will be incremental improvement. i won't be ready for the olympics, but i will improve. >> let's go to afp. >> thank you, mr. secretary. does the u.s. need to escalate as public actions produce something new on president in order to deter iran and proxies and if so how can it be done without sparking a broader conflict? >> i think everyone recognizes the challenge associate with making sure that we hold the right people accountable, that we do everything necessary to protect our troops, and the wii manages things so that they don't escalate. i don't think there's any set formula for doing this. i do think though that in everything that we do decision-making process with national security council, we

are managing all of that, looking at all of that, and we're using every instrument of national power to address various issues. -- >> we're going to leave the pentagon to give life to the senate as part of our commitment to live coverage of congress. you can continue watchg the briefing at c-span now, our mobile app. the senate today debating and voting on to the judicial nominations for the u.s. court of international trade. 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. listen to our prayer, dear lord, for you are our mighty fortress. when we feel overwhelmed, we place our hope in you. when we feel doubt, you fill us with your faith. when we feel afraid, you continue to be our light and salvation. thank you for keeping us safe. lord, guide our lawmakers. may they give you their burdens, as they seek to do your will and as they bow to your will and live for your glory. use them to help heal our hurting nation and world. let faith, hope, and love abound

in their lives. we pray in your loving 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 fo■r 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, february 1, 2024. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable ben ray lujan, a senator from the state of new mexico, to perform the

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 proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. lisa w. wang of the district of columbia to be a judge of the united states court of united states court of

iran sponsors these groups in groups on weapons

again i think without facilitation these things don't matter. >> have you seen any sign china has been pressuring iran? >> we have not. happening in terms of those communications between leaders promote we don't know both not seen visible evidence that they are encouraging or pressuring ever to cost the buddhist tobacco houthis to back off. >> have two questions, regret detail and authority for

transfer because she has a right to know? >> as you heard me say, i apologize to my colleagues and the american people, i wasn't as transparent as it probably should have been. >> is there any discussion reno for what has happened the last couple weeks? >> what happened is not driving us to consider withdrawing troops from syria. there are ongoing discussions with iraqi leadership about our future corporate and others the first steps that will play out over time.

>> discussions going forward. >> thank you very much, that's all the time we have, thank you very much. >> we are still going to forensics. most of the drones in the region connection with the world. i don't think the adversaries have a one and done mindset so they have a lot of capability, i have a lot more so as i said earlier, we are going to do what's necessary to protect our troops.

. iq

mr. schumer: it's not often that the united states senate is

called to act on a multitude of national security issues, all at the same time. but right now, that's precisely the task at hand. vladimir putin has waged war against ukraine and against western docracy for nearly two years. israel suffered its bloodiest day last fall at the hands of the terror group hamas. and millions of innocent gaza civilians are in desperate need of aid. the chinese communist party threatens to increase tensions in the indo-pacific. and our southern border is in urgent need of fixing. these are daunting challenges. they are time sensitive challenges. and, in an era of divided government, the only way -- let is through bipartisanship. pass bipart bipartisanship. over the course of this week, democrats and republicans have continued serious negotiations on the supplemental package.

but there are still some pieces remaining to be settled. democrats have been exceedingly clear that we're willing to treat these negotiations with the seriousness they deserved. we've worked with republicans on border security and on a vast range of issues and on coming to an agreement, and we want to finish the job. the negotiators' tasks have not been easy, because the more progress they make, the louder voices the -- get on the outspied who want to kill these negotiations in their tracks. there will be those who want to exploit the border instead of fixing it. the real question is whether senators can tune all of that noise out and focus on reaching an agreement. opportunities like this one are ex-treatmently rare when it comes -- extremely rare when it comes to border security. we owe it to the american people to seize this opportunity. that's what democrats want to do. sena remain committed to seeing this

bipartisan process through. for the sake of our friends in ukraine, for the sake of security on our border, for the sake of the future of western democracy in the 21st century, we'll keep working to get the job done. now, on the economy, mr. president, the reports are in, the results are clear -- americans are feeling better and better about where the economy is headed under president biden and congressional democratic leadership. when you pass an ambitious agenda like the ones democrats have passed under president biden, it can take some time for the effects to take hold. but now we're starting to see these benefits gain momentum. americans are starting to notice. as a "washington post" headline read this week, falling inflation, rising growth gives the u.s. the world's best recovery. and american citizens have noticed. the university of michigan showed that consumer sentiment nearly 30% over the last two months. the biggest two-month increase

in over 30 years. earlier this week, another survey, by the conference board, showed american consumers are more optimistic about the economy today than they have been in over two years. let me say that again. according to a new survey by the conference board, very well respected, american consumers are more optimistic about the economy today than they've been over the past two years. the chief economist of the conference board cred i79ed the surge -- credited the surge in consumer optimism to, quote, slower inflation, and, quote, favorable employment conditions. look, a year and a half ago, when democrats passed legislation investing in the american people, like the inflation reduction act, the hard right predicted america would sink into recession. instead, the opposite has happened. jobs are up. the economy is up. wages are up. inflation has cooled down. none of this happened on its own. it's a result of democrats choosing to invest in infrastructure, invest in manufacturing and scientific

innovation, lowering prescription drug costs and more. we're seeing big progress across the country. one year ago this week, i stood with president biden to announce historic investment in one of the most important infrastructure projects in the country, the gateway tunnel. just this morning, we learned that manufacturing investment, something that had plagued america for quite a while, is near an all-time high, more than double its highest point during the previous administration. look, republicans know the democrat agenda is working. it's why so many republicans in congress are openly taking credit for our achievements. all over the country you see republicans bragging about projects and jobs that they actually voted against in congress. the hard right knows they have no rea tout. as one texas congressman said on the house floor, i want republicans to give me one thing, one, that i can go campaign on and say we did it.

unfortunately, his options, this republican congressman, his options are slim, because they don't have much to tell the american people about that they did that was good. without real accomplishments on their own, the hard right is trying to take credit for the things democrats are doing. it's laughable, and the american people, frankly, aren't falling for it. make no mistake, we still have a long way to go to make our economy more productive, but americans can rest assured that under president biden and congressional democrats we are on the right track.

the plan. what you think we should do? >> interesting question, i think it's probably not an appropriate question to be honest asked me, member of the armed service committee on the decision commander-in-chief should do a study of people who can give advice, he's indicated yesterday

making decisions on what he should do is to respond, i think it should be proportional, appropriate director of the people who perpetrated the task and i believe commander-in-chief especially, there's probably some tell us but about firing. >> it's not clear enough of a difference continues to navigate the waters. i think have made some amount of the difference and certainly

will continue to respond as we have days like i have deep concerns and i think the president and his administration has had to walk on anything done on behalf of us and our allies have the opportunity and possibility of escalating what's going on in the region and its importance we walk that line carefully so i believe this administration has and criticism from my colleagues lorraine needs to be a fast response on how we retaliate and when and who we are italian with clinic slowly don't escalate

commander-in-chief from what will you have a responsibly and the president of the obligation authority but we do have the responsibility congress shall make sure we get from to be able to continue with whatever is unfolding. >> what you think of the situation in gaza? lawmakers military stating engaging hamas militants, explain. >> we are a group of people and democrats served in the state department or cia and you have concerns and i friend, -- is th

strategic challenge facing the united states. it poses a potentially existential threat to our friends in the region and a growing threat to our allies in europe as well. the prc is working to undermine the prevailing order that has maintained a major power peace for eight decades. and it's useful to think about this challenge from our adversaries' position. president xi aims to expand china's influence at our expense. to rewrite the rules of the road, and to dominate his neighbors. each of these tasks becomes easier the more the west is

dist distracted, i did vited -- divided, and deterred. and depending on the choices, america and our allies make, our adversaries may succeed without even trying. are we distracted? ask beijing what it thinks about the western diplomat energy expanded on unenforceable climate mandates while chinese industry accelerates its carbon emissions. our adversaries must scratch their heads at some of the things about which western leaders obsess. are we divided? the prc clearly hopes that the west's shared values are not as strong as our adversary's disdain for them.

beijing, no doubt, enjoys watching the united states abandon allies in afghanistan, second-guess allies in israel, and initiate trade fights with its closest allies rather than china. are we deterred? we are and hand-wringing over fears of escalation have become hallmarks of the biden administration's foreign policy. right now, you'd be forgiven for wondering whether president biden might take longer to respond to the iran-backed strike that killed u.s. soldiers in jordan than he did to finally approve long-range fires for ukraine. the administration's public obsession with avoiding

escalation at all costs only signals to our addversaries tha indeed authoritarians can take what they want by force. fortunately, putin's aggression has clarified our allies' thinking. the west is waking up, turbocharging investments in new chabots and accelerating -- in new capabilities, and accelerating the expansion of our own defense industrial base. beijing and moscow are not happy to see war in ukraine prompt two more highly advanced european nations make historic new commitments to collective defense of the west by joining nato. they're not happy to see america' a gusher of historic military investment into cutting-edge american

weapons made by american workers. in the past two years, pacific allies like japan, south korea, and australia have been buying american to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. nato allies have invested $120 billion of their own in u.s. capabilities. and, importantly, they're also investing in expanding their own defense industrial capacity. our aiessia, china, and iran ar secretary-general stoltenberg put it yesterday in washington, quote, shaping an alternative world order where u.s. power is diminished and nato is divided. and in response, they're rejecting division and committing to interoperability

and collective defense. in many ways, nato is now more united than during the cold war. but this progress is not a given. it depends on american leadership, and it is quite capable of unravelling president xi would with like nothing more. there's really no quicker way to make sure we'll be distracted from necessary competition with china than by letting russian aggression i fester. there's no sure path to dividing america from our closest allies than by shredding our capability -- credibility and abandoning ukraine. the prc hopes that america and our allies will lose our will to stand up to russian aggression. president xi hopes for russian

victory but will benefit from a frozen conflict. as they watch russia fight in ukraine, what beijing and tehran fear is a western victory. we must understand the threats our adversaries pose as connected. china, russia, iran, and north korea are making alarming new commitments to support and underwrite one another's aggressive behavior. our asian allies know it. they know that by leaving russia undefeated means leaving the prc undeterred. and their security assistance to ukraine demonstrates how seriously they take these linked threats. there's also growing trans-atlantic agreement that china is a systemic rival and a

revision rift power -- revisionist power. when the most successful military alliance in history stands together, it represents fully half of the world's military power and half of its economic power. nato is a a formidable force that inspires confidence and collaboration among an even wider circle of allies and partners, particularly in the indo-pacific. let aggression linger ur allies undefeated, this force is spread thin. and beijing wants nothing more than to face a west fstill consumed by self-deterrence in a conflict halfway around the world. europe has woken up. it's outpacing america in direct assistance to ukraine.

with another $50 billion -- $50 billion in eur0s announced just today. even as they ramp up their support to upgrade their capabilities and expand their defense industrial capacity, america doesn't get to opt out -- out out of doing the same -- opt out of doing the same. even as our most technologically advanced allies take historic steps forward, america doesn't have the luxury of pawning off our interests. deterring china means defeating russian aggression, degrading russia's military means weakening beijing's friendship without limits with moscow, equipping ukraine to defend itself means confronting the prc

with the thing it hates the most -- sovereign nations that choose their leaders and defend their interests. strengthening america's national security means standing with our allies and investing even more heavily in the capabilities we need to face ours top strategic -- our top strategic formidable american strength. now, o matter, last week the biden administration followed through on a devastating threat to some of the most abundant and reliable energy made here in america and to those who rely on it around the world. the administration's de facto ban on new liquefied natural gas export permits is the sort of policy so profoundly damaging that it could only have been dreamed up by the left-wing

being a visits who are -- activists who are increasingly calling the shots on president biden's energy policies. as i've mentioned before, this de facto ban is harmful to american interests both at home and abroad. canceled export permits mean canceled projects and canceled jobs. bans on exploring and exporting american energy mean working families pay higher prices for gasoline, home heating, and countless other everyday expenses. since president biden took office, the cost of gasoline has increased a cumulative 35%, fuel oil prices have been increased 61%, natural gas has increased 27%, and electricity prices have increased 25%.

but the cost of the administration's green bent aren't confineded to our own borders. for the past two years, allies who once relied on russian energy have started consuming more clean american lng. a recent editorial put it, if new lng projects are blocked, europe and asia will have to import gas from elsewhere to meet their growing demand. most won't come from america's friends. iran and russia are both increasing their lng capabilities, ready to meet desperate demand when american export capacity no longer can. meanwhile, the same radical activist whose drove a stake through the keystone x.l. pipeline are glowfully declaring

victory this their campaign to make america and our allies more reliant on dirty energy from our adversaries. and president biden, in keeping with his administration's practice of rewarding bad behavior with more responsibility, put one of the masterminds of his climate policy up for a promotion at epa. yesterday senate democrats overran bipartisan opposition to confirm joseph goffman's nomination as assistant administrator. as i've said before, mr. goffman has anne couraged the epa's worst -- worst regulatory excesses and put activist whims over american workers and job creators. by some estimates, he's presided over the elimination of half the nation's coal jobs, and

unfortunately the radical climate agenda he is helping to steer shows no signs of slowing down. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to to invoke cloture. the clerk: 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 477, lisa w. wang of the district of columbia to be a judge of the united states court of international trade, 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 lisa w. wang of the district of columbia to be judge of the united states court of international trade shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. 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. is the clerk: mr. carper. mr. casey.

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

mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. vote:

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, cantwell, cardin, duckworth, durbin, hassan, heinrich, lujan, markey, merkley, murray, rosen, sinema, van hollen, warner, warnock. senators voting in the negative, capito, cornyn, cotton, cruz, fischer, mcconnell, risch, rounds, tuberville, wicker.

the clerk: mr. crapo, no.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no. mr. johnson, no.marshall, no.

mr. bennet, aye. mr. ricketts, no. the clerk: mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: mr. thune, no.

the clerk: mr. braun, no. the clerk: ms. ernst, no.

the clerk: mr. king, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. mr. manchin, aye. mr. carper, aye.

vote: the clerk: mrs. mr. mullin, no. mr. cassidy, no.

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

mr. tester, aye. the clerk: mr. sanders, aye. the clerk: mr. tillis, no.

mr. hickenlooper, aye. ms. warren, aye. mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mrs. hyde-smith, no. ms. baldwin, aye.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye.

mr. brown, aye. the clerk: mr. vance, aye. mr. fetterman, aye. mr. booker, aye. mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye.

mr.blumenthal, aye. mr. young, no. the clerk: ms. butler, aye.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. cramer, no.

the clerk: mr. graham, aye.

the clerk: mr. moran, no.

the clerk: mr. reed, aye. mr. scott of south carolina, no.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. romney, no.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no. vote: ■p

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

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

the clerk: mr. lee, no. 2 mer padilla the clerk: mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye.

the clerk: mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: mr. ■pkelly, aye.

the clerk: mr. boozman, no. the clerk: mr. kennedy, no. mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no. mr. menendez, aye. ms. cortez-masto, aye. mr. paul, no. deficits.

vote: the clerk: mr. budd, no.■a

the clerk: mr. hawley, no. mr. daines, no.

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 53, the nays are 43, and the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the motion

to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, 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 476, joseph albert laroski, of maryland, to be a judge of the united states court of international trade. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. is it the sense of the -- the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of joseph albert laroski, of maryland, to be a judge of the united states court of international trade shall be brought to a close? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. 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. a 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. 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. senators voting in the affirmative -- boozman, capito, collins, cornyn, cortez masto,

crapo, graham, grassley, hawley, heinrich, kaine, king, menendez, murphy, rubio, schatz, sinema, tillis, vance, warnock, welch, whitehouse, and wyden. mr. mullin, aye. mr. hickenlooper, aye. senators voting in the negative -- cassidy and lankford. mr. young, aye.

mr. sullivan, aye.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye. mr. tester, aye. mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. wicker, aye. ms. butler, aye. mr. reed, aye.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye.

the clerk: mr. durbin, aye.

the clerk: mr. tuberville, aye.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye. the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye.

the clerk: mr. marshall, aye.

the clerk: mrs. fischer, aye.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, aye.

the clerk: mr. cassidy, aye. mr. johnson, no. mr. kennedy, aye.

the clerk: mr. cruz, aye. the clerk: mr. cramer, aye. mr. johnson, aye.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye. mrs. murray, aye.

the clerk: mr. moran, aye. mr. thune, aye. mrs. hyde-smith, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. ms. ernst, aye. the clerk: mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. budd, aye. .

mr. ricketts, aye. the clerk: mr. braun, aye. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. fetterman, aye.

the clerk: mr. daines, aye.

the clerk: mr. risch, aye. mrs. shaheen, aye. ms. lummis, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye.

mr. paul, aye. the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. mr. markey, aye. mr. mcconnell, aye. mr. manchin, aye. mr. hoeven, aye.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. mr. van hollen, aye. mr. scott of florida, aye. ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. romney, aye. of south carolina, aye. ms. cantwell, aye. ■f

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye.

the clerk: mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: mr. merkley, aye.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no. vote: the clerk: mr. cotton, aye.

the clerk: mr. rounds, aye.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, aye. mr. cardin, aye.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, aye.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. lee, aye.

mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: mrs. britt, aye. yea

are 96. the nays are 1. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, joseph albert laroski jr., of maryland to be a judge of the united states court of international trade.

the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: i ask that -- is there -- madam president, i come up to the floor today to express my deep appreciation and gratitude for human rights defenders. they are the core of free democratic societies. they risk their lives and freedom to hold governments and the private sector accountable. they advocate for human rights and political freedom. they protect our environment and fight corruption. despite very real threats to their lives and safety, they have achieved incredible victories. because of their tireless efforts from colombia to mexico, nations across latin america

expanded reproductive rights. argentina passed a law to prevent gender-based violence online and hold perpetrators accountable. the e.u. required companies to address environmental harms to their operations. and malaysia and ghana took steps to abolish the death penalty. we celebrate these victories. but, madam president, i also must underline a deep sense of urgency today. attacks against human rights defenders are on the rise across the globe. hundreds are killed each year and thousands more are attacked, threatened, or imprisoned. the russian investigative journalist that was brutally attacked for exposing human rights abuses in the northern caucuses. the guatemalan judge forced into exile after holding human rights abusers accountable. the taxi driver and human rights

in turkmenistan serving a 22-year sentence for documenting the torture of ethnic minorities. the 289-year-old human rights defender in sudan who was killed along with his parents and his four brothers. or one of the hundreds of human rights defenders killed by those vying for control of the colombian drug trafficking roots. not only are attacks growing, today's offenders target their enemies, even those living in exile. the united nations special rapporteur has said, governments claim that all this repression is about national security. in reality, it is about power and money. they want to maintain power so they control information. as a result, those who stand for freedom and justice often face

death threats, harassment, arbitrary detention and torture. women human rights defenders and those working on environmental protection, climate change, lgbtq-plus community, indill u. dith us in -- indigenous rights face especially high levels of violence. i'm pleased that the biden administration has made protecting human rights defenders our priority for american foreign policy. human rights defenders are heroes in the fight for democracy and freedom, and the united states must stand in solidarity with them. but we all need to do more. that is why i introduced the human rights defenders protection act. this bill enhances our government's ability to prevent and respond to attacks on human rights defenders. it requires the administration to come up with a whole of government global strategy for human rights defenders. it creates a new limited visa

category for at-risk human rights defenders. it elevates the state department's human rights officers in countries facing democracy and human rights crises. it trains foreign service officers on the protection of human rights defenders. and it expands fellowships to allow human rights defenders to conduct research, outreach and exchanges in the united states. madam president, my grandparents came to america in 1902 from lithuania where there were pogroms against jews in eastern europe. the defense of human rights imp my family. for many decades of my life, the soviet union was one of the greatest threats to human rights on earth and it seemed indestructible. but i remember standing with my wife at the berlin wall. my wife and i hammered on the concrete that was covered in

graffiti. chipping away at the better lynn wall was a reminder of the good we could achieve if only we have faith. so to everyone who cares about justice, to everyone that fights for freedom, to everyone that defends human rights against all odds, don't give up. let us continue to advocate for those human rights defenders behind bars. let us champion their efforts across the globe. let us have faith that we can overcome oppression and violence and assassinations. let us keep hope alive that we can build a world that is safe and peaceful and prosperous. with that, madam president, i urge my colleagues to support the legislation i have filed, and i yield the floor.

the presid the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: i would ask unanimous consent that the scheduled vote for 1:45 p.m. begin immediately. the presiding officer: without objection. the question is on the wang nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. 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.

the clerk: mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn.

ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. 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. the clerk: 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. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

vote: the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative, butler, cardin, collins, smith, welch. senators voting in the negative, blackburn, britt, capito, cassidy, daines, fischer, hyde-smith, kennedy, lummis, moran, mullin, paul, risch,

romney, rounds, rubio, schmitt, scott of florida, tillis, tuberville, wicker.l

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no. the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. mrs. shaheen, aye.

the clerk: mr. ricketts, no. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. cotton, no.

ms. ernst, no. mr. boozman, no. mr. vance, aye. the clerk: mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye. ms. cantwell, aye. ms. hassan, aye.

the clerk: mr. braun, no. mr. casey, aye. mr. durbin, aye. mr. merkley, aye.

the clerk: mr. tester, aye. mr. hagerty, no. mr. johnson, no.

mr. mr. re

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, aye. the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye.

the clerk: mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. king, aye. mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye. mr. young, no. mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. warner, aye.

vote:# the clerk: mr. sanders, aye. mr. grassley, no. mr. markey, aye. mr. whitehouse, aye.

ms. baldwin, aye. mr. mendendez, aye.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. ms. warren, aye.

the clerk: ms. sinema, aye. the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. ms. cortez masto, aye. ms. klobuchar, aye.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. mr. graham, aye. mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: mr. manchin, aye.

mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. ■x

the clerk: ms.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. crapo, no.

the clerk: mr. cramer, no.lash.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no. mr. xaerp, aye. -- mr. carper, aye. mr. bennet, aye.

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: mr. budd, no. mr. lee, no.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye.

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

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye.

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 53, the noes are 42, and the nominees is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. lankford: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: madam president, on roll call vote 32, i voted no, it was my intention to vote yes.

i ask unanimous consent to be permitted to change my vote since it will not affect the outcome. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lankford: thank you. i yield. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: madam president, i come to the floor to talk about something every american wants from their public officials, transparency and accountability. unfortunately, after repeated attempts, congress has not received that transparency or accountability from supreme court justice clarence thomas, and it is feeding the perception of corruption. for the past six months the senate finance committee has been trying to get straight

answers from the justice and his wealthy friends about the growing list of handouts that they've lavished on the justice. most recently we sought to figure out whether secretly ove $200,000 in debt written off, simply wiped away by a wealthy bene benefactor. i'm working to learn whether he paid the taxes he was supposed to, taxes that any american is legally required to pay. the justice has refused to respond. justice thomasba acts as if the freebies and the special favors americans are reading about, the flights on private jetscomp.ed, trips on luxury yachts, mega we wealthy people paying for

tuitions and money wiped away and somehow the justice acts that is normal stuff. the reality is it's not. it isn't normal for anyone whn the person receiving all of these extravagant handouts is one of the nine most powerful jurists with power with unchecked power to write laws from the bench, it's worse. here is what we note in 1999, one of justice thomas' friends loaned him 267,230 thousand dollars to buy a luxury r.v. that is some kind of friend. justice thomas wants us to believe the story is simple, like the couple hundred bucks you would loan somebody to get their car fixed in an emergency. the story that the justice has,

in effect, apparently subscribed to, obscures the truth. the simple fact is -- here is that loans have to be repaid and it sure looks like this one was no. according to the terms of the loan agreement which, by the way was written down on supreme court stationery from the chambers of clarence thomas, his friend supplied the money to buy the luxury r.v., the justice was supposed to pay 7.5% interest for five years and then the loan would come due and justice thomas would r would be -- would be responsibility for paying the full principal. but the payment never happened. throughout my investigation i uncovered that justice thomas only paid interest on the tra transtax. -- transaction. when the deadlinevp hit after fe years, his friends extended the

maturity date on the loan another decade. thomases friends decided to stop collecting payments even though the justice still owed him more than a quarter million dollars. justice thomas' friend wrote him a note saying that the interest he paid was good enough and he wouldn't accept further payments. that means that the debt likely the entire $260,000 in principal, was considered forgiven. again, that's quite at friend. so the documents we've seen indicate justice thomas received a $267,000 loan to buy a luxury r.v. and never repaid most appeared likely not even a dollar of the money that his friend originally loaned him. this has legal consequences. the tax code makes clear that in instances whereas a debt is canceled, forgiven or discharged

for less than the amount owed, the borrower must report the fo for income -- or forgiven for income tax purposes. further, justice thomas is required to report it on his financial disclosure report. but justice thomas never reported a quarter million in forgiven debt on his financial disclosure report in 2008 or, the year his debt was forgiven. he won't give the finance committee a direct answer whether he reportedit on his taxes raising serious legal questions. madam president, after i publicly revealed these findings, justice thomas through his lawyer said the documents that i reviewed were unyou troo. the justice said, and i'm quote willing here, the loan was never forgiven. any suggestion to the contrary is false. and the terms of the agreement were satisfied in full. this contradicts the documents i

reviewed. so along with senator whitehouse, our colleague from rhode island, we wrote to justice thomas' lawyer and give him a chance to prove his claim. personally, i believe that a sitting supreme court justice would jump at the opportunity to correct the record and prove that he repaid his debts and did not cheat on taxes. i wish i could report to the american people that was the case and that this whole mess was just a misunderstanding. but that did not happen. justice thomas did not give us any documentation about his so-called, quote, loan. senator whitehouse and i gave him a month to respond and receive nothing, no loan agreement, no payment schedule, no evidence of principal payments and no explanation for why he and his lawyer said the documents and information i uncovered were untrue. if what justice thomas and his lawyer are saying about the loan is accurate, the question, madam

president, is what's behind all the stonewalling? does the justice believe he shouldn't have to answer any questions about all the major windfalls and luxury travel? not even to prove that everything was on the level? justice thomas and his lawyers could put this whole affair to rest by providing copies of checks repaying this quarter million dollar loan. my personal guess is they can't because those payments never happened. if a wealthy friend forgave a quarter million dollar loan to justice thomas, the law requires that he chairman of the senate finance committee, it's essential that justice thomas list that income on his taxes. he's also required to disclose the money on his financial disclosure report. based on what we have seen, it seems like he did neither. our laws including our tax laws have to apply to everyone.

the law applies to everyone, especially one of the nine most powerful jurists in america. the congress must ensure that they do. it's time for justice thomas to respond with the facts about this quarter million dollar loan and any similar money and gift he has received as supreme court justice. and now, madam president, i'm going to yield to my colleague on the finance committee. he's also the chairman of the budget committee and chairman of the important judiciary subcommittee on federal courts, our colleague senator whitehouse of rhode island. mr. whitehouse: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: madam president, let me start by thanking our finance committee chairman, chairman wyden, for his strong leadership. chairman wyden was able to secure the cooperation of the

wealthy donor who gave justice thomas the quarter million dollar plus r.v. loan. the chairman doggedly followed the facts to get the truth for the american people which takes guts, particularly when you consider the man interests rooting for this investigation to go away. let me also thank chairman durbin for his persistent and dogged pursuit through the judiciary committee. both the judiciary and finance committees are working to get to the bottom of this. keep in mind in all the ethics mess engulfing justicequ thomas that for every ethics issue, there is also likely a tax issue. perhaps two sides of the same coin. if a justice isn't reporting income on his legally-required

financial disclosure, there's a good chance that something is amiss with his tax reporting as well. whether a justice receives something of value from a benefactor, the presumption is that it needs to be disclosed under the ethics law either as income or as a gift. generally speaking, if it's income, the justice must also report it as income for income tax purposes. and if it's a gift, the donor needs to report it for gift tax purposes. which is why when you're looking at possible ethics violations in situations like this, it's important to know if that income showed up on the tax side or if that gift report showed up on the tax side. that's why chairman wyden's leadership here is so essential.

if this went unreported, that could be a tax law violation. again, if it's a gift, the justice needs to disclose it under the ethics law, unless it falls under a narrow definition for personal hospitality, spending christmas with your in-laws, for instance, or going on a trip with your college roommates. so either way, the tax question bec becomes for donors for gifts, did the enbenefactor, did the donor report it for gift tax purposes. so you a he got the income tax reporting issue. you've got the gift tax reporting issue. and you've got a third issue which is these tax filings can also test the veracity of what justices claim. thomas and aleelt take claimed they -- alito claimed they didn't have to report gift and

yacht travel gifted by gifts, they claimed, were personal hospitality. there were no college roommates or in-laws involved. it's a heck of a stretch to call this personal hospitality. but one of the ways you could test whether it's personal hospitality would be by looking at how the donor of that hospitality treated it on their taxes. it would be a pretty good tell that all that hospitality those justices received was not so personal if the yacht and jet travel gifted to justices thomas and alito was written off by these billionaires as a tax expense, as a business expense. so there's a lot to be learned . two other reminders as we go through this, one it's a crime.

it's a crime under 18 united states code, section 1001 to file a false sworn statement with the federal government. both judicial disclosures and tax filings are filed under oath. two, the law requires the judicial conference if there's any question about whether an improper judicial disclosure filing might have been willful to refer the question of willfulness to the attorney general for investigation. it is not under the law the judicial conference' job to decide the question of willfulness. it's only to decide if there is a question of willfulness and then refer that to the attorney general for investigation. so this can get serious fast. which brings us to justice thomas and his r.v.

when it comes to ethics requirements, there is no question about what the law required here. if part of justice thomas' debt -- justice thomas' debt was forgiven, he had to report it. the state of the facts based on the documents the finance committee has obtained and reviewed is that justice thomas never paid back a dollar of principal on a quarter million-dollar loan. and that the donor long ago stopped collecting even interest on that loan. so let's take a look at the law. justice thomas likely didn't have to report the loan itself. justices don't need to report loans secured by a personal vehicle as long as the value of the loan isn't worth more than

the vehicle itself. if justice thomas put up the r.v. as collateral for his loan and did not obtain more money, then the r. -- than the r.v. was worth, there was no need for him to disclose the loan. but all that changes if any part of the loan was forgiven later on. and as the chairman has said, when you've collected not one dollar in principal and collecting interest, that sure looks like forgiveness of a loan. and a loan you don't pay back is a form of income. the law requires officials to disclose any income they receive outside of their government salaries, which makes sense if you're trying to expose or prevent corruption. under the law, if you receive more than $200 in income from any one person in a year, you have to disclose that.

here are the regulations on financial disclosure. these are adopted pursuant to law and they say that income includes but is not limited to income from discharge of indebtedness. and down here it further says that you must report discharge of indebtedness. and if you go to the tax code, specifically to 26us code section 61 which defines for income tax purposes, subsection a, subsection 11 of subsection a describes that income from discharge indebtedness counts as income. income from discharge of indebtedness. it's identical language in the tax code and in the judicial

reporting regulations. so a loan whose principal is not repaid is reportable income. both under judicial ethics law and under tax law. and the law is crystal clear on this point and even justices are told what the law is on this point. so if you go to -- if you go to the filing instructions for judicial officers, this is what a judge gets that tells them how to comply with their filing requirements regarding these disclosures. here's what it tells them. in income. the disclosure of the gross amount and the type of income, dividends, rent, interest, or income from discharge of indebtedness is required.

disclosure of income from discharge of indebtedness is required. there's nothing very subtle or complicated about that. couldn't be more straightforward. if justice thomas failed to report a loan that was no longer being collected with a big balance still due and, hence, as a practical matter was forgiven, he likely violated these requirements. if he failed to file his taxes accordingly, he also likely violated our tax laws. and either of these, either the tax filing or the filing under the judicial rules could amount to a false statement under the criminal code. in the first instance, as to the judicial disclosure filings, the law requires the judicial conference to determine if there

is reason to believe that justice thomas' violation may have been willful, in which case it has a legal obligation to report him to the attorney general for further investigation to settle the question of willfulness. i've asked the judicial conference to consider exactly these facts, and i hope that they will do so. it looks like they are. and as they do so, here are some things they should consider. first, this is not justice thomas' first brush with this law. a previous episode of yacht and yet travel gifts to him from harlan crow actually went to the judicial conference for investigation years ago. in my subcommittee on the judiciary committee, we held a hearing about this with a judge who served on the judicial conference at the time and could relate to us what transpired back then with the ld

crow-to-thomas yacht and jet travel undisclosed gifts. that episode, i would describe as a decent burial. but it's not clear now that with thomas back as a repeat offender with the same type of gifts from the same billionaire that he will get the same courtesies from his fellow judges as he did in episode one of crow-to-thomas yacht and jet travel gifts. indeed, the latest report from the judicial conference -- they put out two reports a year, and this is their report of proceedings for the previous -- for this past fall.

i.e., this is dated september 12 of last year. and it has this citizens in it. the committee was also updated on the status of the ongoing review of public written allegations of errors or omissions in a filer's financial disclosure reports that were referred to it since the conference's last session. i don't know of any other or justice who has received public written allegations of errors or omissions in that filer's financial disclosure reports other than justice thomas. so although there is no name mentioned here, it looks like t investigation is alive and well in the judicial conference, and if they should determine that there is a question of

willfulness in his failure to file, particularly to the extent that it may involve similar fil their legal obligation to present that question to the attorney general. so it appears that the matter remains under active review, and i would conclude by saying this is to be continued. i yield the floor. mr. wyden: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: senator cornyn is going to speak, and i just ask unanimous consent that the follow members of our -- following members of our team be

granted floor privileges. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: madam president,

conversations are ongoing. some issues still need resolution, but we are getting very close on the national security supplemental. the national security supplemental is so important to enabling us to address multiple crises around the globe. vladimir putin has waged war against ukraine and against western democracy for nearly two years. and america must step up. israel suffered its bloodiest day last fall at the hands of the terror group hamas, and millions of■s innocent civilians are in need of aid. the chinese communist party threatened to increase tensions in the indo-pacific and our southern border is in urgent need -- in urgent need of fixing. addressing these challenges is not easy, but we cannot simply shirk from our responsibilities just because a task is

difficult. so, for the information of senators, the senate will be in session and will hold a vote on monday, february 5. there's no longer a no-vote day. while respectful of members' schedules and try to limit inconveniences, these challenges at the border and in ukraine and the middle east are just too great, and we will need to be here working as i said, discusse going well, so i want members to be aware that we plan to post the full text of the national security supplemental as early as tomorrow, no later than sunday. that will give members plenty of time to read the bill before voting on it. as for the timing of the vote, i plan to file cloture on the motion to proceed to the vehicle on monday, leading to the first vote on the national security supplemental no later than wednesday.

now, mr. president, i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. all opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to consider calendar 486. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of state. kurt campbell of the district of columbia to be deputy secretary. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: 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 486, kurt campbell of the district of columbia to be deputy secretary of state, signed by 17 senators as follows -- mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names 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 those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 473. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. all those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary. amy m.baggio of oregon to be united states district judge for the district of oregon. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the e desk.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: 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 473, amy m. baggio of oregon to beious district judge for the district of oregon signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today, february 1, be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i yield the floor.

mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, tensions in the middle east have escalated dramatically since hamas, an iranian-backed terrorist organization, launched its war on israel on october 7 of last year. -- killing innocent men, women, and children and taking -- and still holding -- up to 132 hostages. over the last few months, another iranian proxy, iran-backed militias, have intensified their attacks

throughout the republican. there are houthi in yemen, there are hezbollah in lebanon, and of course as i mentioned, the attacks against americans and american interests by iranian proxies in iraq and syria. these conflicts are not -- are playing out thousands of miles away from here, but we are not just a distant and disinterested spectator. thousands of american troops are stationed in the region, not engaged in combat operations but in carrying out a range of security and intelligence missions and helping the residents and citizens of those nations defend themselves and provide a stabilizing force against what is the number-one state sponsor of terrorism, which is the iranian regime. the presence of these american troops is vty of the region.

and, as i said is, our own security interests. we may like to think -- we may get engaged in wishful thinking, thinking what happens over there doesn't affect us here. you might think after 9/11, albeit occurring some 32 years now, would have awakened us to what happens in the middle east does not stay in the middle east. so it is important for us to provide stability operations and assistance,'s train and assist operations in a very dangerous neighborhood. since mid-october, iranian-backed militia groups have attacked u.s. troops in the region more than165 times. 165 times. in less than four months, u.s. troops have been targeted 165 times.

this last weekend the situation escalated dratically when iranian proxies targeted a u.s. military post in jordan known as tower 22. tragically, these proxies of the iranian regime, these militias, used a drone to attack the base, killing three american heroes as they slept. sergeant william rivers, sp specialist kennedy sanders, and spe specialist breonna moffett made the ultimate sacrifice in service to their country that night. these brave individuals were the first american servicemembers killed by enemy fire since the start of the israel-hamas war last october. but they're not the first americans that have been targeted by the iranian regime.

the truth is, as you look back at the changes in iran since the revolution in 1979, the iranian regime has been in a -- what you might call a low-grade■ america interests for the last 45 years. last month, two navy seals were killed while seizing a vessel carrying iranian-made arms intended for the houthi rebels in yemen. these brave seals and their comrades prevented the houthis from ballistic missiles and cruise missile components that could have been used to target u.s. forces or commercial traffic in the red sea. or the nation of israel.

today, i know our country mourns, alongside of the families of each of those heroes, and we pray for the safety of the servicemembers who continue to serve our nation, providing the stability missions in the middle east. but as i said, the violence that we're seeing and experiencing in recent days is only a tragic continuation of iran's decade-long proxy war against the united states. i said iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world. that's a fact. and the reason they operate through proxies is because they don't want to directly confront the united states, because they fear american military might, as they should. but what they do is they will carry out terrorist attacks, having been equipped and trained and provided weapons by the

iranian regime against innocent civilians and american servicemembers in the region. of course, relations between the united states and iran have been extremely fraught a violent since the 1979 iranian revolution, when the country quickly transformed from a pro-western democracy to an anti-western theocracy. its supreme leader is driven by a radical ideology and a deep hatred of the united states and the freedoms that we enjoy. he even referred to the united states as the great satan. and we witnessed over the last four-plus decades that shift, from a pro-democracy to an anti-american policy carried with it very serious consequences. of course, many of us remember

the iranian hostage crisis. the movie "argo" was written about getting some of the 52 americans out of iran who had been held hostage for up to a year. four years later, iranian-backed terror group hezbollah in lebanon bombed a marine corps bar barracks, killing 241 american servicemembers. then in 1996, iran orring stricted an a -- orchestrated an attack on u.s. air force personnel in khobar, saudi arabia. a truck bomb was detonated next to a building housing american troops, killing 19 u.s. air force personnel and a local saudi citizen, and wounding 498 others. then, during the war in iraq from 2000-2011, it became common

knowledge that iran was supplying the most dangerous form of munitions, explosively formed penetrators that penetrate the armor of humvees and other up-armored vehicles that the u.s. forces were in, and planted numerous ied's, killing hundreds of american tr troops. and today, as our country is mourning the troops that were killed in jordan last weekend at the hand of iranian proxies, we need to be absolutely clear eyed about the fact that this is not a new innovation. this isn't something that just happened in the last few days. this has been going on for 45 years. to be clear, this is not an exhaustive list of the violence iran has unleashed against the united states and our interests.

sadly, this just scratches the surface. but it's important to look back at the history, to understand the iranian intentions toward the united states and our a allies. tehran has consistently waged acts of war against the united states. it's gone to great lengths to export terrorism around the globe, and it's engaged in gross human rights violations against its own people. the -- iran's islamic revolutionary guard corps, otherwise known as irgc, is the loyal henchmen responsible for leading these efforts. ity a branch of the -- it's a branch of the iranian armed forces that tries to squash democracy movements, both at home and abroad, by pushing its extreme ideology beyond iran's borders. they provide training and equipment to terrorists that

they use to kill innocent civilians, not just in israel, not just in syria and iraq, not just in lebanon, but even in the southern part of the arabian peninsula, in yemen. the irgc wield vast power and influence, and it capabilities to spark turmoil throughout the middle east. as i said, it provides arms training and foot soldiers to these terrorist groups. as the world has seen in recent months, those attacks are quickly intensifying. it's a grave cause for concern and a very dangerous neighborhood, the sort of escalation that we're seeing by iran via its proxies. but the only responsible answer is for the united states to take swift and decisive action to respond to these attacks, because if we don't we're sure

to be met with more. i don't th administration has responded to this attack with the sort of dec decisiveness that it needs. as aknow, the administration hasn't taken any action to target iran's leaders, the irgc or the quds force. militarily, financially, or otherwise. we're told that the president has decided what he's going to do, but he's not sharing that with us, and i fear as more and more time goes by iranian regime will not connect the killing of three american servicemembers in iraq by shi'ia militias backed by iran with whatever the subsequent kinetic attack against iran's forces are. we're all watching to see what the coming days may hold, but

i'd like to encourage president biden that when it comes to iran, there's no benefit to applying anything less than maximum pressure. now, we're not talking about american boots on the ground. we're not talking about another war. we're talking about deterrence. so if there's no price to be paid for these repeated attacks against civilians and american servicemembers, they are going to continue. this is not a cost/benefit analysis made by the regime. this is pursuant to their radical ideology, where they want to destroy israel and they call america the great satan. so you know they don't mean us well. iran's leaders must learn that the attacks on u.s. servicemembers and american interests will be returned in kind. regardless of who carries out an

attack, iran or its proxies, the iranian regime must be brought to account. it is the head of the octopus, and the tentacles are the proxies they use to create mayhem and terrorism around the region. the only way to achieve deterrence and to prevent this conflict from widening is to teach the iranian regime that these sort of unilateral terrorist attacks will not be tolerated. given the escalating tensions between our countries, president biden can't continue promoting the same weak policies he's embraced over the last few years, trying to appease the iranian regime because he wants to get them back in the joint comprehensive plan of action or the iran nuclear deal negotiated under president obama. he's lifted sanctions, which allowed iran to supply china and other countries oil, which has

helped bowlster their economy -- boles ter their economy. they enriched uranium, getting closer and closer to a breakout r a nuclear weapon. as dangerous as iran and its proxies are now, can you imagine what it would be like if they in the region? ng nuclear weapon what would be the response of saudi arabia, uae, and other arab countries that iran has historically fought or controlled, not just geographic control but control as the leader of the muslim world? according to their own brand of islam. unfortunately, the messages that president biden has sent over the last few years, from the disastrous withdrawal in afghanistan without even notifying our allies, just

pulling the plug and having the taliban march in without a shot being fired, from the withdrawal from afghanistan to the attempts to apiece iran in order to get back to the iran nuclear deal, to the foolish decision to unfreeze $6 billion in iranian assets, the biden administration has projected an image of weakness when it comes to foreign policy. these missteps sent a message to the supreme leader that he can continue to push until we push back the supreme leader will naturally continue to test the limits of this administration to see how far he can go. we know whatis ultimate aims are. we know the methods by which they acted. and we don't need, we don't want any more dead americans because

iran continues to attack americans and american allies in the middle east. the root and foundation of all of this violence and instability in the middle east is iran. we can talk about the hezbollah, hamas, the houthis, the shi'ia militias, but it is iran that finances, eequipments, and trains -- equips, and trains these terrorists. that's true today, and it's been true literally for the last 45 years. from the iran hostage crisis to the regime's outright support of terrorist groups in the middle east to the latest attack that killed three u.s. troops, iran has dem on adminis administratived -- demonstrated over and over and over again its

unequivocal hatred of the united states. president biden cannot hit iran with kid gloves or allow the attacks on our servicemembers to go unanswered. it is a lesson that we have to learn, apparently from history time and time again, that appeasement is not a viable strategy when it comes to autocrats and dictators and terrorists. appeasements doesn't work. it's time for the president to impose crippling consequences on the iranian regime, and i'm talking about on the instruments of their terrorism, which is the irgc and the quds force would be a good place to start. mr. president, i yield the floor. mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington,

president pro tem of the united states senate. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. you know, i have been fighting for over a decade to establish a new summer nutrition program to help end child hunger. and i come to the floor today to celebrate the tremendous progress we've made in that ■d effort, because this year legislation i fought to pass in 2022, based on my stop child hunger act, will go into effect, establishing a permanent summer nutrition benefit for struggling families. summer ebt, electronic benefit transfer. basically that means millions of parents who rely on free or reduced price meals to feed their kid during the school year will get help feeding their kid over the summer too. this has been a long time coming, and it is a huge deal that now this program is becoming permanent. child hunger isn't just something i've heard about from

parents across my home state of washington. it's personal to me. i remember what it was like when my family fell on hard young gr. my parents had seven kid. it was never easy. but when my dad could no longer work because he was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, it wasn't just hard, it was impossible. fortunately for all of us, our country didn't just say tough luck. we got support. food stamps help put food on our table until my mom was able to go back to school and get a job. that was the difference between our family getting by or going hungry. and i want to make sure that we are showing up for families today in the same way. because the painful realty is that right now in this country we have some 30 million kids for whom the free or reduced price meals they get at school are the difference between them eating a real meal that day or going

hungry. and when summer comes instead of feeling relief at getting a break from homework, many of theseid are worried about where they're going to get their next meal until school starts again. it is heartbreaking that in the richest country in the world. this is unacceptable. that's why in 2010 i helped fund the first of its kind pilot program for summer ebt at usda. create a program that gives families benefits they can use at the grocery store to help feed their kids over the summer. one of the pilot sites was in vancouver, washington. and you know what? the program worked. those benefits decreased the number of kids with very low food security by about a third, and it supported a much healthier diet because they got more fruits and vegetables. so to build off the success of that pilot program, in 2014 ip

hunger act, rigorous evaluations made clear that benefit worked. still, even if it seems like common sense and basic humanity that kids shouldn't go hungry, it's been a very long journey to finally get this idea passed into law. i reintroduced my bill several times with different colleagues, and then the pandemic struck. and threw struggling families into even greater food insecurity. everyone here remembers the enormous number of cars lined up outside food banks across the country in the early days of the pandemic. i started working with my colleagues to establish a temporary nutrition program to see families through that crisis in the relief packages that we passed during the worst of the pandemic. and in doing so, we were also able to show how necessary that kind of support is and how effective it is, and established a foundation that we then built on to pass a permanent summer

nutrition program into law as part of our omnibus government funding bill at the end of 2022. and i have to pause and really, really thank my great friend and colleague, the senior senator from michigan. she chairs the senate agricultural committee, and she led on negotiating this big win for kids. now that bill is going into effect and what it means for family is this summer in participating states like my home state of washington, families whose kids qualify for free or red the school year will receive a preloaded nutrition benefits card worth about $120 per child to buy grocery over the summer. and unlike the pandemic-era program that we passed, this program is permanent. those benefits will work similar to snap, which means parents can use them to buy food at grocery

stores or farmer markets or more. in my home state alone, we're talking a half a million kids who can benefit from this program. that is a meaningful step towards ending child hunger in america. but as always, we have more work to do. no child should ever go hungry in the united states of america. and while i don't think that's a controversial idea, my message to all my colleagues who agree is that achieving this takes more than words.on. that means giving a hand to families like mine that fell on hard times. it means making sure parents who rely on school lunches for their kids can keep them fed in the summer months and fully funding wic, which is a lifeline t so many women and infants. that is something i'm very focused on right now, and i will not let up until we see that through. so i'm here today not just to celebrate the important progress which i fought for years to make on fighting summer hunger, to make clear i'm not done

fighting. i'm going to keep pushing to make sure that no child goes hungry, no child, and every family gets the same kind of support that my family got when i was growing up. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: thank you. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:# the clerk: ms. baldwin.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mrs. gillibrand: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. gillibrand: mr. president, this is my tenth floor speech since the october 7 attack. ten times i have stood here and

told the hostages' stories. ten times i have expressed their families' endless pain. but for every minute that i have stood here, the hostages and their families have lived lifetimes and eastern in each moment. i've met so many families whose entire universe has been paralyzed. i met the mothers who are despondent, fathers who are desperate. they're living between hope and despair. they're asking themselves is my father alive. is my daughter being raped every day? is my husband being mistreated? is my sister being fed? i recently met a family who say several of their loved ones were kidnapped by hamas.

two escaped, one was released, but one, 39-year-old carmel gott, is still being held captive. she's an occupational therapist by training. carmel had recently returned from a three-month trip to india and was staying with her parents in kibbutz berre. on the morning of october 7, terrorists broke into her home. they took her mother to a street corner in the kibbutz and brutally murdered her. a few minutes later, they put carmel into a car and drove her by that corner. that's how she learned her mother was killed. released hostages who were with her told carmel's family about the cruelty and the viciousness of the guards, but they also

told them how brave carmel was, defending and caring for the children being held in captivity, keeping them safe, teaching them how to turn within themselves, to meditate, to do yoga, to breathe, to give them some tools just to survive. carmel was expected to be released on the eighth day of the november cease-fire, but just a few hours before it was their time to come home, the deal collapsed. her family said they still haven't heard anything about her condition, whether she's alive, whether she's suffering, whether she will come home. carmel is just one of the roughly 130 people still being held hostage by hamas, including as many as six americans.

but she, like every other person whose life has been torn apart by this conflict, she's not a statistic. she's a daughter, she's loved. and our heart is with her, and we will not rest until she's home. mr. president, i yield the floor. # # # ]i é"

mr. schatz: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. mr. schatz: thank you, mr. president. for centuries native people have had everything stolen from them, their lands, their water, their language, their children. it wasn't that long ago that it was the official policy of the

united states government to terminate -- to terminate the existence of tribes and to forcibly assimilate their citizens. and a big part of that unrelenting, in policy was that the remains of native americans and significant items were taken from them, not permission, but by force, stolen in cemeteries under the cover of darkness or of academic research. think about that. the united states government literally stole bones, soldiers and agents overturned graves and took whatever they could find. these were not isolated incidents. they happened all across the country in my home state of hawaii, the -- those in hawaii re without regard. and all of it was brought to

some of the most venerable institutions at home and abroad to be studied, displayed in museum exhibits as if they're paintings on loan or squirrelled away in a professor's office never to be seen again, this is unconscionable in and of itself, but the legacy of that cruelty continues to this very day because these universities continue to hold on to these sacred items in violation of everything that is right and moral. and more importantly, in violation of federal law. to remedy this injustice congress passed the native american graves protection and repatriation act in 1990. it required museums and universities to quickly return the remains and the items that they were holdinghad that belonged to native hawaiians,

alaska natives and american indians. at the time the congressional budget office anticipated that it would take about five years to complete the process of repatriatation. 34 years later, it is nowhere close to being done. in fact experts recently estimated at the current rate it may take up to 70 more years to complete the process. why? why? because these institutions, all otherwise well respected and sought after, have done everything in their power to obstruct and obfuscate, acting as if it is an impossible task, either in determining the lineage, they purposely m mischaracterized items as quote-unquote, culturally u

ununide ununidentifiable. they, quote-unquote, borrow collections fro one another so they never can actually be the owner responsible for them. and maybe the most outrageous of all excuses, they chairman that tribes and native groups lack the ability to take care of their own things. lack the ability to take care of their own things, bones stolen from graves. this smells of the worst kind of colonialism with a thin very near -- veneer of verbiage. they can do all the land acknowledgements that they want, they can post statements about equity on their websites and champion any number of causes but that rings hollow when they cling on to the vast collections of stolen items because of a perverse, patronizing sense of

ownership. this is not morally ambiguous. there's nothing to p is these i belong in museums and universities or to science or academia. they belong to the native people from which they came. which is why the committee on indian affairs, where i'm chair, held an oversight hearing on this issue almost two years ago and demanded explanations from the foremost offenders about their delays in repatriatizing these items, the ohio history collection, illinois state museum, harvard university, the yurt yut -- the university of california berkeley and indiana university. these five institutions hold at least 30,000 native and ancestral remains, they have been responsive and many react sell rated their repatriatation efforts since, harvard, which has the third lar museums,

including the american museum of natural history and the field museum have recently announced steps to finally comply with the federal law. yet, there are still more than 70 other institutions holding almost 58,000 ancestral remains, and that is not counting the hundreds of thousands of cultural items in their collections. these museums and universities are everywhere. the university of tennessee, the university of kentucky, the university of alabama, the university of arizona, the university of florida, the university of missouri-columbia, the university of oklahoma, the center for american archaeology in illinois, the university of texas in austin, the milwaukee public museum, and so on. this is just a sample and enter the full list into the record. the point is this.

we are not done. our work is not over. these are supposedly the liberal institutions that have no problem parroting whatever expression is in vogue and continue a colonial product against the repeated american people. return these remains and items to the native people they belong to a -- belonged to all along. some of the challenges when it comes to addressing past injustices in american history can seem so big as to be totally overwhelming. where do you start in this is not one of them. returning these items matters and the good news is it's immediately doable, but doable only if we collect live agree that getting this right is a necessary condition for justice to be restored. doing this alone will not right past wrongs or somehow erase a

long and brutal history of injustice. of course it won't. native people still need money for water and electricity and health care. they still, as ever, need the unimpeded right to self-determination, but the least we can do, and i mean that, the least we can do is enable them to tell their own stories and to define themselves for themselves to the rest of the world. give the items back. comply with federal law. hurry. devote resources to this. demonstrate in three dimensions that you care about the values that you he's pous. -- espouse. i ask unanimous consent that my full remarks be entered into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: and that the pages of the list of un-repatriated

remains be in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. ■pú@ mr. schatz 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: is there objection? without objection. mr. president, i have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. schatz: i ask unanimous consent that the committee on health, education, labor and pensions be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to s. res. 529. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 529, recognizing january 2024 as national mentoring month. without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. schatz:

i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be consideredade and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz i ask unanimous consent to proceed to the consideration of s. res. 541, which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 541, supporting the observation of national trafficking and modern slavery prevention month and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? withe senate will proceed to th measure. mrs. schatz: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. schatz: mrs. murray: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on monday, february 5, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, 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 to resume consideration of the campbell nomination. further, that the senate vote on confirmation of the laroski nomination at 5:30 p.m. finally, that if any nominations are confirmed during monday's session, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. following the remarks of senator duckworth. the presiding officer: without objection. ■

ms. duckworth: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from illinois.

ms. duckworth: mr. president, if you listen closely right now, you can hear the drums of war gain momentum. i know that sound. it's the same sound that led me to deploy to a dusty desert outpost in iraq 20 years ago where i served alongside some of the bravest men and women you could ever meet. it's the same sound that ultimately led me to run for office, a decision i only made after i was shot down in iraq when i found myself searching for a new mission to serve my nation. i found that mission in giving a voice to every veteran who had much answering their nation's call to serve. and i found it in speaking up for the active duty troops still waking up in dusty base camps throughout the middle east. still serving tour after tour, bleeding, even dying, thousands of miles away because they had sworn an oath to defend the country they loved no matter what it cost them. and that sound is why a few

minutes ago i wheeled myself to this desk with the same purpose that took me first to battle, then the campaign trail. and that is to help keep america as strong as she can be and to try to look out for the troops who never stopped looking out for the rest of us. today, mr. president, i am here in this beautiful chamber with privilege all around me to beg of my colleagues one simple thing. as tensions in the middle east escalate, please from this place of safety and comfort, think of the sacrifices our servicemembers make every single day. please, as the drums of war grow louder, honor our servicemembers by thinking of what would be asking them to risk if we risked an expanded conflict with iran. on sunday morning we all woke to the tragic, horrific news that three american soldiers were killed in an iran-backed attack in jordan. i imagine many who saw the news may not have even known that we

had u.s. in jordan. but i was acutely aware of it. in fact, just 24 hours earlier i had woken up in illinois andd a illinois national guardsmen off to start their mission in the area of operation, the exact a.o. where this attack took place. and since sunday i don't think i've gone a waking hour without thinking about the brave servicemembers who lostir lives. sergeant william jerome rivers, sergeant kennedy ladon sanders and sergeant breonna alexsondria moffett. each of them was willing to sacrifice unimaginable to keep our nation safe. they are our heroes. during this impossible time, my thoughts are with their families who will never be able to say i love you in person to them again. and my thoughts are with the more than 40 other servicemembers who were wounded in the comblas with at least three -- in the blast with at least three among them having

to be evacuated to germany. it's clear that we must forcefully and swiftly make those responsible pay for the devastation they have wrought and send a message that these attacks against our servicemembers will not be tolerated. but we must do this with clear eyes, a steady hand, and a clear strategic end goal in mind. seeking justice and ultimately a swift end to these threats to our troops. i don't have all the details yet but based on initial reports, it seems that president biden's plan to -- planned response will do just that. it looks like it will be a well thought out strong rebuttal that aims to deter iran from supporting fusht attacks on u.s. -- further attacks on u.s. troops without risking boiling tensions even further. because this is a uniquely dangerous moment. and the message we send to iran must make war less likely, not more. after all, after decades of

forever wars in the region, the last thing we want is to send those who volunteer to serve our country into another endless, senseless conflict. and if we want to adequately honor the sacrifices of the three servicemembers killed last week, we must remain focused on preventing their brothers and sisters in arms from dying in a preventable war on foreign soil. sadly, over the past few days, some of my republican colleagues have been making reckless, irresponsible comments that risk dangerously escalating tensions. they've been throwing rocks, chest thumping over social media, beating the drumgs of war -- drums of war, demanding the president ramp up the temperature that he -- and i quote -- hit iran now and hit them hard. look, i ran for congress so that when those drums of war started beating, i'd be in a position to make sure that our leaders in washington fully considered the cost of war, not just in dollars and cents but in the sacrifices and blood of our troops.

so i've come to the floor today as those drums echo louder than they have in years to keep my promise to do our troopsjk justice. to besiege my colleagues to let cool heads, common sense, and sound strategy prevail over reckless impulses. and if necessary, i will come back to this chamber day after day after day speaking from this wheelchair that i earned the last time congress sent our sons and daughters into a senseless war, ensuring that this time we do right by our troops by fully, soberly considering the consequences of these decisions on those who serve and their families. listen, i am no dove. after all, i volunteered to fight in a war that i deeply disagreed with. so i am certainly not opposed to war when it's necessary to defend this great nation. and i am not opposed to striking iranian assets if our approach is smart, limited, and

strategically calibrated to end the spiral of violence that threatens our servicemembers. but i will also do everything in my power to remind those who today are so eagerly pushing us down a path to war that there are serious repercussions involved for the americans who would actually be in harm's way, even between they may not be felt by politicians here in washington. under both federal law known as the w and article 1 of the constitution, only congress has the solemn responsibility of deciding when and how the united states sends its troops into war. so if republicans really want to risk war with iran, then they owe it to our troops toably an authorization of use of military force to the floor instead of behinding behind social media accounts and television interviews, bring that debate to this chamber so we can actually fulfill our duty and begin the serious business of considering the merits and drawbacks of such a conflict. so that as we ask them to

sacrifice so much, our troops downrange would at least know what their mission is, what their goals are, and what their leaders in washington -- and that their leaders in washington both have their backs and are following the constitution that they are willing to die to protect and defend. whenever republicans are ready if they're ever ready, i'm here to participate in that debate. and if their arguments for war are strong enough, i owe it so my constituents to consider and vote on the merits of them. i must -- i would be the first to volunteer if you would have a gimpy pilot but i will go. i can pack my ruck in 15 minutes if needed. but for now with those drums pounding once more, i just want to ask each of my colleagues to take a moment to think about the true cost of war for all those servicemembers still at risk at dusty desert bases thousands of miles away. i personally cannot go a moment without forgetting them.

i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the united states senate stands adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on monday. adjourn: ♪♪ ♪♪ for you. best-selling nonfiction authors and interviewers the outward podcast and q&a nonfiction

authors and others making things happen. but no plus her weekly hour-long conversation that regularly future nonfiction books a wide variety of topics. on the about books podcasts see industry with industry updates and bestsellers. find all of our podcasts downloaded the app wherever you get your podcasts.org/podcasts. >> your unfiltered view of government funded by television companies and more including cox. ♪♪ when you're connected, you're not alone. ♪♪