Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to oppose the joint resolution of disapproval on the sale of air-to-air missiles to Saudi Arabia, which are being used to defend against armed drone attacks from the Houthis.

I think everybody in this body well knows that I carefully consider every arms sale that comes before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for review. Arms sales are a critical tool of foreign policy that can help bolster alliances while keeping Americans and our partners safe.

However, we have to ensure that our arms sales policies adhere to our core values, including respect for human rights and human dignity. It is for that very same reason that I, along with a series of my colleagues here, introduced the Safeguarding Human Rights in Arms Exports Act--or the SAFEGUARD Act--to make the protection and promotion of human rights a core statutory principle in our arms sales export and monitoring process.

This legislation would enhance our collective oversight of all arms sales to countries that abuse human rights, and I hope it receives consideration in this body and in the House soon.

Now, my colleagues may well remember in 2019 and 2020, that when I truly believe an arms sale undermines our American values, our national security, or when 22 sales are notified under false ``emergency'' pretenses, for example, I will not hesitate to use the tools we have to stop those sales. In fact, that is exactly what we did in this body when I came to this floor and led that effort, in conjunction with others.

Beyond these extreme measures, the committee carefully consults with the State Department and others on the ground to fully understand how weapons will be used.

We have all known for years that there is no military solution to the devastating and tragic conflict in Yemen. Indeed, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed my bipartisan Saudi Arabia Accountability and Yemen Act in 2019, which would have halted certain arms sales, stopped refueling, imposed accountability on the people involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, and sought to end the suffering of the Yemeni people. Unfortunately, the full Senate failed to act.

Make no mistake, the Saudi-led coalition bears the brunt of the responsibility for the devastation in Yemen. Yet I, along with most Members of this body, have always supported the use of weapons systems in defense of civilian populations.

I wish to remind my colleagues that the Biden administration has largely suspended sales of many of the offensive weapons the Trump administration was all too happy to sell to the Saudis. However, there is no denying that the Houthis have been increasingly deploying more sophisticated weapons, particularly armed aerial drones, to target civilian populations in Saudi Arabia, and let's not also forget that we have 70,000 American citizens living in Saudi Arabia.

The weapons up for discussion today are being used in this context to defend against these aerial attacks. As air-to-air missiles, they are largely incapable of attacking civilian targets or infrastructure--a critical factor in my decision to support the sale.

While some have argued they could be used to support the Saudi blockade, the fact is that most humanitarian aid is delivered via land and sea. Indeed, tragically, the Saudis have been perfectly capable of blocking the delivery of aid for many years, and in more recent years, the Houthis have also created abhorrent obstacles for the delivery of food, medical supplies, and other vital humanitarian aid, contributing to the worst humanitarian crisis in the world.

While I believe the United States must continue pushing for a political solution to the crisis in Yemen--and I agree with several of the things said by my colleague Senator Sanders--I also believe that we should continue supporting efforts to stop attacks on civilians. According to the State Department, there have been close to 400 Houthi attacks this year, many of which get past the Patriot missile defense system.

I know that many see this vote as an opportunity to voice dissatisfaction with Saudi Arabia over a variety of its policies, from Yemen to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, which we have not forgotten, to the harassment of American citizens and their family members.

So let me be clear that I completely agree with the need to push harder to hold Saudi leadership accountable for a variety of actions. I even offered a bill last month as an amendment to the NDAA to do just that, and I am hopeful we will see some of that language in a final product. But I also believe it is important that our security partners know that we will uphold our commitments and prioritize security arrangements that protect civilians.

For that reason, I will oppose efforts to stop this particular sale. I will continue to hold sales as I have--there are many other sales that have not moved forward that I have not permitted to get out of the committee--and continue my efforts to hold Saudi leadership accountable and encourage my colleagues to do the same.

With that, I yield the floor.

I ask that all remaining time be yielded back.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Mr. President, for the Committee on Foreign Relations I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. President, I rise today to seek unanimous consent for eight to nine nominees to critical State Department posts.

Each of them moved through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with bipartisan support, and the only reason the Senate has not confirmed them is due to the political obstinacy of a couple of my Republican colleagues. And the evidence of that is that when we have a vote, as we had earlier today for the Assistant Administrator of AID, it passed 59 to 40--59 to 40.

We have heard many complaints about the management of the State Department and the conduct of U.S. foreign policy in recent months. And while the State Department is not a perfect institution--for that fact, no institution is--its leadership was decimated by the prior administration.

The assistant secretaries and ambassadors who should be participating in the rebuilding of the institution and the development and implementation of U.S. foreign policy are instead languishing on the Senate floor--dozens, dozens.

Nominees who should be the face of the United States at international organizations--like the United Nations, NATO, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe--are instead waiting for the Senate to act. The government of the People's Republic of China is watching. Even though the majority of this body has recognized that the Government of China represents the greatest geopolitical challenge to the United States, we are letting China eat our lunch on the world stage.

Our Republican colleagues have spoken at length in opposition to this administration's handling of the situation in Afghanistan, but they refuse to allow the Senate to vote on nominees who are critical to dealing with the refugee situation resulting from the U.S. withdrawal and the much-needed stabilization efforts.

By the way, a withdrawal that was already precooked by the Trump administration when it made a surrender deal with the Taliban that said we will leave on a date certain, we will release thousands of Taliban prisoners--which they did, to the Taliban, who became fighting soldiers--we ultimately will not only leave at a date certain, but we have done nothing to get any of the promises that the Taliban made enforced, and we reduce our troop level dramatically. That is what President Biden inherited.

Now, I have heard a lot about the handling of the situation in Afghanistan, but my colleagues refuse to allow the Senate to vote on nominees who are critical to dealing with the refugee situation resulting from that withdrawal and the much-needed stabilization efforts.

Nominees being held by the Republicans include the Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration; and the Assistant Secretary for Conflict and Stabilization Operations. That cannot stand.

And for all the talk of needing to work with our allies and partners, how does holding our nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Israel or the U.S. Ambassador to Canada actually advance U.S. interests?

It does not. It is seriously detrimental to our national security.

Before I ask unanimous consent, I understand Senator Schumer would like to speak prior to these UC requests.

Mr. President, with that hope, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination: Calendar No. 239, Michele Jeanne Sison, of Maryland, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Career Ambassador, to be an Assistant Secretary of State (International Organization Affairs); that the nomination be confirmed; the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. President.

It is disingenuous to suggest that this can all happen by the majority leader and 60 votes. There were no calls when Republicans controlled this Chamber for votes on each and every nominee. On the contrary, as the leader said, large numbers of Trump nominees to the State Department or Ambassadorial or State Department positions were passed on voice. They were passed on voice vote.

I don't know. In the case of NATO, I think the nominee made it very clear before the committee--I know that our colleague is not a member of that particular committee--but she made it very clear before the committee that she was advocating for all of our allies to reach their 2-percent commitment.

And what better way to achieve it than to actually have an Ambassador at NATO to pursue that goal?

But if you don't have anybody there, guess what. You can't pursue that goal.

So let me try again.

I want to ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Executive Calendar No. 327, Anne A. Witkowsky, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Secretary of State (Conflict and Stabilization Operations).

So we will continue to have conflict and stabilization without anybody being be in charge.

I ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Executive Calendar No. 318, Christopher P. Lu, of Virginia, to be Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations for U.N. Management and Reform, with the rank of Ambassador.

Here is an example. We hear we want reform at the U.N., but we can't put the person there in charge of helping us reform the

All right. I heard a lot of my colleagues talk about how we should get more SIV people from Afghanistan. This is the person who could help us do it.

I ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Executive Calendar No. 437, Julianne Smith, of Michigan, to be United States Permanent Representative on the Council of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, with the rank and status of Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary.

I ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Calendar No. 461, Marcia Stephens Bloom Bernicat, of New Jersey, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of the Minister-Counselor, to be Director General of the Foreign Service.

I can't wait to hear the next objection to someone who would be Ambassador to Israel--to Israel.

I ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Executive Calendar No. 452, Thomas R. Nides, of Minnesota, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the State of Israel.

So we will have no Ambassador in Israel as we deal with the challenges of Iran and others in the region. It is mind-boggling, all of those who get up here and talk about our ally, the State of Israel, the importance of the State of Israel, but we won't have an Ambassador there to help us meet the challenges that Israel has.

I ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Executive Calendar No. 443, Michael Carpenter, of the District of Columbia, to be U.S. Representative to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, with the rank of Ambassador.

Well, let's see if we get a lucky one.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 453, David L. Cohen, of Pennsylvania, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Canada; that the Senate vote on confirmation of the nomination; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise today to express my enthusiastic support for the nomination of Ambassador Isobel Coleman to be Deputy Administrator for Policy and Programming at the United States Agency for International Development.

As the world faces mounting challenges--from climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic, forced migration spurred by conflict, lack of economic opportunity, and growing food insecurity, to the emergence of antidemocratic and authoritarian leaders--USAID's work is critically important to the U.S. national security and global stability.

I am pleased to be supporting Ambassador Coleman's nomination, and I am confident that her extensive development experience and her years of distinguished public service, including at the United Nations, serving with Administrator Power, provide her with the type of background and knowledge required to address the challenges ahead, if confirmed. She is a well-known and trusted foreign affairs professional, and I am confident she will execute her duties with distinction.

The fact that Ambassador Coleman's nomination, someone whose leadership is so essential, has languished on the Senate floor for almost 3 months is a travesty.

I urge my colleagues to support her nomination and make sure that this critical position is filled without further delay.

Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

Madam President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications which have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, today I rise in support of the confirmation of Ms. Christine O'Hearn to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. I was proud to recommend Ms. O'Hearn for this nomination. She has the qualifications, intellect, and the temperament necessary to make an excellent and impartial Federal judge, and I am confident that she will serve the U.S. District of New Jersey well.

A proud South Jersey native, Ms. O'Hearn was born in Camden, graduated from the University of Delaware, and earned her juris doctor from Temple University's Beasley School of Law in Philadelphia. She is an expert in employment and labor law who has worked on behalf of both employers and workers during her impressive career.

She is currently a partner at the firm of Brown & Connery in Westmont, NJ, where she is highly regarded by her colleagues for her keen insight and confident command of the issues at hand in every case she takes on. Twice she was named one of the Top 40 attorneys under 40 in New Jersey. She has also been featured in New Jersey Law Journal's ``Women and Minorities in the Profession.'' Ms. O'Hearn also previously served as an adjunct professor at Rutgers University School of Law in Camden.

In 2020, Ms. O'Hearn was appointed to the U.S. Magistrate Judge Selection Committee and has served on various distinguished boards, including the New Jersey State Committee of the American College of Trial Lawyers and the New Jersey Court's District IV Ethics Committee.

And this year--this gives you an insight of the person that she is beyond her competence and capability and intellect--she has spent more than 85 hours volunteering as a pro bono attorney for newly arriving Afghan refugees in Fort Dix, NJ, informing them of their rights and helping them navigate our complicated immigration laws. She described this work as immensely fulfilling and humbling, and I hope it inspires others in the legal profession to lend a hand to the nationwide refugee resettlement effort.

Ms. O'Hearn's professional credentials, combined with her compassion and commitment to the fair and impartial administration of justice, will make her an outstanding judge.

Finally, I would like to remind my colleagues that the U.S. District of New Jersey is one of the busiest courts in all of America. As of last year, more than 46,000 cases were pending before it, many of them among the most complex and challenging cases in the Nation.

Yet multiple vacancies on the court have left its seated judges with some of the highest caseloads in the country, prompting the Judicial Conference of the United States to declare them judicial emergencies.

Now, we have made some encouraging progress on that front in recent months. However, the people of New Jersey deserve nothing less than a fully staffed district court, not to mention all of the parties with business pending before it.

I am confident that Ms. O'Hearn's experience and intellectual rigor will be an asset to the U.S. District Court of New Jersey, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in support of her swift confirmation.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote that was scheduled for 2:30 occur immediately.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, for the Committee on Foreign Relations I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the

Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. President, I have 9 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. President, I rise today to express my support for the nomination of Paloma Adams-Allen to be Deputy Administrator for Management and Resources for the United States Agency for International Development, USAID.

Ms. Adams-Allen is a dedicated public servant who has spent her entire career focusing on international development and eliminating global poverty. She will bring with her essential leadership experience, stemming from her years as USAID's Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Latin America and Caribbean Bureau and, most recently, as the CEO of the Inter-American Foundation.

She is exactly the type of leader USAID needs right now as Administrator Samantha Power aims to restore and refocus the Agency as a critical arm of U.S. foreign policy.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee reported Ms. Adam-Allen's nomination by voice vote, with no Members asking to be recorded in opposition. Yet she has been languishing on the Senate floor for more than 2 months due to Republican holds. Even though the Biden administration has been in office for more than 9 months, the Senate is only now getting around

to voting on just the second nominee to USAID.

Last week, I made a live unanimous consent request to confirm Ms. Adams-Allen and nine other nominees the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reported to the floor, including two other USAID nominees. But each of the nominations was blocked by our Republican colleagues for reasons that have nothing to do with the nominations themselves.

This continued obstruction of nominees who are critical to restoring U.S. global leadership and ensuring our national security is shameful. And it is dangerous.

USAID is grappling with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and other humanitarian emergencies that are ravaging the globe, and Members of this body are preventing it from effectively carrying out its mission, a mission that is intended to further U.S. interests.

So while I am relieved that the full Senate is finally taking steps to confirm Ms. Adams-Allen, the fact that we need votes on both cloture and final passage on a nominee who is without a hint of controversy, has served dutifully in government for decades, and was reported with unanimous support from the Foreign Relations Committee, is utterly absurd.

The delays and obstacles facing nominees for critical development and national security posts pending on the Senate floor and in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is reckless and contrary to our country's interests. We owe it to the Senate and the American people to fix this problem.

I strongly support confirming Ms. Adams-Allen and respectfully urge my colleagues to join me in advancing her nomination, along with all of the foreign affairs nominations pending before this body.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, in May of this year, terrorist groups in Gaza launched more than 4,000 rockets at innocent Israelis. For 11 days, Hamas and others fired off thousands of various rocket systems with little guidance into heavily populated areas across Israel with no regard, indeed, likely with the intention of killing civilians.

In the face of this barrage, once again, Israel deployed the Iron Dome missile defense system, which intercepted 90 percent of these incoming attacks. Because of this purely defensive system, Israel is able to protect its own citizens and also direct its response to more carefully target those in Gaza who are responsible for launching these brutal attacks.

Now, I have been clear: We should all mourn the loss of innocent Israelis and Palestinians who were killed during this conflict. Beyond a lack of regard for innocent Israeli civilians, Hamas further endangers Palestinians by hiding their stockpiles and themselves in densely populated areas.

But I am not here today to relitigate thousands of years of conflict; I am here to point out two simple facts: Hamas is a terrorist organization that routinely threatens innocent civilians; Iron Dome, a purely defensive system that protects civilians. It saves lives, regardless of religion or ethnicity, period.

Furthermore, by saving those lives, Iron Dome also preserves diplomatic space for deescalation, communication, and further negotiations about Israeli and Palestinian long-term security and the future of a negotiated two-State solution.

There is no conceivable reason why anyone in this Chamber, on either side of the aisle, should stand in the way of U.S. support for this lifesaving defense to be fully ready for the next attack.

I strongly urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join the House of Representatives in passing this funding on a broadly bipartisan effort.

So, therefore, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, following consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 140, H.R. 5323; that there be up to 2 hours for debate; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the bill be considered read a third time and the Senate vote on passage of the bill without intervening action or debate.

Reserving the right to object. While I respect the Senator from Kentucky's consistent approach to foreign aid spending, his substitute to H.R. 5323 is problematic for the following reasons: This amendment would unleash an array of adverse consequences for our broader foreign policy and national security objectives.

This amendment ultimately proposes to rescind funds from the Departments of State and Defense. And this amendment would not reallocate funds that would allegedly go to the Taliban, as the Senator from Kentucky suggests. The reality is that U.S. dollars are not going to the Taliban, nor will they.

Let me be clear and echo what the administration has said: No U.S. foreign aid will go to a Taliban-controlled Afghan Government. This does not mean that we remain any less committed to supporting the Afghan people. On the contrary, U.S. humanitarian aid could be routed through highly vetted partners, like the World Food Programme that we trust to put the interests of the Afghan people first.

So let me be clear. Senator Paul's amendment would actually raid the funding that delivers lifesaving humanitarian aid to the Afghan people. And they need it more than ever.

Secondly, Afghanistan is in the grips of a dire humanitarian crisis. The economy has collapsed. One in three Afghans do not know where their next

meal will come from. People are afraid to leave their homes.

And so for those reasons, as well as the following--this amendment would also slash refugee assistance being used at this very moment to evacuate and resettle the U.S. allies and partners who served alongside Americans in the War on Terror.

Likewise, Senator Paul is proposing we rescind the funding that supports important bipartisan priorities like promoting regional security, countering Chinese influence, and ending this pandemic.

And that is not all. The amendment also jeopardizes funds being used to recover and secure U.S. military equipment.

We may no longer be funding the Afghan National Army, but we still urgently need these repurposed funds to keep American equipment out of the wrong hands.

In short, Senator Paul's amendment could undermine U.S. national security; it would abandon the Afghan people in their darkest hour; and it would betray the American people's commitment to supporting our Afghan allies.

Finally, let me just say that this body overwhelmingly supports the swift passage of Iron Dome. Despite what others may have said, even on this floor, Democrats in the Senate are not holding up this critical funding. In the House, there may have been a very small handful of bipartisan opposition. And the only reason it is being held up in this body is because of this amendment. He is not a member of the Democratic caucus.

This is a defensive, lifesaving system built on years of cooperation with our ally Israel. I am disappointed we are in this situation. But because of all of these reasons, I must object to the Senator's substitute amendment.

Madam President.

Let me just simply say, this is a figleaf.

We could have, today, passed Iron Dome as the House of Representatives passed it, send $1 billion, and make sure that Israelis and Palestinians would be safer as a result of the terrifying actions that Hamas and others take. There is no reason for this.

I know my colleague has not been particularly supportive on foreign aid in general, and in this case in particular, but the reality is that we have an opportunity here.

Now, I am convinced that Iron Dome will get done. We will get the resources to our allies, the State of Israel. But it is a shame that we have to have the uncertainty that is pending as a result of the objection that has been had.

We don't need to find a pathway in this particular way, which, you know, is only going to undermine our own national security interests as it relates to Afghanistan.

With that I yield the floor.