across this country. That should be something that we can all get behind, and for those reasons I am proud to support Senator Kennedy's legislation.

And now I yield to Senator Hoeven.

Madam President, had there been a recorded vote, I would have voted no on the confirmations of Executive Calendar No. 534, Clare E. Connors, of Hawaii, to be United States Attorney for the District of Hawaii for the term of four years; No. 535, Zachary A. Cunha, of Rhode Island, to be United States Attorney for the District of Rhode Island for the term of four years; No. 536, Nikolas P. Kerest, of Vermont, to be United States Attorney for the District of Vermont for the term of four years; No. 581, Gregory K. Harris, of Illinois, to be United States Attorney for the Central District of Illinois for the term of four years; and No. 582, Philip R. Sellinger, of New Jersey, to be United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey for the term of four years.

Madame President, LTC John Meyer joined my office as our defense fellow this past January. It is hard to overestimate in the months since just how much he has contributed.

Time and again, John has drawn on his rich background and his experiences in the Middle East, the Pacific, and with some of the Army's most elite units to inform our work on defense and national security.

More than that, he has consistently stepped up, even when he didn't have to, to help those in need--from veterans and servicemembers at home in Missouri to those affected by the bombing in Kabul over the summer.

For all of these reasons and more, it has been a real privilege to have John as a part of our team this year. We are going to miss him when he goes all too soon here, but I am confident he will continue to serve our Nation with the utmost distinction wherever his career takes him.

I want to take this opportunity, in light of all of that, to request floor privileges for John as a small gesture of my gratitude for his service to my office, to Missouri, and to our Nation.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Lieutenant Colonel John Meyer be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress.