.

mr. peters: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: madam president, when my three children were born, it was like -- unlike anything else i've ever, ever experienced before. those three days were the best in my life, and it's hard to put

into words how beautiful and how daunting it is to have a child. every american who wants to be a parent should have that opportunity, and when they're faced with medical challenges while starting a family they should have the right to pursue every resource to help them navigate that process. ivf is one of those tools, and it's helped countless americans. for those who have experienced frequent miscarriages, suffer from genetic disorders, or are otherwise affected by infer infertility, ivf is an essential procedure. it's safe. it's necessary. and it's given millions of people the chance to have a family. last week, a ruling from the alabama supreme court put the future of ivf in jeopardy.

so my democratic colleagues and i went to work. we proposed a bill that would protect the right to seek ivf treatment for all americans, and i'm grateful to senators duckworth and murray for leading the charge on this legislation, and i was proud to be one of the cosponsors. but yesterday, republicans blocked the senate from passing it. they decided to put politics before protecting a critical medical procedure. they put this resource at risk, one that has allowed millions of women and lgbtq americans to have children. they think that they know better than doctors. they think they know better than parents. they think they know more than four decades of proven science. the bill they opposed is literally pro-life and pro-family. and yet, republicans refuse to

put it on the floor. let's not forget how this all started. senate republicans stood with former president trump when he stacked the supreme court with extreme judges. and when the court overturned roe v. wade, it ripped the right to make choices about reproductive health care away from millions of women. and now conservatives across the country feel empowered to take it even further. the ruling in alabama is just the latest instance in the war against reproductive free th throw -- reproductive freedom. it could keep millions of americans from starting families, and senate republicans are just fine with that. we don't know how far this will go. we don't know what other proven procedures republicans will try to take away from families in the future. we don't know what effect these rulings will have on new innovations in fertility science. we don't know if they're going to come after birth control

next. but one thing is very, very clear -- this is just the beginning of their efforts to deny reproductive freedom. ivf should be available to every american citizen who needs it, and when someone is choosing to have children politicians should never get in the way. i call on my republican colleagues to support the access to family building act, to stop playing politics and instead stand behind the millions of americans who simply want, who simply want the chance to start a family. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president,

yesterday, my good friend leader mcconnell shared some big news. at the end of this year, he'll step down as the republican leader in the united states senate, after having served the longest tenure of any leader in senate history. for more than 17 years he has been the steady hand at the helm, guiding us through some of the most consequential debates in recent history. he steered us through multiple wars, through a pandemic, and countless high-stakes political battles under four different presidents. under his leadership, congress rewrote the federal tax code to help families across the country, unleashed american-jen rachitised power, and -- american-generated power and reshaped the federal judiciary for a generation, and so much more.

it's been an honor to serve alongside of leader mcconnell and witness a modern-day master of the senate. i'll have more to say about our friend from kentucky at a later date, but the good news is he's not going anywhere. senator mcconnell will lead our conference through the end of this conference, but he will remain in the senate through the rest of his term. during that time, he'll do as he's always done, represent the state of kentucky and put his expert knowledge to use in this chamber for use on their behalf. for now, let me just say thanks to leader mcconnell for everything he's done for this body and our great country. on another matter, madam president, this week the senate finds itself in a familiar -- in

familiar territory. for the fourth time since last september, congress is rushing to avert a government shutdown. unless a funding bill is seemed into -- is signed into law before the clock strikes midnight tonight, portions of the federal government will shut d down. and if nothing changes by the following friday, we'll be plunged into a full government shu shutdown. i've made my feelings about government shutdowns crystal clear. number one, they don't save money. number two, they don't solve any problems. number three, they hurt innocent americans. and dedicated public servants. government shutdowns are not in anyone's best interests, and i'm glad that all four congressional leaders agree that we need to avoid a lapse in funding. before the end of this week, before tonight i hope, i expect

congress to pass another stopgap funding bill. this will provide more time to advance regular appropriations bills, and i hope we can see some real progress this time. but i must say that responsibility where where we are today lies at the feet of the majority leader of the united states senate. yes, the house has its problems, but here in the senate senator murray, chairman of the appropriations committee, senator collins, and the entire appropriations committee have produced bipartisan, in some cases unanimous, appropriations bills that senator schumer has simply refused to put on the floor. so, without a doubt, he is complicit in where we find ourselves today. it's just another example of how the senate is broken. while the ongoing game of

brinksmanship is extremely dangerous, it calls into question our military readiness and jeopardizes our natural security at an increasingly dangerous time. making matters worse, this saga is completely avoidable. as i mentioned, the appropriations committee in the senate passed 12 bills last summer, providing a lot of time for senator schumer to bring those bills to the floor. but that's the earliest the appropriations committee has acted in the last five years. thanks to senator murray and senator collins, they laid the groundwork for a thorough and on-time appropriations process, but senator schumer has ball control, and he simply failed to put those bills on the floor in a timely fashion, leading us to where we are today. as i said, the senate did not pass a single regular

appropriations bill before the september 30 deadline. this was september 30 of last year. i don't know if people really appreciate how broken the senate is thanks to a lack of leadership. we are working on appropriations bills from last year, fiscal year began the end of september of last year. as a result of the failure to do his job, congress had to pass stopgap funding bills in september, november, and january. just think about it for a minute, if we weren't lurching from one crisis to the next, what other things might we do to benefit the american people? that is what economists call an opportunity cost.

each time the democratic leader vowed to use the extra time to make progress on regular appropriations bills, but each time he failed to do so. we're now five months into the current fiscal year, and it's embarrassing, it should be embarrassing, to note that not a single full-year funding bill has been signed into law. members of this body are charged to do the hard work of negotiating, debating, and passing bills to provide government agencies with on-time funding. it's hard to do when senator schumer has us in session two and a half days a week. two and a half days a week. hard to get your jo be done when you're working 50% of the time, but he's the one who controls the agenda. he can say we're starting monday morning, like most americans do, and we're not leaving until we

finish monday night -- or friday night. but instead, he's canceled votes on monday, so we come in on tuesday, we have our first vote at 5:30 on tuesday, then we leave after lunch, typically, on a thursday. no wonder the senate is broken and not doing its job. madam president, the senate has a number of big cliffs that are fast approaching as a result of the mismanagement of the senate schedule. we have major funding deadlines tomorrow, but we also have one a week from now, on the 8th. in addition, here's what else has not been done on a timely basis -- the reauthorization of federal aviation administration. that has to be done by next friday. we need to reauthorize and

strengthen section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act before april 19, or else it lambses, making us -- or else it lapses, making us blind to the efforts of our adversaries to undermine our national security. and yes, we need to pass a new farm bill before the end of september. we can't do that working half-weeks. two and a half days a week. it's important to note that all of these tasks -- funding, faa, section 702 and the farm bill -- should have been completed last year. we're doing last year's work. we're not doing the american people's work today looking forward with the challenges that -- with which our country is confronted. we should have wrapped up our work on each of these items in 2023 instead of punting the

deadline to 2024. we're now two month into the new year, and still struggling to complete the work that should have been done months ago. as i said, this backlog comes with a serious opportunity cost. when the senate is dealing with overdue assignments, we don't have the time to work on other critical issues that deserve our attention on behalf of the american people. we don't have the ability to work on legislation to address the border crisis, the fentanyl epidemic, public safety concerns or other issues that are top of mind for the american people. virtually all of the senate's time is focused on one of two things. rushing complete work that should have been done last year or processing nominations. that's it. under senator schumer's leadership, regular order has

been thrown out the window. he's broken the senate. and this chamber has simply lurched from one deadline to another. this should be embarrassing. this is malpractice. it's not negligent because it's by design. it's intenal. this is regrettably -- intention. this is regrettably what we've come to expect under democratic leadership. this is the new norm. for the sake of the country, i hope that in the coming weeks the senate will prove more productive than the past several months have been, and, yes, i hope we have new management next year after the november election. that is the best way the 330 million people in this country can contribute to changing the

status quo which is a broken senate and fixing it, which we know how to do if we change mana management. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

quorum call:

there's a certain introspection that accompanies the grieving process. perhaps it is gods way of reminding you of your own life journey to reprioritize the impact of the world that we will all inevitably leave behind. i turned 82 last week. the end of my contributions are closer than i would prefer. my career in the united states senate began amidst the reagan revolution. the truth is when i got here i was just happy anybody remembered my name.

president reagan called me mitch o'donnell. close enough, i thought. my wife, my wife elaine and i got married on president reagan's birthday, february 6. six. is probably not the most romantic thing to admit, but reagan meant a lot to both of us. for 31 years elaine elaine has been the love of my life, and i am eternally grateful to have her by my side. i think back to my first days in the senate with deep appreciation for the time that helped shape my view of the world. i am i'm conflicted about the good within our country and irreplaceable role we play as the leader of the free world.

it's what why i worked so t the national security package passed earlier this month. believe me, i know the politics within my party at this particular moment in time. i have many faults. understanding politics is not one of them. that said, i believe more strongly than ever that american global leadership is essential to preserving that shining city on a hill that ronald reagan discussed. as long as i am drawing breath on this earth i will defend american exceptionalism. so as i've been thinking about when i would deliver some news to the senate, i always imagined a moment when i had total clarity and peace about the

sunset of my work, a moment when i'm certain i have helped preserve the ideals i so strongly believed. that date arrived today. -- that day -- my goals without narrowly elected to the senate back in 1984 were fairly modest. do a good job for the people of kentucky, and convince them that by doing so they might rehire me for for a second term. that was it. that was the plan. if you would've told me 40 years later that i would stand before you as the longest-serving senate leader in american history, perhaps i would've thought you lost your mind. i have the honor of representing kentucky and his senate longer than anyone else in our state's

history. i just never could have imagined, never could have imagined that happening. when i arrived here in 1984 at 42. i'm filled with heartfelt gratitude and humility for the opportunity. but now it's 2024. i'm now 82. as ecclesiastes tells us, to everything there is a season and a time to every purpose under heaven. to serve kentucky in the senate has been the honor of my life. delete my republican colleagues, it's been the highest privilege. but one of life most underappreciated talents is to know when it's time to move on

to lyse next chapter. so i stand before you today, mr. president, and my colleagues, to say this will be my last term as republican leader of the senate. i'm not going anywhere anytime soon. however, i will complete my job. my colleagues are giving me until we select a new leader in november, and they take the helm next january. i'll finish the job the people of kentucky hired me to do as well, albeit from a different seat. and i'm actually looking forward to that. so it's time for me to think about another decision. i love the senate. it's been my life. there may be more distinguished members of this body throughout our history, but i doubt there

were any with any more admiration for the senate. after all this time i still get a thrill walking into the capital, and especially on this venerable floor, knowing that we, each of us, have the honor to represent our states and to the important work of our country. but father time remains undefeated. i'm no longer the young man sitting in the back hoping colleagues would remember my name. it's time for the next generation of leadership. as henry clay said industry body in 1850, the constitution of the united states was not made merely for the generation that then existed, but for posterity,

unlimited, undefined, endless, perpetual posterity. so time rolls on. there will be a new custodian of this great institution next year. won't surprise you to know i intend to turn this job over to a republican majority leader. i have full confidence in my conference to choose my replacement and lead our country forward. there will be other times to reminisce. i'm immensely proud of the accomplishments i've played some role in obtaining for the american people. today is not the day to discuss all of that, because as i said earlier, i'm not going anywhere anytime soon. there are many challenges we must meet to deliver for the

american people, and each will have my full effort and attention. i still have enough gas in my tank to thoroughly disappoint my critics, and and i intend to with all the enthusiasm with which they have become accustomed. so to my colleagues, thank you for entrusting me with our success. it's been an honor to work with each of without objection. mr. kelly: madam president, three weeks ago i stood here and spoke about the consequences of my republican colleagues walking away from the border agreement. after decades of crisis after crisis at our border, we had a chance to be the senators who actually did something about it. we had a real opportunity, a

real bill, ready to be signed into law by the president. technology to stop fentanyl, more than 1,000 additional border patrol agents, authorities and policy changes to prevent the border from being overwhelmed, visas to keep families together, and more. that's what senators sinema, murphy and lankford worked on together for months with both democrat and republican senate leaders at the table, with the administration at the table. and that's what senate republicans turned and walked away from. i said then that some politicians see more advantage in shouting about problems than

actually solving them. well, late take a look at -- well, let's take a look at what has happened in the last three weeks. a couple of my republican colleagues traveled to texas so they could record videos about how bad things were at the border. neither of them supported the bipartisan border bill. other of my republican colleagues have stood on this floor giving speeches, pointing fingers at president biden. and they've done the same on cable news. president biden supported the bipartisan border bill. they did not. in fact, one of my republican colleagues said in his floor speech the other day that he hasn't seen the two arizona

senators on this floor giving speeches about the border. to that senator, i say this -- that's because we're not here to just talk about the problem. we're here to do something about it. by the way, that same senator did not support the bipartisan border bill. a group of house republicans came to my state for what they called a, quote, fact-finding tour, end ever quote. -- end of quote. what more facts do you need? that it's bad? of course it is. it would be better if border patrol agents had the resources and staffing and policy changes from the bipartisan border bill that we could have passed. that would have helped them. but the folks who went on that

trip didn't want to vote for that bill. so, no, this wasn't a fact-finding tour. it was just a another photo op. because they would rather keep talking about the problem instead of solving the problem. who does that help? it doesn't help border patrol, who by the way they supported this bipartisan bill. it doesn't help border communities, who desperately need some relief. the problems at the border do not go away when you fly back to washington, d.c. they just don't. and they don't go away when the tv camera stops rolling either. in arizona, these aren't just talking points. it's a challenge that we face every day that strains our communities, and it strains law enforcement.

that's why i'm not going stop working to solve these issues with our border and our immigration system. because while anybody can talk about a problem, those of us here in this building have the power to actually do something about it. that's our job. that's what we were elected to do. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. mrs. murray: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. madam president, it has been several months now since hamas carried out a truly heinous terrorist attack against israel. the barbarity of october 7 should not be brushed aside and

cannot ever be excused. we are talking about terrorists gunning down innocent civilians, including in their homes, committing horrible acts of torture and sexual violence, and taking hostages, among them women and elderly people and infants. as i have said repeatedly, israel has a clear right to defend itself and its people against the very real and continued threat that hamas poses to israeli civilians. as i have also said many times, that has to be done in accordance with the laws of armed conflict and international humanitarian law. madam president, i appreciate that this is a tough emotional topic. war always is. but at times like this, we cannot let passion kill compassion. we cannot let the horrors of the

present end the hope for a brighter future. as israel seeks to eliminate the threat posed by hamas, it must make every effort to protect innocent civilians in gaza who make up the vast overwhelming majority of people in the gaza strip. but as we have watched this conflict escalate, it has become increasingly clear that that is not what is happening. just consider. hundreds of palestinians were injured or killed today after israeli troops fired on civilians crowded near aid trucks, desperate for something to eat. while we are still learning more about the details, you have to believe that this kind of bloodshed should be completely avoidable. i come to the floor today as a friend of israel. i understand the very real threats israel, home to about

half of the world's jews, faces outside its borders and in keeping its population safe. and i come to the floor as someone who feels very strongly that israel absolutely must change course. the collective punishment in gaza has got to stop, and israel must do more to protect civilian life. we need a mutually agreed-upon cease-fire to end the fighting as soon as possible. we need the return of all the hostages by hamas. and we need a massive surge in humanitarian aid. israel needs to understand the casualties they have inflicted on the people of gaza, the devastation they have caused cannot continue. it is not in line with american interests, nor does it make israel safer. the prosecution of this war so far by netanyahu netanyahu's

far-right government has been nothing short of an unquestionable strategic failure. many of the families of hostages have been protesting netanyahu themselves, demanding a mutually negotiated cease-fire to see their loved ones safely returned. let's consider what is actually happening in gaza. the human reality on the ground. there are over two million people in gaza who have been displaced from their homes and 1.7 million people facing imminent starvation. most of the water in gaza is unfit for consumption, and two-thirds of the hospitals are no longer operating. there are only 11 left. think about that. think about what that means for the countless people who are starving, who are sick, and who are scared. the survivors. or better yet, listen to the

firsthand accounts. i did. there are more than 150,000 pregnant and lactating women in harm's way. doctors who had worked on the ground in gaza spoke to me about performing emergency c-sections on rubble or in tents without anesthesia. and women bleeding out because they couldn't get medical care. since the start of the war, 66,000 palestinians have been injured, 29,000 have been killed, and more than half of them are women and children. we all understand that war is not a simple thing, but i'll just say i don't know how you call a military operation targeted when there are 29,000 deaths. i don't know how you call it targeted when there are babies and children being pulled from the rubble. who does this serve? it cannot continue this way.

the situation in gaza and in the west bank, where there's been a disturbing rise in brazen vie hence from right-wing israeli setters against families does not lead to peace or security for israelis or palestinians. it just doesn't. and the rhetoric and stated policies of the netanyahu regime, like abandoning a two-state solution, have been nothing short of deeply dangerous and wildly counterproductive. i have voiced my strong support for the president's executive order to allow sanctions on israeli settlers in the west bank who threaten or perpetrate violence against palestinians. i also want to make it crystal clear now, indefinite israeli control over gaza is unacceptable as it is any contraction of territory for the palestinians. madam president, as someone who voted against the war in iraq, i

am acutely aware of mistakes our country made. you cannot defeat terrorism through sheer military force alone. that much is clear. it is my hope that israel can heed that lesson. winning a war against terrorism isn't a matter of how many people you kill. that approach isn't just bloody and brutal. it can be self-defeating. terrorists don't care how many people you kill. they certainly don't care how many civilians you kill. because terrorism is not a human enemy of flesh and blood. it is an idea. it is a hatred of violence and it thrives on suffering. while israel must work to eliminate the threat posed by hamas, that fight must be targeted if it is to be successful. you have to fight the

hopelessness extremism feeds on. you have to fight the sprawl of violence that entrenches conflict. and you have to stay clear-eyed and strategic in pursuit of justice and in pursuit of lasting peace. i may be just one of 100 senators here, but i have been using my voice to help move things in that direction. on humanitarian aid, i have pressed the biden administration repeatedly in many conversations to take steps that would dramatically increase aid to gaza. and i made, including humanitarian aid for gaza in our national security package a red line for me as the senate put together our bill. even as republicans tried over and over and over again to chisel it away. i also want to be clear about the fact that the taxpayer-funded military aid we provided to israel for their self-defense is subject to the leahy law. i have insisted throughout many conversations that this law is implemented as intended and that

civilians are protected and that international law is followed. and finally, i'm moving towards a lasting peace. as president biden recently noted, talks are ongoing and productive towards a mutually agreed-upon cease-fire and the safe return of all the hostages. recent developments like the deaths we saw today in gaza city will likely make that more difficult. but diplomatic efforts must continue, even after this conflict, to ensure a lasting peace. that is why i have backed efforts to reiterate america's long-standing policy of support for a two-state solution and will rebuff any statements by netanyahu or his government that reject palestinian sovereignty. it's why it's important to me that we don't just talk about fighting the enemy and winning the war, but that we also talk about-facing the hatred, the

islamophobia and anti-semitism that have been on the rise in the wake of this conflict, and doing the work of peace, creating a future that ensures dignity and security for both palestinians and israelis alike. i want to close by saying a bit about what's happening here in america and in my home state of washington. because while this war may be happening across the world, it has been painful for our arab and jewish communities at home. they are seeing not just horrific news, including sometimes about relatives and friends, but also horrific rise in antiarab and anti-semitic violence. synagogues in my state have faced bomb threats. a six-year-old palestinian boy in illinois was stabbed to death. and across the nation there have been other disturbing reports of violence and threats against people perceived to be arab, muslim, or jewish. it is heartbreaking, and it is

incumbent upon all of us to stand against that hatred. our north star has to be valuing the humanity in others and listening to the humanity in ourselves. that is my message today, madam president, and it is a message i'm going to keep working to see put into action. thank you, and i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: madam president, first i would ask consent that i could put into the record my statement in regards to children's dental health month. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: madam president, we're certainly -- shortly going to be voting on a motion by senator paul in regards to the f-16 sale to turkey.

recently the administration noted an f-16 sale to turkey to modernize its f-16 air capacity. i understand my colleague from kentucky's concern about president erdogan's record. i share some of those concerns. the state department's most recent human rights report on turkey found significant issues, including credible reports of, quote, forced disappearances, torture, arbitrary arrests, and a continued detention of tens of thousands of persons, opposition politicians, former members of parliament. in addition, turkey forced u.s. partners in democratic forces and supported azerbaijan in its brutal war last year to conquer narcan in a car about a -- this is unacceptable and i have made

it clear that turkey needs to change course. i consulted closely with the highest levels of the biden administration about this transition over several months. i believe they share my concerns, and i believe we are making progress. and our former colleague, ambassador flake is engaging on these issues with the government in nakara. my approval of the biden administration aircraft sale to turkey was fwhot a decision i came to lightly as the chair of the senate foreign relations committee. it was contingent on turkey's approval of membership. that condition has been met. turkey's parliament ratified sweden's nato membership bid. this comes at a critical time. president putin is continuing his brutal war in ukraine and threatening nato and all of europe. given the stakes, not only is

sweden's membership vital to nato, so is turkey's. turkey is a key to the defense of the southern flank of nato. it is host to a major u.s. military presence, and turkey's f-16 fleet contributes to nato, including in the black sea which is critical to our national security. that is why it is in the national security interest of the united states and our allies for turkey to upgrade its aging f-16 fleet to a more capable model, a model that is compatible with the united states and nato partners. that's exactly what this sale will do. it will usher an important new chapter in our relationship with turkey. so, mr. president, i urge my colleagues to reject the resolution being offered by my friend from kentucky and allow this sale to go forward. it's in our national security interest. it's in the security interest of our allies.

it will strengthen nato and strengthen our resolve against russia's aggression in ukraine. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. test.

mr. risch: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from idaho. mr. risch: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. risch: mr. president, i rise today in respect to s.j. s.j. res. 60, which as i understand it will be up for a vote here fairly quickly. i rise in opposition to s.j. res. 60. s.j. res. 60, in essence, says that we would not keep the commitment that we've made to sell or refurbish the f-16 jets

to turkey. i'm not here toe tell you that turkey -- to tell that you turkey is the best partner we've had, as a member of the foreign relations committee, i have to deal with them regularly on a lot of issues. they are an ally in nato. nato, as we all know, is the strongest political and military alliance that's ever been creed on the -- created on the planet, and turkey is a member of that alliance. to be honest with you, and i tell them this face-to-face, they're not acting like a partner, they're not acting like an ally, and there are a long list of complaints that we have in that regard. this actually started with defense missiles that they wanted to buy and we offered them the patriot missiles, as we do to all of our nato allies, and, indeed, instead they chose

to purchase russian s-400 missiles. at the same time they had purchased or were in the process of purchasing four f-35 jets of ours, which everybody wants, understandably, but at the time they bought the s-400's, i said they can't have s-400's in the same country as f-35's. if they're going to do business with russia, so be it, but there's consequences for that. as a result of that is -- i put a hold on the f-35's, and that hold was successful and the f-35's had not been transferred to turkey. that was the fight we had with them over the s-400's. we made them any number of reasonable offers to try to solve this, but they have not accepted any of those offers,

and the result is they still got the s-400's, and we still have the f-35's, which will stay here until the f-35 a -- is-400's leave the country. they said they needed a number of new f-16's. at that time they decided to put a hold on sweden and finland entering nato. as we all know finland and sweden really, really wanted to enter nato shortly after the invasion of ukraine by russia. and everybody in nato agreed with that with the exception of turkey and hungary. both used the accession to nato by those two countries as a way to use leverage against other countries within nato on some

parochial disputes that they had. that's not the way you do business as an ally. when you're aisled, yes -- allied, you will have issues that you have to deal with other ally countries, you don't use the security as a hold, you don't use the good of the hold as a bargaining chip to try to get a leg up on those. so the result of that was for a long, long time turkey held up the access of those two -- accession of those two countries and as a result i held up the f-16 purchases they wanted. they made promise after promise, the promises were broken, but finally they did roll over earlier this year, late last year, and allowed the accession of both scene and -- sweden and

finland. the result of that was we agreed we would do what they wanted to do with the f-16's. this particular resolution, s.j. res. 60, really undoes that agreement, and i can fully understand people's -- people, senators, being upset with turkey for this and a long list of other complaints that we have, but a deal's a deal, and we made this agreement and they kept their side of the bargain, admittedly not very timely, but they did keep their side of the bargain and now finland is in and sweden is about to come in and so that will be the state of play. i'd urge a no vote on this simply because it's imperative on the united states when we give our word on something that we keep our word. and so that's where we are. having said that, i've urged turkey on a number of occasions

to examine their conscience and really think about what their commitment means to nato. that commitment to nato, all the rest of us have, is very, very strong and turkey and hungary have not been behaving the way the rest of us in the coalition behave. one of the most troubling things to me is both of them hold hands with putin under the table, and that is a very, very bad state of affairs as far as what's going on in europe, as far as nato's relationship with russia, and just the overall situation. so although we have a lot of things to complain about with turkey on this particular occasion i'm going to urge that we defeat s.j. res. 60 and actually keep the agreement we made regarding the f-16's. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

mr. paul: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: what we have here is a clear case of quid pro quo. if turkey releases its hold on sweden's membership in nato, then turkey gets america's f-16's. you may remember the last time we had a famous case of quid pro quo, everybody was all up in a lather and they said we have to impeach donald trump because it's a quid pro quo. apparently it depends on what the quid is and two the quo is. the speakers we saw here were adamantly against turkey and getting the f-35 because they

possess a russian defensive system that may well allow americans to become vulnerable. now they'll allow it because sweden is in nato. thank god sweden is in nato. we can all rest easy. rewarding turkey with the sale of f-16 has some repercussionings. i main -- repercussions. i maintain my opposition since 2021 given turkey's dismal human rights accord. it's unreliable as a nato ally and it's disruptions in the middle east, caucuses and the medical tte mediterranean. this must not serve as -- the quid pro quo to expand nato should not come at the expense of rewarding the alliance's most

embarrassing member. president tum pledged -- president biden pledged the protection of human rights, but biden's own state department issued a human rights issue which identifies significant human rights issues, arbitrary killings, suspicious deaths of person in custody, torture, arbitrary arrest and continued detention of tens of thousands of persons, including oppositions,s lawyers, journalists, human rights activists and even an employee of the u.s. mission. doesn't sound like one of our best allies. the human rights foundation of turkey, a nongovernmental coalition in turkey, operating out of ankara subjected that 1,000 individuals were subjected

to torture, in extra custodial places, meaning not jail, somewhere where people could see where the torture is happening. in march 2023, it was reported a 14 boy on his way home in southeast turkey was stopped by the police with no justification, he was abducted and subjected to torture. the police beat him with their guns and according to the boy's lawyer forced him to say i am a turk, a curse upon the kurds. when he refused, the police had him memorize the turkish -- before he was thrown into a swamp. the state department's report also identifies our state department -- our state department eidentifies severe restrictions on freedom of

express, violence and threats of violence against journalists in turkey, increased censorship, criminal liable laws and unfortunately much more. since 2014, it is estimated that more than 160,000 people were investigated for insulting turkish presidentered wauven and more than -- president erdogan. imagine if it was a crime to criticize the president in america. 3,625 people, including ten children were sentenced to prison. while erdogan is imprisoning men, women, and children for insulting him, he's openly praising hamas. so these people come to the floor and they say, we were against giving the planes to turkey before we were for giving them, we are playing real public here because we -- repolitic

here because we want sweden in nato, and we're going to turn a blind eye. that to me is a quid pro quo not worth taking. after hamas' brutal october 7 attack on israel, erdogan claimed hamas is not a terrorist group, it's a liberation group. do you think we should send our best weapons to a be country that said after one of the worst terrorist activities in modern history, october 7, hamas is not a terrorist group? should we be sending our prized f-16's to a country that says hamas is not a terrorist group, it's a liberation group? magea haddene, waging a battle to protect its lands and people? no, they went to a concert and killed young people, and we're going to send weapons? why? because we made a quid pro quo. we got sweden in nato, we'll look the other way with turkey, giving money and support to

hamas. is this the type of government we want to send our weapons to? shouldn't the united states require countries to reflect our values before we send them billions of dollars worth of advance weapons? shouldn't we demand that a nato ally in particular at least respect the rule of law and basic human rights? president biden certainly doesn't seem to think so. the united states cannot proudly proclaim human rights to be at the center of our foreign policy while it arms a country that commits gross violations of human rights. i also remain deeply concerned about the negative strategic implications of this proposed sale, given turkey's reckless military actions in recent years. last october, a u.s. f-16 shot down a turkish combat drone in syria operating dangerously close to u.s. forces. ironically, this sale provides turkey with 40 brand-new f-16's and modernizes an existing fleet

of 79. we're giving them the weapon system we just used to shoot down their drone. why was a turkish drone operating so close to u.s. troops? it was targeting the kurdish-led syrian democratic forces we have been supporting for years fighting isis. turkey views the syrian democrat forces as terrorists. in the eyes of our nato ally, our partners in syria are their enemy and legitimate terrorists. does something seem a bit confusing here? they're shooting against people he can consider our allies in the war against isis. they have drones up close, we have to shoot them down. we're sending our modern planes and updating their beneath. the american taxpayer is paying to arm and train these syrian democratic forces, and the biden administration is giving turkey advance fighter jets that will inevitably used to shoot and kill these same people. this utter lack of strategic

foresight has unfortunately become commonplace in washington foreign policy. this was also not the first time that u.s. forces were threatened by turkey's reckless military actions in syria. november 2022, a turkish drone strike on syrian democratic forces put u.s. soldiers at significant risk, leading the pentagon to call for immediate de-escalation. october 2019, u.s. forces came under turkish artillery fire, which sources claim was a deliberate efforts to push american troops away from syria's northern border. the shelling was reportedly so severe that u.s. personnel considered firing back in self-defense. this is our ally. we're sending these people f-16's who are shooting at us and our other allies. there's also the fact that turkey, this is not an insignificant fact, bought the s-400 air and missile defense systems in 2019 from russia.

despite strong u.s. protests. that decision prompted the trump administration to remove turkey from the f-35 joint strike fighter program. at that point, the leadership on the republican and democrat side were opposed to the f-35 program. they've now switched their mind because of the quid pro quo. they've been given membership for sweden, they salivate over making nato bigger, and they do that in exchange for now sending these weapons to turkey. there are concerns that the s-400 could expose classified f-35 stealth capabilities to russian intelligence gathering. you see, when you have missile defense you're gathering defense on the planes flying towards you. if you own both the planes and the defense system, you can cord night with them to learn -- you can coordinate with them to learn more about the planes attacking your defense system. the same is true with the f-16. so this is strategically and

militarily, one, a huge cavin to the turks -- cave-in am to the turks, but puts our soldiers and pilots at risk because we're exposing the f-16, one of their planes, to the s-400, the russian weapon system, allowing the intermatch of the two, and this will put our pilots more at risk. the risk of the s-400 serving as russian trojan horse to compromise nato's most advanced stealth fighter was clear to everyone in the alliance, but turkey proceeded nevertheless. president trump subsequently imposed sanctions on turkey's defense procurement agency, which the biden administration kept in place. nobody is really reversed amendment said turkey is behaving and deserves a plane because they switched course. everything is saying -- everybody is saying turkey gets what they want because they used a form of extortion. call it questioned quo pro, that sounds -- quid pro quo, that

sounds better. it looks like extortion works. it reinforces bad behave. what will turkey do next time? they'll simply act like a bad ally and hold up something we need to get something they want. both the trump and biden administrations don't trust our supposed ally turkey to keep the f-35 capability secure, but now we're giving them the, 16 -- giving them the f-16. perhaps congress should examine the ways in which turkey used f-16's recently. the armenian ministry of defense claims in 2020 in support of azerbaijan's war to conquer a region, the f-16 shot down an armenian attack aircraft in armenian air space. turkey stood closely by it's be aer -- azerbaijani ally, providing combat drones, military equipment, training, and if we are to believe the

armenian government, direct combat support. our planes we give to the turks, the f-16's, are used in another war with armenia. i've not heard debate which side we're supposed to be on, but your weapons will be going in the middle of that war as well. the war in to in azerbaijan's subsequent military operation in 2023 killed thousands and crafted a humanitarian disaster, forcing more than 100,000 people to flee, more than three-quarters of the population. turkey continues to be an unreliable ally within nato. not only did turkey blackmail the alliance by delaying sweden's nato bid to extract concessions, the turks continue to regularly threaten greece, another nato ally. in 2022, turkish fighter jets in un -- and unmanned aerial vehicles violated greek air space more than 10,000 times.

president erdogan continues his hostile rhetoric, threatening to hit askedens with missile -- athens with missile strikes. sounds like the unstable reverblings of a -- ramblings of a leader who doesn't deserve our advanced fighter jets. last august, an advisor on security and foreign policies to erdogan claimed the mediterranean sea belongs to us and no one should even think about raising a sword against us there. they, greece, cyprus and allies, better not forget this. this is people banging the drums for war with another fellow nato ally that we're sending these weapons to, without a hint of remorse on their side, they just held us hostage over sweden, sweden gave in, quid pro quo, you get your jets. this statement sounds more, beneaths statements from -- these statements from turkey, more like the bombastic threats

from north korea's dear leader than a nato ally. do we really think turkey, giving them more fighter jets will modify their behavior? it was withholding them that was the only chance of modifying their behavior. this sale will only embolden turkey to continue its disruptive actions at the expense of american interests and regional stability. what do we get in return? greater risk to u.s. troops in syria, instability in the caucuses, continued threats to greece, the privilege of defending sweden. nato is supposed to be a collective security agency. the reality is if sweden were attacked it would be american forces doing the majority of the fighting. unless anyone truly thinks turkish f-16's will come to their aid. the $23 billion sale is reckless. it fails to advance the security of the american people, and does nothing to alter turkey's immoral human rights record.

its unruly behavior within nato, or its irresponsible actions in the middle east, the caucuses, and eastern mediterranean. i urge my colleagues to vote in support of the joint resolution of disapproval to reject this disastrous deal. the presiding officer: the senator from idaho. risch risch i ask unanimous consent for two minutes, please. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. risch: mr. president, fellow senators, first of all, let me say i want the record to be absolutely clear, this is not a gift to turkey. this is a sale to turkey. they are going to pay for the munitions, the aircraft they're going to get. as i stated, when i started out, turkey is very, very less than a desired or good ally in the current nato framework. certainly, as i said, woo ef got

a long list of complaints with them. one thing i think i would disagree with my good friend from kentucky, the accession of sweden and finland to nato was a huge, huge matter. it wasn't something that was just a parenthetical thought. it added 800 miles of direct border against russia, is which is what nato has created to push back against. the same with sweden. sweden has a very, very robust defense system itself. with all due respect to my friend from kentucky, i wouldn't put this in the vein or argument that we're going to come to the defense of sweden. sweden's going to come to the defense of nato, and in a very, very robust way. yes, we wanted them, and yes, that's exactly why i withheld the f-16 sale and refurbishment,

so we could get those two. it was extremely important. also, as far as my good friend has reiterated some of the human rights violations that this country has, i would remind my good friend that russia does the same thing, and i have a resolution that came out of the foreign relations committee and is on the floor that reiterates all those human rights and condemns russia for those exact human rights things that my good friend reiterated, but has a hold on that. there's one hold on that piece of legislation, and it's the senator from kentucky. which i would respectfully request that he lift. in any event, i'm not here to defend turkey or the other things that they do. what i am here to do is to defend the importance of nato, the importance of adding hungary and sweden to nato, and the fact

that negotiations are the way these things get done. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: the difference between russia and turkey is no one is offering to sell f-16's to russia. i'm not for selling f-16's to russia. neither to turkey. this is a clear case of quid pro quo. all of the folks now for it were against it just months ago. the reason they've changed their opinion, they've been given something. turkey extorted us. turkey said, you want sweden to be in nato, you have to give us these planes. they gave up sweden in exchange for getting the planes. doesn't change any of the facts. the facts are this -- them having f-16's and russian s-400's allows them to steal some of our technology to match our technology of our fighter jets against a russian defense system and potentially give that to russia. this is a problem.

it's been a problem. it hasn't changed. that hes are the same pro problems -- these are the same problems opponents of this mentioned over and over again. that's why for two years they've been opposed to this. they have flipped. they have sold their opposition to turkey for admission for sweden. it's a quid pro quo. it's a trade. they made a trade, but publicly they will have to acknowledge they made a trade and think somehow it is more important to give these planes, or sells these planes, to turkey than to protect the integrity of the technology of these planes against russian military systems. mr. president, i move to disc discharge j.j. rez -- s.j. res. from the foreign relations committee. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from kentucky, mr. paul, moves to discharge s.j. res. 60, joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval and so forth, from the committee on

foreign relations. mr. paul: i ask for the yeas and nays. i yield back time and ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will report. excuse me, the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. vote:

the clerk: 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.

the clerk: 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.

the clerk: 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 -- paul, peters, stabenow. senators voting in the negative -- baldwin, blackburn, booker, carper, cotton, crapo, ernst, hagerty, heinrich, hickenlooper, kaine, kelly, murray, ossoff, reed, ricketts, risch, rounds, rubio, sinema. mrs. fischer, no.

the clerk: mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: mr. casey, no. mr. thune, no. the clerk: mr. coons, no.

the clerk: mr. king, no. vote: the clerk: mr. graham, no. mr. kennedy, no. mr. van hollen, no.

the clerk: mr. braun, aye.

the clerk: ms. cortez masto, no.

the clerk: ms. collins, no.

the clerk: mr. murphy, no. mrs. shaheen, no. ms. hassan, no. mr. scott of florida, aye. the clerk: mr. cornyn, no.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, no. the clerk: mr. schatz, no.

ms. smith, no. mr. welch, aye. ms. duckworth, no. mr. padilla, no.

mrs. capito, no.

the clerk: mr. boozman, no. mr. cardin, no. the clerk: ms. hirono, no.

the clerk: mr. lujan, no. mrs. hyde-smith, no.

the clerk: mr. durbin, no. the clerk: mr. mendendez, aye. mr. tillis, no. mr. young, no.

mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: mr. bennet, no. the clerk: mr. wicker, no. the clerk: ms. rosen, no.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, no. mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: ms. cantwell, no. mr. sanders, aye. mr. whitehouse, no.

raimondo. vote:

the clerk: mr. budd, no.

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

mr. brown, no.

the clerk: mr. mullin, no.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no.

the clerk: ms. butler, no. the clerk: mr. cramer, no. mr. tuberville, no.

mr. johnson, no. mr. lee, aye. mr. cruz, no. ms. lummis, no. mr. merkley, no. mr. vance, no. mr. marshall, no.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye. mr. warnock, no.

the clerk: mr. tester, no.

mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: mr. grassley, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. schumer, no.

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

the clerk: ms. murkowski, no.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no.

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

mr. president president overturning roe v. wade as devastating as it was never was -- for republicans. they knew that and we knew that because they weren't exactly keeping it a secret except there was center-right and centerleft folks, republicans and pundits who swore privately that it would open the floodgates to an even greater assault on women's reproductive rights and stop the possibility of a possibility of the very kinds of outcomes that we are seeing playing out across the country today. like last week when the alabama supreme court essentially banned idea ivf and left people who are trying to start a family, with nowhere to turn. it turns out people were bright to be worried. one of the worst infirmities in this town is that somehow you are considered savvy thoughtful

centrist and institutionalist. if you never ever out everything is going to be fine. everything is always going to be fine. you aren't going to try to overturn the results of this election. they are going to go through with overturning roe v. wade. every savvy person in every cocktail hour that i don't attend is always telling us to chill out. but now it's happening. they went through with it. the repeal of [roll call] and all the worse case scenarios from all of the organizations to push for reproductive freedom were deemed right. i still remember the great senator from the state of colorado who made an emphasis in his re-election campaign for women's reproductive freedom and you know what everybody called him on the republican side? not mark udall. mark uterus.

the focus on women's reproductive freedom and he sat there and said. look, if the supreme court changes hands in a row is imperiled and everyone needs to chill out. they made fun of united states senator for predicting the future. people are right to be worried. extreme republicans are going after women and reproductive freedoms through every way that they can in congress, in statehouses in the supreme court and in state courts. gutting row is never going to be enough. to the gateway to an all-out war in right now women in america are paying the price. they are terrified of what they can and cannot do and what may or may not land them in prison. it is not a crime to start a family. but now it is. it is not a crime to dispose of

the nonviable embryo. republicans have made sure that it is a crime. do you know how hard it is to do ivf? everyone who is at least my age know someone who has struggled getting pregnant. and emotionally and physically and financially exhausting. i have never thought of ivf in a partisan way and i honestly hadn't. it didn't occur to me, it didn't occur to me that they were going to go after people actually trying to get pregnant. this is not about babies and life and families. this is about punishing women. this is about taking away their autonomy. this is their objective. and you know five years ago you may have come to me with a speech and i would have been like they are going to do that. they did that. they are still doing that.

republicans in congress were quick to dismiss and i even got a memo from their campaign committee to distance themselves from the very policies that they enabled and in literally decades they will try to on one hand say they are for ivf on the floor lock legislation and support fetal personhood legislation and block bills to protect ivf federally. they did it yesterday so no one is fooled. i know the senator from connecticut and i have been talking about this. sometimes it's very difficult to see through the fog on policy. this one is not unclear who did what and what they are in the middle of doing. there is nothing whole pro-life about ripping the way the only options available for someone trying to advocate and there's nothing pro-life about forcing a woman to carry a nonviable

pregnancy. it's not a principled belief. it's insanity that's actively harming an innocent person. in the wake of last week's decision fertility clinics in alabama garb abruptly pulling the plug on ivf treatments because they are afraid of being prosecuted and that's leaving people wondering if they'll be able to have a kid or not. not only can they not go through the process in alabama, they can can't even move their embryos because they are afraid of getting in legal trouble. they can even move their embryos. the most optimistic scenario is laboratories can do whatever they want. you can take your own embryo and move it to another place where ivf is legal. a couple in birmingham went to the ivf process and they said you can't continued in your home state and you don't have the ability to finish a this summer

either. overnight these patients are left without options with no notice and no recall. implications of the decision are as obvious as they are devastating but it's also important to be crystal clear about how we got here politically because the decision is not an anomaly. it's not a fringe view held by a few judges in a single state. it's a direct result of the decades long organized national effort by republican providers to dismantle reproductive freedoms that were until recently the law of the land. they have shown zero restraint in going after people's rights and there's no reason to believe they are going to stop anytime soon. they will not. they did this and they want more and they have a plan. this is on them. this record is theirs to own. mr. president before a closer want to briefly address the ongoing appropriations process. i'm glad that we we are avoiding a needless and harmless shut down as we idolize the spending

bills including one from the subcommittee i chair overseeing transportation and housing and urban development. our subcommittee along with their house counterparts work on the bipartisan basis to deliver a bill that adheres to top length of adheres to top length of the levels to provide resources and provide programs that millions of americans rely on every day. that includes supporting affordable housing, helping to alleviate homelessness improving roads and highways and communities big and small so people can get around. air traffic controllers and safety inspectors to make sure our flights and trains are safe and on on-time. it is not a perfect bill. everyone did not get what they want it that i tell you democrats and republicans worked in good faith and had most of the funds over available. i'm glad we are on the finish line on her belt i hope we can find bipartisan agreement on all the bills so we can fully fund the government. this funding can't wait any longer. i yield the floor.

vote:

>> thank you all for being here. appreciate your coverage of this. this is the most important thing to house republicans and the most important thing to the american people. today president biden is going to brownsville texas to see the crisis at the border. it's disheartening to know with the way the american people will look at this and say okay so president trump decided he'd go to the border in two or three days later president biden goes to the border. that's what the american people take from this and it's disheartening to know that that is the case from what we have seen with the emphasis that our president has put on this crisis. given the devastating crisis that has unfolded at our border they should not be the president's, shouldn't be only a second visit to the border. this -- he should have been all over this in the last three years. an important aspect to recognize

is also the political play here by president biden per brownsville could hardly be considered one of the most challenging immigration areas. it's the 29th busiest station this month with far less activity than san diego, tucson in el paso centers. the american people can see through that. since president biden took office there up in 8.7 million illegal crossings nationwide and 7.2 illegal crossings at our southern border. there is an executive action that president biden could take to address this crisis of the border that happened on his watch. our speaker has articulated those in you have that information on catch and release. he was expedited removal with a very simple things that president biden could do today to help alleviate the cartels from being able to run the border the way they are. we saw the death of lincoln