discuss the book. watch books the shaped america featuring a narrative of the t of frederick douglass monday live at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span networks free mobile video app or online at c-span.org. also be sure to scan the qr code to listen to her companion podcast where you can learn more about the authors of the books featured. >> as part of her new series we're asking you what books do you think shaped america? >> my pick for the books that shaped america is "to kill a mockingbird" ." >> the jungle. >> you can join in the conversation by submitting your pics of the book you think helped shape this country. go to our website c-span.org/books a shaped america. click the tab and select record video.

in 30 seconds or less tell us your pic a why. be sure to watch books a shaped america live every monday at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the u.s. senate is gambling in now on the agenda today vice president kamala harris is expected to swear in laphonza butler as he ascended her. she's california governor gavin newsom stick to fill the late senator dianne feinstein sea. at 5:30 p.m. eastern there was a vote scheduled with advance the nomination of james o'briant to the assistant secretary of state for european and eurasian affairs. and now live to the senate floor here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer.

the chaplain: let us pray. o god, most holy, you are more ready to hear us than we are to pray, for you know our needs before we ask for help. give us listening ears, responsive hearts, and willing spirits. bless our senators. fill their lives with meaning and shower them with your wisdom. reveal the issues that matter most so their work will glorify you. let your love sustain them through the welter and variety

of the legislative process. and whrord, -- and lord, empower your new addition to the united states senate, ms. butler. we pray in your marvelous name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c.,

october 3, 2023. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable peter welch, a senator from the state of vermont, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patty murray, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved.

the vice president: the chair lays before the senate one certificate of appointment to fill an unexpired term. created by the death of the late senator dianne feinstein. of the state of california. the certificate, the chair is advised, is in the form

suggested by the senate. hearing no objection, the reading of the certificate will be waived and it will be printed in full in the record. if the senator-designate will now present herself at the desk, the chair will administer the oath of office. the vice president: please raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear that you will support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that you will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that you take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion;

and that you will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which you are about to enter, so help you god? ms. butler: i will. the vice president: congratulations.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: could we have some order. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: there is order. mr. schumer: it says let me be the first to welcome our newest colleague, but i see she's had a lot of good welcomes already. let me be the first majority leader to welcome our newest colleague to the united states senate, senator laphonza butler sworn in moments ago as the next senator from california. mr. president, i can't help but think how proud senator

feinstein would be seeing someone as brilliant, as accomplished, as history making as laphonza butler take her place. i know that her old colleague is looking down at this moment with pride now that her seat is in good hands. congratulations to senator butler on this immense honor. this is a historic moment for the senate, for california, and for the entire country. senator butler is i'm the third black woman in american history to serve in the united states senate. she's the first openly lesbian senator from california, and she's the first openly lgbtq senator of color to serve in this body. today, the senate takes another step towards fully reflecting our vibrant democracy. now, laphonza's life story can be sum riemsed in two words -- serving -- summarized in two words, serving others.

by her own telling, service was practically a dinner table conversation growing up in magnolia, mississippi. after losing her father to illness, she watched her mom sacrifice everything to put her kids first. working night shifts as a nurse, a security guard, a classroom aide, anything to help her kids have a better life. no surprise. that example left a mark on laphonza for the rest of her days. following in her mom's footsteps, laphonza dedicated her entire career to fighting for others -- fighting for women, fighting for working families, and fighting for the cause of justice. i know she'll do the same here in the senate. so again, this is a proud moment for all of us, and i know this must be a proud moment for laphonza's family. i know you're not supposed to address members before the senate -- in the senate gallery, mr. president, but let me say this to everyone who had attended here and who is still here -- we're all very happy laphonza's

family could join us to share from this special day. we share in their joy, too. finally, to our colleague, laphonza, i know these last few days have felt like a whirl wind. i know it seems like there's a million things to do and so little time to do them. but rest assured, we're here to help you. i spent a great half-hour, 45 minutes talking to laphonza, and she's going to be one great senator. we're ready to work with her. all of us who have stood where laphonza assistants now and felt the awesome weight of holding this office are ready to help her. i urge you, if you permit me, to never let the sense of duty disappear, for in our hands rests the trust, the wishes, the homes, and the burdens of the american people. so to senator butler, congratulations on this honor, and welcome to the senate. today is a day of celebration. and as we celebrate, we also remember and give thanks for our

late colleague and friend senator feinstein, for the information of senators, the floor of the senate will close so members can attend the memorial service of senator feinstein in san francisco this thursday. on that day, it will be my honor to speak at senator feinstein's memorial to give thanks for all she did for this country and to honor the legacy she leaves behind. i hope all my colleagues who have worked with her all these years are label to attend so we -- are able to attend so we can say a final goodbye to one of the greatest public servants to serve in this chamber. mr. president, i understand there's a bill at the desk due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the senator is correct. the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: h.r. 5692, an act making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2024, and for other purposes.

mr. schumer: in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. schumer: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin.

is congress hopefully more times it will use to fund for appropriations bills. on the house and seeing appropriations bills for god, talk about that is a process. >> we 12 appropriations bills usually combined and sometimes a few and if funds discretionary portion of the budget and is about a third of the budget and a little less, i thought medicare or medicaid but it's the things where we picked the level every year so we say how much money are we going to give nasa for nh? in the department of defense selected this one third across 12th bills so house and the senate have been working on all 12 bills of them and they talked

about going on. >> go ahead. >> one of the back dropped behind this is -- the bills level a part of the reason we are in a difficult place is the sudden and bipartisan basis almost fully consistent, a little bit higher the house began writing bills and part of the issues here and it was a couple of months ago. >> you made some statements and i want to read some of the

statements and illustrate on. he said the bill as far as they were looked at for ongoing defense programs, start their. >> the deal a couple of months ago the majority of the house and republicans voted, that total level for government spending in the budget, it was already spending on the current basis by 49 billion so the house republicans appropriations bill passed 58 billion for ongoing programs so out of the cdc and the social security and the various things, 58 billion and in addition, a bunch of other spending by 94 billion and

that's underfunding by 152 billion. the interesting thing speaker mccarthy indicated they are planning another 60 billion and they have it around 5 billion. that's why we are in this difficult situation, house republicans with a massive cut beyond the couple going to go. >> if you want to ask questions about the operations process and funding process (202)748-8001. republicans (202)748-8000 independence (202)748-8002. text at (202)748-8003. ricardo hawkins and hot pot appropriations bill in the work on the committee that because of the differences from what the senator said want versus the

house side. >> the senate has begun, they have major bipartisan support they are moving a minibus and i think it had 89 or 91 green so they have a huge agreement in the bill and it takes a while. congress will pass a resolution it is extremely common. i would say it's working normally. >> the house is offering lower than initially agreed upon. >> the senate can and will go ahead. the house consists below the

deal we are setting up another showdown mid november. i don't think there is an appetite among senate republicans or democrats breaking the deal so similar when there are budget caps for 2012 through 2021 and it didn't go below any of those. objection. mr. mcconnell: i'd like to begin today by welcoming our newest colleague, senator laphonza butler of california. as the senate continues to mourn our late friend and colleague, dianne feinstein, i know the people of california are grateful for senator butler's willingness to serve and i know our colleagues join me in welcoming her.

now, on another matter, last week, the senate voted to prevent a domestic budget dispute from shutting down the federal government. now, with straightforward, short-term funding in place, it's time for congress to redouble our effort on a number of unfinished priorities. in the coming weeks the senate needs to continue making prog rels on -- progress on full-year appropriations, and we'll begin by funding important resources for military construction, veterans services, agriculture, housing, and transportation infrastructure. but our work does not stop there. the senate also needs to address urgent supplemental funding needs and continue our work to bring the biden administration's

reckless spending and radical regulations to heel. many of our colleagues are particularly keen to deliver additional relief to communities rebuilding after devastating national disasters, from hurricanes on the gulf coast to wildfires in hawaii, to flooding in kentucky. bipartisan majorities in both chambers continue to recognize that providing additional lethal assistance to ukraine's defense against russia's aggression is in the united states' direct interests. across the country as historic inflation continues to wreck household budgets, working families are ready to turn the page on biden nommics. after three record-setting years of functionally open borders, folks in every state are eager

for congress to force the biden administration to start cleaning up the southern border crisis. is the fiscal year that just ended saw apprehensions at the southern border exceed two million for only the second time in history. the first time was just last year. some reports expect that the last month's total could clock in as the highest on record. on president biden's watch, illegal border crossings and asylum claims have stretched the border patrol and ice earn he will to their -- personnel to their breaking point. they're seizing hundreds of millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. though they also estimate that

they're apprehending just a fraction -- a fraction -- roughly a quarter of all the fentanyl that's smuggled at the border. frankly, mr. president, this is less about providing border personnel with new resources than it is about giving them the authority and direction to actually enforce the law. it's certainly not about bailing out blue state sanctuary cities while the tsunami of illegal immigration continues unabated. it's about the administration finally taking commonsense steps to end their wrong-headed policies that have encouraged illegal immigrants to cross our borders in the first place. every state is now a border state. major cities like new york and chicago are being overwhelmed by arrivals from the southern

border. finally, even blue state mayors and governors are joining the chorus, calling out the administration for its utter failure on border security. of course, across the country, liberal local governments and innocent residents are also facing the consequences of years of soft-on-crime policies and once again our nation's capitol leads the headlines. just last night congressman henry cuellar was the victim after violent carjacking, a few blocks from the capitol building. armed assailants threatened him at gunpoint and stole his car. thankfully our house colleague was not injured, and his car has been recovered. it's not even the first time this year that a member of congress has been assaulted

while in town for work. but this is what private american citizens are facing every single day. like the 22,000 people who have had their car stolen in chicago this year or the 20,000 victims of felony assault in new york city, this sort of brazen violence against anyone should be a wake-up call to local officials. last year a 55-year-old man was murdered at a gas station in washington by a group of teenagers attempting to steal his car. the city is now averaging two carjackings every day, and these crimes are increasingly being committed by young people. now, at a certain point the american people who visit our nation's capital by the millions every year might expect the city's liberal government to finally start getting serious

about securing the streets. but even as senseless violence increases, local leaders are bent -- bent -- on undermining public safety. one member of the d.c. council, the same soft-on-crime panel that tried to weaken sentencing for repeat offenders earlier this year, proposed recently that local courts be required to provide a written explanation before releasing violent criminals before trial. the court's response? such a requirement was not feasible because it would significantly increase their workload. all this in a city where prosecutors decline to even prosecute two-thirds of the arrests last year. american families deserve to feel safe in their homes and their neighborhoods, and

certainly in the nation's capital. it shouldn't take another assault or carjacking or homicide to convince left-wing local leaders to start actually doing their jobs. mr. durbin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the democratic whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, it is my honor to represent the state of illinois and the city of chicago. i cannot felt you how many times members of the senate and the house in the other party have gone to the microphones to condemn the constituent of chicago and its crime rate. let me tell you point-blank -- there's too much crime in the city of chicago, but it is not the only chicago in america that suffers from that problem. cities large and small have problems every single day with violent gun crime. my hometown of east st. louis, a tiny little town of 20,000, 25,000 in comparison to the large metropolitan of chicago and yet the rate of gun violence

there is even higher in east st. louis than it is in chicago. we have to do everything we can to deal with it. let me tell you what everything we can means. it means we have to look at the flood of guns coming into these cities from out of state fry merrell without background checks that are getting into the hands of criminals who are turning around and killing innocent people to ignore this flood of guns in the united states and condemn crime is to take a position that you're not going to take a look at reality. that's what we're faced with. we have to have a sensible policy when it comes to background checks, universal background checks to make sure guns are not ending up in the hands of people that will misuse them. when they confiscate thousands of guns every year, which they do in chicago, they find that they come from the surrounding states which have lax laws, if any, when it comes to checking the background of purchasers. if you raise that issue on the floor of the united states senate, you'll have the whole side of the aisle on the other

side, come here and wave their arms about second amendment rights. the second thing i want to really raise is personal to the senate. if you want to stop crime in the streets of chicago or any city -- cleveland or chicago, for example -- one of the first things you need is a competent, aggressive criminal prosecutor, a person known as a united states attorney who works as part of the 85 u.s. attorneys across the united states enforcing the strong federal laws which we have enacted. so why don't we have a u.s. attorney in the city of chicago? why don't we have a u.s. attorney in the city of cleveland? because the objections of one republican senator who's come to the floor over and over again to stop these appointments from taking place. the nominees have been cleared, they've gone through background checks, both sides, democrats and republicans, have approved of them. they're sit something on the dark and they cannot -- they're sitting on the calendar, and

they cannot move because one senator from ohio, a republican senator, refuses to lift his hold to get a vote on them. so you can give all the speeches you want about how we've got to end crime in had the city of chicago. but do me a favor. speak to this one senator and convince him that appear competent prosecutor in the city of chicago is one way to achieve that goal. to hold up this nominee is just unfathomable and inexcusable. another point i'd like to to make is over the weekend we avoided a government shutdown and passed a 45-day extension. keeping the lights on is a win for the american people. it used to be considered just normal procedure. now it is a reason for celebration and victory because we have such a discordant group.

i'm disappointed that it didn't include critical fund fog the war in ukraine. it is impossible to explain why when the ukrainians are in the midst of fighting and dying every day against vladimir putin that this congress one way or another managed to pass a spending bill for 45 days and not include more funding for the ukrainian cause. this assistance is absolutely essential. to make sure that we stop the aggression of russia on this tiny country. the russian sympathizers, large lay maga extremists in the house, threaten to hold the entire country, the united states, hostage over this funding. ronald reagan and john mccain musting turning over in their graves. i'm glad that after the vote on saturday, senators schumer, mcconnell, murray, collins, coons, and graham released a statement reaffirming the

senate's commitment to spouting ukraine. i couldn't agree more. let's keep this in perspective. the american people have been generous to ukraine. but this critical assistance has halted and reversed russian aggression accounts for about one half of one percent of all the federal spending in our country. so for a modest investment by u.s. standards, we are keeping hope and freedom alive in ukraine while they are offering their lives. our european allies have stepped up and provided even more assistance than the united states, and i'm glad they have. it as joint effort. quite simply, putin is willing to keep sending prostitution conscripts -- sending russian conscripts to their death in hopes that we'll get tired of his war. i hope we never do. putin is counting on the west, nato, the united states to become growing weary of his ukrainian war of attrition. we cannot let him prevail by this approach. we have got to be organized and unified in our efforts.

on a separate issue, i'd like to address the announced retirement of u.s. general mark milley. mr. president, on january 17, 1961 is three days before he was to leave office, president eisenhower addressed the american people. his farewell to the nation surprised a lot of people. they expected him-to-give an old soldier's speech like douglas macarthur. he issued a strong warning about the dangers of the military industrial complex. he described that complex as a conjunction of immense military establishment and a large arms industry and we must not fail to comprehend the grave complications of that alliance. his words were a warning to his successors that one of the many dangers they could face in the coming years. the words are often quoted because they were so surprising. i thought of his warning just last friday when i heard the parting words of another military leader who has served our nation with wisdom, courage,

and unwaving devotion -- general mark milley, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. in his farewell address, general milley spoke of those in uniform who have died defending our freedoms, of many who have shed blood and sacrificed limbs in that cause, and a brokenhearted gold star families who have lost loved ones and then he said that the united states military exists for one purpose -- in his words, to defend democracy. our military, he said, is unique among the world's militaries. why? because in general milley's powerful words, and i quote him, we don't take an oath to a country. we don't take an oath to a tribe, to a religion, to a king can or queen or tyrant or dictator. and we don't take an oath to a wasn't in a be dictator. we -- to a wannabe dictator. we take an oath to the ideals and values of democracy. that, he said is our moral north star.

obviously general milley has a sense of history. he realizes that despite the strength of our military, the real strength of america is written in the constitution, which we've all sworn to uphold. he rose to the occasion time and time again, particularly under the former president, donald trump. i've had private conversations with him over the years, and the question i had to ask him was very carefully scripted. i said to him, if you're given a choice between a commander in chief and the constitution, which one prevails? he said, that's simple system of the constitution. that was the north star he lived by as general of the joint chiefs of staff. he was a combat infantryman and a green beret. he served five i do noters in combat zones including iraq and afghanistan. he knows the meaning of service and sacrifice and knows the value of offering your life for this country and its constitution.

he was appointed chairman of the joint chiefs of staff by president trump. his four years a as the joint chiefs of staff were the most tumultuous. they included defending ukraine and helping to unite nato, the nato alliance has never been stronger and we can thank president biden and also general milley and all those in uniform who have made that possible on our side of the atlantic. we need to make sure that that security alliance is stronger in the years to come to stop war criminals like vladimir putin. there were also grave dangers against the army of the united states right here in this chamber under general milley's watch. he measured carefully exactly what response we can bring to the occasion. the insurrection mob with an a total surprise to so many. his greatest test may have been containing the impulses of a

former president who didn't understand the role of the military, and i have to offer i don't think he basically understands the constitution. a president who reportedly wanted to use troops, american soldiers to suppress legitimate demonstrations by the public exercises in their right to speech and apprise loyalty to himself over loyalty to our constitution. that was a force general milley was up against. in recent days that former president has told his followers that in times past general milley's actions would have resulted in execution. can you imagine he said that, former president trump said that of general milley? once again a thinly veiled exhortation to violence against the former president. as members of the senate we take an oath to protect not members of a party, not the president but ideals and values of our constitution. may we all honor that oath with the same digit, courage and strength of character as general milley. my parting word to his wife

holly ann, his son peter and daughter mary, i thank the family. how many sleepless nights must have been part of that household wondering if the father and husband would come home safely? he did and thank god he did. he deserves some time off. he said he's going to try to get some rest but i'm sure he's going to be in demand. a man of his character and reputation deserves it. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of state. james o'brien of nebraska to be an assistant secretary of the, european and eurasian affairs.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. cotton: today is the 30th anniversary of the battle of mogadishu. at this very moment 30 years ago nearly 100 rangers and delta force operators were pinned down in the city caring for the wounded and fighting off thousands of heavily armed somali militia men. helicopter crews of the 160th special operations aviation regiment, the night stalkers, proild aerial fire -- provided aerial fire support. one of the most intense battles of modern times had been going for seven hours. it would continue through the night for another eight hours. in the end 18 americans died and

more than 70 were wounded. this epic battle was immortalized in the book "black hawk down" and dramatized by the movie of the same name. what most americans know about the battle comes from his excellent reporting. what bowden made clear is sometimes overlooked. these warriors accomplished their mission. the veterans of that battle should hold their heads high with pride and the gold star families of those 18 fallen warriors in mogadishu should know that their husbands, sons, and fathers were indeed heroes. no less than the men who jumped into normandy or stormed iwo jima. unfortunately their leaders in washington failed these heroes. no modern battle better reflects enduring troops we ought to keep

in mind today. we should only commit our forces when our vital national security interests are at stake, when the mission is so critical that it justifies american casualties if necessary. once committed, we should provide our troops with every last thing they need to fight to win, without tying one hand without their backs. and we should be mindful of what dangerous lessons we teach our enemies when we handcuff our troops or squander their battlefield victories. let's go back to how those rangers, delta operators and night stalkers wound up fighting for their lives in the streets of mogadishu. in 1992 an estimated 350,000 somalis starved to death in a famine of biblical proportion. the american media highlighted the atrocious suffering in

somalia, but the famine primarily resulted not from natural disaster, but from rival warlords fighting a brutal civil war. the warlords stole food aid shipment to profeer, feed -- profiteer, feed their klans and starve their enemies. hunger was just another weapon. after the election and with the approval of president-elect clinton, president biden -- president bush decided to intervene. he be acted against the counsel of senior advisors. cia director and later secretary of defense bob gates summed up their opposition by observing that no vital american interest was at stake. moreover, the humanitarian disaster was caused by the warlords, so intervening to ensure the safe delivery of food aid merely addressed the

symptoms, not the causes of the famine. gates lamented the first u.s. miment invasion -- military invasion intervention driven by cnn. in his diary president biden bush cited the loss of -- president bush cited the loss of life in the famine. not exactly core national interests. what everyone thinks of his decision, though, president bush wisely used overwhelming force to pursue strictly defined and limited objectives. he deployed more than 25,000 troops to mogadishu, but only to secure the port and distribute food aid to needy somalis. he refused the united nations proposal to expand the mission to disarming the somali warlords faced with such overwhelming

power, the warlords backed down and allowed the aid to flow freely into mogadishu. then-chairman of the joint chiefs of staff colin powell later reflected that within weeks we were so successful that we had upset the economics of the marketplace, so much free food came pouring into somalia that it became tough to make a living by farming. when bill clinton took office in january 1993, he inherited a successful narrow mission that was drawing down. unfortunately he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. he flipped president bush's approach of overwhelming force with limited and defined objectives on its head. by march, president clinton turned over primary responsibility to the u.n., reduced the american presence to barely more than 4,000 troops, and expanded the mission to encompass the grandiose

objective of nation building. our u.n. ambassador madeleine albright proclaimed that we will embark on an unprecedented mission aimed at nothing less than the restoration of an entire country. gates later called the plan a pipe dream and hopelessly unrealistic. powell scoffed that since the catastrophe had been provoked by feuding 14th century-style warlords, the solution was a dose of 20th century-style democracy. what happened next was all too predictable. the warlords no longer feared the shrunken american force and renewed their fighting against each other and the u.n. peacekeepers. by june, the militia of the most powerful war warlord massacred two dozen pakistani peacekeepers. two months later ait's men

killed -- adid's men killed four americans. faced with the casualties the inexperienced president felt compelled to respond but only authorized half measures. he deployed 450 rangers, delta force operators and night stalkers to capture adid and destroy his command structure. these soldiers are among our nation's very best and mission creep was extraordinary. president clinton simply asked too much of too small a force. mogadishu was a dense city of more than one million residents, including thousands of adid's klansmen and fanatical supporters some of whom probably received training from al qaeda operatives on how to shoot down our helicopters. yet the elite forces immediately set themselves to the task of rolling up adid's network. their mission on october 3 was

straightforward enough for these seasoned warriors. intelligence reports placed key adid's lieutenants in downtown mogadishu. rangers would fast rope from corners of the task house. delta operators would hit the house and detain the targets. meanwhile a convoy of rangers would stage nearby ready to transport our troops and their prisoners back to the nearby american base. helicopters would provide covering fire throughout the operation. all told, the mission was supposed to last only an hour. but this operation occurred deep in the territory of adid's clan and fighting was intense from the moments the helicopter hit the target house. adid's militia men and angry mobs rushed to the scene and the streets erupted in gunfire explorations. the rangers fought back,

securing the house and beginning to set in the defensive perimeter. and disaster struck. first one black hawk was shot down killing the pilots. a downed helicopter was a contingency for which the task force had planned but it still greatly complicated the mission. now rather than returning to base with the prisoners, the rangers and delta operators first had to fight their way to the crash site, secure it, and recover the dead. and then another disaster struck militiamen struck down a second black hawk, a contingency for which the task force lacked sufficient search and rescue assets. two delta snipers, gary gordon and randy shughart had been providing cover fire from another helicopter. observing a mob rushing toward the downed helicopter, they repeatedly requested permission to be inserted to protect the

crash site. once on the ground and with nothing more than small arms, they heroically fought back the mob untiling -- until they ran low on ammunition and were overwhelmed. the injured pilot narrowly escaped death and was instead taken prisoner. for their willingness to give their lives for his in the face of impossible odds, master sergeant gary gordon and sergeant first class randy shugart posthumously received the medal of honor, the only medals of honor awarded between vietnam and afghanistan to give you a sense of the intensity of the battle. meanwhile the rangers and delta operators had moved by foot to secure the first crash site and recover the remains of their fallen comrades. one pilot was trapped under tons of wreckage, complicating the

recovery mission. but there was never any question that they would state until they succeeded. their creed permitted nothing else. leave no man behind. in any event, they had no way out because the supporting convoy was decimated in the maze of down townl mogadishu, in the nest of enemy fire, the convoy had to return to base leaving the dismounted rangers and delta operators isolated at the crash site. bloodied and staggered, they hunkered down and prepared for the long night ahead. with night stalkers heroically suppressing the somalis from the sky the rangers and delta operators defended their position, tended their casualties and continued the efforts to recover the remains of their fallen comrades. their commanders cobbled together a new and more heavily

armed convoy from the nearby tent mountain division and pakistan city ti and -- pack -- pakistani peacekeepers. they struggled to recover the pilot's body. even the end game was frightful for these warriors. once they finally recovered the fallen and prepared to escape, nervous and poorly prepared for, bashar -- before they could begin to load up to a different renedevous point. given all they had been through, they made it out alive. it is hard to overstate the ferocity of the battle. jeff strucker was a young ranger who received the silver star for his action.

strucker law combat -- saw combat before in mogadishu and many times after. after that night, he said nothing came close to mogadishu, i mean not even close. i once heard the same from general scott miller, a lenl end in the operations world and our last four-star commander in afghanistan. he was a young delta captain on the ground. he observed that i've seen a lot of fire fights these last 20 years, but nothing close to mogadishu. i've never spoken to a veteran of motion mogadishu who said ang different. against all odds and in spite of the horror, these warriors, i want to stress again, accomplished their mission and returned bloodied but victorious. they captured their target and brought them out. tragedy struck with 18 troops

killed in action and more than 70 wounded, but our troops inflicted far, far more casualties. even conservative estimates put enemy deaths over 500 and casualties over 1,000. as one delta operator put it to bodien, they just -- boden, they just fought one of the most one-sided battles in american history. shocking videos of the bodies of american soldiers being desecrated an american pilot in captivity overshadowed everything else. most americans had no idea we even had troops in somalia, much less that they were engaging in such ferocious battle. president clinton failed to articulate what vital national interest justified his decision to massively expand the limited mission he inherited from

president bush. he neither deployed enough troops nor gave them enough firepower and engagement authorities to complete that expanded mission. now faced with political controversy, he cut and ran. his decision left many of our troops in mogadishu confused and enraged. many asked if the mission was worth 18 american lives, why would they abandon it now? and if it wasn't, what were they doing there in the first place? and what about vengeance for the dead and wounded? president clinton didn't trouble himself to answer these questions. he shut down task force ranger. he announced that the rangers within the peace keeping mission would come home by march. he released the prisoners that task force ranger had captured, including the two targets in the raid on october 3.

president clinton later wrote that i knew how president kennedy felt after the bay of pigs. i suppose so. he knew what it felt like to bring humiliation and shame to a great and powerful nation. and grave danger. because among the unanswered questions was another one. what kind of lesson would it teach our enemies if america packed up and left at the first moment of bloodshed? for it wasn't just americans and smolies watching -- somalis watching, the rest of the world was also watching. among those watching was an obscure leader of al qaeda. osama bin laden concluded that america, in his words, was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat.

in fact, bin laden regularly cited clinton's frantic withdrawal from mogadishu in his letters about america over the next eight years. a dangerous letter is an important reminder for us today. we can control where we commit our forces, which we shouldn't do absent a compelling national interest. we certainly shouldn't commit them to quick nation building products, but once america's power and prestige is committed, the whole world is watching, especially our enemies. and from somalia to kabul to ukraine, they will learn dangerous lessons when our leaders are timid, irresolute and weak. one lesson our enemies will take

away from the matle of mogadishu -- battle of mogadishu, never challenge americans. our troops in mogadishu fought with unparalleled bravery and skill. they brought back their dead and wounded. they accomplished their mission. they made their country proud. on behalf of a grateful nation, i want to thank the men and women who served and sacrificed so much 30 years ago. god bless them. god bless their families. may god continue to bless america with warriors just like them.

mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, as the world now knows, over the weekend congress passed a short-term funding bill to prevent a government shutdown. i want to commend speaker mccarthy and the members of the house on both sides of the aisle from finding a path forward to keep the government open for the next 45 days while the two chambers advanced full-year appropriations bills. the failure to advance those bills was in fact the reason why we came up against the end of the fiscal year deadline and had to resort to a short-term continuing resolution. now, i made my feelings about government shutdowns crystal clear. they don't save any money, they don't solve any problems, and the same problems that caused you to shut down the government

are still there staring you in the face when you reopen. they are not in anyone's best interest. unless you're concerned primarily with politics and the blame game. when the government shuts down, millions of federal workers are left without being paid. now, that doesn't mean they don't have to continue doing their job. it must means they won't get paid. that includes members of the military, our front line border security personnel and so many others. i'm glad their families don't have to confront the reality of a shutdown today. beyond the impact on individual workers, shutdowns impact critical functions of the federal government. immigration court hearings are canceled, resulting in an even greater backlog of pending questions. the e-verify system, which is

designed to allow employers to determine whether somebody can lawfully work in the united states is taken off line, meaning employers have no way to verify job applicants' employment eligibility. in many cases, federal investigators aren't able to pursue leads of potential criminal activity, develop evidence or even bring enforcement actions against bad actors. programs that support our veterans, low-income families, and other vulnerable americans are temporarily paralyzed. so there are no winners during a government shutdown. the overwhelming majority of us, and i believe of the country, understand that. so i'm glad we were able to avert a crisis at the last minute, but the fact we even landed in that situation

represents a failure of congress to govern, and it starts right here in the united states senate. at start of the summer, it looked like the senate would embrace the regular & something it hadn't done in a long time. the day this chamber passed the legislation raising the debt limit, leader schumer and leader mcconnell issued a joint statement about the process going forward. this is it back when the debt ceiling was -- legislation was signed. they said they asked the chair and vice chair of the appropriations committee to get regular order process started, to move all 12 appropriations bills through the appropriations committee. the leadership also pledged to work in a bipartisan fashion to advance funding bills and noted that, quote, expeditious floor

consideration would be key to preventing automatic funding cuts. well, there's no question that our colleagues on the appropriations committee did their job. as a matter of fact, they exceeded expectations. under the leadership of chairman murray and ranking member collins, the appropriations committee passed all 12 appropriations bills before the end of july. each bill received, as i said, broad bipartisan support. more than half of them passed unanimously. so our colleagues on the appropriations committee, on a bipartisan basis, handed the majority leader 12 bipartisan funding bills on a silver platter. they put the senate in the strongest possible position to return to a transparent, orderly, and full-participation

process where every hem of the -- member of the senate would get a chance to participate in shaping those bills. hopefully maybe even improving them. but, as we know now, that's not what happened. the majority leader would just, we know, but maybe not everybody knows, is the only person in the senate of all 100 senators, the majority leader is the only one who can schedule legislation for votes on the floor. and he allowed the month of june, july, august, and half of september to pass before he even attempted to put a bill on the floor. the minibus or the package of three appropriations bills that the senate majority leader, the senator from new york, put on the floor for a vote wasn't until 18 days before the funding

deadline. now, that's a far cry from expeditious floor consideration that he promised earlier this year. he had ample time and countless opportunities to move those bills across the senate floor and to pave the way for a thoughtful and ontime appropriations process. instead, as we all know, we were here on saturday, september 30, scrambling to pass a short-term funding bill to avoid a shutdown. and i remember speech after speech after speech, the majority leader said, oh, it's those republicans in the house who are causing this problem and accepted no responsibility for his failure to move a single appropriations bill -- appropriation bill through the senate during the fiscal year

while we were staring down the barrel of a government shutdown and it was in large part because of his lack of leadership of the senate. i'm sure that senator schumer will not hesitate to claim credit for keeping the government open and blame the house for the problems, but i think it's important to remind everyone of the facts. mr. president, here we are, october 3, the democrat-led senate has not passed -- still not passed a single one of the 12 regular appropriations bills. we haven't passed funding for the defense department, for homeland security, for veterans' affairs, nothing. and what's even more astonishing is the majority leader apparently has no plans to move any appropriation bills across the floor this week or in coming

weeks. the senate is not even expected to address any appropriations bills before gaveling out tomorrow evening and returning about two weeks later. now, as we know, congress passed, thanks to the house, passing a bipartisan stopgap appropriations bill, we had 45 days from saturday to fund the government on an ongoing basis and the majority leader has chosen to send the members of the senate home for the next two weeks. and to burn two weeks out of the 45 days doing nothing. i fear that 45 days from saturday we will have passed -- since we passed the current

continuing resolution, we will find ourselves exactly in the same place we found ourselves just a couple of days ago. it's outrageous. it's irresponsible. the american people deserve better. the house by contrast which the majority leader liked to point to as the problem, even though they saved our bacon by passing a short-term c.r. there when the senate had done nothing, all we could do was take up their short-term continuing resolution and pass it which we did on saturday night. meanwhile, the house has passed five of its 12 funding bills with plans to advance even more during the coming days. speaker mccarthy's canceled a scheduled recess so the house can continue to process those business. the senate majority leader should take a few lessons from speaker mccarthy. he should start putting funding

bills on the floor and take our responsibilities seriously. there's no excuse for burning two weeks out of the 45 days we just got last saturday when there's so much work to be done. but i guarantee one thing. i bet you senator schumer will try to cast blame on house republicans, but the facts speak for themselves. the only reason we're not? a shutdown today is because speaker mccarthy -- because of his leadership. he managed to get a clean, short-term funding bill through the house with bipartisan support. all senator schumer had to do is schedule a vote in the senate. mccarthy's clean continuing resolution passed with a vote of 88 senators.

well, i hope the majority leader will use the next couple of weeks or remaining weeks in that 45-day reprieve far more wisely than he has used it during the last three months. he promised regular order, and now is his chance once again to deliver it. in the next several weeks i hope the senate will have the chance to visit all 12 of those appropriation bills, maybe bundled as so-called minibuses but to address them nonetheless. but i expect the senate will also at the same time have a thorough debate about our nation's border security or lack thereof. the biden administration claims it's taking action to control illegal immigration, but the evidence plainly shows their policies are making things

worse, not better. according to news reports, september broke the record for the most border crossings in a single month. an estimated 260,000 migrants crossed the southern border last month. cbs news is reported that the department of homeland security has released most migrants into the interior, just released them, some even without a notice to appear in an immigration court. the department of homeland security has instructed them to undergo immigration court proceedings which potentially are as much as ten years away. law enforcement, nonprofits and border communities have been under tremendous strain throughout the biden administration. and it's time for congress to take action to address the crieft, even if -- the crisis, even if president biden will not. i was in new york yesterday and

learned about the strain being placed on that great city just trying to house all of the migrants that end up there. i read the governor of illinois is asking for more money to help pay for the housing and the feeding of these families. so clearly we've got a problem, but so far the biden administration hasn't cared to lift a finger to do anything about it. one thing i can promise you is i for one am not going to vote for a penny more money to fund the current broken system. so we're going to have a debate and discussion and we're going to have some votes on what the e federal government needs to do to step up and fill the gap being filled right now by states like texas and arizona. we need more agents. we need more detention space, more physical barriers, more immigration judges, and more

flexibility to remove individuals who have zero legitimate claim to remain in the united states. president biden has proven his unwillingness to address this crisis so it's time for congress to do so. as funding discussions continue, this is a top priority for senate republicans. and i know from talking to my democratic colleagues, they understand this is a problem. they understand that the problem that many thought was one that border states had to bear is now affecting the entire country. and we haven't even talked about the drugs that come across the border, smuggled by the same criminal organizations that smuggle people. so i'm glad congress averted a government shutdown, but the real work has just begun. we have less than seven weeks to

advance a full-year appropriation bill and address urgent priorities like securing the border. i would urge the majority leader just to quit wasting time. you know, for many weeks now, congress has not been in session or the senate not been in session on mondays so we come into session on tuesday about 3:00 in the afternoon, have a vote at 5:30, and then we leave after lunch on thursday. the american people are not getting what they pay for when it comes to the senate doing its job, but again, the person that controls that schedule is the majority leader, and it's time to get serious and to get to work and to do our job. i hope the majority leader will quit wasting time and allow the senators to do the work we were sent here to do.

mr. president, i yield the floor and i'd note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. quorum call:

quorum call:

we would take this moment and walk away with three things. making it clear that the ukraine military has done what they have been planning to do for years. eliminated 50% of the capacity. maybe making it the second most powerful military in ukraine. eliminating 50% of capacity without the single life of an american life tornado.

at a moment when we have to reaffirm our alliances somehow offending the signal that we will not be there in light of elections on saturday makes no sense at all. i scratch my head because i hear that i literally care about putin in ukraine terrified about the president in china. not understanding the connection that putin is successful in ukraine. it is absolutely critical that we step up. knowing that china is an ultimate long-term potential adversary. national security and 2023 tanks and guns it is ai and 5 g and quantum computing.

i think we will find the dollars an enormous bipartisan interest in getting that done. i know you are quickly looking at the questions. the question will be, will it be in pieces? >> we were talking about that. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell, the story of the money being spent right here. not just going over as foreign aid. sending checks to ukraine saying , here, have it. does it help? talk a little bit about that. do you think it resignations?

>> the aide to ukraine is any of us. giving them appropriate credit for them. it is actually right. the plots that are on the security side. they have american companies who are increasing our production lines. we needed to increase capacity, domestic capacity. -- according to the american defense industry. good about not making sure these were out of our reserves. bleeding into a little of that by category.

i do think the one thing that we do need more is clarity. they fell on my side of the budget. on the intel side so it cannot be snatched out. i think making clear accounting will be helpful. >> the department of defense. can you talk about how they can use commercial innovation for how they have the most up-to-date technology and just as important they help lower the cost for taxpayers? >> great question. two examples. one example, and overhead. thinking about this as well from the intel side. when i first got on the intelligence committee, people may have had a picture of me because i kept trying to say on satellites let's go commercial. let's not simply have this.

like no one had ever seen a james bond movie. we had not thought that group. we made it where we have got now , you know, spacex really competitive there as well. i think on the kind of military traditional holy side there is a lot of room for improvement. in this job. had not been a business guy, had not been a governor. somebody came in with like 12 volumes of things when i quickly gave up. none of the things that i'm spending time is going to put together all of the thunders on the private sector or side. early stage to middle stage. we still have the classic valley

trying to break the dod. one of the things that is fundamental. there used to be a very small universe of thunders but national security being a i quantum sensors overhead, you know, biology and into areas where we have to compete with china. a lot more companies potentially , they can help those innovative companies get real. looking at this security sector. it is still an opportunity to create.

>> examining that dod activation model. what do you hope to make out of it? >> a lot of the companies are in northern virginia. others are moving here at and has not been lack of innovation. it has been lack of a process that moves away from the traditional lines. taking some risks. the intel community has appointed the sphere appeared helping to push that innovation. this study is a good one. call. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. blackburn: thank you. last week came to the floor and brought forward the proof that

the biden administration allowed an iranian influence operation to infiltrate our government, and they compromised one of the most sensitive weapons negotiations in our nation's history. it was only after the media and senate republicans exposed this ongoing threat to our national security that the biden administration agreed to investigate it. so, as i said, last week i sent a letter to the pentagon demanding to know why biden administration officials granted these operatives top-secret security clearances and sent them to negotiate with the very adversaries that once they worked for those adversaries. but today i want to real estate mind my -- remind my colleagues of another influence operation that we have known for a long

time which requires no security clearance and no special access to government documents. for years tiktok has been under scrutiny for its advertise to the chinese community party. we know that this company openly violates basic privacy standards, puts user data in the hands of the ccp and subjects u.s. users to chinese influence operations. almost 100 million americans have this app on their phone and the biden administration, they have had very little to say about this. in fact, the president himself has embraced it as a tool to rehabilitate his fail policies with young voters. he has invited tiktok influencers to the white house. still, my colleagues and i have made it impossible for the biden administration to totally ignore

the threat. tiktok has been in negotiations with the committee on foreign investment in the u.s. it is known as cfius. they're in negotiations on the potential framework called -- and i am quoting them -- project texas that will supposedly keep americans' data secure and make it impossible for beijing to manipulate the flow of information in the app. a core component of these discussions involves measures to separate tiktok from its chinese parent company bytedance. but of course we're already seeing the ccp find creative ways to get around that fire wall. as you know, they have a habit of doing this with their propaganda schemes, whether it's confuse shus classrooms,

institutes, sister city programs or a social media app tiktok. "the wall street journal" reported last week that this year tiktok has transferred many high-level executives from bytedance to tiktok in the united states. these executives are leading major divisions at tiktok which provides the ccp with a significant degree of influence over the way they do business. the personnel changes undermine tiktok's independence from bytedance, and there's no chance that this happened by accident. it's clear what tiktok is doing. they are repurposing bytedance employees to masquerade at tiktok employees, undercutting the guardrails against chinese espionage. we know that with the confucius

institute, many of these professors that came our way were indeed connected and sent there by the chinese communist party. over the past three years it has become clear that we cannot rely on the biden administration to follow through on its promises to protect and defend this country and the citizens of this country. they fall behind repeatedly, especially when it's politically inconvenient to do so. so today senator blumenthal and i sent a letter to the ceo of tiktok demanding to know how many of his employees are former bytedance employees. what are their jobs? what are the security protocols and the other rules are going to be imposed on these transfers?

these are questions that we need the answers to. we also want to know if these personnel changes were disclosed to cfius before the "wall street journal" published its article. and, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to submit the record, the letter to the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. president. now we know that popular opinion would have each and every one of us believe that the threat posed by tiktok just isn't that serious, and we know from experience that the white house dislikes challenging popular opinion. after all, we hear this is just an app that kids like to use. this is just a silly app with

videos. this is an app that is putting up challenges. there's nothing wrong here. but what we do know, mr. president, is that tiktok gathers all of this information. they have insight into the virtual you. once they're on your phone, they are following where you go, what you do, gathering key strokes and building that profile. and we know this information leads the u.s. -- leaves the u.s. and we know this information makes its way to beijing. why do they think they need this information on u.s. citizens? why do they think they need to

follow u.s. citizens? all of this is a reason that cfius is viewmpg tiktok. this -- is reviewing tiktok. this country can no longer afford to take the word of adversaries at face value. self-appropriate propaganda is what the chinese party is all about. they see this as a way to infiltrate our society, to infiltrate public opinion, to infiltrate and to influence in elections. this is not the first letter senator blumenthal and i sent to tiktok demanding transparency, and i would imagine this is not going to be the last. i know it is very difficult to accept that a silly video app that is liked by 100 million americans could possibly pose a threat to our national security, but we believe that

it does. and i would remind my colleagues, indeed anyone who has not deleted this spy app from their phones, please recognize the threat that is there and do not provide your information to one of our greatest adversaries. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the office of management and budget in the of the station that center for american progress senior director joining us to talk about how the government is funded or thanks for giving us your time. and thanks so much for having me. see making to give chairpersons on how initially the house speaker ship will be resolved in terms of keeping the government funded for the next 45 days? >> a deal came together something, we had roughly a cr continuing resolution that kept most spending on the discretionary side going at the exact levels as before. we authorized what they said was i see things going to be in the

november 17 hopefully more time than that will use rates than the something that sprung from as that is on the house that your sing appropriations bill they worked on. talk about that as a process to the funding of government. >> yeah so each year we do 12 appropriations bills. they are usually combined into one bill for the omnibus and sometimes a that funds would call the discretionary portion of the budget. that's a third of the budget a little bit less. it's not medicare or medicaid or social security or snap but we take what every year they say how much money are going to get this year and how much money are we going to give them this year? that's what it is in this one third. a house in the senate have been working on all 12 bills in the senate has marked up also fails on a bipartisan basis. the house has marked up 10 of their 12 bills and they pass through them and they have given

up on one and they are going ahead on this end happy to talk about what's going on. >> go ahead. >> sure, so one of the things behind this is coming up that they, so we passed the fiscal responsibility act and in their we said there was a bipartisan agreement on what level we were going to fund the government at. people had to decide how is broken down in how much it will go to epr nafta and that sort of stuff but the topline level was agreed to coming up that the fiscal responsibility act so to post to begin riding the bill at that level him part of the reason, part of the reason we are in such a difficult place right now is the senate and a bipartisan basis started riding stuff almost fully consistent with that and a little bit higher but the house began riding bills significantly below

the deal. when you say yes to going forward with this not totally true. part of the issue is at the bills they are writing severely underfunded the deal that was agreed to a couple months ago. >> part of your analysis and taking a look at that, he made some statements and i want you to read some of the statements to get you to clarify and elaborate on them. you start by saying those bills were looked at 58 billion plus for ongoing non-defense programs. can you start there? >> totally right. there was a deal a couple of months ago that was agreed to on a bipartisan basis. the majority of house and senate dems and republicans voted for it. that was the set for the discretionary budget. it was already a strict spending on the current service that would reduce non-defense by

49 billion so then the house republicans appropriations bill was cut $58 billion for ongoing programs. if you add up with a total spending for nih and the cdc and the epa and social security administration announced various things as $50 billion below the deal. in addition to that the call to cut back on this other types of spending by $4 billion below the deal so that underfunding the deal. in interesting thing is in the last few weeks mccarthy has indicated their plan to do another 60 billion beyond that. they blocked him around 5 billion where that 5 billion will come from a half to see. it's why we are in a difficult situation. house republicans are calling for massive cuts beyond what they agree to a couple of months ago. stomach >> bobby kogan is our guest and you want to ask him questions about the funding process

(202)748-8000 won and republicans 2-487-488-0004. text us at 2-027-488-0003. they worked on them in committee is that because of differences from what the senator side wants versus what the house site is offering? >> the senate has begun its progress and mark them up. they have major bipartisan support. they were working on a minibus and i don't remember the amount exactly right but they either had 89 or 91 senators agree on a motion of cloture said they have a huge agreement in their bills. moving appropriation bills and make sure thing is moving right takes a wild. typically congress will pass the resolution to give marte.

i'd say the senate is working normally in this way. >> the house is offering lower figures than initially agreed upon. how does that impact with the senate will do? >> the senate can and will go ahead passing its bills. where it's going to matter than is if the house and says, the house republicans insist on going below the deal we are setting up another showdown in mid-november. i don't think there's an appetite among senate republicans and senate democrats and house democrats and the white house and breaking the deal that they had a couple of months ago. similarly whenever budget caps for 2012 through 2021, it didn't go below the caps in any of those in effect there were bipartisan agreements in all nine years of appropriations level to go but the caps i would say the issue is here is that

house republicans are going down the path of no won't become law. and i'm going to add to that point they have difficulty and withdrew their agate fda bills sharif done the department of agriculture and the nutrition programs in the fda and other agencies and they were having difficulty getting enough people to support in speaker mccarthy went along that hey don't worry this will become lahsa don't worry about voting for it. part of the issue is at the bills they are calling for her real extreme. the fda and i bill as an example it would ban pharmacies from selling the most common portions while simultaneously cutting a program that helps poor pregnant women and infants afford food and it's only healthy -- if you go to the grocery store you see something for wic that's what that is and while simultaneously

making it harder it would cut back and underfund the program that helps poor pregnant women and newborns food. it's a pretty extreme measure and things like that are kind of weather throughout the bill which is why, it's why they won't become law. >> come you said this and you may preference it already said the bill is on the house side $150 billion of funding that jurisdiction of the house appropriations committee. can you elaborate on that? >> yeah, so if congress can do anything, any law can do anything but the appropriations committee works on discretionary appropriations so they can pullback things that are mandatory that are typically funded throughout their committees. it is when that is done it's only done on a major bipartisan basis and so is if there was a

deal of $21 billion of that but they instead were calling for $116 billion. these were programs that were passed by other committees and they said well i know this is another committee's bill or another committee's program of funding but we are going to pull it back anyway. >> bobby kogan on your twitter feed it's talking about ukraine and you have twitter poll. i'll read the question but i want to set about freezing the last two fiscal years the budget has ukraine assistance average and persuaded to put a poll up in the first place? >> it was related to whoever the main character was that day. obviously it's always a big discussion now. anytime you have the money to do x, y or z of how big and what percentage of the budget is

used. this is not a knock on anyone and that anyone's job i mean it's my job but not most people's job to be federal budget experts. so it's a wrong sense of how big the budget is. international assistance for four assistance for foreign aid if you asked people how big it is most would say it's 25% of budget would instead it's around 1% or less. so you seal the time people say we can't do x because of these other things. it's inappropriate and we don't have the money for it. the reason i was asking folks is to kind of get, to help people think about like what are we spending on and how much do these things cost and that is why ask a question paste and that the potential answers or 2% or less, 33 to quarter%, five to six in seven plus%. with the answer? >> the answers around 1%. it depends. their couple of different ways to crunch it. the most generous way the

highest level would be around 1%. >> and yet the topic of ukraine complicated the process of the last couple of weeks. i suppose you saw that play out as well. >> yeah certainly. obviously, to be clear there's a bipartisan majority in each chamber to support ukraine but one of the difficulties of congress is even if the majority never grace sometimes it doesn't end up happening. some make it their biggest issue. in the senate they are continuing resolution, their official would have more for ukraine. eventually they lowered that to between the -- and the stateside and the house version they took out ukraine entirely. i don't know what would have happened if congress had waded till the last minute to stun the

government by giving that this came together on the day before the shutdown before it was time for folks to say well what if we did it this way and what if we did this? we were three hours away from shutting down so folks are working through the house may or may not bring up a measure and i know some people think they might but it's obviously it's important to allow the members for various reasons. we will certainly see it. >> bobby kogan at the center for and progress with us let's are worth a million george on the democrats line. you were on with her guess. good morning. >> caller: good morning. good morning mr. kogan. i wish the democrats would be more specific when they point out what programs republicans are trying to cut. they over the years have been ones to get rid of social security and medicare. when they talk about spending is

one of the things that they want to cut. and then they sacrificed -- president trump he over $8 trillion when they did a comparison with all the other residents over the years he's the one that did lot more spending. he over $8 trillion in four years and when people realize when you do tax cuts its the same as spending. there's no money there so the fact that the republicans are always for the rich and the poor people, the little people the working class suffer. this other lady previously that was with you she said a whole bunch of lies. trump has not done anything. all he did was give rich people tax cuts. >> all right, thanks. >> thanks for watching and calling in. i totally agree and i think it's

important folks to be specific. the interesting thing about government spending as if he asked people should be cut government spending if you say it that way, a huge, huge percentage of americans say gallis a course we should. if you asked them well what should you cut? should we cut this, of course not bad. >> what about this? a course not that either. he goes to the list in the majority of them say note almost everything you talk about so to honor that i did a couple of specifics. $58 billion below the deal that house republicans had. op -- i'm going to sound like a partisan just by talking about the cuts because they are so extreme and i'm happy to point you to this and you can do the arithmetic yourself. they called for an in nearly 80% cut to title i education.

it's an education grant the gives money to poor school districts to make sure they can hire teachers. it's a big program it's like 17 or $18 billion a year. they called to cut it nearly 80%. they would leave it at its lowest level in the program's history. when i first was crunching the numbers i had to triple check my work because i thought i had misread it. we do this grant that helps states and local areas make sure the drinking water that we all have a say. house republican bill calls to cut that program by 59%. to your point i should do a better job about lifting up the expenses. >> marcus into the code on the republican line. hi. >> hi. i was downtown yesterday and i

saw 200 people in the food line. that's. i'm at disabled veteran. what about our veterans and our social security? i thought for this country for two years in vietnam. i'm an old man now and every month you have distress the prest objection. the prest mr. cardin: thank you, mr. president. i come to the floor today in support of james o'brien to be assistant secretary of state for european-asia affairs. as russia continues its briewltal assault on ukraine, as democratic backsliding continues to threaten central europe, as we continue to grabble with energy security, we must have a fully staffed and empowered diplomatic core. vacancies leave a vacuum and they send the wrong message. ukraine is by far one of my highest priorities.

it's very clear to me that making russia does not succeed in ukraine is in the united states national security interests. ukraine is not only fighting for itself, if ukraine loses, moldova and gentleman are next. ukraine is -- and georgia are next. ukraine is on the front line to fight democracy and our shared values. iran is watching. north korea is watching. china is watching. when they see the resolve of the united states and our coalition of partners, it stops them from thinking about taking military action elsewhere. that's why we need to continue to show leadership in supporting ukraine against russia's aggression. as the chair of the senate foreign relations committee, i will do everything i can to show the international community that we stand with ukraine today and tomorrow. that means ensuring ukraine gets more air defense and long range missiles. that means working with our european partners who continue

to house and support ukrainian refugees. supporting humanitarian assistance for those suffering, including children who have been abducted into russia and families who have been torn apart. that means finding a path for the administration's supplemental request. yes, that means getting our nominees to their posts in the european affairs bureau. without our nominees confirmed and in their positions, who will advocate on behalf of american values in ukraine and beyond? who will advance america's national security interests? who will work to lead our efforts from washington to shore up transat whrantsic alliance -- transatlantic alliance in pursuit of stability and peace. president putin is helping far-right political parties, individuals, and groups across europe and beyond who support his agenda. he's attacking the human rights of ukrainian citizens. he's laying waste of ukrainian cities. i believe he's trying to commit

genocide in ukraine and i support an international tribunal into russian war crimes like the one we saw after nuremberg in world war ii. on batch of the american people to confront russia's aggression. that is why i we must confirm james o'brien today. ambassador o'brien has an impressive -- had an impressionive hearing in the senate foreign relations committee. he presented a compelling vision for how he would lead the bureau of european and eurasian affairs. he laid out the importance of america's leadership on integrating ukraine as well as the south caucuses and western balkans into the transatlantic economic and political structures. he was reported favorably by the foreign relations committee by a bipartisan fois vote. ambassador o'brien brings a wealth experience to this position having most recently worked as the head of the office of sanctions coordinator.

targeting among others the russian oligarchs that thrive on corruption. russian oligarchs whose corrupt networks are continuing to fuel the war in ukraine which in turn impacts global energy and food prices for just about every single person in the world. beyond his most recent post, ambassador o'brien's professional resume reads like building blocks for this position. having served as the principal dependty director of policy planning and presidential envoy for the balkans, he will be up to speed if a conflict against erupts in kosovo. he won't be afraid to call out bad actors in bosnia and work with those advocating for peace, transparency, and prosperity. he helped establish the office for hostage affairs and worked for the safe return of a hundred american citizens. he dealt with scientific and environmental agreements and russia and ukraine yeas post -- ukraine's post soviet transitions. he's been part of a initiative

to prosecute persons responsible for war crimes and received numerous awards of distinction from the state department. this is a seasoned, professional who is ready to take on the high profile challenge. once he is confirmed, he will be able to hit the ground running. that sends a signal that the united states cares about what happens in europe. and right now we need to show our resolve. ukrainians are doing their part. even as they fight a war to defend their country, they are making good progress on anticorruption. we need to be there for them and make clear that our support is long term and bipartisan. we need to stand with ukraine to make sure it gets everything it needs to defend itself and succeed in this russian war. ukrainians' success on the battlefield is what will bring russia to the negotiating table, nothing else. that is why it's time for the united states and international community to step up. we cannot take a pass on good versus evil. so, mr. president, i urge my colleagues to join me in voting

yes on the cloture for this nominee, yes to advancing our diplomatic efforts to confront putin's war in ukraine, yes to promoting american values, yes to advancing america's national security interests. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor.

mr. cardin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: i would ask unanimous consent that the vote scheduled for 5:30 begin immediately. the presiding officer: without objection. the presiding officer: the

clerk will report the motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 319, james c. o'brien of nebraska to be an assistant secretary of state signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of james c. o'brien of nebraska to be an assistant secretary of state, european and eurasian affairs, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal.

mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins.

mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo.

mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley.

mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. the clerk: mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan.

ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski.

the clerk: mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters.

the clerk: mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance.

the clerk: mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

senators voting in the affirmative -- bennet, brown, cardin, carper, casey, collins, crapo,

duckworth, graham, grassley, hassan, king, kane, markey, menendez, peters, reed, ricketts, romney, sinema, smith, tester, warner, welch. senators voting in the negative -- blackburn, boozman, cassidy, cotton, hyde-smith, johnson, lankford, marshall, vance.

the clerk: mr. tuberville, no. mr. heinrich, aye. vote:

the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mrs. britt, no. mr. sanders, aye. mrs. capito, aye. mr. barrasso, no. ms. hirono, aye.

mrs. fischer, no. mr. wicker, aye. mr. lujan, aye. mr. cornyn, aye. the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. mr. tillis, aye.

mr. thune, no. mr. merkley, aye. the clerk: mr. young, aye.

the clerk: mr. daines, no. mr. durbin, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye. ms. cortez masto, aye. mr. schatz, aye. the clerk: ms. warren, aye. mr. scott of florida, no. mr. mr. manchin, aye. mr. coons, aye.

mr. murphy, aye. mr. moran, no. mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. mr. hagerty, no.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. the clerk: mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. paul, aye.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. lee, no.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. schmitt, no.

the clerk: mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. ms. butler, aye. mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: mr. rounds, aye. mr. hickenlooper, aye. the clerk: mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. the clerk: mr. rubio, no.

ms. cantwell, aye. mr. schumer, aye. mr. kennedy, no.

the clerk: mr. budd, no.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no. the clerk: mr. cruz, no.

vote: the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mr. mullin, no.

the clerk: mr. cramer, no.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye. ms. murkowski, aye.

the presiding officer: the yeas are 63, the nays are 32. the motion is agreed to. the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. moran: mr. president, i don't expect this to be the best formed set of remarks that i've ever made on the floor of the united states senate, and i would guess that they could be refined and improved and maybe

somebody will edit them and make them in a better form, but i didn't want to miss the opportunity to express my views in regard to several things that occurred in the united states senate in the congress in this country last week. mr. president, i think our country faces perhaps the greatest challenges ever faced in my lifetime, certainly in my time as an elected official. it seems to me that the array of challenges from our adversaries railroad real -- are real, are increasing, and are threatening. i've always been an optimist. i expect us to be able to do the things necessary to change the course of history, to make sure that the united states remains the country that it is today.

perhaps my fears arise because robba and i are now grandparents. perhaps it's this love of another generation and the desire to see that they experience.things that i've been able to experience in my lifetime. mr. president, i want to highlight a recent and important essay penned by a former secretary of defense. robert gates, a fellow kansan, warns of our government dysfunction at a moment in history in which our nation confronts graver threats to its security than it has in decades, perhaps ever. our constituents from time to time they pay attention to what we do here, but i want us to

recognize that perhaps even more intently our adversaries pay attention to what we do or don't do here. what we do and how we do tr -- how we do it either strengthens or harms the future of the united states. it can increase the trust placed in us by our allies or it can embolden our adversaries. because, if i'm right, our future is in the balance and we need to work to increase those who decide to be on the side of freedom and liberty, of stability, of a better life for all people. we need to be the leader of a coalition that understands the

values and the american ideals and how they alter lives, and we need to make certain that those who should be on the side of right are not sitting on the fence. during my time in the united states senate, i have never been more angry or more sullen than those few days, that week or so in which our country left afghanistan. our unprepared actions and void of leadership resulted in the deaths of americans, american servicemembers, and it stranded thousands of afghans, afghan allies, behind enemy lines. i raise this because i want to tie it to what may now be

happening here. those few days may have been among the most costly in emboldening those who seek our country's demise. and i fear that today we're about to again demonstrate to the world our feckless ambivalence to lead. i don't want us to lead as a superior or to be in the face of our allies, but i want people who care, countries who believe in peace and prosperity and freedom around the globe to be part of an alliance that the united states is an important component of. normally when we think about the challenges we face from adversaries abroad, we would think, well, it's time to increase defense spending, we need more assets, we need to make our military stronger. and my view, and i believe the

correct view, is that's true. but of equal importance, we need to dem on strays resolve -- demonstrate resolve, resolve in the support of allies and resolve in the resistance to enemies. when i say that i fear today we are failing, i speak of the ambivalence of our commitment to support the efforts to repeal, repulse, remove the putin invasion across the borders of ukraine. should we fail to live up to the necessary deeds and actions that need to be taken, in my view we are once again replicating the message that we sent in our chaotic and unfortunate manner in which we withdrew from afghanistan.

to my colleagues whom i criticize one but look the other way to the other, i think it is a view that cannot be sustained. failure to do right, to do things right, is the same. and the consequences are the same. leadership depends upon reliability. today americans cannot go it alone. we're not the only power in the world. the burdens of today's challenges are too immense to carry alone. our allies are force multipliers , and failing to lead in ukraine lets those most in danger, those in the neighborhood of ukraine change course and look elsewhere for a

path forward. it's always easier to duck responsibilities, but almost never is it the right course of action. our european leams and those -- allies and thoas -- those elsewhere in the world continue to look to the united states of america for leadership. the end of american support to ukraine would be another indication, just as i believe it was in our withdrawal from afghanistan that we are not the leaders that are necessary in today's dangerous world. never do we want to be seen by those waiting to pick a side, we would never want them to reach the conclusion that the united states cannot be relied

upon. another cabinet secretary, just like robert gates, this one is from wichita kansas as well, former secretary of state mike pompeo and i penned a joint opinion piece. we made the case that helping ukraine, while i pointed out how it matters to the world, what we pointed out is how it matters to america, to american citizens and to the future of our country, that we benefit the united states by the ukrainian success in their country. all this discussion last week about whether ukraine should continue to receive funding was surrounded by another development in our body politic, in the way that we do business in this congress and the way we make decisions about the right course forward. so let me tie to the concerns i

have about the decision that was made in regard to ukraine to the difficulties we had in what should be straightforward, funding the government into the future. every county commission, every school board, every city council in kansas can come up with a budget and make decisions about the funding of their business, the funding of their purpose into the future, and we turn what should be routine decisions, decisions made -- i say routine but decisions made with care and thought. there is no question that the spending path we are on is not sustainable. we are on a different path even in the appropriations bill, the 13 that have passed the united states committee on appropriations are on a different path than what we've

been on in increasing spending. those are important decisions, but we don't need to manufacture a crisis to make a point. the crisis doesn't solve the spending problem, and yet in so many instances we look for the highlight, the television time, the social media responses that sometimes seem to reward the behavior that is the most disruptive and the least effective. the challenges we face require setting aside unnecessary disagreement and disunion. last week disrated our system is creating disunion when we need

unity and common ground in a dangerous world. of all the times that i would expect americans and their elected officials to come together would be when we see the actions, when we know the dangerous nature of our world, when we see what china is doing and what its intentions seem to be, when we know what's taking place in iran and their efforts around the globe, when russia invades a country's, a neighboring country's borders, when north korea fires missiles. we united as a nation numerous times in our history, and we need to return to those circumstances. when things are so different, americans need to pull together, and that can happen if there's leadership here in congress to do so.

again, one would think if you believe those challenges are real, as i do, and if you care about the next generation of your own family and americans that you will never meet, it seems to me that now would be the time to lower the temperature and to find that common ground that puts us in a position that we can be optimistic about our nation's future. it doesn't mean that we don't face challenges and it doesn't mean that we don't have disagreement. it does mean that there is value in finding a solution as compared to accentuating the differences on the evening news. it means explaining to our constituents why, yes, we disagree with a colleague from another state, we disagree with democrats and we disagree with

republicans, and we think that we're right. it doesn't mean giving up what you believe in or what you know to be right, but it means isn't there a path by which we can turn down the fire and pull people together. so last week -- i'm giving these remarks because i spent the weekend rethinking what had transpired last thursday, friday, saturday, and really what's transpired over a much longer period of time, and concluded that at the first opportunity i wanted to make the case that our future's bright, but it's only bright when we work together. and i would say that it is incumbent upon us to send the message, but it's more than that, send the message that we are a reliable partner, encourage allies around the world to be helpful to ukraine. the europeans are now a little

bit ahead of us in the support that they now envision, now that they plan for support for ukraine. we've asked for that. they've now moved in that direction, but it will disappear and disappear quickly if we don't demonstrate that we are going to do what we set out to accomplish. and, by the way, about a conversation about our borders, our borders need desperate attention, and it's another national security issue. as we work to right the cause for america's well-being, enhancing ukraine's chance for success, in defeating putin, we should also resolutely move forward in ending the failure to protect our own country on our own border. we have work to do.

we can look the other way or we can decide that we're going to do what over the long period of time is right. we can decide that it is, would be nice to be popular at the moment, but it would be better to be right in the long term. mr. president, i'm grateful for the opportunity i have to serve in the united states senate. i'm grateful for the opportunity i have to serve with the colleagues that i do. last week was a discouraging moment in my time in public service, but i'm an optimist, and this week and next week and the next week that follows the next 47 days can be times of good work for the american

people and a safer and more secure united states and world. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. blumenthal: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, i'm grateful to follow my friend, and he is a friend, the senator from kansas, who stated very eloquently a number of the challenges that lie ahead and the reasons why we do have to come together on a bipartisan basis to make america and the world more secure. like him, i found last week to be both frustrating and discouraging. but i have been heartened first by the overwhelming bipartisan

votes in this chamber in favor of aid to ukraine. in fact, in support of a bipartisan compromise that included aid to ukraine and provided a temporary extension of funding which eventually became the core of the measure adopted by the house. i've been encouraged as well by the leadership of senator schumer and senator mcconnell coming together with senator collins and senator murray to say that we will fulfill our obligation to ukraine and that we will do it promptly. and that is why i am on the floor of the senate right now, to emphasize the urgency of making sure that we provide ukraine with the tools, the financial support, the humanitarian assistance, the

arms that it needs to win, and it can win. it's making solid, steady progress. i've seen the maps. i've visited ukraine four times in the last 18 months, and ukraine can win, and it will win if we provide ukraine with the tools that it needs. but it must be done now. we owe it to the men and women who are in those trenches right now, bleeding and dying, and who are watching america. we owe it to the leadership of ukraine, president zelenskyy, who has asked me on each of those four visits, will the united states stay by our side? and i have assured him, yes, we will be solid. and we owe it to our allies who

are also watching. our allies and our adversaries. and make no mistake, the chinese have changed their view of whether they can count on the united states to fail and falter, because so far we have stood strong, sending a message to china about what we would do if china invades taiwan. the world is watching and history is watching. and to my colleagues, there are few if any votes you will take or actions where you will be measured more intently and importantly than what we do right now. not months away, but days away, on what we must do in the ukraine security initiative.

and i urge the administration to take whatever action is necessary, again, not just in statements, not just in words, but in deeds. ukraine is waiting for the longer-range artillery, the atacms that it needs to pound targets where the russians gather intelligence, where they store supplies, where they conduct their leadership. those atacms are necessary, not just the hi-mars but the longer- range artillery. we need to train the pilots. that can be done. we need to provide munitions. we're producing more but ukraine continues to use them at a rate of roughly 10 times or 15 of what we are providing. drones, which have become the new fulcrum of the battlefield

not only to gather intelligence, but to deliver the kind of ordinance that we need to provide. these actions by the administration can be done with existing funding, but the fact of the matter is that as of this week or just days afterward the pentagon may well run out of funding for new weapons platforms. without an immediate replenishment, it cannot over the longer term provide ukraine with criminal systems like the air defense platforms that ukraine needs. to protect its civilians as well as military products. those systems is the hospitals,

the schools, the grids for electricity are now supremely susceptible to that kind of air bombardment. we know patriot air defense works, and i've seen it myself in the midst of air raids in kyiv when i went down to the bunker and kyiv's air defense successfully fended off those missiles and drones that were coming after it. we know the urgency of those atacms. we've heard it from the ukrainians, we've heard it from our own military about how important they can be. and i urge the administration to provide that long-term artillery. but we have a larger task ahead

of us, the summital at -- supplemental is important, we can take advantage of the bipartisan agreement that we have to make it happen and move quickly and promptly. i recognize there is turmoil in the house of representatives. i'm clear-eyed about the possibility of glowing fatigue among the american people. but it's on us in the united states senate. it's on us as leaders to make the case and convince americans that it's on us and in our interest because if we fail now to make this investment, the cost will be far greater when putin wins. we will have the need not just

to provide weapons platforms, but troops on the ground because that will be our obligation if putin goes against romania, poland, moldova, finland, sweden. we will pick one of them, he will be on the march if he wins in ukraine and he will have been right about our faltering and failing and it will not only be him, but also china. we will have a far greater cost. it is our national security on the line. ukrainians are fighting for our future, not just theirs, for our independence and freedom, not just their own. we have a national security interest in this fight and we need to make the american people understand it. mr. president, sometimes history is personal.

sometimes it's shaped by a leader who has the courage and strength to step forward and put his life on the line. that shwhat -- that is what volodymyr zelensky has done. he has inspired the people of ukraine and people around the world by staying in ukraine and providing that leadership that is so important. i once asked him how he thought it would end. and he said, in the end, it will be fine, and if it's not fine, it's not the end. they're determined, as he told me, to fight with pitchforks if necessary, but we can't let them fight with pitchforks. we need to give them what they need to be successful. and to vindicate the losses they

have suffered. and i've seen thim -- seen them where women and children were not with their hands behind their backs, like stalin and hitler, in those blood lands os professor snyder has call them. we have seen the images of cities leveled, literally destroyed. we have heard about children kidnapped from areas that russia has occupied. i talked to the prosecutor general about those thousands of children, literally thousands taken from their parents supposedly orphans but their

pairns are still alive. -- parents are still alive and there is a reason the international court has called for the arrest of vladimir putin and why he would be judged a war criminal if he ever were brought to trial because he has committed atrocities that have no match in recent history for their scale and scope and their brew talt. we are -- brutality. we are dealing with someone who has no respect for human life. either ukrainian life or russian life because he will continue to send his people into the war like cannon fodder. in the face of that evil, the ukrainians are determined, but we need to match their courage

and strength with the resources that they need and with the arms that they need. and sometimes history is personal in what it means to us. my own dad left germany in 1935. he came to this country at the age of 17. he spoke virtually no english. he had not much more than the shirt on his back. he knew no one. he left germany alone at the age of 17 because he saw what was coming, and he succeeded in bringing over his parents and his siblings and loss the rest of his family to the kind of brutality and atrocity that we are witnessing right now at the hands of vladimir putin. history doesn't repeat, but it

often rhymes, evil often does repeat even if it's not by the same people against the same people. and what we are seeing now is evil, and there are very few places in the world or conflicts or circumstances where it is, in fact, no gray area, black and white, good and evil. the world is watching now to see how we will keep faith, keep faith with our allies who have invested along with us at our side, keep faith with the people of ukraine, and maybe most important, keep faith with ourselves and with our values. we are being watched, not just by the world but by history, and our values and our self-image,

our ability to look ourselves in the mirror and say, yeah, we did our job is now what is at stake. history will remember us either as paragons of liberty or ineffectual bystanders. we can't wait for 45 days. we need a supplemental now. the men and women in the trenches of ukraine can't wait 45 days for bullets and bandages. the people in kyiv facing this winter without potentially food and electricity can't wait 45 days to know that we will stand by them. they're fighting for their future, for the dreams of independence and democracy. we're the most powerful, wealthiest, and the greatest

nation in the world, not simply because of the example of our power but the power of our example and there are a lot of folks, and i was one of them, who was discouraged and frustrated, as i said at the start, about the ability of our democracy to work given what we went through over these past days, but we can show our values and our democracy at its best if we help the ukrainians at this moment of unparalleled crisis for them. if we delay and falter, we lose time and the loss of time and dplai potentially -- delay potentially means defeat. i urge my colleagues to join me to find a way forward, a path to

vote as soon as possible to make that a -- that aid available to ukraine. it's our obligation and our opportunity at this critical moment in our history when the world is watching and when others long from now will look back and watch what we did or failed to do. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. mr. reed: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. after hearing oral arguments earlier today, the supreme court will rule on case that will determine whether average americans will continue to have an independent federal watchdog to push back against the abuses of big financial institution. the case i'm speaking of is the consumer financial protection

bureau, cfpb v. -- it deals with an outlandish ruling of the first circuit court of appeals that would validate the funding scheme of the cfpb, if it stands, it will effectively prevent it from working on behalf of the american people. but let's take a step back to remember why the cfpb was created over a decade ago. in the runup to the great recession, lenders were aguess rifly market -- aggressively marketing subprime mortgages to borrowers they knew had no ability to pay. reckless wall street firms bundled those into securities and sold them to investors, including pension funds and weak regulators stood by as all of this unfolded.

borrowers discovered they could not repay their mortgages, the securities backed by these mortgages took a nosedive, causing a meltdown in the banking system and taking down the entire economy. while wall street got a lifeline from the congress and the federal government, millions of americans did not. they paid it with their jobs, their homes, and their savings. the unemployment rate peaked at 10%, nearly 7.5 million families lost their homes and americans lost $20 trillion in household wealth. at the time people rightfully asked, who is looking out for them, and the truth was no one really. american families were ill served by financial regulators and by the system. a half dozen federal agencies shared responsibility for making sure that working families didn't get ripped off but they all failed.

in many cases they seemed to regard their primary mission as protecting the big players in the financial system. and they were hamstrung by the bush administration, which used the appropriations process to starve agencies like the sec of the resources and personnel they needed to be effective. while these agencies all had some responsibility for protecting consumers, none of them pursued it vigorously. the performance of regulators at the time put truth to the saying that when everyone is responsible, no one is responsible. this weakness in our regulatory system and structure is why congress created the cfpb and gave it a singular mission to protect americans from the worst kinds of financial abuses, not just for mortgages but for every single consumer financial product. the creation of this agency is

arguably the most, or one of the most certainly, reforms made following the financial crisis. now, i recognize that wall street and big financial companies have always feared the cfpb, that's because the cfpb, the consumer financial protection bureau, is the only financial regulatory agency that exclusively focuses on protecting consumers against abusive practices. but wall street also fears the cfpb because it's -- its funding structure ins lates it from -- insulated it from ai gressive lobbying and political pressure. wielding its power, the cfpb has delivered results for american families. in a little more than a decade, the bureau has attained

$17.5 billion in relief for 200 million consumers. and so, the industry, never giving up on killing the cfpb, the industry hit pay dirt when an activist panel of judges in the fifth circuit court of appeals issued a bizarre and potentially sweeping decision which invalidates the cfpb's funding structure based on a distortion of the constitution's appropriations clause. the court's reasoning is flimsy. it relies on a single concurring opinion and a series of law review articles, some of which were written by students. according to georgetown protestor of law adam l levita, the argue about the cfpb's funding was a throw-away point in the litigation, with the parties dedicating a paltry 370 words apiece to this issue in their briefs.

unfortunately, the result of the fifth circuit's decision are not academic. they're very real for hardworking americans whose financial well-being is now at risk. if upheld, the fifth circuit's ruling will call into question the validity of all the bureau's past actions. mr. president, the work of the cfpb matters to ordinary people. it is the only federal agency that supervises mortgage lenders, student lenders, credit-reporting bureaus, debt collectors, international money remitters, and auto finance companies. because there has been a cfpb for the last decade, people in rhode island and across the nation have had someone who is working to make sure they will be "court tved" -- they will be treated fairly, that their banks and lenders will deal with them honestly, and their interests will be protected whenever

financial institutions try to take advantage of them. that will change if the fifth circuit's ruling stands. i want to particularly highlight what that means for military families, because this has been an aspect of the cfpb's authority that i've been deeply committed to since the beginning. simply put, without the cfpb, military families will be stripped of their financial protections under the military lending act. the cfpb has brought 40 public enforcement actions involving harm to servicemembers and veterans, securing more than 175 million-dollar in relief. the agency plays a unique role in watching out for our nation's two million servicemembers and their families, whether they are deployed in the united states or overseas. the cfpb protects members of the armed forces from exploitation

at the hands of unscrupulous lenders and debt collectors who have charged servicemembers interest rates as high as 600%, and who have threatened to derail their careers if they do not pay up. more than recovering money, the cfpb, through its supervisory powers and simple existence, acts as a deterrent. if the supreme court shuts it down, predatory lenders will reoffend against our troops, again and again and again, with little chance of being penalized. the presiding officer understands this very well, because as a naval aviator and leader of troops, like myself who was a paratrooper and executive officer, a company commander, we saw all the shenanigans that they were playing downtown, selling the trucks to the young enlisted

people for a great bargain, nothing down, but 1,000% interest rates, almost. we saw them come and take the trucks later, when the young soldier, sailor, airman couldn't pay. time and time again. finally, through the military lending act and cfpb, we stood up and said this is not fair. and one of the great ironies, of course, if you ever went off base, all of these car dealers and other service agencies proudly had the american flag waving and all sorts of red, white, and blue, et cetera, while they were systematically, in many cases, stealing from the men and women who protect this country. in a letter written to the banking committee chairman brown, the veteran affairs committee tester, intelligence committee chairman warnock, and myself, in february, the cfpb director said, i am grateful

concerned -- i am gravely concerned this decision could impact the military lending acted and federal consumer financial laws that protect servicemembers and their families. the impact would be dire. effectively stripping servicemembers and their families of legal protections that are critical to maintaining military readiness. in the fifth circuit alone, which covers texas, louisiana, and mississippi, this could affect 300,000 servicemembers and their families. mr. president, i would like to submit for the record a copy of the letter from the director of the consumer financial protection bureau. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. and the military officers association of america and a dozen veterans organizations have validated the cfpb's strong track record. in their words, all told, the cfpb has become an indispensable

agency for protecting the legal rights and financial readiness of servicemembers, veterans, and their families. the stability of the cfpb's funding is therefore vital to the tremendous work it does on their behalf. finally, let me add that it's not just average americans who are put at risk. responsible lenders will lose the protections of the regulatory safe harbors created by the cfpb. those rules essentially protect the industry against the risk of enforcement, so long as they play by the rules and provide standardized disclosures in plain english. those responsible actors in our financial system, who extend credit on fair terms and deal honestly with their customers, have a lot to lose. it all adds up to this --

the fifth circuit's decision prioritizes the interests of predatory lenders over responsible lenders, relies on falsehoods over facts, and it chooses chaos over stability. that's certainly not what any court should be doing. i hope sincerely that the supreme court reverses the fifth circuit's dangerous decision. i hope it recognizes that this is not about extensive lawyers -- expensive lawyers and trade associations and big businesses. this is about americans, many of them wearing the uniform of our country. they deserve the sympathy and the support of the court. mr. president, i yield the floor. i would also note, mr. president, the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin.

quorum call: mr. reed: mr. president, i would ask to dispense with the calling of the quorum. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: mr. president, i have one request for a committee to meet during today's session of the senate. it has the approval of the majority leader and minority leader. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. reed: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of calendar number 96 s. resolution 156. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 96, s. res. 156, calling on the government of the russian federation to release united

states citizen paul whelan. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. the senate will proceed. mr. reed: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the committee reported substitute amendment to be resolution be agreed to, the resolution, as amended, be agreed to, the committee reported amendment to the preamble be agreed to, the preamble, as amended, be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. resolution 394, which was submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 394 honoring the life of james l. buckley, former senator for the state of new york. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the

measure? without objection. the senate will proceed. mr. reed: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it stand adjourned under the provisions of senate resolution 394 until 10:00 a.m. on wednesday, october 4, that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed, that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the

o'brien nomination, postcloture. further, that all postcloture time be considered expired at 11:30 a.m. and that following the cloture vote on the hurson nomination, the senate recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings. that if cloture is invoked on the hurson nomination, all time be considered expired at 2:15 p.m., amendment that if cloture is invoked on the declercq nomination all time be considered expired at 5:30 p.m. finally, if any nominations are confirmed during wednesday's session, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate aide objection -- senate's objection. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reed: if there's no further business to come before the

senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: under the previous order, pursuant to senate res 394, the senate stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m., wednesday, october 4, and does so as a further mark of respect to the late james l. buckley, former senator from new york.