Floor Statements

I am here on the floor today to talk about border security, an issue that is intertwined with our national security and, certainly, with the drug epidemic that we see in our communities around the country. We are in the middle right now of the worst border crisis in the history of our country.

This chart tells the story.

Monthly border crossings are at an unprecedented level. Customs and Border Protection reports that there were 164,973 encounters at the border in February. By the way, that is equal to the population of Dayton, OH. Actually, it is far greater than the population of Dayton,

Mr. President, I come to the floor, again today, to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine. This is the seventh week in a row I have come out here to talk about the atrocities being committed by Russia and what more the United States and this Congress can do to support Ukraine in its fight for survival.

It has now been more than a month since Russia's assault on our ally Ukraine, an independent sovereign democracy, a democracy that just wants to live in peace.

Earlier today, Russia continued its cowardly and brutal bombing attacks on civilian targets in Ukraine. Some civilians, like those trapped in and surrounding Mariupol, are dying due to a lack of access to water and food.

Russia continues its assault on humanitarian corridors which are designed to allow safe passage for civilians fleeing the conflict and for lifesaving humanitarian aid to come in to those who can't get out.

You may recall the theater in Mariupol, where people were taking refuge in the basement and using it as a bomb shelter. The words ``children'' in Russian were emblazed with huge letters clear enough to see from the sky so that it would not be a target, but it was.

We just learned Friday that roughly 300 Ukrainian civilians were killed in that basement when the theater was hit by Russian bombs about a week ago--mostly women and children.

Vladimir Putin's war has resulted in death and destruction not seen in Europe since World War II. Thousands of civilians have been killed. Roughly, 10 million people have been displaced from their homes, and 3.6 million refugees, almost all women and children and the elderly, have fled the country they love, while men have stayed behind to fight the invaders.

In my recent visit to the Polish-Ukrainian border with three colleagues, I talked to dozens of refugees. Through their tears, they spoke of their apartments or houses that were destroyed. They spoke about their friends or family members who were injured or even killed. They talked about the pain of being separated from their husbands or fathers or brothers who had stayed behind to fight, not knowing their fate.

They pleaded for us to do more--to stop the missiles, stop the bombs, and they all said they wanted to return to their homeland as soon as they possibly could.

President Biden is just back from the region where he, too, met with refugees, and I am glad he went. He was clearly moved by what he saw and heard. I thought his speech in Poland Saturday was a powerful indictment of Russia's invasion and a strong statement of support for Ukraine, as well as a reminder that this battle in Ukraine is about the larger issue of freedom and democracy versus tyranny and authoritarianism.

Unfortunately, a compelling speech was overshadowed by an off-the- cuff remark at the end, saying of Putin that ``this man cannot stay in power.''

This was read as supporting regime change in Russia. There is no question in my mind that the world would be a better place and a safer place without Vladimir Putin as President of Russia, but this remark unfortunately played into Russia's propaganda efforts from the start, that NATO, Ukraine, and NATO support of Ukraine are all threats to Russia and attempts to overthrow the Russian Government.

None of that is true, of course. All Ukraine wants to do is live in peace with its neighbor. NATO is a purely defensive pact, not offensive in any respect--simply countries pledging to defend one another from attacks. Regime change is neither our policy in this instance or our broader strategic objective.

I can imagine that having met with the refugees and having heard their heartbreaking stories that the President was expressing his frustration. I get it. But the President's words and the reaction to them reminds us that this is a true national security crisis, and in this sensitive moment, it requires the United States to speak with clarity and to speak, wherever possible, in unity with our allies in NATO and beyond.

Unfortunately, that did not always happen on this trip, whether it was the President talking about our response to the use of chemical weapons, U.S. troops who may end up in Ukraine, or regime change.

But tonight I want to focus on another positive aspect of the President's trip that relates to sanctions and offer a few ideas of where we go from here.

With regard to our sanctions on Russia, I believe there are a number of additional steps we can and should take. I was glad to hear on March 24 that the Treasury Department issued sanctions against dozens of defense companies, 328 members of the duma legislative body, and the chief executive of SberBank. Gold-related transactions involving Russia may be sanctionable by U.S. authorities, the Treasury Department has also said in a statement. We should do that.

But we should also expand full blocking sanctions to all Russian banks, revoking international tax and trade agreements that give Russia privileges not appropriate for a pariah country; seizing, not just freezing, assets from Kremlin supporters; keeping oligarchs from laundering money through expensive art and more.

I have introduced legislation on some of these ideas. I have advocated for all of them here on the floor of the Senate and elsewhere, and I will continue to do so, but tonight I want to focus on what I think is the single most important sanction, the one that could make the biggest difference.

Our top priority should be cutting off Russia's No. 1 source of income that fuels the war machine, and that is receipts from energy. Energy is, by far, Russia's biggest export. It accounts for roughly half of Russia's entire Federal budget. Over the past year, the average oil revenues going back to Russia from their exports to the United States alone was about $50 million a day.

Under pressure from Congress, the administration changed its view and chose to block Russian oil, natural gas, and coal imports. And that is good. It made no sense for to us to help fund the Russian war effort, especially when we have our own natural resources here in North America that we can gain access to and actually do so in a way that is better for the environment than Russian oil, that is produced in a way that emits more methane and CO2, and, of course, has to be shipped by sea to our shores, causing more emissions.

I recognize that sanctioning Russian energy is far more difficult for some of our allies in Europe which are far more dependent on Russian energy than we were. But the same argument applies. We can't be funding this brutal war.

I welcomed the announcement during the President's trip on the creation of a joint United States-European Union task force to help reduce Europe's dependence on Russian energy and strengthen Europe's energy security.

Specifically, this initiative will help provide at least 15 billion cubic meters, bcm, of LNG exports from the United States, liquefied natural gas, this year, with the goal of shipping 50 bcm of U.S. LNG to Europe annually through at least 2030.

This is a very positive step forward because it is telling the Europeans you can cut your dependency on Russia and stop spending money that goes into the war machine and we will back you up. The United States has plenty of natural gas; it is produced in a cleaner way, by the way; and we are happy to back you up.

This agreement is not a silver bullet, but it is a step in the right direction. It is smart to support our domestic energy producers as a means of supporting our national and our economic security but also as a way to support our allies in Europe.

And in light of this Russian invasion, the importance of the United States having a robust, ``all of the above'' approach to power our Nation, which includes fossil fuels, renewable energies, carbon capture technologies, nuclear power, hydrogen, that cannot be overstated.

For context, Europe imported approximately 155 bcm of gas from Russia in 2021 and approximately 22 bcm from the United States through LNG. So 50 bcm from the United States on top of that will lead to a significant increase in U.S. LNG exports and really help Europe.

But if this is to work, the administration is going to have to follow through on these commitments to help get more hydrocarbons on the global market to consumers in Europe.

If the price is higher in Europe, as predicted, some of the LNG supply will go to Europe instead of Asia, and that will help. That will be based on market forces, but in order to ensure that we meet this increased supply to Europe, we have to increase our production here at home and develop the associated infrastructure, such as pipelines and terminals, to get that natural gas to market.

Unfortunately, we aren't off to a great start. The President's tax proposals released with their fiscal year 2023 budget request to Congress eliminates important tax provisions used by our domestic producers, like the deduction for intangible drilling costs, or IDCs, which allows natural gas and oil producers to deduct costs that are necessary for the drilling and preparation of wells.

This includes things like wages, fuel, survey work. Taxpayers get to deduct their cost of doing business. IDCs are one such cost for energy companies, and shortsighted proposals like those in the budget would only serve to discourage domestic energy production at a time when we need it.

On Friday, I spoke at a natural gas seminar in Ohio and met with energy producers that are working in the Marcellus and the Utica shale in Ohio. We are now a major gas-producing State, thanks to those Utica and Marcellus shale finds, and the producers in Ohio had a lot of thoughts about what was going on that day in Europe.

They were glad about the agreement between the EU and the United States, but they drove home to me the key point that we have energy here in the ground, but the current administration's policies have made it very difficult to get that product to market, both domestically and internationally.

Unfortunately, the Biden administration has consistently sent a message to these producers and others that one of their goals is to phase out the use of fossil fuels altogether. This rhetoric, combined with actions like canceling the Keystone XL Pipeline, suspending new leases on Federal lands and waters, redefining waters of the United States, or WOTUS, which makes it harder to permit energy projects, has led to a lot of uncertainty within the oil and gas industry, which has a chilling effect on domestic energy production--again, at a time when we need it. We need ``all of the above.''

In light of this new LNG initiative with the European Union, the Biden administration's actions must now meet its commitments. An important part of building out our domestic energy infrastructure for gas, renewables, and everything in between is streamlining the Federal permitting process, whether it is a wind power project, solar power project, or a natural gas project. Historically, it can take a decade or more for the Federal Government to issue permits to build pipelines and other necessary infrastructure.

I coauthored a law called FAST-41, which improves the permitting process for these big projects by requiring Agencies to work together to set out a plan and a timeline for permitting projects.

It also created the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council, which can help resolve disputes over the permitting process and get a green light on a project much more quickly. FAST-41 has worked. It has helped projects save billions of dollars and years of time, all while upholding environmental standards.

The bipartisan infrastructure bill expanded the Council's authorities and made it permanent, and the recent fiscal year 2022 government funding bill included $10 million for the Council to help support its operations. I urge the Biden administration to use this FAST-41 process to reduce bureaucratic redtape in permitting these projects so we can deliver the liquefied natural gas to Europe, as we promised, in a timely fashion so that we can begin to reduce their dependency on Russian oil and stop sending billions of dollars to fund the Russian war machine.

This is where energy security and national security come together. We need to lead our European allies in doing all we can to sanction Russian's energy sector.

We have talked a lot about cutting off the natural gas and the revenue that fuels the war machine in Russia, but we also need to tighten up these bank sanctions as they relate to energy. As an example, it is simply unacceptable that sanctions against Russia's biggest banks, including VTB Bank, do not apply to energy transactions until June 24. This is simply too late. We need to act much more quickly.

While President Biden was in Poland, inside Ukraine, Russian missiles were striking cities all across the country, including the western city of Lviv, not very far from the Polish border.

President Biden must lead the alliance to redouble their efforts to stop this madness to ensure Russia is not rewarded for its war crimes. It is one thing to keep the alliance together; it is another to lead the alliance out of its comfort zone to a more aggressive stance to actually win this war.

So in addition to the energy and other sanctions we have discussed tonight, what more can we and our allies do to help Ukraine win this war? And note I say ``win this war'' because if we act swiftly, I think we can help Ukraine actually win and keep Ukraine as a viable democracy and save thousands of lives. But they need our help, especially to stop the missiles and artillery that are raining down on civilians every day and every night. As we talk here tonight, this is happening in Ukraine.

The Ukrainians have made it very clear they desperately need more air defense. President Zelenskyy talked about it again in the last 24 hours. Based on the news media reports, the United States is providing some SA-8s, an older, Soviet-era defense system, to Ukraine. I was glad to hear that. However, the media reports also say that the more capable S-300 Soviet-era systems we have in our inventory are not being sent. If this is true, this is a big disappointment and shows a lack of urgency.

While I commend the President for the strong speech he delivered over the weekend, the actions of the administration have to match that rhetoric. There are additional weapons that they are desperately needing that we are not yet providing, particularly these anti-air systems and more munitions for their own anti-air systems. Often it is a matter of us facilitating the transfer of these weapons from former Warsaw Pact countries that are all along the border--the Eastern European, Central European countries that are close to Ukraine and can provide these incredibly important military anti-air systems, but we need to help them. We need to facilitate that and backfill their needs at home.

They have asked for our help across the board, but specifically for tanks, for anti-ship systems, which is really important right now because so many of these missiles are coming from these ships in the Black Sea.

President Zelenskyy needs to be listened to. He knows what they need. He says: We need more, and we need it more quickly.

We must also keep sending Stinger missiles, which are effective at shooting down Russian helicopters and planes at lower altitudes.

We must find ways to quickly provide Ukraine with more armed drones, such as the Turkish TB2s and one-use loitering munitions, which the Ukrainians know how to use and have been very effective on the battlefield with.

Two weeks ago, it was announced that we were sending 100 so-called Switchblade loitering munitions. One hundred will go very quickly. We need to send more, and we need to send them quickly.

To our Israeli friends, I would ask them to sell to us or other countries, and we should agree to buy, their Harop drones, which Ukraine could really use right now. The bottom line is we need to flood the zone when it comes to providing Ukraine with military assistance.

They are not asking us to fight for them, but they are asking for the tools to be able to defend themselves, particularly with regard to this endless bombing. And they have a chance to win if we do that. There should be no gaps in our weapons transfers. We need to lead the NATO allies and others when it comes to providing and coordinating support.

There are loopholes in the sanctions we talked about tonight. We need to do more to ensure that those are closed. We need to do more to ensure that the weapons are being received.

We should act fast to let the people of Ukraine know with certainty that we do stand with them. The popular Ukrainian national rallying cry ``Slava Ukraini'' when translated into English is ``Glory to Ukraine.'' The response to it is ``Glory to the Heroes,'' ``Heroyam Slava.''

In the midst of this atrocity, there are so many heroes, and we need to back them up. There are so many heroes to glorify in Ukraine: the soldiers, professionals, and civilians who have taken up arms; the doctors and the nurses and the firefighters; and the volunteers providing food and water and blankets. We pray for them all, and we pray for their families. Godspeed to them in their simple quest, a battle for a free and independent Ukraine, a country that can chart its own course.

America needs to stand with the people of Ukraine. We must show the world, both our adversaries and our allies, that we stand with Ukraine.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I come to the Senate floor today to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine as they suffer through the brutal and cowardly Russian assault.

I have spoken on the floor each of the last 6 weeks about the horrific events we have all watched unfold and what role the United States should play. Simply put, we need to do more, and we need to do it more quickly, as do our allies.

As we talk this evening, the shelling and killing of innocent civilians continues in the dark of night in places like Kyiv and Kharkiv and Mariupol, a beautiful port city being reduced to rubble by a frustrated Vladimir Putin. He seems intent on destroying what he can't have because of the brave, outgunned Ukrainians, who refuse to surrender and refuse to live under his despotic rule.

Those heroic Ukrainian defenders of their homeland deserve our support. Even if they didn't, this bloody war launched by an authoritarian regime against a peaceful, democratic neighbor matters to world freedom, to our own national security. It must not stand, or else all of us in freedom-loving countries are at risk.

As we talk this evening, the ruthless bombing continues. Something else is happening. President Biden is getting ready to cross the Atlantic to meet with our NATO partners to talk about next steps. Although nothing has done more to solidify the West than the ruthless Russian attacks, I commend President Biden for the important role he has played in helping keep the alliance together. Now, I call on him to lead that alliance to redouble their efforts to stop the madness, to ensure that Russia is not rewarded for its war crimes. It is one thing to keep the alliance together; it is another to lead the alliance out of its comfort zone to a more aggressive stance to actually win this war.

I believe moving leaders to do more is possible because of all the deadly Russian escalation that we have seen but also because free citizens all around the world are shocked by the death and destruction that they see online and on TV every day, and they are speaking up. I see this at home in Ohio, but I see it all around the globe.

I think leaders can be persuaded to do more. Over the past month, the administration itself has changed its mind and ratcheted up some sanctions and military assistance that we have advocated from both sides of the aisle from this Senate floor. To their credit, the administration reversed themselves and agreed to implement the Nord Stream 2 sanctions, to allow U.S. Stinger missiles to go to Ukraine directly from us, to impose the SWIFT banking sanctions, to ban oil from Russia, and to take away Russia's most favored nation trading status with us.

Now, with Russia ramping up its brutal assault, targeting and killing thousands of innocent civilians, America and the free world must do more--as they bomb maternity hospitals and schools and a shopping center in Kyiv last night and bomb shelters filled with children.

Last week, I led a bipartisan group of Senators to Poland and to the Ukrainian border, where we witnessed firsthand the pain that Russia is inflicting on innocent civilians. We talked to dozens of refugees-- almost always Ukrainian women and children, sometimes grandmothers and grandchildren. They came to Poland with only a backpack or a suitcase and nothing else, leaving everything else behind. In tears, they begged us to close the skies so the bombing would stop. They told of apartments or homes being destroyed, of the heartbreak of leaving their husbands or sons or fathers behind to fight the invaders.

So what more can we and our allies do to help Ukraine win this war? Note, I say ``win this war.'' If we act swiftly, I think we can still defeat the Russians and keep Ukraine as a viable democracy. If we do too little, thousands will die, as will the dream of Ukrainian democracy. The forces of evil will win, and all of us will pay a price.

Let me talk about five areas where I think we could do more to assist Ukraine. First, on the military side, we must redouble our efforts with urgency to provide Ukraine with the equipment and munitions and, where necessary, the immediate training to improve their air defenses and give them better offensive air capabilities.

The decision whether to facilitate providing more MiG-29s from Poland and perhaps other allies in the region who have these Soviet-era airplanes has been hotly debated. In my view, we should have done it a long time ago, when we got the initial green light from the administration a few weeks ago.

The Ukrainians have asked for them, and I do not believe they are any more escalatory than, certainly, the escalation that Russians are engaged in virtually every day. We now have reports of cluster bombs being used. We have reports of vacuum bombs being used against civilians. It is also no different than what we have done and continue to do with other weapon transfers, whether it is Stingers or Javelins or others.

Remember, the Ukrainians are on defense here. They are just trying to protect their country. Give them what they say they need to defend themselves. I would hope that at least we could immediately facilitate spare parts and other assistance to keep the current Ukrainian planes flying.

The Ukrainians have made it desperately clear that they need more air defense. We just learned today from public sources that the United States is providing SA8s, an older Soviet-era defense system, to Ukraine. Apparently, this is equipment that we got years ago--because it was the Soviet system--to be able to study it. We now have that system, and as of today, we have decided to send it to Ukraine. However, the same reporting also said that the more capable S-300 Soviet-era systems that we have are not being sent.

Look, I am very glad these systems are going to protect innocent civilians, but, to me, this shows the lack of urgency that I was talking about earlier. Here we are on day 25 of this all-out war-- people dying every single day--and, finally, we have looked into the closet, and we have in the inventory these incredibly important air defense systems, and we are providing them? Where were they on day 5 or day 10 or day 15 or even day 20, with people dying every one of those 25 days?

And why are we not sending the A300s? I don't know the answer to that. There may be an answer. There may be a reason I can't know what that answer is. But again, to me, this is an example of us having to have the urgency to respond and doing more and doing it more quickly.

The United States can and should facilitate the transfer of former Warsaw bloc anti-aircraft systems that Ukrainians know how to operate, like the S-300, like the SA8s, the SA10s, and others. There are regional partners in the area, Eastern European countries, that have these systems, without going into detail.

We should also provide extra munitions to replenish existing anti-air batteries. Our partners in the region say they are willing. Let's facilitate. Let's

make it happen. Let's get the NATO countries that can help to help more.

Over the weekend, there were reports, as an example, that Slovakia and Turkey were willing to take such action. We have got to be sure that we are ensuring these transfers take place immediately. Of course, we must also keep sending Stinger missiles, which are effective in shooting down Russian helicopters and the lower-flying jets.

We must find ways to quickly provide Ukraine with more armed drones, such as the Turkish TB2, which has been very effective, apparently, and even one-use loitering munitions, which the Ukrainians know how to use and have been very effective with on the battlefield.

Last week, it was announced that the United States was sending 100 of these loitering munitions, one-use munitions, called the Switchblade. One hundred will go very quickly. We should increase that number. Let's get the hundred there first, and let's increase that number to give the Ukrainians more to be able to defend themselves.

To our Israeli friends--I know this is controversial--but I would ask them to consider selling us or other countries--and we should agree to buy--their Harop drones, which Ukraine could use right now. The bottom line is we need to flood the zone when it comes to providing Ukraine with military assistance.

We are not being asked to fight this fight for them. They just want the tools to be able to defend themselves and have a chance--a fighting chance--to be able to win. There should be no gaps in our weapon transfers, and we need to lead our NATO allies and others when it comes to providing and coordinating support.

Second, we need more sanctions. We need to implement them faster. The sanctions have to bite now, not 2 weeks from now or 2 months from now. We need to remove all Russian banks' access to the global financial system. Russia must be financially cut off from the rest of the world if we are to have the effect that we want to have. Even without using our full sanctions authority, we have already seen some of the pain that we can inflict.

However, there are loopholes in these sanctions. It is not enough to go after individual banks, such as VTB and Sberbank. We are told that the Kremlin has already transitioned payments from these banks through Rosbank, UniCredit, and Raiffeisen. We need blocking sanctions on all of Russia's finance and defense industry as long as Russian forces are in Ukraine.

We need to exert maximum pressure to ensure no money can be sent to Russia to fund its war effort. We must implement full blocking sanctions on all Russian banks and ensure energy transactions are not exempt from these transactions. Russia should not be allowed to use its oil and gas profits to kill innocent Ukrainians.

We can also target the way Russia, including individuals close to President Putin, currently evade sanctions. In 2020, when I was chair of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, we published a bipartisan report showing how sanctioned oligarchs continued to have access to the U.S. financial system, in this case, through the purchase of high-value art. The two oligarchs we investigated were sanctioned in 2014 following Russia's invasion of Crimea.

You have heard that those sanctions weren't particularly effective. This is one reason. They laundered their money through art. They continued to purchase millions in art through auction houses and dealers in New York after they were sanctioned.

In that report, we recommended Congress should amend the Bank Secrecy Act to require art dealers to confirm the identity of buyers and sellers in transactions to ensure they are not using the art purchases to launder money or evade sanctions. These are the same requirements we place on financial institutions. Those changes are now more urgently needed than ever. The European Union and the United Kingdom recently closed this loophole by requiring businesses handling art transactions valued at 10,000 pounds or more to comply with anti-money laundering laws, including verifying the identity of the seller, buyer, and ultimate beneficial owner of the art so that the purchase isn't being used to evade sanctions.

Since the EU and UK have tightened compliance, the United States, which has the largest art market in the world, becomes now the main target for sanctioned Russians to continue to evade sanctions and launder money through high-value art purchases. If the administration doesn't move on this, we are currently drafting legislation to close this loophole in the U.S. Senate.

Third, on tax treatment, we should suspend our tax treaty with Moscow and explore options to remove other tax benefits from Russian businesses. The United States has income tax treaties with a number of foreign countries to facilitate investment and prevent double taxation of residents and businesses which operate in both countries. Under these tax treaties, residents, not necessarily citizens, of foreign countries are generally taxed at a reduced rate or exempt on certain items of income. It is important to note that these treaties reduce U.S. taxes on Russian residents and businesses, but they generally don't reduce the taxes of U.S. citizens or U.S. treaty residents. Instead, they would reduce Russian taxes for U.S. citizens.

President Biden has the constitutional authority to suspend our tax treaty between the United States and the Russian Federation. We need to pursue all options to isolate Russia and make it clear that there are consequences for their actions. The tax treaty is one more way to do that.

We should also follow the UK and suspend the exchange and sharing of tax information with Russia and Belarus. With Russia's hostile actions toward Ukraine, we should no longer incentivize U.S. investment in Russia or provide preferential tax treatment for Russian investment in the United States.

Fourth, on trade, there are two additional things we can do to bring pressure on President Putin and his allies. Access to our market is a privilege, not a right, and we should not give Russia the normal access. The House passed a law to suspend what is called ``most favored nation,'' or PNTR, for Russia last week, which some in the Senate oppose because it does not contain a statutory ban on Russian energy imports. Currently, the energy import ban can be undone at the whim of a President, rather than the legislative criteria about the restoration of Ukrainian sovereignty and the cessation of hostilities. So I agree with putting it in statute. I think that would be a good idea. But I also believe the urgency of the moment means that we have to find a way to stop preferred access to our market. Let's do it this week.

The International Trade Commission should also bring the full might of U.S. trade remedy law to bear on Russian companies which trade unfairly, similar to how we treat Chinese companies. Last week, I sent a bipartisan letter with Senator Brown to the ITC on this topic. The Commission is required by law to consider ``all relevant economic factors which have a bearing on the state of the industry in the United States.'' Given Russia's behavior, including its manipulation of trade flows in pursuit of malign strategic objectives and exceptional involvement of the state in the domestic economy, we ask the Commission to take these into account in cases involving Russia when they violate our trade laws.

The Commerce Department should reclassify Russia as a nonmarket economy, making it easier to bring unfair trade cases against them. It is appropriate to reclassify them because up to 77 percent of their economy is now run by the government. Commerce was asked to reclassify in the fall but retained Russia as a market economy, allegedly after a Russian delegation pressured the Biden administration. In light of the invasion, Commerce should reconsider that decision and ensure that Russia is reclassified as a nonmarket economy.

Now a handful of countries, like China and Belarus, are in that category. This means these countries don't have a free market. Instead, they have policies that restrict the flow of capital, involve government in the running of the economy, and don't allow wages to be set by free bargaining between labor and management. When a country is a nonmarket economy, it means our trade enforcers have an easier time of being tougher on those countries when they sell products here that are unfairly priced. It is time to do it.

Fifth, and maybe most important and most difficult, we need to lead our European allies on fully sanctioning Russia's energy sector. Russia's war machine is funded primarily through energy sales, including natural gas and oil to Europe. Probably the best way to persuade those persuadable in Russia is to cut off those resources, as we are doing here in the United States. It is going to be a lot more difficult for our allies in Europe to do that because many are dependent on Russian energy. But there are many steps the United States and other allies, like Qatar, can take to expand energy production here at home and help our allies abroad. LNG export contracts need to be finalized now and the export and import terminals quickly expanded. And that can be done.

Further, the Treasury Department's announcement that sanctions against Russia's biggest banks, including VTB Bank, do not apply to energy transactions until June 24--June 24 may be too late. That is unacceptable. We need to change that Treasury Department approach to sanctions against those biggest banks and ensure that we are applying them to energy transactions as soon as possible.

I would advocate for a similar approach in how we designated Iranian entities in 2018 when we left JCPOA. We did not issue sanctions waivers to European companies that continued to do business with Iran's economy, and that forced those companies to leave Iran's market, even though European governments weren't particularly supportive of that. That is what happened.

Some countries in Europe have not done enough to diversify their energy future in light of this invasion, which they are now financing, again, through the purchase of Russian gas. It can't be business as usual. We need to figure out a way to stop that revenue.

By the way, there is a connection between the Iran deal and Ukraine. Under the new Iran deal, secondary sanctions will be lifted on the Central Bank of Iran and all other Iranian financial institutions, enabling transactions between Russia and Iran, to include the Central Bank of Russia, Sberbank, and others. In other words, the Iran nuclear deal guarantees that Russia can use a sanctions-free Iran as a sanctions-evasion oasis. This should not stand.

The administration needs to reverse course here. Sanctioning Russia because of the barbaric war in Ukraine and then giving them a pass when it comes to the Iran nuclear deal is contradictory to our foreign policy interests. At the very least, this proposed treaty needs to be submitted to Congress as is required by law so that we can analyze that issue and make a decision.

We need to do more, and we need to do it quickly. I have outlined some of the actions we can take, and we should act fast to let the people of Ukraine know we stand with them. The popular Ukrainian rallying cry ``Slava Ukraini,'' when translated into English, is ``Glory to Ukraine.'' ``Slava Ukraini,'' to which the response is ``Glory to the Heroes,'' ``Heroyam Slava.''

In the midst of this atrocity, there are so many heroes to glorify in Ukraine: the soldiers, professionals, and civilians, alike, doctors and nurses and firefighters and the volunteers who are providing food and water and blankets. We pray for them all. We pray for their families.

Godspeed to the people of Ukraine in their simple and profound quest, a battle for a free and independent Ukraine. We must show the world that America supports that simple quest, that we stand with Ukraine.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I come to the floor again today to stand with the people of Ukraine.

What Russia is doing to Ukraine and its citizens is an atrocity. Ukraine is an American ally and an independent and democratic country of 41 million people who simply want to live in peace.

The Russian invasion is an illegal, unprovoked, and brutal assault that, over the past 19 days since the full-scale invasion began, has targeted and killed thousands of civilians. Americans have seen this atrocity in realtime with horrific videos online or on our television screens.

The videos and photos have sometimes been shocking. Remember the one of the woman who was on a stretcher, pregnant, leaving the maternity hospital that had been bombed by the Russians. We now learned that that woman and her baby have died. Today we learned that more journalists have been killed, including an American journalist, a FOX News cameraperson.

I just returned last night from a bipartisan congressional delegation trip to Poland, neighboring Ukraine. I was joined on that trip by Senator Klobuchar, Senator Wicker, and Senator Blumenthal. I see Senator Wicker is here on the floor. Senator Blumenthal is also here. Senator Klobuchar has a conflict. She wanted to be here, but she is going to be submitting her statement for the record to join us tonight.

We had a very emotional trip because we talked to a lot of the refugees coming out of Ukraine, talked about the incredible trauma they are going through. We also got some very sobering briefings when we were over there from our own team but also from the Polish Government, from people who were helping the refugees.

It is a very difficult situation. Poland is doing what they can to help their

neighbor. They have a special bond with Ukraine, and they are doing a lot. In fact, most of the nearly 2 million refugees who have fled Ukraine because of this invasion and the brutal attacks have come to Poland, where they have been met with open hearts and open homes. Literally, people in Poland are opening up their homes to these refugees. We were at the border, where some of these Polish families have come to welcome Ukrainians into their apartments, into their homes.

In addition to briefings from our U.S. Embassy team in Poland; the U.S. Embassy team from Ukraine, who is now in Poland; the U.S. military in Poland; and the Polish Government, we did go down to the border between Ukraine and Poland to meet with the border officials from Poland, U.S. and Polish international relief organizations, and, of course, with the refugees themselves who were streaming across the border.

Roughly, 100 refugees every minute are leaving Ukraine. It was heartbreaking to hear their stories. You can imagine. We spoke to them at the border crossing but also a couple miles away at what is called the reception center, a convention center that has been converted into a place where thousands of refugees can come, get a good night's sleep, maybe stay for a few days or even a few weeks, find food, find healthcare, find mental health treatment.

Most of this, by the way, has been donated. The Polish people have donated bed sheets and blankets and quilts. We worked there as volunteers with what is called the World Central Kitchen, something actually a Washington, DC, chef, Jose Andres, has set up at natural disaster areas to help feed people. He is now doing this on the border with Ukraine and in Ukraine. In fact, he has about 20 different World Central Kitchens set up. This one was at this reception center being used by refugee families who need to find some comfort and food, as they have made a long trek, in many cases, across Ukraine to get there.

There are also lots of displaced people in Ukraine itself, and those people are being helped by the same group, this World Central Kitchen. I thank them. I thank all the volunteers who give them support and help so that they can lend a hand at these reception centers and help these refugees along their way.

I also thank so many other volunteers we saw there from every organization: Catholic relief organizations, other faith-based organizations, the World Health Organization, and others.

We were at the border only about 6 hours after the Russian missiles had attacked and killed at least 35 and wounded more than 130 at a Ukrainian training center just 15 miles away. The border guards said they had felt the Earth tremble when the bombing attack occurred, again, just several hours before we got there.

This was the first Russian attack so close to the western border with Europe and so close to a NATO ally, a potentially dangerous new phase of the Russian assault.

We met refugees there from all over the country, the vast majority of whom were mothers with their children, sometimes grandmothers with their grandchildren. Men between 18 and 60 are required to stay and fight, so we heard some really tough stories about families being split apart and moms and wives and sisters wondering whether their sons and husbands and brothers who were in harm's way were still alive.

Some refugees had traveled by bus, some by foot, some on trains. Some had come over Ukraine for several days. They told of heart-wrenching stories of their homes being destroyed, of friends and family being wounded by the indiscriminate Russian bombing of civilian areas. They had backpacks or small suitcases; that is it. They had to travel and travel quickly and travel light. They left everything else behind, including, again, in some cases, family members.

Some, again, had been traveling for several days. One family we met from the eastern part of Ukraine said it had been over 2 weeks. Some who lived close to the border had only made the difficult decision to leave their homes that very morning after the bombing of the training center 15 miles away. Refugees spoke with tears in their eyes about the pain of leaving their homeland, and all the families I spoke with said they want to go back when it is safe.

Many said they appreciated what America had done, but just about every single refugee we talked to asked that the United States of America and other countries around the world do more particularly to stop the deadly bombing of civilian targets and the senseless destructions of their towns and cities.

In particular, they begged us to close the skies, as they said: Keep us from getting bombarded. Stop the carnage. They were very proud of the courage of the Ukrainian soldiers--they are patriots--and, of course, of the citizen soldiers, sometimes including their own family who have stepped forward. They were proud of the bravery and leadership of President Zelenskyy.

But consistent with what we have heard from the military experts on the trip and what many of us have heard directly from President Zelenskyy, these families, these refugees--the grandmothers, the mothers--said the ability to provide better air cover with more and better ways to protect them is what they really want.

What President Zelenskyy and others have said is better anti-air systems, better ways to protect against missile attacks, anti-missile systems, drones, airplanes--that that is the single most important thing we can do to save lives and give Ukrainian military fighters, the civilian soldiers we talked about--professional soldiers--give them a chance, give them a fighting chance.

Other countries on the frontlines also need to know we are with them, especially our NATO allies, because they are nervous, as you can imagine. While in Poland, we met with hundreds of 82nd Airborne troops who have come to Poland in the past couple of weeks, along with some troops from other NATO countries. We have gone from about 5,000 U.S. troops in Poland to about 10,000 troops over the past couple weeks, and the Polish Government and the Polish people are deeply appreciative. They believe that this it is a deterrent to Russia making an even bigger mistake and coming into their country.

We received extensive briefings from the Polish Government but also from the 82nd Airborne, and we were able to join troops for dinner to hear directly from them. I was fortunate there were a lot of Ohioans there, and hearing from them made me very, very proud that they were willing to step forward and serve their country in this way.

We listened carefully to everybody. We listened to the refugees, listened to the humanitarian aid workers, listened to the U.S. diplomats, to the military experts, as well as the Polish military officials. There were differences of opinion, to be sure, on some of the specifics but actually broad agreement on the ongoing role the United States can play.

Based on what we learned, the following steps should be taken immediately. First, on the military side, we have got to redouble our efforts to provide Ukraine with the equipment and the munitions they need and, where necessary, the immediate training to provide the air defenses they need to give them better capability--defense and offense.

Whether to facilitate providing more MiG-29s from Poland or not has been hotly debated in this past week. In my view, we should have done it when it got that initial green light from part of this Biden administration because the Ukrainians asked for them, and I don't believe they are any more escalatory, certainly, than the escalation the Russians are engaged in virtually every day and what we have done and continue to do on other weapon transfers. So we should have done it immediately and quietly. But the administration seems to have dug in on this for now, and it has become too much of a public debate. I would hope that at least they would facilitate spare parts and other assistance to keep the current Ukrainian planes flying.

Perhaps more promising is to immediately help Ukraine bolster its anti-air systems. The United States can and should facilitate the transfer of Soviet-era anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems so the Ukrainians know how to operate them. And there are a number of regional partners that have this equipment.

Without going into detail, this should also include extra munitions to replenish existing anti-air batteries

that the Ukrainians have. In conjunction with transferring anti-air systems and aircraft, we need to continue to provide Stingers and enhancements to them.

All can be useful in shooting down the Russian fighters and the missiles that are raining bombs on innocent Ukraine civilians and causing so much needless death and destruction. We must find ways to quickly provide Ukraine with more armed drones, such as the Turkish TB2, which the Ukrainians know how to use and have been devastatingly effective on the battlefield already.

Especially now that Congress has passed the omnibus spending bill with a bump-up for defense and specific additional security systems for Ukraine and higher drawdown authority for the President, there can be no excuse for a gap in the flow of arms to Ukraine. We want to be sure that this is seamless. As we complete one tranche of help to Ukraine, there cannot be a gap before we do another. We must move more quickly. Ukraine needs this help. It is a matter of hours and days, not a matter of weeks or months.

In addition to the items mentioned above, this also means more anti- tank Javelin missiles but also small arms, munitions, body armor, communications equipment, anti-tank, mining, anti-ship weapons, and more so the brave Ukrainian soldiers can continue to protect their country and their citizens.

Before I talk about the second part of this, which is the humanitarian side of this effort, I would like to ask my colleagues, whom I see are here on the floor with me, if they have any comments particularly about what Ukraine needs right now in terms of military assistance to be able to be effective or other comments that they might have.

The gentleman will yield.

Madam President, first I want to say that I appreciate my colleagues being on the floor tonight and their really moving statements about the crisis in Ukraine and the atrocities that are being committed there.

And I think what you did tonight is you added a lot of texture and perspective to the resolution that just passed this body by a unanimous vote. Nobody objected. We are now on record here in this body with a strong statement of support for Ukraine and strong opposition to the atrocities being committed and our commitment to do more.

So, again, I appreciated being with you in Poland, and I appreciated your coming to the floor tonight.

I am going to pick up where I had left off and talk a little more about what we can do because that is the real question that faces us here in the U.S. Senate.

We talked a lot about military assistance tonight, and we, again, I think, had a consensus among us as to what we need to do to help the Ukrainians

protect themselves, particularly from the aerial assault that they are under.

I know we also have another colleague who couldn't be here on the floor because of scheduling concerns, as I said earlier, Senator Klobuchar, but she will be making a statement for the record that will go along with our statements tonight. I look forward to seeing that.

The four of us got in at about midnight last night, and we come back with a heavy heart but also lots of advice for our government as to how we can do more.

On the humanitarian side, the United States has got a key role to play as well, not just on military assistance but on ensuring that people who are fleeing this conflict and people internally displaced have the help they need.

We support our European partners who have opened their homes, as I said earlier, and their borders to Ukrainian refugees. In fact, they have provided a 3-year visa, in essence, to Ukrainians in the European Union and permission to work, and this is, I think, a strong signal of the special relationship that the countries of the EU feel toward Ukraine, which I hope someday will be a member of the European Union, as do they.

Congress just passed some immediate help for Ukraine. It was in legislation called the Omnibus appropriations bill a few days ago. That will help AID here in the United States and other organizations around the world be able to help with these refugees and help those Ukrainians who are trapped in cities under siege. To me this is the No. 1 priority right now.

Cities like Mariupol--you probably read that people have been without food and water for days--for days. There was a child--a girl, apparently--who died of dehydration recently, and others are going to be finding themselves in an impossible situation, not knowing where their next meal may come from. So we need to help them, particularly in these cities in the east and the south of the country that are under such terrible siege and being surrounded.

This is an unprecedented humanitarian disaster, and it is being caused by Vladimir Putin's attack on Ukraine--Vladimir Putin's war and Russia's war. The actions that they have undertaken have created the largest movement of refugees in Europe since World War II. That is already. By the way, I favor seizing, rather than freezing, the assets of Kremlin officials and oligarchs and then providing those proceeds to the refugees. Doesn't that make sense?

So when a billionaire has his assets frozen, it is one thing; but when they are seized, as some countries have done--France, Germany--the United States needs to step up and do that as well. We should be leading on this, not following. That is another thing that we can do to help get proceeds to help with the humanitarian efforts.

But I also have a message tonight to those Russian officials and to the Russian commanders on the ground, which is that you have a choice to make. You can stop this atrocity. You can refuse the orders to kill innocent civilians. You can stop this atrocity that has already taken the lives of thousands of civilians--men, women and children, your neighbors--your neighbors--some with family connections to Russia, who want nothing more than just to live in peace. You can stop this atrocity. Disobey the orders. The world is watching, and the war crimes are being recorded. You have a choice.

On sanctions: We talked a little bit about this earlier tonight, but we need more and faster sanctions. We need to remove all Russian banks from their access to the global financial system. Russia must be financially cut off from the rest of the world, or it won't work. We have already seen the pain that we can inflict using a portion of our sanction authority. We need to do more.

We need to exert maximum pressure to ensure no money can be sent to Russia to fund the war effort. This is one reason it was so important that we finally stopped the importation of Russian oil and gas. Why would we want to send $40- or $50 million a day, which we were sending to Russia to be used for the war machine.

But we can implement full blocking sanctions on all Russian banks, and we can ensure that energy transactions are not exempt from these sanctions. That is very important, because right now there are some exemptions for energy.

Russia should not use its oil profits to kill innocent Ukrainians. That should be our principle. We should not allow money to flow down like water in cracks in the pavement. We should pass legislation to ensure that these funds stop--and not by June 24, which is in the sanctions that the administration has put forward, but now--blocking sanctions now, not for the energy sector transactions on June 24. That is too long.

I think we should move ahead with legislation to cut off most- favored-nation treatment. This is the permanent trade relationship with Russia we granted back in 2012, bringing them into the World Trade Organization. Access to the U.S. market is a privilege, not a right. And we should not only ensure that we are not giving Russia that privilege of access to our markets--lower tariffs of all kinds of products, including oil and gas--but also that other countries of the world follow suit. That way it would be much more effective.

But I would like to go beyond most-favored-nation treatment tonight and suggest that we also suspend our tax treaty with Russia. Why would we want to have a tax treaty that provides tax benefits to Russian businesses? Again, our principle there could be no tax breaks for invaders. That would make more sense.

We also need to sanction the Russian energy sector with currency and blocking sanctions, as I said, right now--not June 24. I know this is more difficult on the Europeans who are more dependent on Russia for energy, but there are many steps the United States can take to help expand energy production here at home and help our allies abroad.

I met with someone today who is trying to set up LNG terminals in places like Germany and also Ireland and other countries to bring liquefied natural gas to Europe. We have plenty of natural gas in this country. We are blessed with it. We should use it to help our allies.

Finally, I would like to advocate for a similar approach to how we designated Iranian entities in 2018, when we left the JCPOA. We did not issue sanctions or waivers to European companies that continued to do business with Iran's economy. We forced those companies to leave Iran's market, even at the displeasure of some of those governments. The bottom line: It can't be business as usual.

There is a popular Ukrainian national rallying cry, ``Slava Ukraini!'' When translated into English, it means ``Glory to Ukraine.'' ``Slava Ukraini.''

There is a response to that rallying cry, which is ``Glory to the Heroes.'' ``Heroiam Slava.'' So ``Slava Ukraini'' and in response, ``Heroiam Slava.''

And even in these dark times, there are many heroes. While we heard firsthand about the worst of humanity represented by the brutal bombings of civilian targets, we also saw the best of humanity at work. And we saw acts of kindness and generosity: Polish border guards helping carry suitcases of mothers who were overwhelmed as they carried young children in their arms, fleeing from the only home they have ever known; volunteers at the reception center where they provided healthcare and lodging and served thousands of meals a day to frightened and bewildered families who were waiting to move on to homes that generous Poles, Germans, and others in the EU had opened up for them.

In the midst of this atrocity, there are so many heroes to glorify in Ukraine. Yes, glory to the heroes: the brave border guards on Snake Island; the grandmother bravely walking up to Russian soldiers and handing them sunflower seeds, saying: If you don't leave, this is so that something beautiful will grow on your grave; the courageous President of Ukraine who when asked by western countries if they could help him escape, responded simply: ``I need ammunition, not a ride.''

``I need ammunition, not a ride.''

President Zelenskyy's bravery and resilience has been an inspiration to Ukrainians and freedom-loving people everywhere. Tomorrow, he will be here virtually in a joint session of Congress to talk to all of us, and I look forward to it.

Glory to the everyday heroes who are caring for the wounded, feeding desperate families huddling in basements and subway stations, glory to the professional soldiers and citizens alike who have taken up arms and are putting their lives on the line to defend their beloved homeland in the cause of freedom, against great odds. Glory to the heroes. Heroiam Slava. Godspeed to them in their battle for a free and independent Ukraine.

Some may ask--and some of my colleagues here have asked me: Why does a Senator from Ohio get involved in Ukraine? Why do you care? Well, tens of thousands of Ukrainian Americans call Ohio home, as do hundreds of thousands of others who trace their family to that part of the world; and it is an honor to represent them and their values.

I stood together with a thousand fellow Ohioans at a prayer service and rallied for Ukraine 2 weeks ago in Parma, OH, just outside of Cleveland. We prayed for family and friends in Ukraine who are in harm's way. We prayed for the courageous Ukrainian troops and asked for God's wisdom and blessing on the duly elected Government of Ukraine and, of course, for the protection of President Zelenskyy.

Ohioans like Andy Futey and Marta Liscynesky are rallying support across our State and coordinating efforts to provide humanitarian relief to those in need in Ukraine and in neighboring European countries. They are heading up through the United Ukrainian Organizations of Ohio a fund called the Fund to Aid Ukraine. I contributed to it. They do great work.

Two weeks ago, Sunday, I was honored to speak at an emotional rally in Washington, DC, much like the one in Parma, OH, only larger. Again, many Ohioans were there. And this past weekend on the border between Ukraine and Poland, Ohioans were there volunteering.

But even if I didn't have a single constituent of Ukrainian descent, I would be standing shoulder to shoulder with the people of Ukraine because this fight is our fight. This is where, in our generation at this time, all freedom-loving people are called to defend what we hold dear.

Eight years ago, Ukrainians made a choice. They stood up to a corrupt Russian-backed government. They stood up for freedom, for free markets, for peace and prosperity, and for the rule of law. They looked to America, and they looked to the EU. They chose freedom over tyranny. They chose a democracy over an authoritarian regime. I was there in 2014, right after the Heavenly Hundred who stood up to the corrupt Russian-backed government were killed in what was called the Euromaidan or the Revolution of Dignity. I saw firsthand then the commitment the people of Ukraine had to freedom and independence, to charting their own course.

Right now, those friends in Ukraine need our help. We cannot let this call to action go unanswered. We cannot sit by and watch as innocent civilians are brutally killed.

America and our allies must stand up for freedom, and the world is watching. Our friends are watching. Our adversaries are watching. We must show them that America stands with Ukraine.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I appreciate the comments from my colleague from Rhode Island. I would say ``all of the above'' energy, so I do support the energy efficiency he was talking about and other opportunities to ensure we have the ability to be energy independent. But at a time when the price per gallon is over $4, on average, we also need to produce more in this country.

And here we are at a time where we have an Executive order from the President, saying we are going to freeze all leases on public lands and waters. We have an Executive order from the President, obviously, stopping Keystone XL Pipeline.

We have an Executive action by the President to rewrite the policies with regard to permitting that are in the waters of the United States that are very important to energy projects. So we have got to do it all because, otherwise, without certainty, we are not going to get the oil and gas production we should have here to be able to substitute what we are getting from places like Russia.

The President did the right thing by banning the Russian oil, but we ought to also be doing the right thing with regard to North American production.

I stand today to support the Postal Service bill that is before us. We are nearing the end of a long journey to help the Postal Service and to help the Postmaster General to be able to implement needed reforms.

Last year, Senator Peters--who I see is on the floor here--and I introduced the Senate version of the Postal Reform Act. We had 28 cosponsors, equally divided between Republicans and Democrats.

Why? Because the Postal Service is not a partisan issue. It is something that all of us should agree on. We need to save our Postal Service; otherwise, we are going to be in big trouble. In the next few years, I believe it would go insolvent otherwise. I believe we would be here talking about a big bailout. This is not a bailout. In fact, there is no appropriation in this legislation.

The post office is really important to my constituents--young, old, rural, urban, everybody. That is why we have seen such strong bipartisan support when this bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 342 to 92--that rarely happens in the House--and strong bipartisan support last night when the Senate cloture vote was 74 to 17.

Saving the post office is the right thing to do. Let's face it. The fact of the matter is, the Postal Service is delivering less and less more profitable first-class mail to more and more places. That economic model just does not work, and that is a recipe for ruin if we don't adjust to this new reality and make some necessary changes.

Is it hard to make changes? Of course, it is, but it is the right thing to do. We have talked about it for years here. Finally, we came together, Republican and Democrat, neither of us got exactly what we wanted, both had to make concessions, but we were actually doing the right thing for the country here in saving the post office.

And I regularly hear about this from my constituents across Ohio; I am sure you hear the same. You hear it from your veterans. You hear it from some of your rural residents who depend on the post office for a lot, including their lifesaving medications. Families rely on the post office to deliver their rent checks on time, to pay their utility bills, to get their Social Security checks.

In Ohio, we have got no-excuse absentee voting. That has worked really well for over a decade now. But if you are a voter in Ohio, you want to get your application in time, and you want to get your ballot in, in time. That all depends on the post office. Small businesses in Ohio reach their customers primarily through direct mail now; that is through the post office.

So this is really important that we put the post office on a sound financial footing. And, by the way, it can't be done just with an act of Congress.

What we are doing is complementing what the Postmaster General and the postal Board is doing in terms of serious reforms at the post office. They work together. In fact, the Postmaster General said this bill he strongly supports because it gives him the headroom he needs, the financial breathing room he needs to make the other important reforms to save the post office.

What do we do? First, we eliminate a very burdensome prefunding requirement for retiree health benefits. Congress mandated this a decade or so ago. Regardless of age, current employees have to be prefunded. This has crippled the post office financially. By the way, no other Federal Agency has to do this, and private sector companies don't do this. This is prefunding. The money will be there, but it is a matter of having to prefund it that is crippling the post office financially.

Second, we require the post office employees who are retiring, who have been paying into Medicare their entire careers, to enroll in Medicare Part B and to access Part D--something, by the way, that almost every private sector employer does. They are already in Part A.

Third, we require the Postal Service to maintain its current standard of a 6-day-a-week delivery through an integrated delivery network of mail and packages together so that those who rely on the Postal Service for their medications and other important needs are properly served. That 6-day-a-week delivery, by the way, is really important to my constituents and to a lot of your constituents if you talk to them about it, particularly in the rural areas.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that after all of this, this bill will result in a savings to the taxpayer. The savings over the next 10 years is $1.5 billion.

I would also like to note what this bill does not do because there has been

some misinformation out there. One, it does not appropriate new funds to the post office, period. Two, it does not change the accounting or costing structure for packages and letters so it does not disadvantage private-sector carriers. That is very important to me. This is the status quo that we are putting in place here. It does not change the accounting or costing structure for packages and letters.

Third, it does not allow the Postal Service to enter into new commercial services like postal banking. That is also very important to me.

And contrary to the claims of this bill's opponents, this bill does not impact the solvency of the Medicare hospital trust fund. That is the trust fund we all talk about. It is going belly-up in 2026. It does not affect it, period. CBO has actually written us something saying that, but it just makes sense. People are already in Part A. And this bill does not increase the Medicare Part B and Part D premiums based on the CBO analysis. Why? Partly because it is such a small number of people. Only 25 percent of postal employees were not already in Part B and Part D, so additional ones make very little difference. But part of it is they are paying their premiums.

So let's pass this bill. We also have a budget point of order before us that is coming up next. I want to be clear, again, CBO's estimated $1.5 billion savings over the 10-year budget window that we have to use around here. However, CBO has estimated that this legislation would likely increase on budget deficits by $5 billion or more in at least one of the four 10-year periods beginning in 2032.

I would like to make three quick points: First, none of this deficit is related to the Medicare hospital insurance trust fund for Part A. Again, that is the trust fund that we talk about a lot here because we are concerned about it, and it could be exhausted as early as 2026. CBO has said that trust fund will not be affected. Second, CBO's deficit only addresses on-budget direct spending. It actually excludes all future savings to the post office, which are off-budget.

Let me give you an example of that. The premiums that Postal Service employees are going to pay, that is not part of the calculation.

Third, and finally, this budget point of order ignores that postal workers are entitled to Medicare Part B and Part D like any other eligible American worker. The bill simply requires future Postal Service retirees to access these benefits; the 25 percent that don't already do it. Private-sector employers require their retirees to do the same thing. Of course, no one raises these budget points of orders on them.

Right now, the post office is in trouble, folks, and if we don't do something and do something significant, working with the post office to make their own internal reforms, we are going to be in big trouble as I said earlier.

Let's move forward on this bill. Let's make sure the post office is healthy going forward for all of our constituents.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise in support of the Postal Service bill before us. It is important reform. People know this needs to be done. The vote in the House of Representatives was 342 to 92. It has to be done because the Postal Service's business model just doesn't work-- having to deliver more and more packages and fewer and fewer more profitable first-class mail pieces to more and more addresses. So we have got to do something to reform it.

Let me tell you what this bill does do and what it doesn't do--first of all, what it does not do. It is not an appropriation, so there is no money here going into the Postal Service from the taxpayer. It does not change the accounting or the cost structure for packages and letters. That way, it does not disadvantage the private sector carriers some were worried about. It also does not allow the Postal Service to enter into new commercial services like postal banking that we are against. Contrary to claims of some of the opponents, it actually does not impact the solvency of the trust fund. So the Medicare hospital trust fund we all worry about, predicted to expire in about 2026, this does not affect it at all. Postal Service employees are already in Part A. And it does not increase the Part B or the Part D premiums.

What this does do is it saves the post office, which is incredibly important to all of our constituents--to our veterans who get their prescription drugs through the mail, to people who are voting by mail, and to people who are relying on the Postal Service to provide them with what they need to be able to survive.

This is an important bill that has been worked on for 15 years. I thank my colleague Senator Peters from Michigan for working on a bipartisan basis on this.

Let's get it done tonight.

Madam President, I am proud to be a champion of the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act--or HABHRCA-- program. The program was first created in 1998 to help address harmful algal blooms in water bodies across the country. Congress recognized the devastating impact of harmful algal blooms, both ecologically and economically, and the importance of providing resources to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to advance scientific understanding of harmful algal blooms, as well as the ability to detect, monitor, assess, and predict bloom events.

In 2014 and again in 2018, I worked with then-Senator Bill Nelson to reauthorize the program in a bipartisan way. And in the 2014 legislation, I worked to ensure that freshwater bodies, specifically the Great Lakes, were a focus for the program for the first time. Since then, I have worked to secure funding for the HABHRCA program through the annual appropriations process.

I am pleased to report that, today, NOAA's work through the HABHRCA program is being used by my constituents and others across the Great Lakes basin. For example, I hear from the fishing and charter boat industries that they rely on NOAA's biweekly forecasts to monitor the location of the blooms so they know what areas of the lake to avoid in order to continue operating their tourism and fishing businesses.

It also helps our drinking water systems prevent contamination in drinking water because they are able to anticipate additional treatment needs if the location of the bloom is near a water intake valve. This will help prevent crises similar to the 2014 water crisis in Toledo, OH, in which nearly half a million people lost access to safe drinking water because a harmful algal bloom contaminated the city's water supply.

As cochair of the Senate Great Lakes Task Force, I am committed to ensuring our Great Lakes communities have the resources they need to create jobs and protect the water quality and health of the lakes.

My colleague from Florida, Senator Rubio, has a bill that would amend the HABHRCA program to require NOAA to conduct harmful algal bloom and hypoxia work specifically for the South Florida ecosystem. I am supportive of this legislation and of efforts to address harmful algal blooms across the country, so long as it does not take away or divert resources that are used in the Great Lakes.

To that end, I ask for unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from NOAA Administrator Spinrad committing that the work done in South Florida, such as would be the case with passage of Senator Rubio's legislation, S. 66, the South Florida Clean Coastal Waters Act, would have no impact on the resources and work currently being conducted to support the Great Lakes.

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

Madam President, I come to the Senate floor today to once again talk about the crisis in Ukraine and what we can do here to help.

Night has fallen in Ukraine and in Kyiv, Kharkiv, and other cities and towns. All through Ukraine, the bombing continues, the bombardment--artillery shells, missiles. Thousands of innocent Ukrainians have already lost their lives. We cannot let this stand. We need to work with our allies to stop these atrocities.

By the way, all over the country, people are standing up and speaking out.

A week ago Sunday, I was in Ohio with a thousand people--mostly Ukrainians, Americans of Ukrainian descent, but also people from everyplace: Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovenia, and so many other countries, and people who have been Americans for generations--who were standing together to say: This cannot stand. We had a prayer vigil and a demonstration. The prayer vigil was in a huge church, but it was an overflow crowd pouring out into the streets.

Yesterday, I came to Washington to join such a rally. It was in front of the White House, and again it included so many Ukrainians, including from Ohio, but so many others as well. The rallying cry was: We are all Ukrainians today because we all believe in democracy and freedom and the right for a country to chart its own course and for people to be independent and free. We had rabbis there; we had ministers there; we had clergy there from four or five different denominations--again, praying for the people of Ukraine.

We were all standing together, hoping that through joint action, we can help during these dark days for the people of Ukraine. We prayed for protection for those in harm's way, of course. We prayed for the courageous Ukrainian troops, some of whom are civilian soldiers who have just joined the armed forces for the first time. Some are seasoned professional soldiers, and we prayed for their protection--all of them.

We asked for God's wisdom and blessing on the duly-elected Government of Ukraine--again, duly-elected. We prayed for strength and resolve for President Zelenskyy and for his protection. He has been amazing. He has been resolute and courageous, and he has shown the Ukrainian people that the way forward was just to stand up to these barbarous acts.

If you care about America, you should care about Ukraine. Every freedom-loving country should care because in Ukraine today is where the fight for freedom is being waged. It is not just about Ukraine; it is also about the rest of the countries in Eastern Europe, of course-- Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Hungary, those countries. But it is also about the entire world, isn't it? It is about, can an authoritarian government step into a free, independent government and take over territory and kill its citizens?

By the way, Ukraine wants nothing but to live in peace. They are not looking to attack anybody. They just want to be able to lead a life where they can, in peace, pursue their dreams.

Just today, during the negotiations between the Ukrainian Government and the Russian Government, the Russian Federation, the Russians said that they would only allow humanitarian corridors to go from these cities that they are bombing, where they are killing civilians--they would only allow humanitarian corridors to go into Russia or into Belarus. Think about that for a minute. Innocent Ukrainian women and children who are fleeing the violence savagely and illegally brought on by Belarus and by Russia

are told: You can leave, but you will be forced to go to the land of your enemies. You are forced to go only to Belarus or Russia, the countries that are killing you and your family.

That doesn't sound like peace talks to me.

There have been numerous recorded war crimes in this assault on Ukraine. One is the way they are dealing with these civilians, obviously. President Putin and his generals and his officials must be held accountable. The Russian Federation's deliberate targeting of civilians is the most obvious example, but there are so many--the bombing of a nuclear powerplant.

It is now documented that yesterday--yesterday and into this morning--Russians shelled Ukrainian citizens who were fleeing the siege of Mariupol while they were transiting through a negotiated humanitarian withdrawal corridor--a corridor that was established for them to escape. They were shelled by Russian combat forces--civilians-- because Russians did not keep their word to allow for a humanitarian escape corridor in the besieged southern port city of Mariupol. Hundreds of thousands of people remain trapped without food and water, under regular bombardments.

Again, this is a tragedy on a scale difficult to comprehend. That is why it is so important to show our support with actions, not just words.

A number of my colleagues and I spoke to President Zelenskyy this weekend. It was emotional, and it was inspiring. He pleaded for our assistance to help his people, and he told us he needs defensive weaponry, like fighter planes and drones, desperately.

After the call, I led a bipartisan letter to President Biden with my colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Jeanne Shaheen. We repeated what we had called for over the last several days, which is to help Ukraine be able to get what they need, which is more air power.

Our Eastern European allies, including Poland, Bulgaria, and Slovakia, have older, Soviet-era aircraft, such as the MiG-29 and the Su-25, that they are willing to provide to Ukraine, but they would like to have an agreement with the United States that they can backfill over time by purchasing advanced fighters, such as F-16s.

By the way, the Poles, as an example, already have F-16s, but they already have these older MiGs that they are willing to provide.

This seems like a win-win for everybody--for Ukraine certainly but also for Poland to improve their defensive posture in the wake of what is going on in Ukraine.

The Soviet aircraft are compatible with the Ukrainian Air Force. Their pilots have the requisite training to operate them.

Again, we have been told they are willing to donate these aircraft when they are provided these assurances and a roadmap, that they will be allowed to purchase more advanced aircraft over time.

Let's make this happen. Let's not say we have to go through a long, bureaucratic process. Let's be creative here. They need these planes now. They needed them yesterday. This will help to stop some of the atrocities we talked about. Think of that column, miles and miles of armored vehicles and tanks heading towards Kyiv to kill more civilians. Some airpower would be very helpful right now.

And there are other capabilities such as communications gear, drones that can provide intelligence and surveillance and ammunition, all of it should be moving quickly into Ukraine. And I applaud the administration for what they have done, but we have got to do more.

We have all seen these horrible images on our television sets, families torn apart, the ravages of a needless war, the deliberate intentional targeting of civilians by rockets, even cluster munitions.

By providing lethal and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine, the U.S. sends a strong message: We stand for freedom, and we stand with freedom-loving countries.

I commend the administration for some of the steps they have taken, as I say, but we have got to do more.

I appreciate that we have sanctioned Russian banks, Russian elites, placed limits on high-tech commerce, Russia's ability to do business in dollars. That is all good. The Treasury Department has imposed sanctions on economic measures to target the core infrastructure of Russia and more than 50 percent of the total banking system of Russia, which will have devastating economic effects over time.

But let's put all the banks into that system. Let's do everything we can to tighten the noose on the Putin economy.

Some have asked me: Why does what is happening in Ukraine matter? I was home this weekend, and a lot of positive response, but people were also saying: Ukraine is a long way away, why does it matter so much?

I would say that this is where, in our generation, in our time, the cause of freedom is being defended. This is where, in our generation, in our time, we must protect those who wish to chart their own course, protect their sovereign independent country. And this is where we are being tested--not just the United States, but our allies and all freedom-loving people around the world.

When the people of Ukraine chose to get rid of a corrupt Russian- backed government 8 years ago--for a second time, by the way--they chose freedom over tyranny. They chose democracy over authoritarianism. They chose to ensure that the people of Ukraine would have the ability to be free and independent. That is what we freedom-loving countries of the world proclaim every day.

Now is the time not to shirk our responsibilities, but to step forward and help any way we can shoulder to shoulder with the people of Ukraine.

They are defending their homeland fiercely. They have already denied President Putin his early goals. He has severely underestimated the power of freedom and the power of the Ukrainian people; there is no question about that. But in Congress, we can and should do more. And the international community must do more to hold Russia accountable.

I say to the Russian commanders in the field and to the officials in Moscow: There is another choice. Stop this atrocity. Refuse the orders to kill innocent neighbors. Stop this atrocity that has already taken the lives of thousands of innocent civilians--men, women, and children--who want nothing other than to live in peace.

I say to those commanders and these officials: The world is watching. The war crimes are being recorded. You have a choice.

Here in Congress, we can do more to tighten the sanctions. We can do more to provide more military assistance to Ukraine. There is bipartisan agreement on so much of this, including the need to cut off the funding that is going to the Putin economy and his war machine. One example of this, but one important one, is not to buy Russian oil and send blood money to Russia. Why would we be importing Russian oil, sending Russia $40, $50 million a day? That makes no sense.

Let's use our natural resources here in North America. We have the resources here. We should not be dependent on the Russian oil. We should not be sending them this blood money.

By the way, there is bipartisan agreement on this. Last week, I joined legislation with Republicans and Democrats alike, equal number, with Senator Murkowski and Senator Manchin, to do just that.

We need to stop all Russian banks from their access to the international banking system--not some; all. I commend the administration's sanctioning of Russian oligarchs and wealthy citizens, but we need to do more. We need to move from freezing assets to seizing assets. We can do that. Other countries have done it. By the way, Germany has done it. France has done it. We should be out front as Americans and not just freezing but seizing. By the way, those assets that we seize should go to the people of Ukraine to help with the humanitarian effort that is underway.

Right now, our friends in Ukraine need our help. Right now. Immediately. Yesterday. They can't wait. We have an emergency supplemental bill we are working on here in Congress. Let's get it done. Let's do it outside of the omnibus or the CR or anything else. We know what needs to be done. Let's not wait. Let's not dither. The shells are flying tonight, raining upon the cities of Ukraine and its people.

We cannot let this call to action go unanswered. We cannot let the Ukrainian people continue to be at the mercy of a tyrannical dictator. We cannot sit by and watch as innocent civilians are being killed. In the West, in America, we must stand up--all of us--for freedom. The world is watching. Our allies are watching. Our adversaries are watching.

We must show the world that America does stand for freedom, and we stand with Ukraine.

God bless Ukraine. Or as the Ukrainian people say: Glory to Ukraine, glory to the heroes. Slava Ukraini, heroyam slava.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I am here on the floor today to talk about Postal Service reform. We have another vote this afternoon.

And this is incredibly important to the people I represent and whom all of us represent. It is important because the Postal Service is something people depend on for so much. This legislation we are talking about has been in the works for years. It is a bill to try to save the post office from insolvency. And if we don't act on this, I believe in the next few years we will be back here with a big bailout for the Postal Service because they are having a tough time financially.

The combination of this legislation that we will pass and some internal reforms that the post office is making should be enough to get the post office back on track.

The Postal Service has a Postmaster General right now who is absolutely committed to that--making the post office more effective, more efficient--but he needs a little breathing room, as he says, and that is what we are doing here in Congress. It doesn't cost the taxpayer anything. By the way, if we don't do this, in a few years, it would cost the taxpayers a lot in terms of a bailout, and I am afraid it would happen.

The post office, again, is so important. It is definitely worth saving. Our country is pretty divided right now--let's be honest--but one enduring reality about our country is that we have a post office that ties us all together, and everybody depends on that post office.

By the way, it has been that way for a long time. In 1775, 3 months after the battles of Lexington and Concord--so this is 1775, before the Revolution was finalized in 1776. During that time, the delegates to the Second Continental Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin as the Postmaster General. And why was this so important? Franklin was one of the Founding Fathers, and this was considered to be a really crucial post because the new Postal Service offered a way for the colonists to talk to each other, to communicate, for Revolutionary leaders to be able to strategize with each other outside of the official British channels.

So the post office has that rich history, and it continues to bind us today. In Ohio, it ensures that veterans get their medications that they get through the mail. And believe me, that is important to them, to get it on time.

It allows for absentee voters. In Ohio we have no-fault absentee. We have had it for years. It works well, but it requires the post office to do its job and obviously to not just deliver the absentee forms but to get the ballots in on time.

It is also crucial for people to get their rent checks in or to be sure that they get their utility bill on time. It is for people's financial statements from their banks. But, also, the post office still delivers birthday cards, thank-you notes, and personal letters that strengthen the bonds of family and friendship. So our Postal Service binds us together at a time when we are increasingly polarized.

Let's talk about what this particular legislation does. How does it save the post office? First, very simply, the bill makes sure the post office is going to be on a strong footing for the future by relieving the Postal Service of an obligation that virtually nobody else has-- nobody in the Federal Government--which is to prefund retiree health benefits.

Now, if you are in a private company and you are listening to this, I am almost sure you don't prefund your retirement healthcare benefits. People don't do that. In the Federal Government, we don't do that. We don't do it here in Congress. Yet the post office has that obligation.

This would allow the post office, by getting out from under that obligation, to reconcile its books more accurately and to focus on immediate obligations. They should focus on those immediate obligations but not the prefunding.

Second, this bill requires postal employees who retire in the future to enroll in Medicare Part B and Part D. So hospitalization, Part A, people are already signed up for that--everybody is. But for Part B and Part D--doctors' visits, prescription drugs--about 25 percent of the people who work for the post office are not signed up for that. And by putting that 25 percent into there, it helps to save a lot of money for the post office and the taxpayers. Taxpayers will save about $1.5 billion based on this legislation, and a lot of it is because of that change. The employee health benefit plan that they would otherwise be in is a more generous plan, and that is how you get those savings.

Third, the bill requires the post office to maintain its current standard of 6-day delivery. That is important to a lot of my constituents, particularly in the rural areas--they like getting their mail--and to do it through an integrated delivery system of mail and packages together. That, of course, makes sense. You don't want separate systems going out for packages and for mail. That is what they do now, so this is really just restating the status quo, and that is very important. For some of the private-sector companies that provide delivery services, they want to know that this is just the status quo; we are not talking about any changes.

Both sides of the aisle have talked to me about this 6-day delivery. I know that wherever people have a rural area in their State, this is particularly important. It ensures that people are going to receive their medications, their checks, their correspondence on a timely and predictable basis.

So this bill shores up the post office, and it does it in a way that actually saves money. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates, as I said, this legislation will save taxpayers $1.5 billion, so it doesn't cost taxpayers anything. It is not the appropriation of more money, but over 10 years it saves that money.

CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, which is the nonpartisan body up here that looks at the economic impact of legislation, has told us recently that this bill will not affect the solvency of the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. That is the trust fund we talk about a lot here that we are concerned that it is going to become insolvent in only a short number of years and that that is going to cause problems for Medicare. That trust fund is not touched by this legislation.

CBO has also made it clear that the bill will not increase Part B or Part D premiums--again, Part B, doctors' visits; Part D, prescription drugs. That is very important because a lot of people have concerns about that. And one reason it doesn't affect it, by the way, is there is only a small number of postal employees--only 25 percent of them-- who would become part of that, so it is a drop in the bucket compared to the number of people on Medicare. There are probably 60-some million people--that would be 61, 62 million people in Medicare, and this is between 14,000 and maybe 80,000 people who would be added to Part B and Part D. So it does not affect the premiums. By the way, these people have been paying into Medicare for their whole career, so it is appropriate that they go into Part B and Part D.

This is a good bill, and I think that is why it passed the House with such a strong vote. It passed with a bipartisan vote in the House of 342 to 92. That rarely happens, particularly in the House of Representatives. So that is an indication of what kind of legislation this is.

It is popular because it is about saving the post office, and it is popular because it does so without asking the taxpayers to step up and do more. In

fact, it saves some money. And it is popular because we have worked together on this. We have each side made concessions. Is it the perfect bill that I would have written? No. The same as my colleague from Michigan, who has just arrived on the Democratic side. He would have written it differently in a number of respects. I know that because he had to make concessions; we had to make concessions. But we ended up with legislation that does the job, and that is what is important: to put the post office in a position to succeed in its critical mission to provide essential services to small businesses, to our veterans, to our seniors, to our rural constituents.

Let's pass this bill, and let's ensure the post office is healthy for all those folks we represent back home.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I want to start by commending my colleague from South Carolina. He just spoke about his police modernization efforts over the years and of his passionate commitment to this issue, which comes from his heart.

I hope that the other side is hearing that because I think there is an opportunity now to come together, particularly in light of the speech the other night by the President, to say, let's do two things. One, let's help these communities to be able to be safer and help the people who live there, but, also, let's increase the amount of respect and gratitude for our police officers. Those two are not inconsistent. In fact, they are complementary. That is why I appreciate the work that he has done and will do.

Ukraine

Madam President, tonight, in Ukraine, the bombs are already raining down on the cities of Kharkiv, of Kyiv, and other towns and cities throughout Ukraine. Indiscriminate bombings--artillery, missiles--are killing innocent civilians. Already, thousands of civilians have been killed.

This was a totally unwarranted, unjustified, atrocious invasion of a free country, of an independent sovereign country. Here on the floor of the Senate we have an opportunity to do something about it, which is to act on legislation called the supplemental appropriations bill, which provides more funding and help for two things: one, the military response.

We need to do everything we can--we need to flood the zone--to help the Ukrainians be able to defend themselves. They want more help, and they need more help, and I think the American taxpayer, from what we have already done, should be proud of that, but we need to do more and do it quickly. We can't wait for the redtape and the bureaucracy to finish up before we send small arms, before we send more Stingers to be able to shoot down airplanes, or more Javelins to stop these tanks that are coming into Kyiv. You saw that long column.

We should do more. We should provide more funding for the kind of airplanes that we don't have but that other countries do that they might be willing to provide, we are told, if we provide compensation to them--MiG fighters that they can use--because airpower is so important.

We should provide more in terms of the drones that countries like Turkey can provide, and we can help finance, to be able to give them the ability to do things like stop that murderous column that is on its way to kill civilians in Kyiv tonight.

So my hope is that, on both sides of the aisle, we put aside whatever differences we have and focus on this immediately. The funding is needed to be able to ensure that we have a sustained effort here-- because this is not going to be a matter of hours or days; it is going to be a matter of weeks and months--and we need to do everything we can do to help the freedom-loving people of Ukraine defend their liberty, their freedom, their independence, their sovereignty.

So I encourage my colleagues to join us in support of this legislation. Let's put the Postal Service in a position to succeed, and let's provide those essential services to the small businesses, veterans, the elderly, rural constituents, who rely on it so much--the prescription drugs we talked about, the Social Security checks, the rent checks, the utility checks, and the ballots.

I appreciate working with my colleague Senator Gary Peters on this, over time, to try to find a consensus, to try to find a way forward that was bipartisan, bicameral, where we could actually do something after years and years of talking about what bad shape the post office is in financially, to do something to right the ship, to ensure it will be there for the future.

Let's pass this bill, and let's do ensure that the post office is healthy for all the folks we represent going forward.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, first, I want to thank my colleague who just spoke about some really important issues.

Senator Grassley from Iowa talked about the fentanyl crisis that is facing our country. Unfortunately, this synthetic opioid is now killing more and more Americans. We are back to record levels of overdose deaths, and probably two-thirds of them are caused by fentanyl.

He is absolutely right. We need to be sure it is scheduled clearly as an illegal drug, as well as all the variants of it.

Strengthening American Cybersecurity Act of 2022

Mr. President, I am coming on the floor today to talk about another issue that is really important to our country, and that is protecting us from cyber attacks.

Last night, I commend this body because the U.S. Senate passed legislation called the Strengthening American Cybersecurity Act of 2022.

What does that mean? It means that we took the time to do our homework, had hearings, and reported out legislation that helps protect our government data, including personal data of American citizens, but also our national security data and other sensitive information from cyber attacks.

Also, we put in place provisions to help protect the private sector, particularly critical infrastructure.

With what is going on right now around the world, particularly with regard to Russia and Ukraine, it is incredibly important that we put up better defenses here in this country, as well as helping Ukraine and other countries to fight against these cyber attacks.

In recent years, we have seen this time and time again. I am sure you remember the Colonial Pipeline. Remember, they shut down gasoline distribution to the eastern part of the United States. These were cyber attacks.

You probably heard of some of these other cyber attacks, like SolarWinds or ones where these criminal gangs demand a ransom using so- called ransomware. This is happening increasingly.

Again, my concern is, particularly with what is going on today in our volatile and dangerous world, that it will continue to happen and even become much more dangerous for us.

The House of Representatives now has a chance to take up this legislation and pass it. They have been working with us on this all along on a bicameral basis, the House and the Senate, Republican and Democrat. This hasn't been a partisan issue. It has been one of these issues where we have worked together.

Senator Peters, who is the chair of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee--I am the ranking Republican, top Republican--we have worked together on this, but so did a lot of other members across the aisle.

Senator Rubio and Senator Warner, Senator Collins, and others, they vitally represent the Intelligence Committee, which also has a strong interest in this.

In my role as the ranking member on Homeland Security, we spend a lot of time focused on the oversight of this issue, how to respond to things like SolarWinds we talked about or Colonial Pipeline or other cyber attacks. What we have found is that these cyber attacks are increasingly sophisticated and that our own government doesn't have the tools they need, and that is why this legislation is so important.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an atrocity. It must not stand. But one of the things they have done in Ukraine for the last 8 years--and, really, before that as well, but particularly the last 8 years, since 2014 when Ukraine decided to turn to the West, to turn to us--is Russia had done these cyber attacks relentlessly in Ukraine. And they are stepping them up right now, along with the horrible scenes we see of the bombings of innocent civilians in their apartment buildings. I saw today that not only have hospitals and childcare institutions been bombed but also the Holocaust memorial in Kyiv has been damaged. So what the Russians are doing is appalling, and the entire freedom-loving world needs to stand up to it, and we need to help Ukraine more.

But one thing they have also done is they have launched these cyber attacks against the Ukrainian Government and against the private sector infrastructure in Ukraine. That, too, is a place where we can help.

But, again, we need to be sure that we have our own house in order here to be able to be more helpful, to be able to provide the best practices, and to help Ukraine be able to deal with these attacks, both kinetic attacks, these military attacks, and also the cyber attacks.

Many times, the cyber attacks are also mixed with disinformation attacks because the Russians are flooding the zone and trying to take their disinformation and their lies and spread it around to the Ukrainian people. By the way, not many people are

believing it anymore because it is so outrageous.

In China, we see another sophisticated cyber adversary ramping up their rhetoric and their incursion into Taiwan's air defense zone. All these threats make enacting this legislation we passed last night all the more important.

Legislation has three complementary bills combined into one. First, it will protect our critical infrastructure better from cyber attacks by increasing our visibility as a country into these cyber attacks and building the government's ability to warn potential victims and mount a nationwide defense and provide best practices to our critical infrastructure.

It will strengthen the government's own response and recovery capabilities, protecting sensitive data as well. And, finally, it will make government acquisition and use of cloud services more secure, more accountable, more efficient, and, significantly, keep countries like China and Russia from being able to access the cloud.

All of these bills were passed out of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee with strong bipartisan support. And, again, it passed the Senate overwhelmingly last night.

The first of these bills that I mentioned is called the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act. Cyber attacks against U.S. critical infrastructure, whether by foreign governments, like Russia and China, or criminal organizations, are, of course, a serious national security threat.

Today, no one U.S. Government agency has visibility into all the cyber attacks occurring against critical infrastructure on a daily basis. We need that. We need to know what is going on to be able to warn other infrastructure and to be able to respond quickly.

Right now, if Russia initiates a cyber campaign against U.S. critical infrastructure, there would be nothing to ensure that the U.S. Government is notified of that so it can mount a nationwide response and, again, warn other critical infrastructure operators similarly situated.

This bill would change that, enabling a coordinated, informed U.S. response to cyber attacks against the United States.

The Cyber Incident Reporting Act will require critical infrastructure owners and operators to report substantial cyber attacks within 72 hours and ransomware payments within 24 hours to what is called the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. It is called CISA.

CISA has done an effective job in the Trump administration, now in the Biden administration, but they need these tools to be able to do a better job.

CISA having this information will be able to use the data to immediately contact the FBI and other appropriate law enforcement but also to help with best practices to mitigate the damage and to warn other critical infrastructures of threats, help these victims recover, analyze trends, and enable a whole-of-the-nation defense and response to these attacks.

It is a cyber attack. It is not soldiers with guns, but it can have some of the same horrible impacts and damage to our economy and to individuals. Again, think of the oil pipeline, Colonial Pipeline, being basically shut off to the whole East Coast of the United States.

The second bill that is part of this package is called the Federal Information Cyber Security Modernization Act, or FISMA.

FISMA is the acronym for the way in which we protect our Federal Agencies. And, unfortunately, we know that Federal Agencies--government Agencies--have failed to protect Americans' data--our data, personal data.

Last August, I released a report with Chairman Peters detailing the significant cyber security vulnerabilities of eight different key Federal Agencies--Homeland Security, State, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Education, and the Social Security Administration--the Social Security Administration where a lot of our sensitive information is kept.

This report that we issued followed a report just a few years ago, in 2019, that I issued with Senator Carper when I was chair of the Permanent Committee on Investigations, and we investigated all eight of these Agencies to determine how they were doing in terms of pushing back against cyber attacks.

In last year's report, only the Department of Homeland Security had an effective cyber security program. No other Agency we reviewed met the standard. And we found that, governmentwide, the average cyber security grade in pushing back against these cyber attacks was a C- minus--not the grade I would have wanted to take home to my parents. But that is the truth. We are just not prepared.

The report identifies several common Agency vulnerabilities, including the failure to protect personally identifiable information. Again, think about some of these Agencies, HHS or Social Security. That is a big issue; second, maintain an accurate list of the Agencies' IT equipment so they know what they have; third, install security patches quickly; and, fourth, replace vulnerable and insecure legacy technology. A lot of these Agencies have technology that needs to be updated that is stovepiped--in other words, isn't working well together and that makes it difficult to push back against these cyber attacks.

In the 7 years since FISMA was last updated, Federal Agencies have had these same vulnerabilities year after year, putting America's data at risk. So this legislation takes the important steps to remedy these systemic problems we identified. It incorporates recommendations from my bipartisan reports with Senator Peters and Senator Carper and will adopt a risk-based approach to cyber security budgeting; position the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency--CISA, we talked about earlier--as the lead Agency in securing these Federal networks. There needs to be accountability, and that is missing now.

We need to require Agencies to notify Americans whose personal identifiable information is compromised during a breach. To me, this is just a basic requirement for government. If you have personal information that has been breached because the government system has not been properly protected, you ought to be told about that so you can take your own steps to protect yourself.

Complement the Cyber Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act by ensuring that Federal Agencies and contractors also notify CISA when they suffer a breach. We talked about that earlier. But having that information is very helpful.

And, finally, update the requirements for congressional notification when an Agency suffers a major cyber incident.

We have an oversight responsibility here. We need to know if there has been a major cyber attack.

Finally, this legislation includes a third part, which is called the FedRAMP Authorization Act. This is the one that will authorize the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program that deals with cloud computing and protecting the cloud. FedRAMP is a governmentwide program administered by the General Services Administration that provides Agencies and cloud service providers with a standard approach to evaluating, authorizing, and monitoring the security of cloud services. So when a Federal Government Agency wants to use the cloud services, they have to go through this process.

In the first 4 years of FedRAMP, the program authorized only 20 cloud service providers. Today, there are more than 230 cloud service providers--30 percent of which are small businesses. This act builds on the successes of FedRAMP and Agencies' continued push to adopt commercial cloud solutions by addressing existing costs and processing times.

But it also includes measures to strengthen the government's response to foreign interference in our cloud systems. Supply chain security experts have warned us about the weaknesses in FedRAMP that leave our cloud systems vulnerable to interference from countries like Russia and China, North Korea, Iran.

The reforms in this bill will allow for increased transparency and better monitoring of possible foreign influences in FedRAMP-approved systems. For example, it requires an Agency to review, on an interagency basis, government standards to identify and assess the origin of software and code to

provide the transparency and accountability needed into the FedRAMP- approved systems that are developed and maintained by foreign engineers in countries like Russia and China.

This bill also requires private-sector, third-party assessment organizations to disclose to GSA any information they have related to any foreign interests, any foreign influences, any foreign control, of course, or ownership, and to report a change in foreign ownership or control to GSA within 48 hours.

We have had instances like this where we are using cloud-based services that then become bought by a foreign entity and that is not reported and therefore they continue to provide these services, which is something we need to stop.

I commend the hard work of so many of my colleagues in crafting this broader legislation, including Chairman Peters, Chairman Warner, Ranking Member Rubio, Senator Collins of the Intelligence Committee, as well as so many other colleagues on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the Intel Committee.

I also want to thank our colleagues in the House, particularly Representatives Clarke and Katko, because this has been a truly bicameral exercise, both in terms of the oversight and identifying what the problems are and coming up with appropriate legislation.

And by the way, this legislation is strongly supported by those in the administration who are responsible for dealing with cyber attacks. They need these tools, and they want these tools.

We are not done yet because it has just passed the Senate. It has not passed the House. But we need to move quickly to enact these important changes to modernize our cyber security posture.

I urge the House to act quickly, to be sure we can protect ourselves from cyber attacks, particularly in this increasingly dangerous environment. I would hope that we could send this critically important legislation to the President's desk for signature very soon and be sure we are doing all we know to do to be able to better protect our country and our citizens in cyber attacks.

Madam President, I rise today in support of the legislation that my colleague from Michigan just talked about. This is H.R. 3076, the Postal Service Reform Act. What it really is, though, is ensuring that the post office works, that it works for the constituents whom I represent and people all around the country.

Unfortunately, right now, the post office is in trouble. It is in dire need of reform, and if we don't do it, we are going to have big problems. The post office just had its 15th consecutive annual net loss in 2021, and they projected they are going to be insolvent in the next few years unless we make these reforms and other reforms as well that can be made by the post office itself. In fact, they project a 10-year loss of $160 billion if we just continue with the status quo.

The reality is that the Postal Service is delivering less and less first-class mail. We are all online. We are not sending as many letters as we used to. Yet there are more and more addresses that they deliver to because more and more people want to get the mail they do deliver, the packages, the direct mail, and so on. So it doesn't work. It is a recipe for ruin if we don't adjust to the new reality and make some necessary changes.

Last year, Senator Peters and I did introduce the legislation he talked about. We had 26 cosponsors, equally divided between Republicans and Democrats. We kept this bipartisan from the start. In fact, I would even say we tried to keep it nonpartisan. What could be more nonpartisan than trying to save the post office? Everybody cares about the post office and wants to be sure it is working well and working efficiently. It is not a partisan issue; it is of importance to all Americans--young, old, urban, rural, everybody.

I hear a lot about it back home from my constituents. A constituent from Butler County, OH, wrote me recently and said:

My father, a veteran of the Vietnam war, has COPD and is 70

years old. He receives his lifesaving medication through the

mail. My father can't breathe without his daily inhaler.

We have to be sure the post office works for him.

A constituent from Montgomery County wrote:

As a disabled veteran, I need to vote by mail.

We have the ability to vote by mail in Ohio. It is no-fault absentee. But it requires the Postal Service to work, right? It doesn't work well if the ballot is late and is not counted.

A constituent from Richland County, OH, wrote:

The post office is essential to millions of Americans,

including seniors and veterans who depend on it for

medications, small business owners who are already

struggling.

Everybody. Everybody.

Putting the Postal Service on sound financial footing cannot be accomplished through an act of Congress alone. This is not just about passing a law here. We are going to do that. We had a good vote last night, and I think we will get more people supporting it, I hope, as we go through the week. But it is also about reforms that the post office is going to make itself.

The current Postmaster General, Louis DeJoy, has embarked on an ambitious plan to transform the Postal Service by finding efficiencies, including transforming existing capabilities to more efficiently meet the needs of the American people. He is taking on a 10-year plan to make certain changes to make the post office more efficient, but he has made clear to us that he needs the financial space to do that. He needs some headroom here by us making some important changes here in Congress.

We have a role to play too. This is what we do:

First, we eliminate a burdensome and unique prefunding requirement for retiree health benefits. Congress mandated this back in 2006 for current employees, regardless of age. That has crippled the Postal Service financially. Prefunding of retiree health benefits is not something that anybody else has to do. It is really uniquely the post office. The Federal Government does not do that. The private sector does not do that. In fact, very few private sector entities, of course, offer retiree health benefits. They rely on Medicare. So the Federal Government doesn't do it. The private sector doesn't do it. Why is the post office doing it? That is a good question. We are just trying to bring the post office in line with what everybody else is doing with regard to retiree health benefits.

Second, it requires Postal Service employees who are retiring--who have been paying into Medicare their entire career, by the way--to actually enroll in Medicare Part B and Part D. Everybody is in Part A, but about 25 percent of postal employees are not in Part B. Instead, they rely on the Federal employee health benefit plan, which is far more expensive.

This includes the ability for these post office retirees to get into Medicare Advantage. That is very important to me. So just like happens under current opportunities to enroll in Medicare Advantage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, they would be able to use the Medicare Advantage Program, which I like. It is kind of a wraparound program that gives you more opportunities for more options and benefits. It is more like a private sector plan. A lot of my constituents in Ohio like it and use it.

Currently, again, about 25 percent of postal employees don't enroll in Medicare even though they are eligible for it. Again, they paid their HI payroll tax, the HI tax you see on your paycheck. This means the Postal Service is currently paying higher premiums for FEHB than other public or private sector employers who require Medicare. This is a big savings for them.

Third, it requires the Postal Service to maintain its current standard of 6-day-a-week delivery through an integrated delivery network of mail and packages. This was important to a lot of my colleagues--particularly those representing rural areas--that they keep this 6-day-a-week delivery. It is important to the guy who is from Butler County who gets his COPD medication through the mail. So it requires the post office to continue to do that even while finding other efficiencies.

In terms of the integrated delivery network of mail and packages together, it underscores through a rule of construction that this has no impact on existing rules governing how the Postal Service attributes costs between packages and mail.

Let me repeat that. We provide for an integrated delivery system of mail and packages, and that makes sense. If you are going to deliver mail to somebody, you should also be delivering the package, right? That is much more efficient. But we say that this has no impact on existing rules governing how the Postal Service attributes costs between packages and mail.

This is important to me because this makes sure that the private sector will not be subject to unfair competition.

In addition to doing all of these things, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill will result in a little more than $1 billion in savings in outlays and $458 million in savings in direct spending.

The bottom line is, the Congressional Budget Office, CBO, the nonpartisan group up here in Congress, has looked at this and said there is going to be a $1.5 billion savings to the taxpayer because of this legislation--$1.5 billion savings to the taxpayer.

Because it makes sense, this legislation received strong bipartisan support when it was taken up in the House of Representatives. In fact, it was passed by a vote of 342 to 92. Not much gets passed with those kinds of big bipartisan numbers these days. Republicans and Democrats alike looked at this and said: You know, the post office is in trouble. We have to do something.

Some say: Well, this may not be perfect. Well, it is not perfect. Nothing is around here. But it is a whole lot better than the alternative, and it does get the post office back on track.

Again, along with the reforms that are being undertaken at the Postal Service itself, this legislation gives them the financial breathing room they need to be able to save the post office.

I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. Let's put the post office in a position to succeed and provide those essential services that small businesses, veterans, and rural constituents rely on so much.

I appreciate working with my colleague Senator Peters on this over time to find consensus. Both sides had to make concessions to get to this point. We have ended up with a good bill. Let's pass this bill and ensure that the post office is healthy for our constituents moving forward.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, this is the fourth time I have come to the floor of the Senate in the past month to talk about the crisis in Ukraine and to talk about what we can do here in the U.S. Congress to try to help the great people of Ukraine.

Today, I come to the floor to express my solidarity with the courageous people of Ukraine, who, as we speak, are under attack in Kyiv and Kharkiv, and in so many other cities and towns throughout Ukraine.

Russia's attack on Ukraine is a brutal, unprovoked invasion of a democracy--an ally and a sovereign nation. It must not be allowed to stand or it will create a precedent that unravels the international order that has kept the peace in Europe for nearly 80 years.

Earlier today, Senator Durbin and I organized a meeting of the Ukraine Caucus. We are the cochairs. We had Ambassador Markarova come, who is the Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States. Along with her came a member of the Rada, their Parliament, who happened to be in the United States when the attack began. They spoke with emotion about their country, about what they needed--Stinger missiles, Javelin missiles--to be able to fight against superior Russian air power and Russian tanks.

But they also spoke with compassion about the people of Ukraine, about the sacrifice and the courage that they are showing. From the woman who has never fought before who now has an AK-47 and is defending her family in her apartment building to the President of the Republic, President Zelenskyy, all of them are showing courage in defending their homeland, their way of life, and democracy.

I also just left a briefing that was an opportunity to hear from the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and other American officials about what we are doing as a country and to give us an update on their view as to what is happening in Ukraine.

Just as the conversation with Ambassador Markarova and a member of the Rada was inspiring to hear about the courage and the resilience of the people of Ukraine, the briefing with our American officials was sobering.

It was encouraging to see America stand up to protect freedom; but also, an understanding that the Russian forces outnumber those in Ukraine--and certainly their equipment, technology, their planes, and their tanks, and their ships are going to make this a very, very difficult battle.

Thankfully, the world is rallying on this side of freedom. That is encouraging and inspiring.

I was in Cleveland, OH, last night at a prayer vigil and then a rally. Over 1,000 people showed up. Many were Ukrainian Americans who live in Northeast Ohio--it is a strong community--but many were not. Many were from other countries: Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, people who have family from Romania, Bulgaria, people from the entire region--including some from Russia--but all standing firmly with the people of Ukraine.

As was said last night at the prayer vigil: Tonight, we are all Ukrainians. Tonight, we are all Ukrainians.

There were also demonstrations and rallies all around the country yesterday. We are told over 40 cities had rallies to support Ukraine and the people of Ukraine.

Last night, I heard stories about family members who are in harm's way. Again, people with their voices choked with emotion were talking about what is going on, what they are hearing from their family members back in Ukraine. One guy who I know told me that his brother-in-law back in Ukraine who, again, has never picked up a weapon before in his life, has joined the military. He is probably about my age. He has joined the military to put his life at risk for his country and for his neighbors.

The people of Ukraine did nothing to cause this invasion--nothing. Their only desire is to live in peace. As Ambassador Markarova said this afternoon: Ukrainians never attack anybody. We just want to live in peace. Allow us to determine our own fate, our own destiny.

That is what Vladimir Putin cannot abide, and that is what we in America and the rest of the free world must support Ukrainians in doing, to allow them to have the future that they choose through a duly elected government. The freedoms and democracy and prosperity that we take for granted so often in this country, they relish.

In 2014, at the Maidan, once again they threw off the shackles of a Russian-backed government. They know what it is like to live under the thumb of Russia, under the thumb of the Soviet Union before that. They don't want to go back. In 2014, they made a conscious decision to go forward, looking to the West, to stand with us.

I was there while the Maidan was still smoldering. The tires were still smoldering. People were still there, gathered. Even though the Russian-backed government had been removed, they still weren't sure what would happen. Then an election occurred, a democratic election. And a President was elected. And a parliament, a Rada, was elected. And they began to fight for not just the freedom of Ukraine and the democracy in Ukraine but the rule of law to get rid of some of the oligarchical structure that Russia had left, the corruption. And now this, after so much progress. Since 2014, they have fought and fought and fought to be like us. And now this.

Hundreds of innocent Ukrainians--men, women, and children--have already lost their lives in this invasion. Nobody knows the exact number. But we saw footage today on CNN, on FOX, on the networks, of apartment buildings that had been attacked by missiles. We heard from the Ambassador that two five-story apartment buildings had been attacked today, and women and children had lost their lives.

This humanitarian crisis, of course, is pouring refugees into other countries as well. Hundreds of thousands of people have escaped to Poland, mostly women and children. Romania is also taking its share of refugees.

But make no mistake: Ukrainians are fighting. They are fighting back bravely. And they have inflicted great costs already on their Russian invaders.

I commend those brave Ukrainians and Armed Forces who picked up arms against these great odds and have already denied President Putin his initial objective and immediate occupation.

I want to particularly commend the brave leadership of Ukraine President Vladimir Zelenskyy. His defiance in the face of evil is what leads free countries and societies through difficult and dark days like Ukraine is experiencing right now. When it was suggested to him that the West would like to help him to find a way to escape, his response this week was: ``I need ammunition, not a ride.'' ``I need ammunition, not a ride.''

This has been a rallying cry not only for the people of Ukraine but around the world. Unfortunately, Ukraine is used to this Russian aggression. They have suffered already during an 8-year war on Ukraine since 2014, since the Revolution of Dignity, since the events under Maidan I talked about earlier. Fourteen thousand Ukrainian citizens have lost their lives at the hands of Russian snipers, Russian military, and artillery.

I have been to the front. They call it the line of contact. It is the border now between Ukraine and these so-called occupied territories, the Donbas. ``Line of contact'' is a euphemism. It makes it sound like there are gloves touching at the contact. It is a line of war, and it has been for 14 years. Again, 14,000 Ukrainians have lost their lives.

I had to wear the helmet and the flak jacket because there were snipers that

day taking pot shots at Ukrainian soldiers. But I saw with those Ukrainian soldiers the patriotism, the nationalism that I knew would lead them to fight; that the miscalculation by President Putin was that, somehow, Russia would be greeted as victors. Some even said that he thought he would be greeted with flowers. Instead, they are being greeted with AK-47s. And having been there on the frontlines, you knew this would happen. These Ukrainians are not going to give up their country.

When President Putin decided to invade Ukraine in 2014 and seize Crimea and come into the Donbas, it was clear that Russia was not a rational actor but one motivated by the irrational dreams of recreating an empire at all costs. The world warned Russia to stand down then, and they refused. And the sanctions were too weak. This time, the world again has warned Vladimir Putin to stand down. Instead, he has ordered airstrikes into the capital city of Kyiv. Now there are reports of Russian military deliberately striking hospitals, kindergartens, and apartment complexes, as I talked about a moment ago.

These are war crimes, and the world is watching. I would say to Russian officials tonight, Russian commanders, there is another way. Stop this atrocity. The world is watching, and the war crimes are being recorded. You can refuse these orders--and you must for the sake of humanity. Why would you want to kill your neighbors in Ukraine who are innocent and just want to have the opportunity to lead their life as they see fit?

These are not just war crimes; they are a clear violation of Russia's international commitments under the Budapest Memorandum, the Minsk agreements, the U.N. Charter, international law--as was the decree issued earlier in February, about 2 weeks ago, by President Putin, which recognized the independence of parts of Ukraine, the Donetsk People's Republic, the Luhansk People's Republic. He did so as a pretext to ordering the Russian military to conduct so-called peacekeeping missions in occupied Ukrainian territories.

We now see that this was one more case of disinformation. The lies and disinformation will continue, as they did today. But they are taking in fewer and fewer people because people can see what is happening. This is the age of digital communications, where people can see videos in realtime of the war crimes being committed.

I was among those advocating for tougher sanctions upfront, preinvasion, believing that might dissuade Russia from launching a full-scale assault. I cosponsored legislation to do just that and had hoped Congress would pass bipartisan legislation mandating tough financial sanctions, Nord Stream 2 sanctions, assistance to combat cyber attacks, disinformation, in addition to advanced military aid.

I honestly don't know whether it would have kept Vladimir Putin from making this terrible mistake, but I thought it was something we should have done. We chose not to. And we are where we are. And now, we are seeing not just the United States but the rest of the world step forward with these tough sanctions.

And I congratulate the Biden administration for getting the rest of the world on board, as they have. There is more to do. We have now targeted Russian banks, Russian elites with sanctions, placed limits on high-tech commerce and Russia's ability to do business in dollars. All are welcome. In particular, the Treasury Department's imposition of economic measures that target the core infrastructure of Russia and more than 50 percent of the total banking system in Russia will have a devastating economic effect over time. Already today, they closed down their markets in Russia, their stock market. They are saying that foreign reserve cannot leave the country. So it is already having an impact.

In addition, the administration's announcement that they will sell 250 M1A2 battle tanks to Poland, I commend. I have been pushing for that for some time. These are the best tanks in the world. And Poland wanted them, and it is great we are now delivering those.

We have now deployed more U.S. troops to Germany and Eastern Europe to enhance NATO defenses. That is necessary, in my view. We are not in Ukraine but in the countries around Ukraine to ensure that, should Vladimir Putin expand this war--and who knows whether he will or not-- he will meet even stiffer resistance from NATO.

We must make it part of a deliberate, coordinated strategy to enhance the military readiness of our Eastern European allies and do so quickly.

I also applaud the United States working with our European allies-- with Australia, with Canada, with South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore on a coordinated export control response. Combined, by the way, these four Asian countries I named account for over 70 percent of the world's semiconductor production. A ban on semiconductors, on chips, would be very costly to Russia's ability to arm and resupply its military. We must be sure this action comes to fruition. This must happen.

However, these are just first steps, in my view. We can and should do more. And I think there is a bipartisan consensus now here on Capitol Hill to do just that. Let me offer a few more suggestions.

I welcome the news from this weekend that we are going to be joined by a number of allies in sanctioning Russia's central bank and cutting off a number of their institutions from the SWIFT financial system. We are still seeing details of these plans. But as of now, it looks like they still have some carve-outs in this plan for certain financial institutions when it comes to SWIFT. I think it is a better idea to put all of Russia's banks on this sanctioning list.

As for the central bank, I am glad we are getting global cooperation, but who we really need to step up to the plate is China. I am told China holds 14 percent of Russia's finances in reserves. China needs to know that this is a decision point. Will they stand against this tyranny that the global community is standing against or not?

I believe we should also target Russia's trade sector by revoking our permanent normal trade relationship, or PNTR, with Russia. In other words, the United States should no longer give Russia unrestricted access in trade to our country. This would have the effect of raising tariffs on goods from Russia to the rates at which they were before Russia joined the World Trade Organization and received this special status, PNTR, from the U.S. Congress.

When I was U.S. Trade Representative, I helped negotiate this agreement, and it does give them certain privileges with regard to our economy. Free trade with the United States is a privilege, not a right. After Russia joined the WTO in 2012, Congress passed legislation to expand trade between our countries by eliminating tariffs on some of these imports. But as easily as we granted PNTR, Congress can take it away. Invading a sovereign nation, a democracy no less, is certainly grounds for us to take away that privilege. And we have the right to undo it under the WTO rules for national security reasons.

It would not be unprecedented. In 1992, Congress revoked market access for Serbia and Montenegro as a result of their aggression in the wake of the breakup of Yugoslavia.

Today, I will be introducing bipartisan legislation to revoke unrestricted market access for countries who invade their neighbors, period. I call upon our trading partners to invoke their own national security rights at the WTO and similarly take away market access Russia, until this point, has enjoyed in their economies.

This should be ended, this market access, unless and until Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty are as they were prior to the Russian invasion.

I was also glad to see the Germans have reversed their policy of not allowing arms that were originally produced in Germany to be sent to Ukraine. This is a big deal. They are now joining our other allies that have sent weapons in the past and are sending more now.

Germany is allowing another ally, the Netherlands, to send rocket- propelled grenades. I have been critical of Germany. I have been critical of Germany on this very floor--also, when I was at the Munich conference in Germany last week. I wish they had taken these steps sooner, but I commend them for taking these steps now.

We also need to increase shipments of lethal military arms to Ukraine, to the

Baltics, to Poland, Romania--as well as increasing defense spending here at home. This weekend, the administration authorized an additional $350 million in lethal defensive arms for Ukraine. That is a positive development, and we need to get those weapons there immediately. I understand that some have gone. Others have not. These Javelins and Stingers and other military equipment need to be in Ukraine as soon as possible. The Ambassador told me today they need them badly, and there is absolutely no time to lose.

I understand the administration has also recently requested $6.4 billion in aid for Ukraine in an emergency supplemental. I don't know if that is enough. With hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees fleeing to Poland and other countries supporting Ukraine, we need to provide these allies with help to deal with this crisis.

I also want to take a hard look at the amount we are spending on arming Ukraine and our allies. Now is the time to provide them with what they need. An aid package should increase our lethal defensive assistance, provide critical support to combat enhanced cyber attacks against Ukraine and disinformation, and prepare for a refugee flow out of Ukraine into Europe.

By the way, we also need to enhance our own tools against cyber security right here in this country. Russia's cyber warfare against America continues, and it could increase. There is legislation actually on the floor this week to do just that, the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act and two other pieces of legislation, FedRAMP and FISMA, our legislation to help protect our critical infrastructure on the private sector side but also protect our sensitive government information, national security data. So we can do something this week by passing that legislation.

Finally, Ukraine and Georgia should be allowed to begin the process to become part of NATO. You may remember it has been 14 years since NATO told Ukraine and Georgia they were in line for NATO membership. It was back in 2008.

I do not believe this invasion would have happened had Ukraine been part of NATO, period. I was told when I promoted this idea over the last several years that we couldn't do it because it would make Russia mad. I don't know what the reason is now.

These two countries, Ukraine and Georgia, along perhaps with Sweden and Finland, if they are interested--I understand the Finnish Parliament is going to take this up tomorrow--could join the so-called MAP process, or Mutual Action Plan, in NATO, laying out the specific roadmap for entry. It is time to put Ukraine on that final track toward NATO membership.

Let me remind everyone that Ukraine is not asking us to fight their wars for them. In fact, the world continues to watch and see images of Ukrainian forces and regular civilians picking up arms and defending their homeland. They are just asking for enough help to defend themselves.

This is about the fight for freedom, and it is taking place right now at this time in the country of Ukraine. It is taking place in places all around the world. I am told that today there is a move toward more authoritarianism; that more people live under authoritarian regimes than under democratic regimes, based on some analysis; that it is shifting in the wrong direction.

Well, why then would we not stand by Ukraine? Because Ukraine is moving in the right direction. In 2014, they moved from being under the Russian thumb, authoritarianism, to democracy, and now Russia is trying to reverse that. We must stand for freedom. Why? Because it is in our interests.

Ultimately, we are the beacon of hope for opportunity for the rest of the world because of our freedoms here, but they are tenuous, and they depend on the allies around the world who also treasure freedom.

There are two quotes from two U.S. Presidents that come to mind. One is from a Republican and one is from a Democrat. The Democrat is John F. Kennedy. And these are words that he actually never spoke, but he wrote them. And it was from a speech that he was meant to give on the afternoon that he was assassinated in Dallas. He was to say, at this time:

[I]n this country, in this generation, [we] are--by destiny

rather than choice--the watchmen on the walls of world

freedom.

We are the watchmen on the walls of world freedom.

Senator Kennedy served in this Chamber. President Kennedy was right. Just as he stood up to the Cuban Missile Crisis, he understood that by destiny rather than choice, it is up to us.

Ronald Reagan famously said that you get ``[p]eace through [s]trength.''

To me, that is one of the great truisms of our last couple of decades in this country; that we have to have a strong military if we want to have peace because only by the projection of force can we ensure that we can keep peace around the world.

He also said:

We know only too well that war comes not when the forces of

freedom are strong, but when they are weak. It is then that

tyrants are tempted.

Think of the situation in Ukraine. It is then that tyrants are tempted.

There is strong bipartisan support now for Ukraine. And this week, we should work hard to ensure that we pass this supplemental appropriations bill we talked about that includes the assistance for Ukraine but also to strengthen our ability to protect against cyber attacks; also to do what we can in terms of trade--cutting off the normal trade status with Russia, tightening up the sanctions on the central bank we talked about.

There is so much more we can and should do. But I find there is no lack of resolve right now from this Congress in its support for Ukraine and their people--their people who are just choosing a democratic and free future, free from tyranny.

The Ukrainian dream is now under attack by a brutal dictator who wants to remake Europe and disrupt the international order that has kept the peace for nearly 80 years. It is time for this Congress to speak with one voice. Freedom in Eastern Europe depends upon it, but so does global freedom and our freedom. Our allies and our adversaries are watching.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Renee Sheehy, a Postal IG detailee from my staff, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of this Congress.

Madam President, I rise today with Senator Jeanne Shaheen to request that the Ukraine resolution introduced by us, along with Senators Risch, Menendez, Cornyn, and Durbin be passed by unanimous consent.

This is a dangerous time in the world, especially for our ally, Ukraine. There are over 150,000 Russian troops poised on their border, an overwhelming force that could invade at a moment's notice.

This resolution is very simple and straightforward; it makes it clear that for 30 years Ukraine has been an independent and sovereign country. It commends the bravery of the Ukrainian people and their desire to integrate with the West, to align themselves with democratic values and freedom and continue to move away from the autocratic rule of Russia.

It also acknowledges the over 14,000 Ukrainians who have been killed since 2014 in fighting against Russian backed separatists.

It details the ongoing illegal Russian aggression against Ukraine.

Most importantly, this resolution reaffirms our unwavering support to Ukraine and the importance of our NATO alliance and our transatlantic partnerships.

This is simply a strong, bipartisan show of support to our ally Ukraine as they face a threat and danger not of their making.

I now yield the floor to my friend, Senator Shaheen from New Hampshire.

Madam President, I come to the floor tonight with my colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, to discuss the critical situation in Ukraine.

Ukraine is an independent country. It is a democracy. It is an ally of ours. It is a country that is currently under siege. There is a threat of invasion by Russia that grows every single day.

Right now, there are more than 130,000 Russian troops under the command of 100 tactical groups surrounding Ukraine. This Russian deployment includes nuclear-capable missiles, rockets, tanks, and artillery, and it is no longer just on the eastern border of Ukraine, where there has been activity before, as we will discuss, but now on the northern border, where Russian combat troops and heavy equipment have moved into the country of Belarus and also in Crimea. Additionally, Russia has now deployed amphibious assault ships and other ships into the Black Sea, to the south, and has positioned its S- 400 missile defense systems, which could stop flights into Ukraine.

So from the east, from the north, and from the south, Ukraine is facing this threat. News accounts say additional equipment is actually being moved to the Ukrainian border, not being pulled away.

While there are differing views on whether Russia has made the final decision as to whether to invade or not, there is no question that they have now amassed the capability needed to conduct a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Let's not forget that Russia has invaded Ukraine twice in the past 8 years, illegally annexing Crimea and inserting troops and offensive military equipment into the Donbas region in the east.

They have also targeted cyber attacks against public and private entities in Ukraine and continue to use information to try to destabilize the democratically elected Government of Ukraine.

By the way, Ukrainians have lost about 14,000 citizens in the last 5 years at the hands of the Russians--14,000--fathers, brothers. That would be, as a percentage of our population, like the United States losing about 115,000 people. That is more than we lost in Vietnam and Korea combined--actually, Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan combined. Think how we would feel.

And let's not forget that Russia continues, day by day, to conduct this low-grade but serious war against Ukraine.

We all hope that instead of an invasion, Russia chooses a diplomatic end to this current crisis, but we had better treat this threat of an invasion as a very real and serious possibility. Doing anything else would be irresponsible, given the massive mobilization and the past malign behavior.

And all freedom-loving countries have an interest here. Ukraine is where the cause of freedom is under siege today in our generation.

Eight years ago, Ukrainians made a very deliberate choice. They stood up to a corrupt Russian-backed government, and they turned to the West, to the European Union, to America. They said that they wanted to be like us.

I was in Ukraine in 2014 shortly after what is called the ``Euromaidan,'' the revolution of dignity. The barricades

were still there in the center of town. The Maidan is a square that was still occupied by Ukrainian patriots. They sat there in makeshift tents in the cold because they believed that their hard-won freedom was worth defending.

And they did defend it. In the protests against the Russian-backed government, they lost 100 Ukrainian citizens by the security forces of the Russian-backed government. These individuals were called the ``Heavenly Hundred,'' and they are still honored today by memorials at the Maidan. Their freedom came at a high price, and they were willing to defend it then, as they are today.

I was there as an election observer with other American and European officials, mostly parliamentarians from Europe, and we witnessed a fair and robust Presidential election with a huge turnout. I saw their patriotism and national pride.

The Ukrainian people are proud and consider themselves Ukrainian, not Russian. They have been a free and independent country for 30 years, and since the protests in 2014, they have been on a track toward a Western-focused democracy and a free-market economy. It is their choice to be free and independent, and no country--no country--has the right to take that away from them.

I also want to highlight a change since 2014, and that is in the proficiency of the Ukrainian military and the great tragedy that would result from an illegal invasion of Ukraine. The Ukrainian military will stand up, and they are ready. The military of today is a professional force that has been fighting this low-grade war with Russia for the past 8 years. It is not the military they had in 2014. They are, instead, battle hardened today. And thanks to the United States and our allies, including many NATO allies, they are better trained and better equipped than ever before.

I have been to the line of contact in the Donbas region--the line of contact, which is where the Russian troops are on one side and the Ukrainian troops are on the other, firing back and forth periodically. I have seen these troops from Ukraine. They are tough. They know how to fight, and they will fight to defend their country.

And Ukraine is a big country. It is a nation of 418 million people. In the capital city of Kyiv, there are almost 3 million people. Think about the humanitarian disaster that will ensue if there is an invasion--millions of innocent civilians displaced from their homes in the dead of a Ukrainian winter, fleeing desperately for safety, while fighting rages around them. This is not a sight anybody wants to see.

By the way, the blood of these innocents will be on the hands of the Russians.

And there will be significant Russian casualties as well, and severe multilateral sanctions that will be devastating for the Russian economy and targeted sanctions that will ensure that the era of Russian oligarchs treating the West as their playground while pillaging their own country of resources and wealth will be no more.

In 2014, the Ukrainian people rejected authoritarianism and chose instead democracy, freedom of speech, freedom to gather, respect for the rule of law, free markets, prosperity. They are not going back.

Despite Russia's underlying efforts to destabilize Ukraine over the past 8 years, the people of Ukraine remain committed to this independent, sovereign, and democratic nation. They don't want State control, repression, and fear. They instead seek liberty and opportunity.

Moscow would have the world believe that somehow this massive, unwarranted Russian buildup is about trying to shore up its border against threats from Ukraine and NATO. This is, of course, patently false and should be rejected out of hand by America and its many allies. Ukraine's military posture has always been defensive. They just want to be left alone. And unlike Russia, Ukraine has upheld its commitments under the Minsk agreements, which were designed to ensure a ceasefire in the Donbas region. NATO is defensive and is no threat to Russian territorial integrity.

It is important to note that Ukraine is not asking for us to fight this war for them. They are asking us for increased lethal military assistance to help them defend themselves should Russia make a mistake and invade Ukraine again. And they are asking all of us to abide by commitments we have made. In 1994, after the Berlin Wall came down, Ukraine signed what is called the Budapest Memorandum. It was a treaty where Ukraine agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees from Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom; that we would all respect the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine and refrain from the threat or the use of force against Ukraine. These are commitments that must be honored.

I know there is a lot that our country and this Congress are divided over today, and we see it played out on the floor and in the media constantly. But I will tell you, Republicans and Democrats alike are united in backing Ukraine in this crisis. That is why it is so important that my colleague from New Hampshire is on the floor with me today. She has been a stalwart. We traveled to Ukraine 2 weeks ago and had the opportunity to meet with the leading officials there, including President Zelenskyy, but also talked to the Ukrainian people. And we let them know that on a bipartisan basis we support Ukraine. We have a bipartisan consensus on the broad structure of sanctions and an aid package for Ukraine.

The sanctions, by the way, would cripple the Russian economy. We have some disagreement perhaps over preinvasion or postinvasion sanctions and how much on each, but we agree on sanctions.

We also agree on assisting Ukraine with further and much needed support: defense against cyber attacks, as an example, that the Russians are already conducting--and we expect more to come--and disinformation attacks coming from Russia. We agree, Republicans and Democrats alike, not just on sanctions but providing more support to Ukraine for these critical areas. And of course we agreed on providing more military assistance to Ukraine so they can defend themselves.

We have come to a consensus on these issues. What we now need is for all of us to work together, including the White House, to ensure that we can step forward and put legislation or a resolution on the floor to ensure that we are doing whatever we possibly can to make it clear what the consequences will be to act as a deterrent to Russia from making a terrible mistake.

This is a critical time for us to act and to lead. It is time for us and the Congress and for this government to speak with one voice. Freedom in Eastern Europe depends on it but so does the cause of freedom all around the world.

I now yield to my colleague from New Hampshire Senator Shaheen.

I would like to commend my colleague from New Hampshire for her strong statement. There should be no mistake here. The United States of America is united, as this place is united, the Senate and the House, Republicans and Democrats alike, in standing with Ukraine.

And if there were to be another invasion, the consequences would be devastating for Russia. It would also, by the way, be harmful to the stability of Europe and the cause of freedom all around the world because then you would have an authoritarian country coming into a democratically elected smaller country and invading it, as Russia has already done in Crimea and parts of Donbas.

So this effort tonight on the floor is simply to make it very clear that regardless of what legislative vehicle we end up choosing or resolution or other, there is no question that we are united, both Republicans and Democrats, in doing what is nonpartisan, which is standing up for freedom, which is what America has traditionally done.

I thank my colleague.

Absolutely.

That is correct. And if there is an invasion, it would be the first time since 1945 that we have seen this kind of malign behavior--not just an invasion but even the proof we have seen of the so-called hybrid attacks, the cyber attacks, the disinformation attacks, which is why so many in Europe are alarmed, particularly in the Baltics and Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland, Romania. Countries that are right on the border, they realize that this is not going to end in Ukraine if this is what happens. It will send a message that we no longer have this post-World War II security system in place in Europe that has kept the peace.

So my hope is that we will continue to see not just unity here on the floor of the Senate and in the House and in the White House to stand up for Ukraine but among our allies because all of us are engaged in this.

And I must say I think what Russia and Vladimir Putin have done quite well in the last several weeks is unify the transatlantic alliance in ways I have rarely seen it. So NATO is stronger than ever because the Secretary General of NATO talked about this. He sounds exactly like we do, meaning that this shall not stand and cannot happen. So I think this is going to bring us together.

But deterrence is what we are all about--a peaceful resolution, a backing off, and the ability to allow a free and independent people of Ukraine to have their sovereignty and territorial integrity respected.

Now, may I ask my colleague from New Hampshire a question?

We have seen here on the floor of the Senate lots of back-and-forth and partisanship. I made the assertion earlier that I see colleagues on both sides of the aisle being unified on this. I certainly feel that way with my Republican colleagues. Can the Senator speak to it as to her Democratic colleagues?

Well said.

I yield the floor.