>> c-span's student cam documentary competition is back celebrating 20 years with this year's theme, looking forward while considering the past. we're asking middle and high school students to create a five to six minute video addressing one of these questions. in the next 20 years, what's the most important change you'd like to see in america? or over the past 20 years, what has been the most important change in america, as we do each year, we're giving away $100,000 with grand prizes, a grand prize of $5,000 and every teacher who has students participate in this competition has the opportunity to share apportion of additional $50,000. the competition deadline is friday, january 19th, 2024. for informat visit our website at student cam.org. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. who are funded by these television companies and more,

including charter communication. >> charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best internet providers and we're just getting started building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> and we take you live now to the floor of the senate where today members will continue discussion of aid package to ukraine, israel and taiwan and debate a measure that with withdraw troops from syria not authorized by congress. you're watching live coverage 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. god of might, as we remember pearl harbor and a date that will in infamy, we are reminded that you are our defender. without your protection, we are powerless. hear our prayers as we lift our hearts toward your throne. lord, forgive us for our failures and continue to defend us with your mercy. today, bless our lawmakers, make

them instruments of your peace. guide and lead them as you have promised. keep them safe from the traps that bring national ruin, and shelter them from danger. help them to find the common ground that will bring blessings to our nation and world. we pray in your mighty name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our 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, december 7, 2023. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable raphael warnock, a senator from the state of georgia, 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. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume of the motion to proceed to h.r. 815, the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to 815, an act to amend united states code and so forth and for other purposes.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: now yesterday morning democrats came to the floor of the senate to try to pass the assault weapons ban and other lifesaving gun safety legislation. sadly republicans stood in the way of the senate passing lifesaving legislation to get rid of the scourge of gun violence in america. just hours later, we learned of yet another shooting on the campus of the university of nevada las vegas. our prayers are with the victims of the shooting at unlv and

their families and our prayers are with the students and staff. and thanks to the brave law enforcement officers who prooevend more -- prevented more deaths. the pain never truly goes away. i remember the pain i felt when i first about the long island railroad massacre which happened in my own backyard. today, december 7th, marks 30 years since the railroad long island massacre. it is heartbreaking that the horrors of a tragedy 30 years old still feel like it happened yesterday. i remember the reports well. the 5:33 p.m. rush hour train from penn station, filled with commuters, average working men's, going home after a hard day's work to see their

families, moments later a gunman unleashed carnage. six dead, 19 injured, many more lives shattered, changed forever. among those killed and injured were the husband and son of carolyn mccarthy, a nurse from mineola. following the shooting, carolyn began to advocate for tougher gun laws. carolyn understood that something had to change. so after carolyn's congressman at the time announced he would be voting for the repeal of the assault weapons ban, that he would be votingto repeal, sorry, so after carolyn's congressman at the time announced he would be voting to repeal the assault weapons ban that i championed, i carried the law in the house, she took matters into her own hands and ran for a seat in the house and won on that issue. she served in congress for 18 years, with me and many of my colleagues in this building. and she remained a vocal

advocate for stronger gun safety laws. so now, in memory of those lost and those injured 30 years ago today on the 5:33 p.m. long island railroad train, i ask for this chamber to observe a brief moment of silence. mr. schumer: now, mr. president, last night was a sad moment for the senate, for the country, and for our friends in ukraine and israel and around the world. with our values and democracy on the line, senate republicans killed a much-needed bill with

funding for ukraine, for israel, humanitarian aid for the people of gaza, and for the indo-pacific. if there is a word for what we need now most, it is to be serious. republicans need to be serious and stop game-playing. mr. president, it's absurd we're even in this situation to begin with. let me retrace the steps that got us here, and then how we can get out and get something done. first, we all know how important ukraine aid is. both sides have long claimed to support it. to quote a recent speech from my friend, the republican leader, leader mcconnell, quote, helping a democratic partner against an unprovoked attack from a common enemy is obviously in america's interests, unquote. in another speech here on the floor, leader mcconnell added that, quote, now is not the time to ease up, unquote.

on helping ukraine defending their sovereignty. interestingly, he didn't mention anything about the southern border that day. second, it was republicans who threw an unnecessary wrench into ukraine funding by trying -- by tying it to the extraneous issue of border. we all agree that border security is important. president biden included strong border provisions in the proposal he sent us. but we also know it's a complicated issue, very complex, that's escaped bipartisan solution for years. i'm certainly willing to have that difficult conversation. i was a leader of the gang of eight that produced the last real border compromise a decade ago. but it's not realistic for republicans to suddenly hold up ukraine aid, which they claim to support, and then suddenly demand we take up border, which has been a problem for years,

then solve it in a matter of days. nevertheless, we democrats were willing to give it a try. that's my third point -- for three weeks, democrats have sat down at the negotiating table with our republican counterparts to see if something on the border was possible. we talked for three weeks, and actually negotiations ended up moving backward after speaker johnson said the only thing his republican caucus would accept was donald trump's extreme border policies as embodied in h.r. 2. so democrats tried to negotiate in good faith, but after the speaker pushed h.r. 2, talks remained at an impasse. fourth, to work our way out of this morass, we offered our republican colleagues a golden opportunity, an offer for a vote on an amendment on any border policy of their choosing. all they would need to pass it

was 11 democratic votes. they rejected our offer. it decries credulity for republicans to demand border, hold up ukraine balls of the border, then -- ukraine because of the board, then hold it up. it may be republicans can't agree among themselves on a proposal. ear way, they rejected our offer, voted down the bill. so, where we are now that that happened yesterday? well, we're left with only two paths to break forward -- we are left with only two paths forward to break the logjam. either republicans can take us up on an amendment offer, or we can restart negotiations. now, if we are to negotiate, it has to be in good faith. republicans need to show they are serious about reaching a compromise, not just throwing on the floor basically donald trump's border policies. again, republicans need to be serious and stop the

game-playing. they've been game-playing when they pushed donald trump's radical border policies, when they said border is the ransom they want, and when they move the goal posts during negotiations. we need to stop playing around and get serious about the immense challenge in front of us. both sides must accept that we have to compromise on things important to each side if we have any hope of passing the supplemental. let me state, we democrats very much, very much want an agreement. is we are willing to make compromises and concessions to meet our republican coll colleagues, as long as they are willing to do the same. let me conclude, again, with how important this is and the warning that the republican leader issued in recent months, that if we aren't willing to invest in the defense of democracy right now, we're going to be forced to pay a much

higher price down the line. better to defend democracy with american resources today instead of american lives tomorrow. that is the danger of allowing groups like vladimir putin to win the day. so, the time is now for us to show the world we're willing to defend democracy in its hour of need. democrats are serious about reaching a reasonable, bipartisan compromise to pass this security package. the question is if republicans are now willing to do the same. finally, mr. president, on han aca -- hannukah, jewish people around the country and world will celebrate tonight, the first night of hannukah. this year, more than most years, hannukah comes at a home of grief, trial, and fear for many jewish americans. perhaps for that, it is all the more meaningful. the story of hannukah is a story of perseverance, perseverance in the face of unspeakable hatred.

we have been taught about how the jews of a different age, forced from their land, forbidden to practice their religion, their temple destroyed and desecrated, gathered to pray in secret, banded together in the hills and fields, and fought off their attackers. once they endured, they set about the hard, slow, and painful work of rededicating the temple and lighting once again the eternal flame of hope. i believe that america should do the same thing right now, rededicate ourselves to that noble promise of being a labled of -- a land of tolerance for all people. anti-semitism is on the rise, islamaphobia is on the rise, hatred is a festering wound in the soul of our country. we must rededicate ourselves to stand against anti-semitism in all forms of discrimination and to building a more perfect union, one that preserves

tolerance and equality for every single american. i have faith that the forces of intolerance will lose in the end, just as they did in the days of hannukah when judas maccabeus led the jewish people against an impressive authority -- an oppressive authority. authority.

wasting so much time on these efforts to target democratic congress, target president biden, target president biden's family members. it's because the extreme maga republicans have nothing to show for their narrow, fading, and decreasing majority. nothing to show the american people. no progress on the issue of significance. no progress on the economy, no progress on health care. no progress on public safety. no progress on education. no progress on anything designed to improve the health, the

safety of the economic well-being of the american people. instead, it seems like republicans are actively targeting social security, actively targeting medicare, actively targeting reproductive freedom and a woman's freedom to make her own reproductive health care decisions. actively targeting the affordable care act and actively targeting our democracy. and they want to hide that extreme right-wing agenda from the american people pick that's why we continue to see since a resolution after since a resolution being brought to the floor. and next week is going to waste time on an illegitimate impeachment inquiry targeting president biden and his family. [inaudible] [inaudible question] can i get your thoughts on the ndaa been passed by -- [inaudible]

>> we haven't had the opportunity to have that conversation as a caucus with the text now being in the public domain. but it's been a bipartisan process that we have been engaged in, led by the top democrat on armed services committee, and i single republican rejected the democratic leader's attempt to separate border security from national security. as we've said for weeks, that was a futile effort that was doomed to fail from the very beginning. hopefully, the senate can now seize a new opportunity to make real progress on legislation that addresses urgent national security priorities both at home and abroad. so, let's establish a few things going forward. it is profoundly unserious to

p pretend that national security priorities don't include securing our nation's borders. to warn about borders in jeopardy and not start with the one that's being overrun here at home, to invoke threats facing sovereign nations without a clear plan to uphold america's own sovereignty, mr. president, i'm not in need of any lectures about the gravity of the challenges facing national security. i don't need any admonishments about what's at stake for america and our allies in ukraine's fight against russian aggression. i'm well aware that the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism remains undeterred

from trying to kill americans in the middle east. and i certainly have not forgotten that china, our top strategic adversary, is watching what we do very closely. instead, unfortunately, it's been the biden administration, including our commander in chief, who have all too often needed reminders about the responsibilities of a global super power. from europe to the middle east, the administration has reached new heights of self-deterrence. with putin's forces massing on the border of ukraine, the administration slow walked lethal assistance as the russian offensive unfolded, they held back the most decisive capabilities ukraine needed out of an unfounded fear of

escalation. and even with further security assistance hanging in the balance, the biden administration has been slow, very slow to sell this urgent measure and its massive domestic benefits to our people here at home. from the outset the biden administration resumed the obama-era efforts to reset relations with tehran and removed the iran-backed houthis from the terrorism list. so it's no surprise that iran has thumbed its nose at these displays of weakness. it's no surprise that u.s. personnel are facing a spike in terrorist attacks from iraq and syria to the red sea, but the administration continues to pull its pufrms.

-- its punches. meanwhile republicans have spent years urging the administration to start performing even the bare minimum of its fundamental responsibility to secure our southern border and enforce our nation's laws. right now this crisis created by the biden administration's neglect is bringing illegal aliens to the united states at the rate of 300,000 a month. that's roughly the population of -- kentucky arriving every month. and the parole system that desperately needs fixing, many of them are just brought straight in. i know many of my democratic colleagues recognize the urgency of this crisis. i know many of them are ready to help restore sanity at our southern border.

well, senator lankford, senator graham, and other republican colleagues are still working hard to do exactly that. and there's no time like the present to join them in those efforts. now, on a different matter, this morning the senate will vote on a resolution calling for the withdrawal of american military forces from syria. passage of such a resolution would be a gift to iran and its terrorist network. driving american troops from the middle east is exactly what they'd like to see. adopting this shortsighted measure would wreck america's credibility in the region. it would encourage iran's proxies to open a northern front in the territorial war against israel. it would invite america's adversaries to challenge our

military presence throughout the world. back in 2019, as our colleagues can recall, the senate went on record about the wisdom of withdrawing prematurely from syria and afghanistan. at that time the vast majority of us rejected such a retreat and those who didn't have since watched president biden's withdrawal from afghanistan, putin's escalation against ukraine, china ace challenge to peace and prosperity and iran's glaring threat to america and to israel. today is the 82nd anniversary of pearl harbor. it's a day to remember the cost of being caught on our heels. a vote in favor of this resolution is a vote for retreat in the face of terror. now, on one final matter,

working americans can't seem to catch a break from bidenomics. washington democrats' spending sprees on president biden's watch have driven inflation up 17.^6% and the effects are becoming inescapable. in my home state, any small businesses' owners have been forced to raise their prices to keep up with rising costs. one shop own near lexington put it, quote, i'll make food and chocolates and all the ingredients have gone up. i've been battling with increasing my prices, he said, which i don't want to do. just like in cities and towns across the country, small businesses are facing declining -- which might have something to do with the consumers' shrinking

paychecks. inflation is eating away at people's savings. by one estimate the average american family would need an extra $11,^ 400 a year just to maintain the standard of living they had when president biden took office. and needless to say folks on fixed incomes are among the hardest hit. one 68-year-old retiree in western massachusetts summed up his struggle to make ends in the bide -- ends meet in the biden economy. here's what he said. you get your check. then you have to sit down and ask yourself what am i going to pay? am i going to get food or lose my electricity? i can't spend nothing anymore. i have to pay rent, utilities, food, medicine. this is what the american people

are up against. this is everyday life under bidenomics. the biden administration still seems to hold its favorite praise in high esteem. the white house press secretary called bidenomics the word of the year. well, working americans feel quite differently. and the president's hometown is no exception. as one resident of scranton, pennsylvania reported recently, quote, everything is going up except the paychecks. i suggest the absence of a quorum the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the clerk: ms. baldwin.

>> joining us is con tom tiffany propublica and wisconsin. us to talk about this very issue. you probably heard that last caller making the argument, we should fund ukraine so we can

avoid u.s. troops on the ground in europe defending our nato allies. how do you respond to him? >> guest: as i think the issue of ukraine first of all should be separated out when we look at the supplemental bill that's coming forward and one of your callers earlier made mention that separates these things out. that's an important principle. people don't want all these issues mash together israel, order, ukraine, whatever. i think there was room to support ukraine but we're seeing increasingly people are skeptical. one of the main things i think we need to do at this point is just like the israel aid they came out of the house a couple of weeks ago, we had it as a pay for. we took money from someplace else to pay for that rather than adding on to the debt that is burdening the american people leading to the inflation we have. if there's any additional military aid that goes to ukraine, it should be done as a pay for.

the other thing that should be done is it should only be for military aid, not humanitarian aid. oftentimes these over $100 billion that of uganda ukraine a be used for other purposes than military aid. the europeans should take care of the humanitarian aid. we should only be helping militarily, if we're going to do that with ukraine. >> host: explain why we wouldn't help on humanitarian part as well. >> guest: because the europeans have to carry some of the weight. that's part of the problem here is that we've been carrying the burden for decades in europe. there was a reason to do that but at this point the europeans have to put more into combat that more skin in the game. i mean think about appear we fought two world wars over the last 100 years over on european soil. we should not have americans going over in fighting a third world war over there. the europeans need to carry -- they need to senate?

a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are thune i would ask unanimous consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. thune mr. president, if democrats were unsure about republicans' seriousness about including meaningful border security provisions in the national security supplemental, yesterday's vote made it crystal clear. every single senate republican rejected democrats' collective attempt to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that what's happening at our southern border isn't a threat to our security. border security is national security which is why any national security supplemental that moves through this chamber must tackle this crisis head-on. mr. president, on tuesday fbi director christopher wray testified before the senate judiciary committee and told members, and i quote, i've never seen a time when all the threats or so many of the threats are

all elevated all at exactly the same time. end quote. senator graham then asked director wray to comment on the threat environment using the blinking red light's analogy often used about warnings before the september 11 attacks. and director wray responded, and i quote, i see blinking lights everywhere i turn. i see blinking lights everywhere i turn. it is against the background of this threat environment that have -- we need to secure our border. we have endured years of record breaking immigration at the border with president biden and the situation is only getting worse.

today saw a staggering 12,000 -- tuesday, i should say, saw a staggering 12,000 migrant encounters at our southern border. 12,000 in just one day. that's eight people per minute. and that follows two days of 10,000-plus encounters. i'm not sure how anyone can look at these numbers and not think this is a crisis. plus those numbers don't count any gotaways, and those are individuals the border patrol saw but was unable to apprehend who may have made their way across the border during that same period. the month of october saw an average of roughly 1,000 gotaways per day. that's roughly 30,000 unknown individuals who made their way into our country.

30,000 in just one month. all told, there have been more than 1.7 million known gotaways on president biden's watch, not to mention an unknown number of unknown gotaways. and these gotaways are not the migrants who are showing up hoping to be apprehended because they know they can game the asylum or parole system. no. these are individuals bent on avoiding detection, which should concern us deeply. anyone who doesn't think bad actors are attempting to exploit the situation at our southern border needs to think again. during fiscal year 2023, the border patrol apprehended 169 individuals on the terrorist watch list attempting to make their way across our southern border into our country. that number, by the way, is more

than the total of the previous six fiscal years combined. fbi director wray showed the at the same judiciary committee hearing that since the hamas attack on israel on october 7th, the threat level has gone to, and i quote, a whole other level. end quote. abroad american troops have been attacked nearly 80 times since october 7th. and it is naive to think that there aren't terrorists out there currently trying to make their way into the united states to day tack our country. and why wouldn't any terrorist trying to enter our country take advantage of the chaos at our southern border? and you don't have to take my word for it. the department of homeland security in its threat assessment released in september node the risk that, and i quote, terrorists and criminal actors

may exploit the elevated flow of migration and increasingly complex security environment to enter the united states, end quote. and that assessment, mr. president, was written before -- before the october 7th attack. or the many attacks on u.s. troops abroad that followed it. if there was a risk before, i think it's safe to say that there is an even greater risk now. mr. president, this situation cannot continue. the massive flood of legal immigration at our southern border has to stop, and that is why the national security supplemental must contain real measures to secure the border, not cosmetic fixes, not superficial sweeks -- tweaks,

real border security measures. i believe it is in our national security interest to support allies like israel, taiwan, and ukraine, but we cannot support american interest abroad while continuing to sacrifice the security of the american people here at home. mr. president, for three years, the biden administration has put out a de facto welcome mat at our southern border. if we want to protect our country, that has to stop, and it's got to stop now. mr. president, i yield the floor. i suggest -- nope. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: thank you, mr. president. i understand shortly we will be considering a motion to discharge senate joint resolution 51 from the senate foreign relations committee, and i take this time to urge my colleagues to vote against that motion to discharge. i understand the concerns of my

colleague from kentucky about the -- ensuring congress exercises the appropriate role in authorizing the use of military force. i appreciate the senator's long-standing interest in these important matters. i value having what i believe are critically important debates under when and what authorities u.s. troops serve abroad. decisions about authorizing the use of military force are among the most solemn duties we have in this body. but here the decision is not so simple as the senator from kentucky presents it. the middle east is unstable right now. i don't have to remind my colleagues about that. isis is a threat to syrians, iraqis and u.s. interests. now is not the time to withdraw from the region, but that's what

this joint resolution would do without weighing the consequences, without a plan. think about what it would have. think about what it would do to the resolve to our nato allies and kurdish partners fighting isis now. think about how this would hurt the syrian people. without u.s. presence, they would be caught between is is and the -- ice sis and the assad regime. they would use it as a base to attack iraq where last week they killed 11 innocent people. think about what a gift this would be to the assad regime who has committed atrocities aided and abetted by iran. they have put at risk the very

people who fought side by side with the united states, people who would subjected to the industrial scale system of torture and murder and then there are the assad backers, russia and iran, putin wantsto distract the world from his war on ukraine and iran's long-standing objective has been to push the united states out of the region. we see its proxy attacks on u.s. shipping. not only would we pull u.s. troops out of syria would be a propaganda victory for iran, it would be a strategic victory, it would be easier to move weapons to hezbollah. we don't want to see an escalation of the conflict. at a time when the administration is working to prevent the gaza conflict from

spilling over, this would be the wrong thing for us to do. the last thing we want is for -- what is going on in gaza to stretch across the region. i urge my colleagues against the motion to discharge senate resolution 51 if that motion is made by my colleague from kentucky. with that, i -- i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

isis

>> addressing the senate and remarks during the day from the white house.

here's a little bit more of his argument before the vote took place. >> if putin takes ukraine, he won't stop there. it's important to see the long run here. he's going to keep going. he made that pretty clear. putin attacks and nato ally and if he keeps going and then he attacks the nato ally, and we've committed a nato member that we defend every inch of nato territory. then we let something that we don't seek and that we don't have today, american troops fighting russian troops. american troops fighting russian troops. make no mistake, today's vote is going to be long remembered. history is going to judge those who turned back on freedoms cause. we can't let putin win. say it again. we can't let putin win. it's an overwhelming national interest and international interests of all of our friends. any disruption in our ability to

supply ukraine clearly strengthens putin's position. >> host: president biden urging the senate yesterday to vote for his international, to vote to move forward on his international aid package. it was a procedural vote and it failed. the "new york times" noting this morning on the "wall street journal" excuse me, that 49 senators back the measure and 51 were against, falling short of the 60-vote threshold needed to advance the bill. senate majority chuck schumer originally voted in favor, but he then changed his vote to reserve the right to bring up the bill again. senator bernie sanders independent from vermont who caucuses with the democrats voted against it because he thinks any aid to israel needs to be tied to conditions on civilians in gaza. that is what happened in the senate yesterday.

now it is your turn to tell washington what you think. do you agree or disagree is what what happened? here is the argument from republicans, minority leader which mcconnell on the floor. >> now it wasn't always like this. democrats didn't always have such a hard time following the logic of national security begins right here at home. i'm reminded of the condition president reagan set up in the mid-80s to assess the importance of peace and security in the western hemisphere. it was a bipartisan exercise and included everyone from henry kissinger to the former chair of the dnc, and the president of the afl-cio. they concluded america's security and world quote depends on the inherent security of its land borders. and our adversaries would reap,

quote, a major strategic coup to impose on the united states the burden of defending our southern approaches. major strategic coup for adversaries, past generation of democrats understood the logic implicitly when it pertained to the threat of soviet implements. ..

the arguments from the president and now the republican side, forest in arizona, democratic color. what you think of this debate in congress for eight to ukraine and border security? >> i think getting a two ukraine regardless putin is going to run over there and china is going to jump in what's over there by china? taiwan, he. the republican side, i don't know what they think, they always throw in that order thing but they haven't had it for ages

and the speaker, i don't know what we are going to do with them, they don't know what supporter but putin is going to start a domino effect. >> talking about what message to send a special security experts against taiwan. taiwan security as well. independent. >> good morning. >> you look nice this morning. look, i think joe biden 27 and rick agree with the republicans to get hundred control.

no place to go and with got to do something. they should be helping those people in their own country and they are not doing it. i'm an independent and i'm looking for a third party because joe biden is too old and trump committed treason as far as i'm concerned but y'all have a nice day. >> there have been negotiations between democrats and senate democrats and republicans, a group of lawmakers negotiating on some sort of deal for changes to immigration talks fell apart before the weekend and chuck

schumer decided to hold this vote to get republicans on record voting against this ukraine aid. president biden at the white house yesterday talked about negotiations over immigration policy. here's what he had to say. >> and with national security holding ukraine funding hostage on the border policy. let me it clear, we need real solutions, i support real solution to the border. apple poured a company has a plan the first day i came in to office. make clear we need congress to lead changes to fix what is broken system because we all know it's broken and i'm willing to do significantly more in terms of changes of policy provide resources will change

and for more border agents, immigration judge. republicans have to decide if they want a political issue, a solution for the border and they really want a solution they cannot be sustained as it is now. we need a real solution. my team has been negotiations and republicans border security. democrats pointing forward bipartisan compromised democrats also proposed amendments. republicans rejected it so introducing your proposal, even though democrats can amend it anyway sure, they won't do that. this has to negotiations. republicans they want without any bipartisan compromise. that's not the answer.

they are willing to kneecap ukraine on the battlefield and damage the process. >> what is your reaction thereto president biden and his view how republicans are handling these negotiations? reporting aids and allies to the president had said he's going to accept new restrictions on asylum and potentially other republican but immigration policy changes particularly as numbers at the border continue to rise. the supplement a funding request that seeks 14 billion for the border, that's part of this package of aid to ukraine to taiwan, i would higher more and that's how the 14 billion would be, increased for migrant families and higher immigration courts, a backlog of 1 million cases and only increases.

some are released into the u.s. and wait for years whether the qualify for asylum. on the other side of the aisle, senator john thune, republican of south dakota, member of the public in leadership that chamber had this to say yesterday. >> mr. president, i support aid to israel, taiwan and and i believe it was in our interest to support these allies so or to see us take up this national security supplemental. national security begins at home and we can't pass a bill to advance american interests abroad while ignoring the security crisis of our own border. a quorum call. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent that we vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. paul: i rise today to invoke the war powers act. the war powers act requires that upon a request from a member of

the senate or member of congress that there will be a vote on whether or not troops should be put into harm's way or into a conflict without the approval of this body. our founding fathers felt very clearly on this that we should not go to war without a vote of the legislature. they wanted to make sure that the executive, or the president, was prohibited from going to war without the authority of the legislature. we've drifted away from that. it really hasn't been a valid declaration of war since world war ii. we have at times taken votes to authorize the use of military force. they call them an aumf. we did when we went into the iraq war. so we did the voting properly. it was still a disastrous mistake to go there. but we never have voted on being in syria. we never have voted on having troops in the middle of the syrian system war in which hundreds of thousands have died, millions of people displaced. and we owe it to the soldiers in

syria, the u.s. soldiers, the young men and women in syria, to have a don't and have a vote. now, the senate doesn't want to do this. they're only doing this unduress, because i am forcing them to vote on this issue. i have the power because it's called a privilege vote. they can't deny me this vote or debate. this will put the senate on record -- are you for having troops in syria? if so, why? what are they doing in syria? i fear they're merely a trip wire to a greater war or tragedy, should a terrorist attack occur. they have become the target for the iranian proxies. will we ever learn? as the fire of war spreads across the middle east, the biden administration sends aircraft carriers, strike groups into the region without a debate of congress. about whether the united states should be further enmeshed in these conflicts, and will there be a debate at all? for the past two decades, the wisdom of washington foreign

policy, the establishment, has embroiled our country in one war after another, impervious to the catastrophic consequences result there this adventurism. some 7,000 u.s. servicemembers lost their lives in post-9/11 conflicts. tens of thousands more live with missing limbs, burn scars, or are confined to wheelchairs, to say nothing of the mental wounds of war. more than 30,000 veterans committed suicide since washington's miss guided project to -- misguided project to remake the middle east. while our soldiers carried out their pitchingses with honor, the washington -- their missions with honor, the washington establishment consistently failed them. both democrat and republican commanders in chief repeatedly have ordered our troops into ill advised conflicts, with no vital national interest and no possibilities of victory. syria is but one example.

in 2014, it the obama administration entangled the united states in yet another endless war in the middle east, without congressional authorization. 2002 a definition of -- without a definition of victory and without an exit strategy. operation inherent resolve was ostensibly intended to destroy the islamic state in iraq and syria, isis, an abhorrent terrorist organization only able to thrive because of the chaos created by the iraqi war, by bush's foolish invasion of iraq. the u.s.-led coalition carried out a significant air campaign against yooifsis targets -- ayes -- isis targets. our intervention didn't stop there. president obama unilaterally deployed boots on the ground, sending 300 special forces into syria. my comments at the time were who goes to war with 300 people?

who sends 300 soldiers to a wattle -- battle of thousands and thousands of troops? it was a terrible military strategy, and still is. by the end of 2017, the pentagon revealed that we had in fact 2,000 american troops stationed on the ground in syria. there were tens of thousands of turkish troops. there are syrian kurds. assad's troops. russian troops. we've got a couple thousand troops, sitting ducks in the middle of this chaos. congress enacted the war powers act in 1973 to prevent this exact type of situation. at the time, the nation was emerging from the national tragedy of the vietnam war. that was was never declared as such, yet it cost the lives of 58,000 americans. vietnam started with a few hundred u.s. military advisors, but subsequently escalated to a point where there were over 540,000 troops, u.s. troops, in

vietnam. the calamity of vietnam prompted congress to resolve that the president should never again be permitted to enter the united states into a prolonged war without congressional authority. the president doesn't have this constitutional authority. the president does not have the constitutional authority to unilaterally declare war anywhere, at any time, for any reason. it is the prerogative of congress. the constitution is clear. congress must heed the lessons ever the past and seize abdicated their constitutional war-making power to the executive brefrn. if we are -- branch. if we are going to deploy young men and women in uniform to some far-flung corner of the planet and ask they fight and potentially give their life for some supposed cause, shouldn't we as their elected representatives at least have the courage to debate the merits of sending them there? shouldn't we debate if the mission is achievable?

shouldn't we debate what the mission actually is, what the purpose for having the troops actually is and if it is possible for them to accomplish that mission? the syrian civil war is one of the greatest tragedies of our time. for the past 12 years, the syrian people have endured unimaginable suffering. that country has been torn apart, beset by conflict from within and without. the syrian observatory for human rights estimates that the war cost the lives of 600,000 people. the united nations claims more than 6.8 million people are internally displaced and another 5.2 million people live as refugees abroad. some 90% of the syrian population lives in poverty. the war which began as a civil uprising of the syrian people against the regime of bashir

assad quickly transformed into a global catastrophe as other countries, militias and terrorists groups turned syria into their own proxy field. like vietnam syria should serve as a powerful warning of the dangers of presidential overreach and the dangers of mission creep. the american people are told that the united states is in syria to fight isis, but we're not fighting isis. isis is gone. we're also -- we also have been there and directly attacked by the syrian government and pro-assad forces. it's a much more complicated situation. we targeted iran, islamic revolutionary guard, we targeted every stripe of jihadist and militia group we can find in the region which is lots. in 2018, then-c.i.a. director mike pompeo admitted to the senate foreign relations committee the united states even has killed a couple hundred russians who were in syria as part of the wagner group.

we also had american troops take fire from our own nato ally turkey. just this past september we returned the favor by shooting down an armed turkish drone that came within 500 yards of u.s. forces. it's obviously a conflict. it's obviously a war. and it's obviously a dangerous place to have a few hundred troops with no clearcut mission. none of these conflicts were debated or authorized by congress. nine american servicemembers have been killed in syria, and not once has this body debated the merits of our troops being deployed in harm's way there. the only reason the debate occurs today is because i'm forcing them to have the debate. they would rather wash their hands of this and just say president, republican, president democrat, whoever you are, you take care of it. we're watching our hands of this. we have no responsibility. but today the senate will take responsibility. those who vote against my motion will be voting to have troops in syria and it will be their

responsibility if calamity occurs. there is a bipartisan agreement that the executive branch does not have authorization for military action, or at least there has been in the past. in 2017, the current chairman of the senate foreign relations committee said in an interview -- he's a democrat -- said the president does not have authorization from congress to use force against the syrian regime. he should come to congress and get the authorization for the use of military force. he has to come to congress and the american people and tell them what the game plan s. how do we get a resolution? this was democrats in 2017. fast forward to democrats today and they say no big deal. we've got a democrat president. we don't want to appear to be critical of him. so even though we used to say there used to be congressional authority when there was a republican president, we no longer say that. now we're just peachy with

whatever happens. if it was true in 2017, it's still true in 2023. congress that either authorize a war or we should come home. the biden administration continues to say that we're there to defeat isis. well, the isis caliphate was completely eradicated in 2019. four years later we still have 900 troops in syria. the administration claims it seeks an enduring defeat of vices. not surprisingly they don't define what enduring means. obviously enduring doesn't mean complete destruction of the isis caliphate because the isis caliphate no longer exists. they hold no land. our intelligence folks said they don't even have the capacity to attack much less have the desire to attack us now. the administration's quarterly combined state and defense department inspector general reports states that the majority

of isis branches lack, likely lack the intent or capability to have direct attacks on the u.s. homeland. the only way they can get at us is if we're there. so isis hasn't controlled territory for four years. they lack the capability and intent to attack the u.s. and those remaining members of isis -- there are indeed still radical extremists -- they're surrounded by numerous state and nonstate actors that also seek to eradicate them. between the turks, the syrian kurds, the syrian government, none of them are happy to have isis there if it should try to arise again. it seems to me, though, our 900 troops have no viable mission in syria, that they're sitting ducks, they're a trip wire to a larger war, and without a clearcut mission, i don't think they can adequately defend themselves yet they remain in syria. and they remain vulnerable to attack by other groups. our troops in syria regularly come under attack, not from isis

but from iranian-backed militias. since joe biden took office, iranian-backed proxies have attacked u.s. forces in syria and iraq more than 160 times. they attack us because we are in close proximity to them and they couldn't attack us, frankly, if we weren't there. these attacks have accelerated following hamas' monstrous october 7 attack on israel. since october 17, the u.s. troops have been attacked at least 76 times, 40 times in syria and 36 times in iraq. according to the pentagon, a total of 60 u.s. military were injured in these attacks. of those, at least 32 were at the al tenth garrison in southeastern syria where our soldiers suffered various injuries including traumatic brain injuries. the u.s. responded with a series of strikes on facilities used by the iranian revolutionary guard and its proxies in syria and

iraq. during his time in office, president biden has carried out strikes on iranian proxies on at least eight separate occasions. each time the white house claimed that the strikes were necessary to deter further attacks. how many times do our troops need to be attacked for the administration to realize that we're not deterring anyone? does anyone believe the ninth air strike will do the difference? do the trick? we are actually a target. we are a trip wire. we are a place they can actually reach by being there with no clearcut mission. in 2019 joe biden as presidential candidate compromised to end the forever wars in the middle east saying, staying entrenched in unwinnable conflicts only drains our capacity to lead on other issues that require our attention. i wish he still had the same belief. 900 troops sitting in the middle ever the syrian desert does not advance u.s. interests or provide deterrence.

in fact, their presence does the exact opposite. their presence invites the iranian proxies to be able to reach them with attacks. this is the only way these groups can strike at the united states. it's the only way they can get attention. if they kill each other, no one seems to pay attention. if they kill americans, they pay attention. so why would we plop americans down in the desert within a few dozen miles of these folks and allow them to be attacked? we actively are providing iran leverage to direct proxies to attack u.s. forces. this is a sort of strategic genius, so-called genius that the washington establishment parades around as prudent foreign policy. our troops' presence also risks getting us dragged into a wider regional war. imagine if these recent attacks resulted in the deaths of 60 of our servicemembers, not injuries but deaths. how would the biden administration react to that?

history is replete with major wars breaking out for less. president biden would do well to channel the wisdom of president ronald reagan. in 1984 ronald reagan withdrew u.s. troops from lebanon following the beirut marine corps barracks bombing that killed 241 u.s. military personnel. remarking on the decision in his autobiography, reagan wrote, in the weeks after the bombing, i believed that the last thing we should do was to turn tail and leave. yet the irrationality of the middle eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. if there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would have been a lot better off. if that policy had changed more of a neutral position, that policy had become more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines might still be alive. president reagan made the right decision in 1984 and we now have

a chance to make the right decision in 2023. without any more american servicemembers being injured or killed. the american people have had enough of endless wars in the middle east. the american people have had enough of the uniparty, the demo republican party directing their sons and daughters to fight and risk their lives in these conflicts when the united states is not directly threatened and no vital u.s. interest is at stake. my war powers resolution that i put forward today offers the american people an opportunity to see how clearly their elected senators view our unconstitutional, unnecessary, and dangerous presence in syria. this vote makes it possible for senators -- makes it impossible for senators to avoid voting or stating their opinion on having troops in syria.

today's vote essentially puts every senator on record as being either for or against having u.s. troops in syria. i urge all my colleagues to muster the courage to reclaim their constitutional responsibilities by voting to remove u.s. troops in syria. let's finally bring our troops home. with that i move to -- move to discharge senate joint resolution 51 from the committee on foreign relations. the presiding officer: the motion is pending.

mr. schumer: mr. president the presiding officer: the majority leader mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 410. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion.

all in favor say aye. all opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination the clerk: nomination, executive office of the president, harry coker jr. of kansas to be national cyber director. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report 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 the debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 4 # 10, harry coker jr. of kansas to be national cyber director signed by 18 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, december 7, be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion.

all in favor say aye. all opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i yield the floor. mr. paul: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i move to ask for the yeas and nays on senate joint resolution 51. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. vote: 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. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy.

mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. the clerk: ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley.

the clerk: mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray.

mr. padilla. mr. paul. the clerk: mr. peters. mr. reed. 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.

the clerk: mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren.

the clerk: mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- paul. senators voting in the negative -- boozman, cantwell, gillibrand, hagerty, johnson, klobuchar, lujan, marshall, murray, ossoff, schumer, tester. mrs. hyde-smith, no. mr. romney, no. mr. fetterman, no. mr. ricketts, no.

mr. casey, no. mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: ms. smith, no.

mr. warner, no. the clerk: mr. markey, aye. mrs. welch, aye.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, no. mr. carper, no.

the clerk: ms. butler, no.

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

the clerk: mr. kennedy, no. mr. wicker, no. mr. manchin, no. mr. kelly, no.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, no.

the clerk: mr. peters, no. mr. rubio, no.

mr. warnock, no.

the clerk: mr. booker, no. mr. schatz, no. mr. blumenthal, no. mr. braun, aye.

the clerk: mr. heinrich, no. ms. cortez masto, no.

the clerk: mr. risch, no.

the clerk: mr. cotton, no. the clerk: mr. graham, no.

the clerk: ms. capito, no.

the clerk: mr. thune, no. the clerk: mr. murphy, aye.

ms. s collins, no. mr. daines, no. ms. hassan, no. vote: the clerk: mr. cardin, no.

mr. cornyn, no. mrs. blackburn, no. mr. wyden, aye. mr. menendez, no. mr. grassley, no.

ms. baldwin, no. mr. young, no. mr. merkley, aye.

the clerk: mr. reed, no.

the clerk: mr. king, no. the clerk: mr. cassidy, no.

mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no. the clerk: ms. stabenow, no.

mrs. britt, no.

the clerk: mr. vance, aye.

the clerk: ms. hirono, no.

the clerk: mr. cruz, no. mr. mcconnell, no.

the clerk: mr. lee, aye.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, no.

ms. sinema, no. the clerk: mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, no. ms. ernst, no. mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. mr. kaine, no. r the clerk: mrs. fischer, no.

mr. tillis, no. mr. mullin, no. mr. scott of south carolina, no.

mr. tuberville, aye. mr. schmitt, no. ms. warren, aye. mr. padilla, no.

mr. coons, no. mr. hickenlooper, no.

the clerk: mr. brown, no. ms. rosen, no.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no. ms. murkowski, no.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no.

mr. crapo, no.

the clerk: mr. budd, no.

the clerk: mr. bennet, no.

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 13, the nays are 84. the motion is not adopted. the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: mr. president, i rise

to express my support for the fiscal year 2024 national defense authorization act . i am glad that we have just brought the ndaa conference report to the floor. first, i would like to acknowledge senator roger wicker, chairman mike rogers, and representative adam smith, whose partnership has been critical for the success of this bill. the hallmark of the senate and house armed services committees has long been bipartisan, and i'm glad we have continued that tradition for the 63rd consecutive year. i would also like to thank my colleagues on the senate and house armed services committees who helped produce this bill, as well as leader schumer, leader mcconnell, speaker johnson, and leader jeffries, who facilitated a full debate and enabled all members to engage in the process. we were able to negotiate hundreds of provisions -- the presiding officer: the senate is not in order. mr. reed: we were able to negotiate hundreds of provisions

between both chambers over the past few months. the most in many years. this is a strong, forward-looking bill that i think we can all be proud of. this ndaa is laser-focused on the threats we face. it addressed a broad range of pressing issues, from strategic competition with china and russia to countering threats from iran, north korea, violent extremists and climate change. the bill authorizes record-level investments in key technologies like hyper-sonics and artificial intelligence and makes real progress toward modernizing our ships, aircraft and combat vehicles. most importantly, this ndaa provides a historic level of support for our troops and their families, including the largest pay raise in decades. i'm confident it will provide the department of defense and our military men and women with the resources they need to meet and overcome the national security threats we face. i would like to take this opportunity to also recognize

the incredible staff who made this bill possible. senator wicker will, i'm sure, speak on behalf of the minority staff in a moment, but i want to specifically recognize the droerment of the democratic staff -- director of the democrat staff, elizabeth king, and the republican staff, john keefes. they did a remarkable job and led their staffs with professionalism and skill. i'd also like to thank the members of the armed services committee staff, jody bennet, jenny davis, jonathan epstein, jordi feldman, creighton green, curt mcconnell, maggie mac that mara cooper, bill monaghan, mike noble, john quirk, andy scott, cole stevens, allison warner, sean jones, joe gallow, brittany amador, brittany cannon, chad johnson, julia coulter, noah

sis, and once again the staff director elizabeth king. that was a long list -- mr. schumer: are any becoming generals? mr. reed: i hope so. but it is a fraction of what they put into in terms of time and effort and we could not have accomplished this without them. let me thank the floor staff and leadership for all they've done to make this possible. finally, i urge all my colleagues to support this excellent bill. with that, i will yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: i'm pleased and honored to join my colleague from rhode island, the distinguished chairman of the armed services committee in urging adoption of this important step in getting our national defense authorization act passed and signed into law. it is routine now, and profound

at the same time. it's routine because as the chair said this is the 63rd time that this house and this senate will have come together on a bipartisan basis to join hands and try to move our national defense forward. it is profound because it has become routine, because no matter what other things we are discussing and differing about and expressing our deeply held views, this is something that we feel must be done every year, regardless of the other things that divide us. so the fact that it has become routine does make this a profound step, and i'm honored to be part of that great list of

persons who've been part of this. senator reed is absolutely correct to thank our counterparts in the house. chairman rodgers and ranking member smith. and our staff. let me also give a shout out to the ranking members of the s subcommittees who took this from subcommittee to subcommittee to the full committee and helped us get started in a very meaningful way. senator cotton, ranking me membererland, mike rounds, cybers cybersecurity, joni ernst emerging threats and capabilities, senator rick scott, personnel subcommittee. senator dan sullivan, readiness and management support subcommittee. senator kevin cramer, c-power.

a committee that i served as ranking member. and as chair, senator deb fischer, whose work so diligently in a very technical and important area, strategic forces. and then, as the chair mentioned, i will try not to leave out any of the staff. the experts who took our concepts and who were able to put into words that became statutory language, of course, john kiest, staffer director on our side, who has been the great partner of elizabeth king. then other talented, just absolutely brilliant and diligent and hardworking american public servants who have helped get it right, rick burger, brenliedan gavin, james maysle, greg lilly, adam barker, zach barnett, christina

bellcourt, jack birer, travis brundret, isaac jalkinin. jonathan moore, shawn o'-keefe, katie romaine, pat thompson, eric trager, adam troll, olivia trustee, phillip lawler. i wouldn't be surprisedif i left somebody out. even so, mr. president. it does contain some very high hopes and dreams. i hope it builds, i hope this legislation builds on an opportunity for further expansion of our defense industrial base, because so many of the things that we need to do, mr. president, cannot be done unless we've got the resources in place to actually put americans to work making our

country stronger. it does contain one of the largest pay raises in decades. there will perhaps be more said on final passage, but i'm grateful to my colleague and friend and fellow veteran, senator reed, and i urge the passage of this vote. i yield back. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: mr. president, first, let me thank chairman reed of the armed services committee for his great leadership, ranking member wicker, and all the members of the committee and the conferrees for their good work in the past few weeks. in a few moments, i'll lay down the ndaa conference report. a lot of hard work on both sides. we've reached agreement for this year's defense authorization bill. never easy, harder now than ever before. i will file cloture on the ndaa later today. members can expected to take votes on this early next week.

at a time of huge trouble for global security, doing the defense authorization bill is more important than ever. the annual defense bill is a prime example of both sides cooperating on a strong bipartisan package to strengthen america's national security, to take care of our servicemembers, keep the ups the -- the united states the leader in innovation. when we began the december session, i said the senate faces three important tasks -- ending the hold on military nominees, which we did earlier this week, getting ndaa done, which we're doing today and early neck week, and then -- next week, then the biggest and heartest of all is passing the supplemental. we want to get that done as well. it's critical. we're going to keep working. i yield the floor and ask for the yeas and nays. i move to proceed to the conference report to accompany h.r. 2670, the national defense

authorization act . and now, i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the question is laying down the conference report. 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. 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. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters.

mr. reed. 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. mr. warner. mr. warnock.

ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative, bennet, blackburn, budd, butler, cantwell, capito, cardin, collins, duckworth, durbin, fetterman, fischer, graham, grassley, hassan, hyde-smith, kaine, kennedy, lummis, mullin, murkowski, murray, ossoff, rubio, schumer, shaheen, sinema,

thune, whitehouse, and wicker. senators voting in the negative, markey, merkley, sullivan, warren and wyden. mr. murphy, aye. mr. schmitt, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye. mr. heinrich, aye.

mr. brown, aye. mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye. mr. lujan, no.

the clerk: mr. vance, no. mr. tillis, aye. the clerk: mr. lankford, aye.

the clerk: mr. sanders, no. ms. klobuchar, aye.

the clerk: ms. ernst, aye.

the clerk: mr. reed, aye. mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. menendez, aye. mr. cornyn, aye. ms. stabenow, aye. mr. blumenthal, aye.

mr. casey, aye. mr. cotton, aye. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. johnson, no. mr. young, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida, aye. ms. cortez-masto, aye. mr. marshall, aye. mr. tuberville, no. mr. crapo, aye.

mr. paul, no. ms. baldwin, aye. mr. braun, no. mr. romney, aye.

the clerk: mrs. britt, aye. mr. mcconnell, aye.

mr. boozman, aye.

the clerk: mr. tester, aye. the clerk: mr. risch, aye. mr. peters, aye. mr. lee, no. mr. carper, aye.

mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. barrasso, aye. mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: mr. ricketts, aye. mr. hickenlooper, aye.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, aye.

mr. cassidy, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, aye.

mr. booker, no. the clerk: mr. schatz, aye.

the clerk: ms. rosen, aye.

mr. hoeven, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. manchin, aye. mr. warnock, aye. mr. daines, aye. the clerk: mr. welch, aye.

mr. king, aye. mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. cruz, aye.

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 82, the nays are 15. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: the chair lays -- the presiding officer: the chair lays before the senate the following. the clerk: the committee on conference on the disagreeing votes on the two houses on the amendment of the senate to the bill h.r. 2670 to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2024 for military activities so forth and for other purposes, having met, have agreed that the

house received from its disagreement to the amendment of the senate and agree to the same with an amendment and the senate agreed to the same. signed by a majority of the conferees on the part of both houses. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. 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 conference report to accompany h.r. 2670, an act to authorize appropriations for yoifshg 2024 -- fiscal year 24024 for military activities for the department of defense, military construction and defense activities for the department of energy, to provide military activity strength, signed by 17 senators as followings. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to recommit the conference report to conference with instructions. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from new york, mr. schumer, moves that the conference report with

respect to h.r. 2670 be recommitted with instructions that the conferees on the part of the senaten instructed to insert language that makes the effective date of the measure one day after the date of enactment. mr. schumer: i ask further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. schumer: i ask for the yeas and nays on my motion. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there is. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. schumer: i have an amendment to the instructions at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from new york, mr. schumer, proposes an amendment numbered 1373 to the instructions of the motion to recommit the conference report to accompany h.r. 2670 to the committee on conference. mr. schumer: i ask further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: is there objection? seeing none, without objection. mr. schumer: i ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second?

there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered. mr. schumer: i have a second agreed amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from new york, mr. schumer, proposes an amendment numbered 1374 to amendment numbered 1373. mr. schumer: i ask that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: is there objection? seeing none, without objection. mr. schumer: i ask that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today be waived. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to resume consideration of executive calendar 352. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. motion is agreed to. the clerk will rofrpt. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, richard e.n. federico, of kansas, to be united states circuit judge for the tenth circuit.

mr. hawley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. hawley: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to be able to speak for up to 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hawley: mr. president, earlier this summer millions of americans learned about the origins of our country's nuclear program, what perhaps more americans are learning about now are the tens of thousands of brave american citizens who risked their health and, in many instances, gave their lives to make that program a success. and what many are learning now is that those americans who risk their lives, who gave their

health, did it without the knowledge that their government was exposing them to nuclear radiation, without the consent from their government, and for years and years and years without any kind of help or any kind of compensation. so much so, that in 1990, this body passed a landmark piece of legislation that compensates the victims of the government's oppenheimer-era nuclear program, those who were exposed to nuclear tests, those who were exposed to the radiation from nuclear waste, without their consent, and often, usually, in fact, mr. president, without their knowledge. this body passed a landmark piece of legislation that included some findings that i just want to read here. this body said the health of those individuals who were unwitting participants in these tests and were put at risk to serve the national security interests of the united states

deserves compensation. they went on to say, this body did, that the united states should recognize and assume responsibility for the harm done to these brave americans. finally, congress actually offered an apology, something you don't see often, an apology to its people who it had exposed to nuclear radiation. congress apologizes on behalf of the nation to the individuals and their families for the hardships they have endured. that was exactly the right thing to do, mr. president. but today, congress is effectively rescinding that apology, because today congress is moving forward, the senate is moving forward with the defense bill that strips this program out of the law, that allows this program to expire, that turns its back on the tens of thousands of good americans who have sacrificed for their country, who have served their

country, who have dutifully given their health and in many cases their lives to this country and gotten nothing. and those that have depended on this compensation provided from 1990 will soon get nothing, because today this body decides to allow that program to expire. how did this happen? just earlier this year, in july, i said right there, in the well of the senate, as this body passed on an overwhelming bipartisan basis, 61 votes on the floor of the senate, to reauthorize the nuclear compensation program and to update it to include more americans who we now know, we've learned since 1990, thousands of more americans who were exposed to the government's nuclear waste and radiation, including thousands and thousands in my home state, in the state of missouri. we voted for it, mr. president. we voted for it on an overwhelming bipartisan basis. i would go so far as to say it

would be pretty hard to get 61 senators to vote for vanilla as a good ice cream. yet, 61 voters voted yes to renew this program, to preserve it, to keep our commitment to the good people of this country. yet today, the program is gone. today, in the bill before us, on the floor of the senate, it's nowhere to be found. what happened? what happened is what so often happens in this town and body, a backroom deal is what happened. yeah, the leaders of congress went to a backroom and over the last few weeks negotiated away this compensation for these thousands and thousands of americans. negotiated away, voted for by the senate, relied on for 30-plus years by thousands of americans, and now it's to be gone. why? because it's more important to pay the defense contractors and to pay the suits. oh, the suits will get paid, mr. president.

mark that down. that's always true in washington. the defense contractors will get paid. you can bet your bottom dollar. we have more than enough money for them. but for the people of my state who are sick with cancer because of the goff's nuclear waste, they get nothing. for the people of new mexico or idaho or colorado or arizona or washington state or oregon state or anywhere else in this state, exposed to the government's nuclear tests and radiation, they get nothing. mr. president, this is a grave injustice. this isn't an inconvenience. this isn't an oops, i wish it were different. this is an injustice. this is this body turning its back on these good, proud americans. this is the senate prioritizing i don't know what. certainly not the national security of the united states. because the greatest strength of the united states is in the

people of the united states, and this bill turns its back on the people of the united states. in defense of the lobbyists and the suits and the corporate entities who are going to get paid. hand over fist they'll make money, while the american people are left out in the cold. mr. president, i'm not going to vote for this bill, to say the least, and i'm going to do everything in my power to slow it and stop it if i can. i want to introduce my colleagues and the rest of the country to some of the victims, some of the people turned out in the cold because of a decision made by the leadership of this congress. let me start with zoe. you're looking at a picture of her here. this is zoe from st. louis. zoe was born with a mass on her oefshry, born with a mass on her ovary. she had surgery to remove it when she was just 3 weeks old.

she's 5 now. but just last night, zoe's parents had to rush her to the hospital for an mri because she remains in incredible pain. why does zoe from cancer? why was she born with a mass on her ovaries? because she grew up in an area that has known nuclear contamination from the manhattan project that the government has not cleaned up and has not compensated zoe or her parents for. take a good look. this is who the senate is leeching out in the cold. this is who congressional leadership decided is not important, girls like zoe, 5 years old. meet zack. this is baby zack. he was born with a rare brain tumor. one that is known to be caused by nuclear radiation. zack had his first surgery when he was 1 week old.

1 week. he started kiko when he was -- started chemo when he was 3 months old. 3 months. i bet many people within the sound of my voice have been on chemo and know what it is like. can you imagine a 3-month-old baby on chemo to start his life? zack died when he was 6. why was zack sick? zack grew up in an area of st. louis, born in an area of st. louis that is known to have nuclear contamination. his mother, kim, grew up along a place called coldwater creek, which is as i stand here and speak still contaminated -- still contaminated with nuclear radiation. why don't we meet mary? mary lived her entire life in st. louis. she went to high school there. she met her husband there. got married, raced a family there -- raised a family there.

when she went to nursing school to give something back to her community that had done so much for her, she was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer. she died last year. leaving her husband and two children. mary grew up in an area of st. louis known to have nuclear contamination. this is yet another person who this body today choosesto leave behind. then there's chantelle. chantelle has been diagnosed with two different kinds of breast cancer. she has had 13 surgeries, 13, including a double mastectomy, gallbladder removal, and a full hist revving pli -- hyst hysterectomy. her mother died of breast cancer. her aunt died of breast cancer. her grandfather died of pancreatic cancer.

her two cousins have breast cancer. a they've yu -- nephew has a cancerous brain tumor. chantelle is from a region in sthus known to have -- st. louis known to have nuclear contamination. chantelle is another good american this body chooses to leave behind. this next photo is -- is -- her daughter kirstie was diagnosed with a rare childhood form of brain cancer and died when she was 13. she was born in an area that studies have been identified of having dramatically higher instances of childhood cancers. kirstie and her family will get nothing now because of the actions of this body. the radiation hasn't been cleaned up, the contamination

has not been dealt with, her family has not been given a dime of health. a dime. not only for her death, but who knows how much hundreds of thousand dollars of dollars in medical bills they had to pay. and finally we have the students at this elementary school. here they are sitting in this lunch room at school, but the problem is, mr. president, they can't go to school anymore. nope. not one of these students can go to school at this elementary school. why, you may ask. because it is closed. why is it closed? because the creek that runs by their school is full of radioactive waste. here as we sit here, 2023, years after the man han ann -- manhattan project concluded, their school is full of nuclear contamination and they are shipped off to other schools in other places.

they can't do a thing about it. take a look at them. these are the voiceless americans who today this body turns its back on. these are the people who deserve the polling that -- apology that this body deserved in 1990 and the compensation for the sacrifices they have made. but they will get none of it. who will get paid? the defense industry will be paid big time. a recent analysis found that this bill contains not only almost a trillion dollars in new defense spending, it's contains 26 billion dollars for the defense for -- 26 billion dollars for programs that the pentagon didn't even ask for. 26 billion dollars that they didn't even ask for in one year and yet we are told that the students we just saw and every young person, old person, good

person who i have just shown you, we don't have money for you. we don't have anything for you. we can pay these people until the cows come home, but we can't do anything for you. we've got plenty of money for raytheon and owl the -- and all the rest weeks don't have a dime for the working poor etch who are -- poor who are sick because of the government's radiation, but we must carry on. well, mr. president, not with my support. i would say to the congressional negotiators, your actions have earned my opposition, but i would say to the good people of the state of missouri who have endured decade upon decade, this fight is not over. to the people of this nation, tens of thousands of who have depended on this compensation,

lifesaving help who are at risk of losing all of it, this fight is not over. i understand some high schools in the missouri area may be watching now. i want to assure you i will come to this floor as long as it takes, i will force amendment votes as long as it takes until we compensate the people of this nation who have sacrificed for this nation and do not believe them behind. the failure to do so now, mr. president, is a scar on the conscience of this body and i will remind my colleagues of it as long as it takes until we make it right. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar

number 352, richard e.n. federico, of kansas, to be united states judge for the tenth circuit. the presiding officer: the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on richard e.n., federico, of kansas, to be united states judge for the tenth circuit, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays have been ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

had mr. bookerkirby.

mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty.

ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. 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. mr. murphy.

mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. 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. mr. warner. mr. warner. mr. warnock.

ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. senators voting in the affirmative -- baldwin, bennet, blumenthal,