illinois, and virtually in every other state. she is a dedicateed professional with an extraordinary resume who wants to continue to serve this nation. will she be able to work with law enforcement groups? they think so because they support her. there's a long litany. national sheriffs association, major county sheriffs association, international association of chiefs of police, major cities chiefs, 53 former police chiefs and sheriffs, the police executive research forum, the term law enforcement organization, the list goes on and on. but the simplest statement that was made comes from a pretty hard nosed group, the fraternal order of police. those of us in politics know you have to work to earn their support. here's what they said about vanita gupta. gupta always worked with us to find common ground, even when that seemed impossible. isn't that exactly what we want

at this moment in american history as we cope the civil rights challenges of our age? this is our chance. i hope the senate with its vote, i hope it is a bipartisan vote, will give vanita gupta the chance to serve america again. i yield back my time and ask for the the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: all postcloture time has expired. the question is on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change his or her vote? if not, the yeas are 51, the nays are 49. the nomination is confirmed. mr. schumer: thank you, madam president. first i just want to say, before i move on a motion to discharge, it is really so good too have vanita gupta -- so good to have

vanita gupta installed as associate attorney general. to have someone with such a background in civil rights at this time in american history is so important and so vital to the country. and i'm so glad that the senate has now approved her and she can do her vital job, including dealing with the systemic bias we have seen in policing and in law enforcement throughout the country. so it's very good news for the forces of equality and justice in the country. with that, now, pursuant to -- sorry. the presiding officer: will the senator suspend.

mr. schumer: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask that the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate and the senate be immediately note -- and the president be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the presiding officer: without objection. so ordered. mr. schumer: now, madam president, pursuant to senate resolution 27, the committee on armed services being tied on the question of reporting, i move to discharge the committee on armed services from further consideration of the nomination of colin hackett kahl of

california to be under secretary of defense for policy. the presiding officer: under the provisions of s. res. 27, there will now be up to four hours of debate on the motion equal divided between the two leaders or their designees with no motions, points of order, or amendments in order. mr. schumer: i would ask unanimous consent -- [inaudible]. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. inhofe: madam president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call in progress be vitiated.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. inhofe: thank you, madam president. i -- let me start by urging my colleagues in the senate to vote against the motion to discharge from the senate armed services committee the nomination of colin kahl for under secretary of policy. you know, this is not a decision i take lightly. i've always felt that any new administration should have his team or her team and -- and i've generally been very supportive. when president biden nominated dr. kahl for this position, my expectation was that if confirmed, he and i would often disagree on policy, but we would actually get along together, we could coexist together. but i quickly learned that this would really be impossible with dr. kahl. i don't think i've ever said

that about anyone, any nominee for any position that i can recall. my republican colleagues in the senate armed services committee, all 12 of them reached the same conclusion, we opposed his nomination unanimously. that's very unusual. before i explain why no republican, not a single one was able to support dr. kahl's confirmation in committee, i want to emphasize how rare this is. the senate armed services committee, as everyone knows, is extremely bipartisan. certainly, the years that i was chairing that committee with the ranking member jack reed, we got along famously. we got things done other people couldn't get done. the senate armed services committee has always been bipartisan. we have disagreements, of course, but republicans and democrats on the committee have a legacy of consensus. the national security and taking

care of our troops, these are bipartisan concerns and this is how we've been succeeded in passing the national defense authorization act. the national defense authorization act is the largest bill every year. it's the one where it sets out the guidelines for the coming year and it's one where we've always -- always gotten along and we passed it every year for 60 consecutive years. so that's -- it shows and demonstrates very clearly how well we get along. the department deserves a nominee with bipartisan credibility. you have to keep in mind this position is is the number three position in the pentagon. it represents our shared bipartisan vision of effective national security and healthy, civil military relations. this position demands a nominee who can carry out the president's policies while engaging those who disagree in

good faith and that isn't the case with this nominee and that's why we're faced with this vote today. i also want to clear up a commonly -- a common misunderstanding. republicans on the committee did not vote against dr. kahl simply because we disagreed with his policy views. now, policy is what that position is. it's the policy position of the pentagon. this should be obvious to anyone who paid attention to the confirmation of president biden's nominees for secretary of defense, secretary of -- deputy secretary. both of them, we got through -- i don't remember a time when any new administration got the two very significant positions of secretary of defense and deputy secretary of defense so fast. we -- we got them in just record time. and there are some things that, you know, we disagreed with policywise, but we supported

their confirmation and did most of my republican colleagues for one reason, they were eminently qualified -- i'm talking about the secretary of defense and the deputy secretary. both of them were eminently qualified with long track records of bipartisan cooperation and strong professional judgment. i dealt with both of them for many, many years. in fact, we expedited the nomination to give the president his national security team just about as quickly as we could. republicans may disagree with it, but we can work with them very well. unfortunately the same cannot be said of colin kahl. the national security problems we face are wicked and complex. we wrestle with them constantly and -- on this committee. what i cannot support are nominees who reduce complex national security conversations to partisan -- soundbites.

for instance, as many of my -- my colleagues will recall. in 2019, republicans and democrats disagreed about our policy in syria when president trump announced a troop withdrawal from northeast syria, some of our colleagues worried about extended deployments. this is a reasonable concern. but here's how dr. kahl chose to characterize it. republicans are the party of ethnic cleansing, he wrote. he actually said that. he said that publicly. good and kind people can disagree with each other, they don't have to resort to name calling and accusations of war crimes, and that's not an isolated example. as we discovered during our review of kahl's writings and public statements, he often embraces conspiracy theories. for example, he alleged the

kushner kremlin quid pro quo, referring to the president's son-in-law, and to express his opinion during the confirmation theory, he stood by his statements. he has a long history of claiming every policy decision with which he disagrees will lead to war. and, thankfully, he's never been right. dr. kahl predicted that president trump's decision to withdraw from the iran deal would lead to war. it didn't. he said by sanctioning iran's foreign minister, president trump was boxing himself into a war. there was no war. it didn't happen. at one point dr. kahl suggested that president trump might start a war with iran for political diversionry purposes. that's a quote. this is a ridiculous claim. obviously it didn't happen.

according to dr. kahl, the strike on iranian terrorist leader, soleimani soleimani, the appointment of john bolton as national security advisor and the events in the korean peninsula, all of those would lead to war and none of them happened. his public declarations of policy judgment are partisan and wrong. the under secretary of defense for policy deserves as the defense secretary's top national security advisor, it requires a leader with sound judgment and even temperament and colin kahl simply doesn't possess either one of these qualities. even worse, dr. kahl has a long track record of maligning people he disagrees with. i mentioned the syrian example earlier. he also said the republican party has a death call to trump.

that's what he said. the bare minimum for his position is good judgment and even temperament. it would set a terrible precedent if we confirm someone like him for the job. and, you know, i have a history of working so well with people on both sides, which is why i can and have supported many nominees whose policy views differ from mine and that's -- that goes -- that goes with the job. we have someone who is elected president of the united states. i disagree with him on many of the issues having to do with our defense policy. but because i trust that, while we may disagree, they understand we're all trying to do the right thing for our nation and for our kids and our grandkids. unfortunately, i don't have that trust in dr. kahl. confirming him would create a real political challenge for the department over the years to

come. every time d.o.d. lays down a new policy or makes a critical military decision, we will have to wonder, was this a decision informed by the department's skilled professionals or by the partisan conspiracy theorist that happens to run the department? that's why all 13 republicans on the armed services committee voted to reject this nominee. and this is why i urge my colleagues to vote against the motion to discharge and urge president biden to consider another nominee, one who can work with productively with both sides of the aisle even when we disagree. and so, mr. president, i would like to have you consider these things and make your job and my job a lot easier. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk

will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. sullivan: madam president. the presiding officer: the

junior senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: i ask unanimous consent to engage in a colloquy with my colleague and friend, senator scott, from florida. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: madam president, i'm honored to be on the senate floor with my colleague, senator scott from the great state of florida. we are here to talk about an issue that really matters to both alaska and to florida, and i would say it actually matters to the whole country. let me begin by just saying, like all states, my state, the great state of alaska, struggled through the pandemic, a lot of challenges. i'm proud to say that with regard to the health challenges of the pandemic, i'm very honored and privileged and proud to represent a great group of americans, my fellow alaskans who came together on the house

side, despite our huge challenges in terms of a giant state, and on so many issues related to health, directly related to the pandemic, alaska, alaskans did very well. we were number one per capita in terms of testing throughout the entire pandemic. remarkably, we have been the number one state per capita in terms of vaccine distribution. which is a mini miracle if you know alaska, given how big it is. we had vaccines going out on snow machines, dog sleds. you name it, we were getting it out to everybody, in a more efficient way than any other state in the country. and importantly, thank god, one of the lowest per capita death rates in the country. so we're proud of that, madam president, but our economy , like many, but i would say almost uniquely is getting

hammered, and people are suffering economically, first by the pandemic, of course, and now unfortunately by our own federal government. let me just give you a couple of examples. in the energy sector, very important to alaska, very important to america. yes, we still need energy. oil and gas, we need it. some of the greatest workers in the world in my state, the biden administration thinks we don't need them. they have been crushing my state. nine executive orders directed solely at the state of alaska. by this administration to shut us down. nine. there's no state in the country getting that kind of attention. we don't want that attention. commercial fishing, our state has been what i like to call the superpower of seafood. over 60% of all seafood harvested in america comes from alaska that has been hurt by the pandemic, and the issue that

we're here to talk about today, madam president, tourism. it is so important to alaska, so important to florida. that's what i want to talk about with my good friend, senator scott, to bring relief to our fellow americans, floridians, alaskans, to work to immediately pass the cruz act. that is our bill which would provide relief to coastal communities in our country, in alaska and florida, to enable responsible return of cruise ship activities that are so important to the small business owners in our states whose livelihoods depend on a robust tourism sector. so let me just very quickly, madam president, mention one thing. alaska is open for tourism. one of the most beautiful places in the world. in fact, america, do you want to

come and have a great vacation? come on up to alaska this summer. not only will you have an amazing experience, we just announced two days ago you can get a vaccine. come on up. if your state's too inefficient to get a vaccine, have a great vacation to alaska, and you will get a vaccine in alaska as well. you can do both. you can see the most beautiful state in the country, you can fish, see glaciers, wildlife, climb mountains, whale watch, and if you do that, it's going to help our economy, help the small businesses, fishing guides, hotels. i know americans want to help one another. that's what we have been doing for the last year. we want you to come up, stay safe, get a vaccine, but here's what we need. to enable that to happen in alaska and other parts of the country, we need the c.d.c. to better understand their job, their mission, and their role.

this particular relates to the issues of cruise ship passengers, the ability for cruise ship vessels to start to return to america's waters as they are doing throughout the rest of the world. asia, europe, latin america, people are cruising safely, safely right now. but the c.d.c., madam president, is dragging its feet. they're dithering. i have been meeting -- my staff has been meeting with them almost certainly weekly. i have met twice with the c.d.c. executive director. and all we get is foot-dragging. all we get is excuses. all we get is guidance that's muddled, confusing, simply unworkable. and here's the thing. in my state, communities are

dying, and no one seems to care. the c.d.c., the bureaucrats there don't seem to give a damn about what americans are suffering through right now. literally. i don't know how many times we can be on calls with them where we get no response. and when people lose jobs and lose businesses, that is a health impact, too. so here's what our simple bill does, the cruise act. first, it would require the c.d.c. to issue recommendations for how to mitigate the risks of covid-19 to passengers and crew on board ships. this would be in addition to what the industry has already put forward in their over 70 recommendations. second, our bill would establish an interagency working group that will develop recommendations to facilitate the resumption of passenger cruise ship operations in the united states, in florida, in

alaska. the recommendations will facilitate the resumption of passenger cruise ship operations no later than july 4, 2021. our bill requires the c.d.c. no later than that same day, independence day, to revoke the order entitled framework for conditional sailing and initial phase covid testing requirements for protection of crew. and our bill finally assures that the d.h.s. and c.d.c. retain all appropriate authorities to make the commitments necessary to prevent the spread of communicable diseases on cruise ships. madam president, this is a commonsense bill. we need the c.d.c. to continue to work with us, certainly, but to recognize that by dragging their feet, tens of thousands of americans are going to continue to suffer when they don't have

to. we can do this responsibly. my state, the state of alaska, we want to do this responsibly, but we can't wait any longer. our tourism season in alaska is very short. our businesses need to know that they can open again. and our citizens need help. i yield the floor to my colleague from florida whose citizens are experiencing some of the same devastating impacts that my fellow alaskans are. mr. scott: madam president. the presiding officer: the junior senator from florida. mr. scott: madam president, i do want to compliment my colleague. he comes from a beautiful state. while i would like all the tourists to come to florida, alaska is a great state to take a vacation. i have had the opportunity to do that a few times. it's a beautiful state. i want to thank my colleagues, senator sullivan and senator rubio, for working on this bill that is so important to all of our states but for sure florida and alaska. many states rely on the success of our ports, our cruise line,

and our maritime industries. throughout my time as governor of florida, we proudly welcomed more than 100 million visitors every year, shattering annual tourism records each year. every visitor to our state supports small businesses, fuels job growth, and boosts tax revenue. helping to increase state and local investments in the environment, transportation, public safety, and education. it's not just florida and alaska. tourism includes all -- it has huge impacts for states across our nation and the thousands of jobs that rely on its success. in this chart, you can look at this. first off the cruise industry shut down. it's killing a lot of jobs all across this country. before the covid-19, we had 450,000 american jobs and 55 -- $55 billion in g.d.p. every year in our economy. unfortunately due to the suspension of cruises caused by the c.d.c. inaction, more than 300,000 american jobs have been

lost. so this is all across -- this is all across our country. as we continue to work to recover from the coronavirus and get our economy back on track, i remain committed to doing everything i can to support our tourism industry in florida, alaska and all across the country in a safe manner. unfortunately, many -- while many sectors of the economy had been safely operating for many months under c.d.c. guidelines, floridians and those across the nation that rely on the cruise industry for work continue to wait, wait, wait for updated guidance from the c.d.c. i've heard from small business owners who have sthaird all their story -- shared all their stories about how important tourism is to them and specifically the cruise industry is to their livelihood and how much the c.d.c., the c.d.c.'s decision here has hurt them. let me give you an example. the founder and owner of protective services who says, as a business owner, i've been dependent on the cruise industry for my livelihood for 20 years. and this pause has been

devastating. what many people don't see behind the scenes is that cruising has significantly impacted many small businesses that employs hundreds of thousands of people in america. resuming cruising is critical to my business and would allow me to work again and support my family. jennette, president of cruise port destination who says the uncertainty we've been living with last year is probably the most devastating mentally for a business owner. i have former employees that are still unemployed. they want to get back to work and there's been nothing i could do. the cruise industry needs to be treated on par with other sectors of the travel industry and this legislation would provide a plan to safely resume cruise operations. madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the statements from these business owners are placed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: the c.d.c.'s refusal to properly address this shutdown is wrong. it's time to get the cruise industry open and it's going to create jobs all across our country. that's why i'm proud to join my

colleagues senator sullivan and senator rubio in introducing the cruise act that says we're not waiting on the c.d.c. any longer. in march president biden announced the effort to vaccinate all americans, his plan to vaccinate all americans by july 4. as of this week, all adults will be able for covid-19 vaccines. our nation has made enormous progress in fighting covid-19 yet the c.d.c. continues to act like we're still in march 2020. meanwhile as my colleague from alaska said, there's cruising all over the rest of the world. my colleagues and i are simply asking the c.d.c. to provide a timeline when the cruise industry can begin to reopen like so many other sectors and the cruise act ensures they can do that in a safe manner. the c.d.c. is treating the cruise sector unfairly while other industries are open for business. there is no reason why america's cruise industry and the thousands of jobs that rely on its success should continue to suffer. cruises can and should resume and we're going to do everything we can to bring back cruising

safely. i yield back to my colleague from alaska. mr. sullivan: madam president. the presiding officer: the junior senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: as if in legislation session, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on help be discharged from further consideration of s. 1105 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mrs. murray: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: madam president, reserving the right to object. i understand the position of my colleagues from alaska and florida who want to see a return to cruising by july 4. i'm there with them. the cruise industry in my home state supports over 5,500 jobs and creates $9 million in annual local business revenue. those jobs and that impact on the local economy have been

severely disrupted. but we have to ensure the safety of our friends and our families on these cont -- on these cruiss before they disembark. we have seen firsthand how devastating covid outbreaks on cruise ships can be. just last year we saw thousands of passengers stranded on cruise ships, people putting -- put in quarantine or refused entry to ports as borders closed. over 31 million americans have contracted covid and 560,000 have died from this disease. cruise ships require specific focus and protocols in place to prevent future outbreaks. while i am as eager as anyone else to see a return to travel, we cannot cut corners. doing so risks lives and will only further delay returning to normal hurting our economy more in the long run. we must trust the science and we

must allow the c.d.c. to continue its work to help us return to what we love as safely as possible. so i will continue to work with c.d.c. and the administration as they develop the next phase of their cruising guidance, but for now, i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. sullivan: madam president. the presiding officer: the junior senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: madam president, to my colleague from washington who i have the utmost respect for, it is true that at the beginning of the pandemic there were all kinds of challenges with the cruise ship industry. there's no doubt about that. we saw that, but that was over -- well over a year ago. we didn't know anything about the virus then. we didn't have vaccines then. and we didn't see the economic devastation then. it is a very different period right now a year later. madam president, what we are asking for is the c.d.c. to move. that's what our bill does. you know, senator murkowski and

i had a meeting, our second meeting with the c.d.c. director just three weeks ago. in that meeting she told us that they were going to issue all the guidance for the cruise ships, issue it all so people can plan. they said that they would -- that they could anticipate with this guidance that we could meet cruising opportunities to start by mid-july in alaska. they said that with this guidance, the c.d.c. wouldn't have to be approving every move, every move going forward. and they said they would take into consideration this huge progress we have made on vaccinating americans. there's huge -- in my state, in southeast alaska, there's communities with 60%, 70%, 80% vaccination rates. that's where these cruise ships are going to be going. the unfortunately thing, madam secretary, not one thing, the director of the c.d.c. told us, turned out to be true. that's not good.

her staff or somebody in the c.d.c. needs to be held responsible for telling us something that was not true at all. again, what is happening right now is an economic and health devastation in my state the estimates are up to $3 billion worth of damage just in alaska alone because of the foot dragging, mismessages, and unresponsiveness when it comes to the c.d.c.'s guidance. as my friend from florida just mentioned, airlines, schools, hospitals, hotels have all gotten c.d.c. guidance and have been able to open. but for some reason they are focused on this industry which negatively impacts thousands of small businesses across america in florida, in alaska. and i certainly hope that the

c.d.c. seeing that we are trying to move this and it's a bipartisan issue, by the way, will start to do its job, will start to do its job and make the commitment that was made to me and other senators to get this moving quickly in terms of guidance so we can be having tourism, cruise ships and otherwise in america by mid-july. that's what i was told by the director three weeks ago. they need to keep that commitment. madam president, i yield to my good friend from florida. mr. scott: madam president. the presiding officer: the junior senator from florida. mr. scott: i'm clearly disappoint thad my colleague from washington -- disappointed that my colleague from washington would object to this commonsense proposal. the cruise industry, it impacts thousands of jobs, not just if florida, not just in alaska but in the state of washington. everybody here i know wants to make sure we can start cruising again in a safe manner.

let's remember, what my colleague was talking about, she was talking about what was going on in man and april of 2020 but today hotels are open. airlines are flying. beaches are open. restaurants are open. tourism sites are open. amusement parks are open. they're all open. but for whatever reason the cruise industry has made a decision to not allow cruising to happen so they singled out this industry and cannot tell any of us why they've singled this out. all we asking is for the c.d.c. to provide a timeline when the cruise industry can begin to reopen. the cruise industry wants to do it safely. it's a lot of american jobs, including -- i think it's 23,000 jobs and a billion dollars economic impact in the state of washington. so i know everybody says they want to get this done, but the only way this is going to happen is if we make sure that we force the c.d.c. to finally make a decision and allow the cruise industry to get open again in a safe manner. thank you, madam president.

mr. cotton: madam president? the presiding officer: the junior senator from arkansas. mr. cotton: -- president biden's nominee for the under secretary of defense of policy. this is the top strategic planning position at the department of defense. the number three position at our department of defense. the role is critically important to the national security of our country and the safety of our allies around the world. unfortunately, mr. kahl is temp mentally and professionally unfit to hold this or for that matter virtually any other job at the pentagon. he is impulsive, offensive, and has consistently demonstrated terrible judgment. for the past several years, mr. kahl has endeavored for some inexplicable reason to be something of a twitter celebrity, not exactly aiming

his sights high. in pursuit of this goal, he's personally attacked the character and reputation of virtually every republican senator as well as, i would say, lots of democratic senators. he has tweeted that members of both parties who supported the withdrawal from the terrible iran nuclear deal, quote, won't be satisfied until they get the war they pushed for decades. he wrote that 45 senators supported weapon sales to saudi arabia to share ownership of the world's worst humanitarian crisis. this claim in which he referred to the war in yemen of course ignores the role of iran's murderous, terrorist proxies, something, of course, that colin kahl repeatedly turns a blind eye to everywhere in the world iran's evil malignancy. on a separate occasion mr. kahl said that every republican that supported an end to combat

operations in syria, quote, debase themselves at the altar of trump. he then added the party of lincoln is the party of ethnic cleansing. let's let that sink in for a moment. joe biden has nominated a man to be the number three official at our department of defense who's accused one of the two main political parties in our country as being the party of ethnic cleansing. it's hard to imagine an uglier or more vicious accusation than that. perhaps mr. kahl could ask bill clinton and susan rice on whose watch the ethnic cleansing in rwanda happened. when john bolton was about to become the national security adviser, mr. kahl quite reasonably stated on social media, quote, we are going to die, end quote. to my knowledge, we are not dead. and mr. kahl is very much alive

despite john bolton being appointed as a staffer in the united states government. he also claimed that the republican party had a, quote, death cult fealty to former president trump. these statements and many more make it difficult to conceive of a circumstance in which this nominee could successfully forge a productive relationship with members of the republican party in the senate or the house or anywhere else for that matter. mr. kahl's ranting and raving on social media in 2017 may have even gone from offensive to criminal on several occasions. it appears that several of mr. kahl's tweets did i have have you think or -- divulge or confirm classified and sensitive information. i joined 17 of my fellow senators in requesting a full f.b.i. investigation into this very serious and troubling matter. no vote should occur until that

important inquiry takes place. now, the nominee's transgressions on social media are somewhat reminiscent of ms. tanden's foolish statement on that media platform. i think the senate set a standard and we ought to maintain that standard with this nominee. in many ways mr. kahl's behavior is worse than ms. tanden's because his poisonous partisan and temper will directly affect his job. he's up for a post that is less partisan and more cooperative in nature than was ms. tanden. his position will require him to be under extreme stress where he will need to listen to a full range of options, engage in careful deliberation and regularly make life-and-death decisions. i have to say his audition as a

social media celebrity over the last five years don't inspire confidence in his ability to do so. when i asked him about this at his hearing, he said he may have gotten caught up in the passions of the moment or that these were stressful, trying times. some of these social media statements, i would point out, came in the middle of the night when whether kahl was presumably sitting on his couch at his home watching his news feed. if he thinks that was a stressful or trying moment, what is he going to do when he's sitting in the pentagon and vladimir putin is invading southern ukraine? since we're talking about foreign policy decisions, i'll point that mr. kahl has been, like joe biden, wrong about every important foreign policy decision of the last decade. in 2010, mr. kahl said the concerns about a rapid withdrawal from iraq were exaggerated, and it was very unlikely to trigger a dramatic uptick in violence.

he missed that one by just a little bit because soon thereafter 30,000 radical islamic extremists conquered a quarter of iraq and isis carried out horrific terrorist attacks on multiple continents. in 2012, he ridiculed then-candidate mitt romney, now senator mitt romney's assertion that russia was a major geopolitical threat. of course two years later russia invaded ukraine and conquered crimea. it has since been an obsession of the democratic party even though joe biden has once again reverted to the democrats' traditional doveishness on russia, something presumably mr. kahl will support. in 2017 he predicted recognizing jerusalem as the capital of israel were the seat -- where the seat of israel's government is located will result in a, quote, third intifada. instead israel has signed multiple historic peace deals.

in 2018, when president trump warned iran against pursuing nuclear weapons, mr. kahl wrote, the war drums are already sounding. but no war happened. that same year when president trump withdrew from the terrible iran nuclear deal, mr. kahl said, war will be all that is left. no war happened. in 2020, when the united states finally delivered justice by killing iran's terrorist master mind suleimani, mr. kahl said mr. trump started a war with iran and iraq. yet again no war happened. mr. kahl's ability to accurately assess these events almost defies probability. after all, even a broken clock is right twice a day. on issues of war and peace, mr.e

and consistently wrong. this is not a fault that one of the chief strategic planners, the number three official at the pentagon and one of the most powerful policy advisors in the government ought to have. no pentagon nominee should be this partisan, this divisive, this controversial. republicans have given every defense department and intelligence nominee a fair hearing, and most have passed this chamber with healthy bipartisan majorities, in some cases unanimously. mr. kahl is different. mr. kahl is different because his toxic statements and reputation would inhibit the workings of the department of defense. every time that secretary austin and senior pentagon personnel testified before the senate, members of this body will wonder the policies they are presented with are the product of hard-headed serious planning or the workings of a political

hack. a man of mr. kahl's judgment and temperament and his record of disastrous policy judgments is unfit to be the under secretary of defense for policy, and i will oppose his nomination as every senator should. mr. president, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. tuberville: thank you, mr. president. the under secretary for defense for policy serves as national security advisor to the secretary of defense. this position requires even temperament, sound judgment, and a willingness to work with both sides of the aisle to protect and advance our national security. as many of my colleagues have noted, president biden's nominee for this important position severely lacks these qualities. colin hackett kahl has promoted conspiracy theories on social media. he makes outrageous claims against those who disagree with him, like when he called republicans the party of ethnic

cleansing. and he views the threats of our nation solely through the lens of partisan politics. dr. kahl blatantly down played the threat of russia when our colleague mitt romney highlighted it during the 2012 presidential campaign, but then promoted numerous lies about president trump and russia after the 2016 election. this is not -- and i repeat -- not the kind of person who should serve in the pentagon's number three position. but today i want to address another position. dr. kahl presents himself as an academic, but he often makes claims that are not grounded in data. that is especially true when it comes to the situation along our southern border. as everybody knows, the illegal migration crisis is not new. as of 2017, according to the pew research center, there were an estimated 10.5 million

unauthorized immigrants in this country. and according to pew, over 77% of those unauthorized immigrants came from within the western hemisphere. president trump came in office in 2017, promising to do something about this challenge. enforce our immigration laws, reinforce southern security along our border. dr. kahl disagreed with this policy, and that's certainly his right. but rather than explain why he disagreed, he promoted baseless lies. in october 2018, a migrant cara van surged toward the border. president trump deployed 5,000 u.s. members of our service to support homeland security at the border. this is not as some in the media claimed a show of force. this was a defense support of

civil authority's mission, the type of mission d.o.d. also does to support fema during hurricanes. dr. kahl has served previously at the pentagon. he has served as national security advisor to the vice president. he knows what defense support to civil authorities is and what these missions entail. but rather than explaining any of this to his many thousands of twitter follows, dr. kahl told them that the deployment was a stunt. this was a terrible insult to the men and women in uniform who were supporting d.h.s. at the time. but more to the point, it was also a blatant lie. a few months later dr. kahl called the situation at the border a fake crisis and also tweeted that trump's claim of a border crisis are bogus. to justify his claims, kahl cited data showing a decrease in arrests at the southern border, but there was one problem with

his data. arrests along the border always decline when border enforcements is lax. well, as we know, president trump stepped up enforcement at the border, and it worked. as a result, arrests at the border surged through the first half of 2019. more border security means more arrests. but it also deters future illegal migrants. and that's why illegal border crossings fell dramatically in the second half of 2019. far from being a fake crisis, as dr. kahl would have it, this was a crisis that was not being properly addressed until president trump took action. today we have another crisis at the border. we have seen a record number of illegal crossings and arrests in recent months, as illegal migrants anticipate a more welcoming environment under president biden's administration.

the administration has made detrimental changes to our border policy, including ending the remain in mexico policy. but it is worth noting what has not changed. u.s. troops are still deployed in support of d.h.s. along the border. they're still there. anyone who has taken the time to visit our southern border, as i was there just a few weeks ago, understands that if our troops in this region, the crisis at the border would only grow worse. colin kahl saw the deployment as a stunt under president trump. i suspect he sees it a little different under president biden. and that's exactly the problem. colin kahl's judgment is often based on partisan politics, not data. we cannot accept the risk of having someone so partisan in the defense department's number three position.

this position requires someone who bases his recommendations on data and notten on the top trending -- and not on the top trending hashtag. i urge my colleagues to vote against the motion to discharge. let colin kahl keep tweeting and let the administration send us another nominee. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. wyden: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, i have ten requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and the minority leaders. the presiding officer: senator, we're in a quorum call. mr. wyden: i ask unanimous consent that vacate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wyden: mr. president, i have ten requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and the minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. wyden: mr. president, i rise today on behalf of oregonians in every nook and cranny of our wonderful state to thank my friend, chris meyer, for more than three decades of stellar public service. chris is retiring this month as

a superhero who has been cutting through red tape and defeating bureaucracy for so many oregonians who turned to her nights and weekends and all hours. she helped with emergency immigration and state department needs, passports, visas, immigration needs. as a caseworker representative in my office for more than a decade, chris brought an unfailing professionalism, determined follow through, and oregon-way focus on smart solutions when tackling all of those duties. chris came to our portland office in 2009, after a decade of working for my friend,

senator gordon smith. before that, she had worked a total of 11 years in the office of senator mark hatfield, congressman denny smith, and state representative chuck cooper. if those names, mr. president, that i just mentioned were an answer on jeopardy, the question would be, who are four prominent elected republicans in oregon history? the senate heard that one right. chris is retiring after a career of workering -- working for elected officials from both political parties. on one level she worked forral -- for all of us as elected officials. but she worked for everybody in

oregon, regardless he was their politics and on that larger level, chris epitomizes so many other public servants in 0er or and our country whose names, mr. president, just never get celebrated in headlines or tweets or news coverage. the word "bipartisan" gets tossed around a lot, but chris lived that ethos every single day of her public service career. when she was responding to the uncounted number of calls and e-mail inquiries she got over the years, she never said, so, tell me a little bit about your politics. her response was always, how can i help? and she always applied her common sense from the deep reservoir of good will she earned nationwide to move the

levers of government quickly and successfully. and as i alluded to at the outset, those queries and her responses never corresponded to an 8-to-5 schedule because she always was on the phone to a u.s. embassy somewhere thousands of miles away. chris' duties went into overdrive in the first few weeks this past year during covid. oregon parents called chris frantic to get their kids home from overseas study programs. oregon families and friends would e-mail chris desperate for information about family members abroad on travel that they had saved a lifetime for. and we had businesses from all over oregon text chris about their u.s. employees who were working in other countries.

on the other end of all of those calls and e-mails and texts was chris meyer, always responding with her experience and empathy to figure out solutions. i can't even begin to calculate, mr. president, the number of times oregonians would come up to me in our iconic fred meyer stores and they would say, ron, let me tell you about how chris meyer went to bat for me and my family. so today we're very grateful for her chris meyer brand of tenacity with a smile because she was steering so many oregonians through the unprecedented trials of the past year. and i have been thinking about all the challenges she's been

helping oregonians with over her entire career. and she was helping all those people when she in our office every single day brought relentless good cheer, an overflowing candy bowl, and a love bordering on obsession for university of oregon football. we ducks take our football seriously but certainly nobody more than chris meyer. i'm going to close with a final thought as i send chris off to a very well-earned retirement with her husband brad and her daughter, katherine, back home on the east side of my hometown of portland. as chris, fellow oregonian fans know, the pregame pageantry and

home games in eugene always included the tradition of one joyful shout in unison. it never rains in austin stadium. if i may paraphrase that thought today in talking about my friend, her optimistic outlook and legacy of success means that all of us were joyful because it never raindrop in chris meyers' world. so, chris, on behalf of oregonians in communities small and large, we're so grateful for all the time you went to bat for the people of our state, for the people of this country. for that we say thank you. mr. president, i yield the floor and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: are we in a quorum call? i ask to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. manchin: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join senator portman and myself, and senator portman will come in later and express his desire for this also, in taking action to permanently schedule fentanyl and deadly fentanyl analogs.

fentanyl is 100 more potent than morphine, 50 times more potent than heroin, and according to the d.e.a., just two milligrams of fentanyl can cause a lethal overdose. in february, 2018, the drug enforcement administration issued a temporary scheduling order to schedule fentanyl and related substances to allow federal law enforcement authorities to bring criminal actions against individuals who manufacture, distribute, or handle fentanyl-related substances. a year ago, this body extended the scheduling ordered through may 6, 2021, via unanimous consent. the house extended it by a vote of 320-88. this should not be controversial at all. in 2019, 36,359 people died because of fentanyl. that's a 51% of all overdose deaths that year. 51%. over half of the people that were killed on overdoses was by fentanyl.

we know 2020 was a record year in drug overdoses, mainly driven by fentanyl-related substances and the covid-19 pandemic. we can safely assume that there were at least 44,000 deaths last year. think about that. 44,000 deaths to fentanyl last year. in total, that's over 80,000 people that have died because of fentanyl in just the last two years. and it's heart breaking to lose so many americans to preventable overdoses. the time to permanently schedule this deadly substance is now. that's why senator portman and i have introduced a bipartisan fight fentanyl act to permanently schedule fentanyl and fentanyl analogs. i'm saying permanently schedule fentanyl and fentanyl analogs. the fight fentanyl act is a proactive overdose prevention bill. it stops the creation of these drugs and removes incentives for people to bring these deadly chemicals into our country, reducing the harm to our fellow americans. we know that fentanyl is deadly.

it's killing americans at record rates. west virginia, my home state, has the highest overdose rates per capita in the nation, and every west virginia is familiar with the horrible impacts of the drug edmonton on our family, friends, neighbors, and our entire economy. and i recognize their concerns about mandatory minimums that do more harm than good, but permanently scheduling fentanyl and fentanyl analogs is not about locking people up. it's about keeping our fellow americans alive. but don't take my word for it. we asked the g.a.o. to study it, the general anotherring office to study it. in the last three years since the rescheduling was put in place, the g.a.o. found only eight prosecutions occurred related to fentanyl analogues. four of which were associated with drug cartels. and if that's not enough, our bill also explicitly prohibits new mandatory minimums associated with fentanyl analogues. here are the facts.

80,000 deaths compared to eight prosecutions. 80,000 deaths compared to eight prosecutions. but here's another fact we simply don't have the support in congress today to pass the fight fentanyl act right now. hard to believe. we must pass another short-term extension this week to ensure the essential temporary protection does not lapse. i hope my colleagues will at least support that effort. but i also urge any colleagues, democrats and republicans, to join senator portman and i in this effort to -- in this effort to permanently reschedule this deadly, deadly drug. we cannot afford to keep kicking the can down the road as we have for far too long. thank you, madam president. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. portman: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: madam president, i'm here to join my colleague and friend from west virginia -- the presiding officer: i'm sorry. we're in a quorum call. mr. portman: i ask unanimous consent to not have a quorum call.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. portman: so my friend and colleague, senator manchin from west virginia and i are on the floor today to talk about this issue of fentanyl. this is a deadly synthetic opioid that is killing more people in our states than any other single drug, and unbelievably, congress only has 15 days to act, and if we don't, some of these illegal fentanyl products are going to be legal again. this is exactly the wrong thing for us to do right now as sadly we're seeing a big increase in overdoses and overdose deaths because of the effects of the coronavirus pandemic. so we want to have bipartisan legislation that we've introduced passed that simply says let's not allow these illicitly manufactured and deadly synthetic opioids to suddenly become legal again. and again, if we don't act within 15 days, that happens. our bill would ensure that these deadly drugs continue to be scheduled. that's the technical term, scheduled by the drug

enforcement agency meaning that they would continue to be illegal. here's why we've got to act. fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, is more than 15 times more powerful than heroin. and it's incredibly addictive. for years this has been coming to our shores from china. almost all of it through the mail until more recently because we frankly passed legislation to cut down on the mail deliveries and instead now much of it is going through mexico coming across our southwest border. it's a big reason that overdose deaths in the united states have now surged to record highs during this covid-19 pandemic with more than 87,000 americans -- think about that -- 87,000 americans died during the 12-month period between september 2019 and september 2020. that is a record. it's a terrible record. now, when we have the actual numbers from 2020, it's going to be even worse. we just got these numbers from

september 19 -- 2019 until september 2020 when we have the numbers from january 2020 through december 2020, it will be even worse. that's what everybody says and it makes sense. when you look at this data, the worst months are the months during the pandemic in 2020. so again we are very sadly after several years of progress looking at once again an increase in these overdose deaths. according to the centers for disease control and prevention, c.d.c., synthetic opioids like fentanyl are the biggest drivers of this tragic surge. we can project that more than half of these deaths are from this class of drugs based on what we know about the 2019 data. that's the latest information we have. in 2019 there were 70,630 deaths and more than half of those, 36,359 involved fentanyl. experts believe again that fentanyl sometimes mixed with other drugs like cocaine or crystal meth or sometimes heroin

continues to be the number one killer. it's such an enormous crisis because these drugs are so incredibly dangerous. it takes only two milligrams of fentanyl to kill an adult which is why the d.e.a., drug enforcement administration permanently classified fentanyl as a schedule 2 drug. in order to avoid prosecution, drug traffickers started making slight modifications to fen fentanyl. so you've got some evil scientist in china or in mexico that makes a slight md indication to fentanyl -- modification to fentanyl. sometimes adjusting a single molecule and create whag are called fentanyl analogues, in other words it's not prosighsly pure fence -- precisely pure fentanyl. even though it has the same properties, the tiny variations allows the traffickers and the scientists to evade prosecution. oftentimes by the way, these analogues like carfentanil are even more deadly, believe it or not than fentanyl itself.

in response in 2018, the d.e.a. temporarily scheduled fentanyl analogs but under law, that designation expires after may 6. again, only 15 days from now. in that deadline lapses, evil scientists and criminals who run labs in china and mexico will be able to avoid law enforcement as they flood the united states with unlimited slight variations of this deadly drug. again, that's why senator manchin and i are calling on congress to do the sensible thing. pass the find fentanyl act to make these dangerous subsubstances -- substances permanently illegal. that's what we want and our communities demand and that's what we deserve to give them. it's long overdue we make this designation permanent. china implemented wide controls over analogues in 2019. it defines the subbanses more broadly than the u.s. government defines them. how ironic. here's china, a country that's sending us this poison and

actually making these drugs illegal in china and they're not illegal here. how could that be? i know some colleagues oppose permanent scheduling of these fentanyl drugs because they are concerned about mandatory minimum sentences and also that it could hinder research into future medications to treat addiction. let me address both of those. first, i share this concern about the harsh punishments that don't fit the nature of a crime. that's why our legislature ensures that mandatory minimum sentences are not automatically imposed. in any criminal case, we want the judge to look at the severity of the crime and look at all relevant factors in sentencing. so that issue is addressed. there has been a great deal of conversation about the impact of prosecutions and incarcerations on specific populations, including minority communities. but what is often lost in this debate is the growing impact of fatal overdoses in these same communities. since 2016 while white

fatalities have decreased through 2019, the data we have, overdoses from opioids among black americans, particularly black men, have actually accelerated. from 2011 to 2016, black americans had the highest increase in synthetic opioid-involved overdose death i rates compared -- death rates compared to all populations. so it's getting worse, not better in these same minority communities. while from 2017 to 2018 overall opioid-involved overdose fatalities decreased -- remember, we were making progress for the last several years -- overall it decreased by just over 4%. rates among black and hispanic americans actually increased. another issue my colleagues have raised again is concern that permanently scheduling fentanyl and its analogs somehow hinders research into treating addiction. first of all i agree we need this research and need it badly.

one example of this is coming up with naloxone, a miracle drug based on heroin that actually reverses the effects of an overdose. it's a miracle. and i've seen it work and it saves lives. researchers have told me there are barriers to be approved to legally research schedule one substances. there's also a stigma to conducting this kind of research, even though we know it could lead total development of new treatments. i am open to working with colleagues to address these barriers and i believe we could do that through legislation creating the flexibility in the registration system to scientists. but we cannot let these deadly fentanyl drugs become legal in the meantime. and certainly we can't allow this to happen in the next 15 days. just before we came to the floor this afternoon, the house of representatives passed a temporary measure. it's a five-month extension of the ability to schedule these deadly drugs. why would we do it for just five months? let's do it permanently. now i'm told, well, we've got to

take it or leave it from the house. i hope that's not the case. if so, of course, i'll be for extending it rather than having it expire in 15 days but let's act. let's act responsibly. let's act now. the united states senate should be taking the lead here and saying let's permanently classify these drugs as everybody agrees they should be classified in the sense that they are dangerous narcotics that are killing, literally tens of thousands of our fellow citizens every year. let's do the right thing for those communities. let's do the right thing for law enforcement. let's sure they have the predictability and certainty in law enforcement to know that they can prosecute these criminals, these traffickers. we need to act now to address the threat of these demed fentanyl drugs -- deadly fentanyl drugs coming into our community, and i urge the senate to pass the fight fentanyl act this week. i yield back my time.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: madam president, i rise today to speak in opposition to the nomination of mr. colin kahl to be under secretary of defense for policy. the position of under secretary of defense for policy is essentially the third most senior leadership position in the department of defense. it requires a leader of tremendous experience and knowledge, someone with the ability to separate politics from policy. with the many national security challenges our nation and the pentagon face, this position

requires a measured, rational, and deliberate leader. it needs a leader who puts the safety and security of the american people ahead of scoring one more point on the political board. the head of policy at the pentagon needs to be someone we as a country can trust with some of our most delicate secrets. the reality is mr. kahl does not meet the standard for this position. secretary of defense austin and his deputy, dr. kathleen hicks, have affirmed before the senate what the national defense strategy articulated, the most

pressing strategic challenge facing our country is communist china. we know the threat from china is long-lasting and very serious. the complex actions and efforts of the c.c.p. are disrupting the global order and reducing our national security. these actions demand expertise in the development and leadership of our national defense. when it doms president biden's -- when it doms president biden's pick for the head of defense policy, mr. kahl, mr. kahl lacks any meaningful experience and has only a sparse record of thought on china or anything in the broader indo-pacific region,

for that matter. the united states cannot afford this lack of knowledge and experience in a top pentagon official. now, folks, we can also look to his judgment as a matter of concern. mr. kahl has a record of leniency toward iran. the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, and belligerence to israel. on iran, i would note that this administration is already not taking seriously the threat tehran poses. iran flay dprently -- flagrant ly continues to enrich their uranium and inch closer and closer to obtaining a

nuclear weapon. we, the american people, cannot afford for this administration to play footsie with iran and kowtow to their demands of sanction relief. based on kahl's record, he would be one more advocate at the table pushing to get the united states back into the failed iran nuclear agreement. frankly, when it comes to iran and israel, mr. kahl couldn't be more wrong in hissing understanding of who our friends are and who the real threats to america are. madam president, if i'm honest, i'm deeply dismayed that we are even to this point in consideration.

the under secretary of defense for policy must be a steadfast, measured, and discreet public official. mr. kahl has proven to be the complete opposite. he is brash and unserious in his public rhetoric. in fact, he has called republicans, quote, the party of ethnic cleansing, end quote. and he played the role of chicken little in claiming, quote, we are all going to die, end quote, if one former white house advisor were replaced for another. his hysterical -- yes,

hysterical -- public comments may have even compromised classified information. that's why i've joined with many of my colleagues to call for an f.b.i. investigation of his handling of classified information. having led troops overseas during operation iraqi freedom, serving in our military for over 23 years, i believe our service members deserve someone who will take a serious nonpartisan outlook to policy, apply measured thought to their actions, and real qualifying experience to a most critical job. mr. kahl is far from meeting that standard.

and i strongly, strongly oppose his nomination and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor.

mr. hagerty: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. hagerty: i rise to -- the controversial nominee to be the

under secretary of defense, the third highest position in our department of defense. on april 13, 2021, i, along with 17 other senators, wrote to f.b.i. director christopher wray requesting an investigation into whether kahl had improperly disclosed classified information. we asked the majority leader not to advance kahl's nomination on the floor until the f.b.i. completes his investigation. yet here we stand. the 18 senators who signed these letters include the senators who sit on senate judiciary committee, the senate intelligence committee, and the senate armed services committee. as senators, the constitution charges us with providing advice and consent. and so i stand here today because the senate deserves to have these questions answered so that we might properly discharge our duties. i fear my democratic colleagues want to force this nominee through before we know all the

facts. facts which may be incredibly damning to his nomination. here's what we do know. as a u.s. government employee with a top secret security clearance, he signed a nondisclosure agreement. in fact he likely signed many of them during his tenure in government. this binds government employees in perpetuity to protect u.s. laws, regulations. these do not come with footnotes, they don't come with fine print that says you're only obligated to protect classified information when it's a president you like or when it's a president that belongs to the political party you agree with. mr. kahl signed this document in perpetuity, period. rather than uphold the oath, kahl disclosed sensitive information to score political

points on twitter. some of the information that kahl appears to have leaked internal deliberations at the national security counsel, is of a category even senators and senate staff with the highest security clearances are almost always denied access. in december of 2017, kahl publicly bragged that he confirmed the disclosure to the media of classified planning for military options in korea with multiple sources inside the administration. you can see right here, his tweet. there's a con tinge enter at the white house that believes a limited strike is viable and the u.s. can control escalation by threatening regime change if kim jong-un retaliates. this is incredible. continuing on the same threat. he says, i heard this separately from multiple sources inside the

administration. in other words, if the intelligence services of north korea, china, russia, iran, and other adversaries were working to corroborate the accuracy of this leaked information, kahl saved them the trouble by working with, quote, multiple sources inside the information to confirm this leaked classified information. publicly no less. let me put this in a personal perspective. when kahl tweeted these leaks in december of 2017, i was serving as u.s. ambassador to japan. this was at a time when north korea launched two intercontinental ballistic missiles over japan and detonated a nuclear warhead. putting the lives of my family, fellow diplomats, all of us living within range of north korea in harm's way. at a time when tensions couldn't have been higher, colin kahl was

willing to expose vital information to north korea and risk american lives. all of this just to score political points. reckless, i say. in february and march of 2017, kahl leaked details about a classified national security meeting on counterterrorism operations in yemen, that he confirmed with four separate staffers in the room. here's his message, talking about yemen, quoting the deputy national security director k.t. mcfarland saying, saddle up. the existence of this meeting should have been classified and certainly anything said during this meeting, here it is on twitter. and then he follows up by saying that he is confirmed with four separate staffers in the room. in short, kahl used social media and other forums to leak

classified information to brag about his ability to get u.s. government employees to confirm with him the veracity of leaked classified information. whoever holds the third highest position at d.o.d. must be someone who completely understands and appreciates the important nature of sensitive information an dedicated to safeguarding it. rather than respect the responsibilit kahl shared this information on twitter for the world to see merely to scratch a political partisan itch. if we let this nominee slide through under these conditions, what message does it send to other national security ambitious types doesn't it says they will be rewarded. doesn't it disclose further disclosure of classified information? doesn't it play right into our

adversaries by shown we can be exploited to obtain the most sensitive information that our government keeps? as my senate colleagues and i explained in our letter to f.b.i. director wray, the undersecretary for defense policy plays a key role in america's national security and should be held by a person of sound judgment and temperament. someone who understands the need to safeguard classified information and to keep national security affairs distinct and separate from partisan political activities. kahl's growing record of mishandling of information, and evasive response regarding this issue falls far short required for holding one of our nation's top security positions. by apparently soliciting or receiving information and repeatedly posting such information on social media, kahl demonstrated disregard for security protocols that are

designed to protect our national security interests. kahl has shown that he's unfit to serve and his nomination should not move forward until the f.b.i. has completed the investigation requested by me and 17 of my senate colleagues. i hope that all of my colleagues want to see answer ises -- answers to these important questions as well before we begin to advance his nomination. madam president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: i ask that we dispense with the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: thank you, madam president. i would yield back all time. the presiding officer: all time is yielded back. the question is on the motion to discharge. mr. reed: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote:

vote:

vote: