Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 13, submitted earlier today.

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

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, I understand that there are three 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 object to further proceedings en bloc.

Mr. President, for years America's vital interests in the Middle East have been jeopardized by regional chaos. The security of our ally Israel continues to be challenged by the long reach of the Iranian regime and its affiliates. In Syria, the Assad regime has made its own nation a graveyard for hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, and the resulting chaos continues to provide Iran and Russia opportunities to expand their malign influence throughout the region. That is why the Senate is going to vote later today to take up pressing legislation that tackles all of this head on.

The bill at hand would reaffirm the United States' commitment to Israel's security and authorize military assistance, cooperative missile defense, and loan guarantees. It would counter an aggressive and hostile attempt to delegitimize the State of Israel through economic boycotts. It would also reauthorize efforts to strengthen defense cooperation with our ally Jordan, as its people and government grapple with the security and humanitarian ramifications of the Syrian crisis.

Importantly, the legislation also includes the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act. This provision would hold accountable individuals responsible for the senseless evils of the Assad regime and impose severe penalties on the entities that support them.

We will vote later today on whether or not Members of this body believe these issues should be addressed. It is my sincere hope that the Senate will approve these bipartisan proposals and send the strong message of support that our friends and partners in the Middle East deserve.

During the last Congress there was broad agreement on both sides of the aisle on the need for action. I expected today's action to be a big bipartisan vote, not some partisan showdown, but over the last few days something seems to have happened. The Democratic leader and several of his colleagues have stood up and said they want to block the Senate from even considering this legislation--never mind that it includes legislation cosponsored by the Senate Democrats last Congress and never mind that Senate Democrats mentioned the Syria crisis literally dozens of times last month here on the Senate floor.

Mr. President, in spite of all of that, some Democrats have now threatened to block us from even taking this legislation up later today. We would have to ask why. It is because we are 18 days into the partial government shutdown caused by Democrats' total unwillingness to negotiate with the White House over border security.

Democrat intransigence has made sure that a quarter of the Federal Government has been shut down for more

than 2 weeks--2 weeks. Now they are threatening to shut the Senate down too. They have shut down the government for 2 weeks, and now they want to shut the Senate down. They are threatening to shut down efforts to protect our allies and strengthen our relationship with Israel-- something they all recently claim to support.

Let's remember what we are talking about. In light of the urgent humanitarian and security crisis on our border, the President is requesting $5.7 billion for physical barriers and border security. For some context, that is just about one-tenth of 1 percent of Federal spending--one-tenth of 1 percent--for physical barriers like fences and barriers that already exist, which Democrats have previously voted for with enthusiasm.

Back in 2006, then-Senators Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and our colleague, the current Democratic leader, all voted for more than $1 billion to construct about 700 miles of physical barriers.

Then-Senator Obama called it ``badly needed funding for better fences and better security . . . that should help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration.'' That is what Senator Barack Obama said.

Senator Schumer later described his vote proudly as ``miles of border fence that create a significant barrier to illegal immigration.''

As recently as 2015, Secretary Clinton boasted: ``I voted numerous times . . . to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in.'' That is what Hillary Clinton said.

Obviously, that was then, and today the new Speaker of the House is trying to argue that a physical barrier is ``immoral''--``immoral.''

Today, my friend the Democratic leader is proposing to add a Senate shutdown to the partial Federal Government shutdown and block even more of the people's business, all--all--to avoid more of what he already voted for. Maybe the Democratic Party was for secure borders before they were against it, maybe they are just making it up as they go along, or maybe they are dead set on opposing this particular President on any issue, for any reason, just for the sake of opposing him.

Walls and barriers are not immoral--how silly. Enforcing our laws wasn't immoral back in 2006 when then-Senator Clinton, then-Senator Obama, and our friend the Democratic leader were proud--proud--to vote for physical barriers. The only things that have changed between then and now are the political whims and, of course, the occupant of the White House.

This is no newfound, principled objection. It is just political spite--a partisan tantrum being prioritized over the public interest. For more than 2 weeks, they have indulged in that partisan tantrum rather than negotiate in good faith over border security funding-- hardly something that should be a partisan subject in the first place. They have put that partisan tantrum ahead of keeping a quarter of the government open. Now they are saying their partisan tantrum is more urgent than pressing legislation that concerns our alliance with Israel and the Syrian civil war.

I hope that isn't the case. I hope our Democratic colleagues don't pile on even more pointless obstruction. I hope they don't block the Senate from turning to this important legislation--legislation, by the way, they support. We will find out later today.

We all know what is necessary to move past the funding impasse: a negotiated solution that can pass the House, earn 60 votes in the Senate, and get the President's signature. That is what it takes to make a law.

As I have stated clearly, the Senate will not waste floor time on show votes, messaging votes, or any other proposals that fail to check those boxes regarding the funding bills.

The Democratic leader actually shared that opinion earlier. Here is a fairly recent quote from the Democratic leader. He said: ``The President must publicly support and say he will sign an agreement before it gets a vote in either Chamber.'' That is a fairly recent quote.

I am glad we seem to agree on that--no wasted floor time on appropriations bills that fail to clear the President's reasonable threshold.

For the sake of the humanitarian crisis on our border--as the President will describe in his address to the Nation this evening--for the sake of our national security, and for the sake of all the Americans who need all of their Federal Government reopened, I would urge our Democratic colleagues to get past these harmful political games and get serious about negotiating with the President.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I enter a motion to reconsider the vote.

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

I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call be waived.

Mr. President, on February 1, the Kentucky Supreme

Court will bid farewell to a towering figure in our State's judiciary, Justice Bill Cunningham. A Lyon County native, Bill announced he would retire from the high court at the beginning of next month, bringing to a close a career of public service that has spanned more than half of his life. I would like to take a moment to join his colleagues, his family, and his community in western Kentucky in congratulating Bill on this remarkable milestone and to thank him for his service to the Commonwealth.

Bill first answered the call to service early in his life. Once he graduated from Murray State University and the University of Kentucky College of Law, Bill enlisted in the Army, nobly serving our Nation in uniform in Vietnam, Korea, and Germany. Upon his return to Kentucky, Bill decided to put his legal education to work for the men and women of his community. For the last 45 years, he has done just that.

Working in various courtrooms as the Eddyville City attorney, public defender for the Kentucky State Penitentiary, and the 56th judicial district's Commonwealth's attorney, Bill earned the esteem of his colleagues. In fact, his peers voted him the ``Outstanding Commonwealth's Attorney for Kentucky.''

Beginning in 1991, Bill moved to the other side of the bench when he was first elected as a circuit court judge in western Kentucky, serving in Caldwell, Livingston, Lyon, and Trigg Counties. He was then elected to the Kentucky Supreme Court in 2006. On the high court, Bill represents 24 counties in western Kentucky. His constituents rewarded Bill's accomplished service by reelecting him to a second term in 2014.

In addition to his dedicated leadership in our Commonwealth's legal system, Bill has written six books on Kentucky history and is a frequent contributor to local newspapers. He is also known as a captivating speaker, and I hope he will continue to share his perspective with audiences even in retirement.

As Bill's tenure on the Kentucky Supreme Court comes to a close, I would like to express my sincere gratitude for his lifetime of service to his community, our Commonwealth, and our country. In retirement, Bill said he looks forward to spending more time with his wife Paula, their five children, and their 15 grandchildren. I extend my best wishes to the entire Cunningham family, and I ask my Senate colleagues to help me congratulate Justice Bill Cunningham for his service to Kentucky.

Mr. President, the Paducah Sun recently published a column congratulating Bill on his retirement. I ask unanimous consent that the article be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, last month marked the end of a distinguished career for Laurel County clerk Dean Johnson. Dean recently retired after 37 years of public service to his community, our Commonwealth, and this country. Today I would like to take a moment to reflect on my friend's many contributions to Laurel County and to thank him for his dedication to Kentucky.

First drawn to public service at a young age through organizations like the Key Club and the Future Farmers of America, Dean spent his career focused on integrity and efficiency. After serving in the Armed Forces and for 4 years as the county's treasurer, Dean was elected Laurel County clerk in 1985. His leadership has brought substantial innovation and development to this eastern Kentucky community.

In my State, a county clerk is responsible for providing a broad range of services to Kentuckians, including everything from voter registration and election management to licensing and recordkeeping. During Dean's tenure, the Laurel County clerk's office introduced new infrastructure and implemented new procedures to better serve a growing population. Running an election has changed quite a bit in Laurel County since Dean entered office, but his dedication has helped promote access to the ballot box for more than 44,000 registered voters.

In addition to his work in Laurel County, Dean collaborated with his peers to share best practices in the Kentucky County Clerks' Association. Earning both their trust and respect, he served a term as the organization's president, helping deliver essential services across Kentucky. Like other county clerks, Dean supported his fellow veterans by repurposing license plates into birdhouses. The products are sold with proceeds benefiting our Commonwealth's veterans.

Over the years, I have enjoyed working with Dean on behalf of our constituents, and I am proud to salute this man of great accomplishment. In his retirement, Dean plans to do more of what he loves most: spending time with his daughter, Teresa, and his granddaughter, Rebecca. He will also continue to oversee his 175-acre cattle farm. As he begins this next chapter, I would like to wish him the very best, and I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in thanking Laurel County clerk Dean Johnson for his decades-long service of our State.

Mr. President, the Sentinel-Echo in London recently published a profile of Dean's accomplished career. I ask unanimous consent that the article be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I understand there are three 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 object to further proceedings en bloc.

Mr. President, later today, I will join President Trump, the Democratic leader, the new Speaker of the House, and our congressional colleagues down at the White House.

The meeting represents the latest in the President's ongoing efforts to persuade Democrats that appropriate funding for border security is a better outcome than persisting in this partial government shutdown. I hope that this time around my friends across the aisle will come prepared to engage much more seriously on the issue at hand.

We may have entered a new Congress since our last meeting, but the basic steps that are needed to end this unfortunate standoff really haven't changed at all. We are in the same place. As I have said on several occasions and as the administration has affirmed, any viable compromise will need to carry the endorsement of the President before it receives a vote in either House of Congress. Under these conditions, the package presented by the House's new Democratic leaders yesterday can only be seen as a time-wasting act of political posturing. It does not carry the support of the President--in fact, the administration indicated yesterday that the President would actually veto it--and it cannot earn the support of 60 of my colleagues over here in the Senate.

My friends across the aisle understand the ground rules perfectly well. They know that a solution will need to be palatable to House Democrats and Senate Republicans alike. They know that making laws takes a Presidential signature. We all learned that in grade school. In fact, the Democratic leader himself insisted ``the President must publicly support and say he will sign an agreement before it gets a vote in either Chamber.'' That is the Democratic leader who said that.

Everyone understands what we need to move forward and successfully make policy instead of simply staging political theater. Everyone should understand just how urgently the situation on our Nation's border demands our attention--the situation that has been accurately described by the Commissioner of the CBP--the Border Patrol--as a ``border security and humanitarian crisis.'' This shouldn't be taken lightly. It should not be viewed as an opportunity for the new House Democratic majority to prioritize political performance as an art form ahead of the public interest.

I urge our Democratic colleagues to approach our meeting today with a willingness to join the administration and the men and women of Customs and Border Protection to work to protect our border and bring this partial shutdown to an end.