don't want to vote for this because of some future plan, even though what we're talking about now is to pay for other things that were previously incurred which senate republicans voted for and they are criticizing a plan which we intend to pay for. and, yes, we had planned to make some important investments with that revenue. we intend to extend the tax cuts for middle- and lower-income families with kids. they're going to expire at the end of this year -- december 31, the $300 a month, up to $300 a month tax cut for families, for each child. that goes away if we don't enact the build back better agenda. we intend to reduce the cost of prescription drugs, something that's hitting every american really hard in their pocketbook. we intend to increase the

availability and affordability of high-quality child care. a lot of parents aren't reentering the workforce because like every parent, they want to make sure their child is in a safe and secure place during the day, and it doesn't make economic sense if they have to pay as much for that child care as they make on the job. so we need to address that issue. and we want to expand medicare to cover vision, dental and hearing services. that's a big gap in the program. so i hear republicans down here railing against the build back better agenda even though every survey shows the american people of all parties support that agenda. and then i hear them say they're not going to vote to lift this debt ceiling because of that proposal, even though we're planning to pay for that proposal. i just heard one of our

colleagues talking about inflation. the reality is if you pay as you go, then that's not a problem. the problem is when people put everything on the credit card and then decide not to pay for it. that's what the republicans did during the 2017 trump tax plan. so i would just say to my colleagues, you yourself are on record here in the united states senate talking about what kind of economic devastation would be caused if the united states defaults on its debts, if we don't lift the debt ceiling. you know what that action would mean for american families because you said it here on the senate floor and around the country. and so don't threaten the

american people and our entire economy with something that you know to be so irresponsible. and i'll end with this. you should do the right thing and join with democrats in lifting the debt ceiling to pay for bills that are already due and owing and that you voted for. but for goodness sakes, if you don't want to do the right thing, at least get out of the way. at least don't use the filibuster to prevent democrats from doing the right thing for the country. that is a cynical ploy. i don't know what the political calculus is. i have heard the republican leader say that he didn't want the biden agenda to succeed. but for god sakes, let's put country first and let's make sure that we do the right thing for the american people.

let's lift the debt ceiling, let's pay our bills on time, as we have done every year throughout our history. i urge my colleagues to either do the right thing on the vote or get out of the way and help the country. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, yesterday the senate confirmed the nomination of jayme ray white to serve as deputy united states trade representative. today the senate has an opportunity to fill another important deposition following a debate on president biden's nomination, sarah bianchi for that role. i'm going to to outline a few reasons why ms. bianchi is the right person for this important job and why the senate should confirm her nomination today. she is a long time accomplished

member of the biden economic team. she worked in a host of settings during her time in public service, the office of the vice president, domestic policy council, the office of management and budget, and as a staff member here in the senate. she bristles valuable experience in the private sector to her nomination. she helped to build strong biden economic agenda that's focused on making sure that all americans have the opportunity to get ahead. with respect to the key issue of trade which is under the jurisdiction of the senate finance committee -- that means fighting for american workers and american businesses and cracking down on the trade cheats that will flagrantly try to rip off jobs and economic growth. her variety and the depth of msn public service will be a big asset to the ambassador and the team at ustr. when the finance committee voted on ms. bianchi's nomination, she was approved by a vote of

27-1. i often say that it is a struggle to get a bipartisan group of 27 senators to even agree on buying a 7 up, but supporting the bianchi nomination is clearly a bipartisan proposition on a vital economic position. in fact, all of president biden's ustr nominees have come before the finance committee, i'm pleased to say, have gotten strong support from both sides of the aisle. for example, a long time staffer of mine, jayme white, 80 votes yesterday, mr. president. 80 votes with strong support, i might add, from business and from labor. and it is because these individuals are focused on getting beyond some of the old theories about trade, free trade, fair trade, and the like. what really brings democrats and republicans together is trade

done right. that's what ms. bianchi is all about. when confirmed she'll take on a challenging portfolio which includes asia, africa textiles and industrial competitiveness. the headline in that list of course is taking on china. the finance committee has worked hard on policies designed to take on china's many trade rip-offs. china's use of forced labor, massive unfair subsidies that destroy any semblance of a level playing field, theft of intellectual property, the great fire wall and censorship of the internet extending beyond china's borders. these abuses, these rip offs directly threaten america's jobs, innovations and values from sea to shining sea. the united states senate, part of how members should address these issues is confirming highly qualified and experience

nominees like sarah bianchi whose jobs will include confronting china directly. the senate simply can't afford to leave this important deputy ustr role open any longer. now the senate has a top-notch nominee before us. i support sarah bianchi fully. 27 members of the finance committee supported her earlier this year during our committee's markup. i urge senators to vote yes on the bianchi nomination, and i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. grassley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask that the calling of the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: last week special council durham indicted michael sussmann, an attorney for the hillary clinton presidential campaign. he was indicted for lying to the f.b.i. the indictment gives example

after example of the democratic party's bag of dirty tricks. in september 2016, sussmann met with the f.b.i.'s general counsel james baker. at that meeting he provided information and data files that allegedly contained evidence of a secret communication between the trump organization and the russian bank alpha bank. the evidence, however, was fabricated. the allegations about the trump organization being linked with a russian bank, these were false. the e-mail server at issue was neither owned nor operated by the trump organization.

but the lie in the indictment occurred when sussmann allegedly told the f.b.i. general counsel that he wasn't providing the information on any client's behalf. he repeated the same to another government agency. those assertions were apparently false. he was working for the hillary clinton presidential campaign. now, interestingly, the indictment states that although baker was allegedly unaware of the political affiliation of the information starting in april 2016, sussmann represented the democratic national committee and regularly met with the f.b.i. according to the indictment, the f.b.i. failed to connect the

dots. what special counsel durham's indictment shows in significant detail by the way are the stop -- or the steps that the clinton campaign and her democratic allies took to dirty up trump and did so with known false information. time and again my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have cast false information against trump to tie him to a foolish conspiracy that he's an agent of the russian government. time and again when the evidence is made public the democratic party is shown to be the master of the disinformation universe. and much of the so-called

mainstream press fell for and peddled the falsehoods. what's wrong with our journalists being a journalist and investigating everything rather than trying to not do their work and let people get away with these sort of -- this sort of action. now, i'm going to take a few examples from the indictment. notably sussmann was working with an unnamed executive at a technology firm that had been offered a position in the clinton administration should we have won that election in 2016. the information compiled and analyzed the false -- false alpha bank information and according to the indictment and i quote, exploited access to

nonpublic data at multiple internet companies to conduct opposition research concerning trump. end of quote. to accomplish those ends, the executive enlisted, and i quote, the assistance of researchers at a u.s.-based university who were receiving and analyzing internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract. end of quote. now, amazingly the indictment later says that the university accessed data of an unnamed executive branch agency through an unnamed internet company. that unnamed internet company possessed that data because it was a sub-contract, quote, in a

sensitive relationship between the u.s. government and another company. end of quote. apparently taxpayers unwittingly assisted the false information campaign used against trump by the democrats. i'd like to say that you can't make this stuff up but that's exactly what they did. a researcher that worked to falsely connect trump to alpha bank said this, quote, we cannot technically make any claims that would -- that would fly public scrutiny. end of quote. they also discussed faking e-mail addresses to try and beef up some bogus false connections

between trump and alpha bank. even the unnamed tech associate said that it was a red herring. one e-mail in the indictment even says in part, the only thing that drives us at this point is that we just do not like trump. this will not fly in the eyes of public scrutiny. folks, i'm afraid that we have tunnel vision. end of quote. they recognized that what they were doing lacked any factual support. yet sussmann, the democrats, and the clinton campaign proceeded to head -- proceeded ahead anyway. even more than that, christopher steele reportedly got his

information from alpha back from suspa and colluded -- included it in the steele dossier. it shows the depth to which the clinton campaign went to smear trump, smear false evidence and plant it with the liberal media who then willingly ran with it and probably smiled as they ran with it. and here we are, years later, with a country that's been almost torn apart because the democratic party's fake evidence against trump. special counsel durham stated on december 9, 2019, in part, relating to the justice department's inspector general's report on crossfire hurricane, quote, last month, we advised

the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report's conclusions as to the predication and how the f.b.i. case was open. end of quote. special counsel durham has had a -- several years to investigate and bring a case forward. we've seen o'two instances where -- we've seen two instances where folks have been charged with a crime, one already pleading guilty. one must not forget the obama-biden justice departments and f.b.i.'s blatant misrepresentation to the fisa courts during the crossfire hurricane and other serious wrongdoings much of which was uncovered by congress and by the inspector general. on june 29 of this year, senator johnson of wisconsin and i asked the attorney general garland if

he agrees with then-attorney general barr's statement that any durham report be submitted in the form that would permit public dissemination. on july 13, this year, tornlg garland said that he debris -- attorney general garland said that he agrees. let's see what you've got and we'll be able to see it when the report comes out. on one other matter, shorter than i just had. news accounts continue to mention plans to increase i.r.s. enforcement funding and to impose -- impose honest reporting requirements on sensitive banking information to the i.r.s. these proposals raise many concerns, particularly in light of questions regarding the ability of the i.r.s. to protect

taxpayer's information and even this year we had a whole bunch of stuff go public of private taxpayer information that by so doing violated the code to protect privacy of taxpayers. however, i want to now discuss an existing i.r.s. program that's already collecting hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid taxes and doing it annually. i'm referring to the program called the private debt collection program they use as private contractors pursuing tax debts that the i.r.s. would otherwise not pursue. this program was enacted as part of the infrastructure legislation signed into law 2015. each year since the annual updates on the program's

finances document very well the growing success of this program that's done by private debt collectors. as of the end of the fiscal year 2020, the program had collected nearly $1 billion in unpaid taxes. after accounting for the program's costs, it's returned more than $678 million in net revenue to the treasury. and of that $678 million, more than $458 million was from the fiscal year 2020 alone. every year the program is allowed to function, it brings more and more money into the treasury. at the same time it generates resources that the i.r.s. uses to hire additional tax collection personnel.

to date, the program has enabled i.r.s. to hire many new employees. the recent i.r.s. update for the third-quarter of fiscal year 2021 continues this trend. through june, the private debt collection program has provided more than $700 million in net revenue to the treasury. in other words, in the first nine months of fiscal year 2021, the program has more than doubled the revenue it has returned to the treasury. the longer this program is allowed to work, the more successful it becomes. the proposals being put forward by my colleagues across the aisle are based on the premise that by spending more money, the i.r.s. will collect more money, the private debt collection program brings in money without

spending taxpayers' money. despite the obvious benefits of this program, i'm very concerned that the i.r.s. has suspended providing additional cases to the program until the end of september. commissioner commissioner readic assures me in responses to written questions that the additional cases would be provided on september 27. i'm going to hold the commissioner to that statement and in upcoming days expect to see him keep his word to me. all the hand writing over -- over spending more money for i.r.s. enforcement and information reporting shows the serious issues involved with those proposals. the i.r.s. private debt collection program is proven to collect taxes already owed,

allows the i.r.s. to hire more personnel and costs nothing up front. anyone serious about closing the tax gap should support and encourage the full use of this program, the private debt collection program. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: i ask at the end of my remarks the scheduled votes take place. the presiding officer: without objection. sands sands mr. president, as chairman of the -- mr. sanders: mr. president, as chairman of the senate budget committee, i want to say a few words about some of the important budgetary issues that congress is now facing. i want to focus on the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill, but before i do that, i want to comment on the looming

debt ceiling crisis that we face. mr. president, republican leader mitch mcconnell this morning once again reiterated that the republican party will not vote to lift the debt ceiling and in an extraordinarily irresponsible manner, republicans have indicated that they will not pay the debts incurred under the trump administration. in his statement as he has done time and time again, senator mcconnell implies that this debt ceiling has something to do with future spending. it does not. like anyone who owns a credit card, the payments that are made are for past spending. in this case spending incurred under the trump administration.

and let us be clear. if the united states, the largest economy in the world, defaults on its debt, it will plunge not only our country but the entire global economy into what could become a severe economic depression. that means massive unemployment, higher interest rates, severe reduction in government services, and possible cuts in such programs as social security and medicare. the irresponsibility of the republican leadership is not just something that i worry about. according to press reports, former republican secretaries of state -- secretaries of treasury

hank paulson who worked under george w. bush and steven mnuchin who worked under donald trump, republican secretaries of the treasury, both of them visited with senator mcconnell to make the case about the need to extend the debt ceiling. they understand, as i think all of us do, how important it is that the united states of america does not default on its debt and it is about time that my republican colleagues listened to them. now let me say a word about the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill. there has been a lot of talk lately about the need to compromise. well, let me be clear. to a very significant degree, that has already taken place.

of the 11 democratic members of the senate budget committee, nine understood the need for a $6 trillion bill which would finally address the unmet needs, the long-ignored needs of the working families of our country, as well as begin the process of tackling the existential threat of climate change. my guess is that at least 40 out of the 50 members of the democratic caucus supported the $6 trillion proposal. we compromised big time. we cut that proposal or agreed to cut that proposal almost in half down to $3.5 trillion. that, mr. president, to my mind

is a major, major compromise. and as we go forward in this debate, let me be as clear as i can be as to why every penny of that $3.5 trillion is absolutely needed. and let me also make clear that this bill, despite some of the rhetoric coming from my republican colleagues, will not add, should not add, and will not add one nickel to the deficit. it will be paid for. it will be paid for by finally demanding that some of the wealthiest people in this country who in any given year -- we're talking about multibillion theirs who in a given year do not pay a nickel in federal income tax or dozens of large

profitable corporations that in a given year do not pay a nickel in federal income tax. well, we are going to demand that these people start paying their fair share of taxes, and that is more than enough money to cover the $3.5 trillion that is in this proposal. so anyone who suggests to you that this bill is not going to be paid for, that it is going to add to the deficit is simply not telling the truth. it should and will be fully paid for. now, the media is very worried about process. when are we going to do this? what about that person? what about that senator? but they have forgotten to a large degree to talk about what is in the bill. i'm not quite sure that the average american is staying up

nights worrying about whether it's completed on a wednesday or a friday or what this senator thinks or what that senator thinks. they'd like to know what's in the bill. and the reality is that for many, many decades while congress has played rapt attention to the large campaign contributors, it has significantly ignored the needs of working families, the middle class, and low--- low-income people. i think the reason that many of my republican colleagues are so upset about this legislation is that we're changing the dynamic. we are now beginning to pay attention to the needs of working families and not just the wealthy and the powerful. so what's in this bill? first is a result of the extraordinarily successful american rescue plan which went

a long way to pull this country out of the severe economic decline that we experienced as a result of the covid pandemic. as a result of the american rescue plan, mr. president, we cut childhood poverty in the united states of america by over 50%. and for black and brown families, that cut was even higher. year after year the united states has the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country on earth. we took a major step forward in cutting childhood poverty. and now it is clear to me and i think to people all across this country that we must extend the $300 a month per child direct payment that working class and middle class families now receive. and let me be very clear. if we do not pass the

reconciliation bill and not continue those payments, we would once again plunge the children of this country, million, of them, back into poverty and that is morally unacceptable. furthermore, in the united states of america, every person should be outraged by the dysfudysfunctionality of our chd care system. i don't think there's anyone that disagrees with that. we have millions of people who cannot find child care. we have families in vermont and maine paying 20%, 30%, 40% of their limited incomes for child care which is pretty crazy. we have child care workers who are employed at starvation wages. the system is not working. it is broken. it is dysfunctional.

and it is not a radical idea to say that every family in america, when mom goes to work and dad goes to work should be entitled to high quality and affordable child care. a lot of studies out there that say -- says take the best investment we can make in federal dollars is to our children. and that's why we have got to expand what we're doing in child care and under this legislation, no working family in this country will be paying more than 7% of their income for child care. so if you're paying 20% now, you're paying 30%, we will reduce that to no more than 7%. and on top of that and of extraordinary significance, we're going to make pre-k education for 3 and 4-year-olds universal and free, and we are going to do, bottom line, what

almost every other industrialized country on earth does. and understand that the most important investment we can make is in our children. and by the way, importantly, when we do that, we are going to allow well over a million women to go back into the workforce because they no longer will have to stay home because of lack of affordable child care. so if you're worried about labor shortages all over this country, you must support significantly expanding our child care capabilities. further, what is in this legislation, mr. president, is at a time when the pharmaceutical industry charges us the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs, we are going to demand that medicare start negotiating

prescription drugs with the pharmaceutical industry. and i know that americans now are seeing a lot of the ads, completely dishonest ads from the pharmaceutical industry. and let be clear. over the last 20 years, the pharmaceutical industry has spent well over $4 billion on lobbying and hundreds and hundreds of millions more on campaign contributions. guess what? they own the united states congress. and that is why when you walk into a pharmacy and you find that the price of your medicine has doubled, it's because they can do anything they want to do. they write the laws. they right now have 1,400 lobbyists running all over capitol hill trying to make sure that we do not lower the cost of prescription drugs.

and that is what the struggle is about. these guys year after year make outrageous profits. their c.e.o.'s get extraordinary compensation benefits, and they do that by charging us by far the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. well, those days are coming to an end if members of the congress finally have the guts to stand up to -- now, i understand that the pharmaceutical industry owns the republican party. i got that. and i understand that there will not be one republican in the senate who has the guts to stand up for his or her constituents and lower the cost of prescription drugs. well, there should not be any democrat who is in that position. there should be no democrats who are not prepared to stand up to the pharmaceutical industry. and when we have medicare

negotiate prescription drug prices, we can save over $500 billion. and one of the things we're going to do with $500 billion is do what the american people desperately want us to do, and that is to expand medicare to cover dental, vision, and hearing aids. this is the united states. elderly people should not walk around without any teeth in their mouths. they should be able to afford to go to a dentist. not a very radical idea. grandparents should be able to communicate with their grandchildren because they have a hearing aid that they need in their ears that today they cannot afford. and older people should be able to read their daily newspaper because they can get a pair of

glasses that works for them. the need to expand medicare to cover dental, hearing aids, and eyeglasses is absolutely critical. nobody in the year 2021 denies that oral health, hearing, and vision are essential parts of health care. medicare is supposed to cover health care needs of seniors. well, oral health, hearing, and vision are parts of health care. not surprisingly, out of all of the provisions in president biden's build back better plan, expanding medicare to provide dental, vision, and hearing aids is by far the most popular. according to a june 30 morning consult poll, adding dental, vision, and hearing benefits to

medicare is supported by 84% of the american people. not often you get 84% of the american people supporting anything. and yet that includes 89% of democrats, 79% of republicans. this is what the american people want, and this is what we must deliver for them. given that, it is just hard for me to imagine that any member of the house or senate would oppose this very popular and important provision. mr. president, it is a bit embarrassing that our nation, the richest on earth, is the only major country not to guarantee paid family and medical leave. i have been all over this country, and i have met with women, low-income women who are forced to go back to work one week after having their baby

because they need the income. we are the only major country on earth not to guarantee paid family and medical leave, not to make sure that a mom can stay home with her sick kid, or dad with spend time with his dying father or mother. this legislation finally does what should have been done a long, long time ago. it guarantees paid family and medical leave. and what this legislation does is address the reality that many of our younger people are unable to obtain the good-paying jobs that are out there because they lack the ability to get a higher education. now, my own view is we should make public colleges and universities tuition free. my own view is we should cancel

all student debt in this country. that is not in this bill. but what is in this bill is the reality that every american will have the right to get at least two years of community college tuition free, and they can use that to get the training they need for good jobs. they can use that to accumulate credits that can be transferred to a four-year college if that is what they desire. mr. president, a few blocks away from here, and in every major city in america, there are americans sleeping out on the streets. they are veterans. they are people with all kinds of issues. they are working people who

simply cannot afford the housing in their community. two blocks away from the united states capitol, there is an encampment of homeless people. 600,000 americans are homeless today. and on top of that, we have some 18 million households who spend 50% of their limited incomes on housing. in other words, we have a major housing crisis. this legislation addresses that, and in an unprecedented manner invests in low-income and affordable housing, and when we do that, by the way, we create a whole lot of good-paying jobs. mr. president, we are an aging society, and whether people have severe disabilities or whether they are just getting old, people would rather stay at home in many cases rather than be

forced into nursing homes. what our legislation will do is significantly improve home health care in this country and make sure that those people who provide that important service, that difficult service are adequately compensated because today they are not. we need more of those workers, and we need to pay them decent wages. mr. president, i am sadly aware that many of my republican colleagues do not believe that climate change is real or at the very least don't believe that we should do anything about it, but they are dead wrong. and in my view, we cannot go home and look our children and grandchildren in the eye knowing what we know and knowing that the scientists are telling us that we have a very, very few years to address the climate

crisis or else there will be irreparable harm done in our country and around the world. we have turned on the tv this past summer and we saw the unbelievable fires in oregon and california. learned that in siberia, their fire was larger than all the fires combined. smoke went thousands of miles. we learned that july was the hottest month ever, and the climate is exacerbateing extreme weather disturbances like hurricane ida which brought havoc to louisiana. this legislation that we are proposing, it does not go as far as i think it should on climate, but make no mistake about it, it is a major, major step forward in transforming our energy system away from fossil fuel to energy efficiency and sustainable energy. so that is where we are right now, mr. president.

we are at a moment where millions and millions of americans have lost faith in their government. they think that we are incapable of addressing their needs, that all we do is listen. the wealthy campaign contributors and the lobbyists and the billionaire class. and the question we face right now is at this moment, do we have the courage to keep faith with the american people and show them that their democracy, in fact, can work for them and not just powerful special interests? so let us go forward, let us do the right thing. let us pass this $3.5 trillion reconciliation package. and with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. the presiding officer: all time has expired. the question is on the bianchi

nomination. the yeas and nays have been requested. mr. sanders: i would ask for the yeas and nays on that. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 85, the nays are 11 .is the nomination is

confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider sr considered made -- is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22, do hereby bring to a close debate on of executive calendar 241, daniel j. kritenbrink, to be assistant of secretary secretary of state east asian affairs. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of -- the question is, is it the sense of the senate on the nomination of daniel j. kritenbrink, of virginia, a career member of the senior foreign service to be

assistant secretary of state shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this

vote, the yeas are 77, the nays 18. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of state, daniel j. kritenbrink of virginia to be an assistant secretary.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas is recognized. mr. cruz: mr. president, i want to talk today about russia. i want to talk about vladimir putin. i want to describe to this chamber a bipartisan victory that together we won, and then i want to describe tragically how president joe biden is giving that victory away to putin and russia. to understand this issue, we need to go back to the summer of 2019. in the summer of 2019, russia was in the process of constructing a pipeline called the nord stream 2 pipeline. behind me is a map demonstrating

where the nord stream 2 pipeline runs. it is a pipeline that was to run from russia to germany going underneath the baltic sea. the summer of 2019, the pipeline was nearly complete. at various periods in time, it was 70% complete, 80% complete. there was widespread consensus that if this pipeline were completed, it would have devastating consequences. in a few minutes, i will discuss those consequences in greater detail. but in an effort to stop the devastating consequences, i worked on bipartisan legislation , along with senator jeanne shaheen, democrat from new hampshire, and we introduced bipartisan sanctions legislation designed to stop the nord stream 2 pipeline.

that legislation when we introduced it was almost immediately subject to a russian disinformation campaign. in europe, the russians were saying to anyone who would listen that the cruz-shaheen sanction legislation could never pass, that there was no way congress would come together in a bipartisan manner to stop the nord stream 2, that it was hopeless, that no one needed to be concerned that this legislation could pass. they also made the argument as part of their disinformation campaign that the pipeline was nearly complete so the u.s. sanctions could not stop it. there was nothing that could be done to stop it. well, mr. president, to the surprise of nobody who follows these issues, that russian disinformation was precisely that. it was disinformation. it was lies. the senate foreign relations

committee, senator shaheen and i worked with our colleagues, and our legislation was initially voted out of the senate foreign relations committee by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 20-2. overwhelming bipartisan support. at that point, senator shaheen and i began working to get it passed on the floor of the senate. while we were doing so, the russian disinformation continued. this cannot pass. we endeavored to have our sanctions legislation attached to the national defense authorization act, which was moving in the fall and winter of 2019. to do so, mr. president, was not easy. to do so, we needed to get the explicit signoff of the chairman

and the ranking member of the senate foreign relations committee. we needed the explicit signoff of the chairman and the ranking member of the senate armed services committee. we needed the explicit signoff of the chairman and ranking member of the senate banking committee. and then we needed the explicit signoff of senator mcconnell and senator schumer, the republican and democratic leader respectively. all eight of those individuals, all eight of those senators needed to agree with our legislation for this to proceed on the ndaa, and then, mr. president, we had to do the exact same thing in the house of representatives and get the chairman and ranking member on foreign relations, on armed services on banking and get the sin-off from nancy pelosi and kevin mccarthy. to get the explicit support of all 16 of those republican -- leaders, eight republicans and eight democrats, is not easy.

i will say on my part, on senator shaheen's part, we invested dozens, if not hundreds of hours in terms of talking to our colleagues to build that bipartisan consensus. and we ended up getting that overwhelming support. in many ways, that support was miraculous. why is that? well, one of the reasons why nord stream 25 is particularly problem matter -- nord stream 2 is particularly problematic is because russia is building nord stream 2 in order to cut off ukraine. through nord stream 2, russia has the power to starve ukraine. why is it miraculous in december of 2019 that we're able to pass this legislation? well, if you recall what was happening in the house of representatives in december of

2019, the house of representatives was in the middle of impeaching president donald trump for alleged high crimes and misdemeanors concerning ukraine. if you'll recall, mr. president, from the trial we held on the senate floor, central to the allegations that were raised by democrats against president trump was conduct concerning ukraine. it remains astonishing that right in the middle of a partisan gladtorial battle concerning ukraine, simultaneously we were able to get republicans and democrats to work hand in hand to agree with complete consensus that we were going to come together and stop the nord stream 2 pipeline, we were going to stop what vladimir putin was doing. in december of 2019 our legislation passed. the cruz-shaheen sanctions

legislation passed. mr. president, i will remind you of what the russian disinformation had been when we first introduced it. they said, it'll never pass and they said, even if it does pass, it's too late for it to have any effect. well, my memory serves me correctly, president trump signed the cruz-shaheen sanctions legislation at 7:00 p.m. on a thursday. at 6:45 p.m. on a thursday, 15 minutes before our sanctions legislation was signed into law, the company that was laying the pipeline in the baltic sea announced that it immediately halted laying the pipeline, and it was lifting anchor and sailing away. it was an incredible bipartisan victory. the pipeline was stopped in its

tracks. what happened next was absolutely nothing. for a year the pipeline laid dormant. the talking point from vladimir putin and now sadly adopted by joe biden and his administration is that the pipeline is 95% complete. but, mr. president, it is not rocket science that a 90%-complete pipeline is zero percent complete. until you complete both ends of the pipeline, it ain't nothing but a hunk of metal at the bottom of the ocean. nothing is traveling through it until the pipeline is complete and online. for a year, the pipeline lay

dormant. then in the year 2020 senator shaheen and i joined together again in a second round of bipartisan legislation. a second round of sanctions -- we had stopped the nord stream 2 pipeline in its tracks. for a near putin was stopped altogether, and we came for a second piece of legislation. the second version of cruz-shaheen and just like the first sanctions we passed it through both houses of congress, and it was signed into law. with overwhelming bipartisan support, nearly unanimous support of all 535 members of congress. so we now had two major pieces of sanctions legislation on the books, and those sanctions had been working for a year the

pipeline was stopped. then in november of 2020 was the presidential election, and in the wake of the presidential election, joe biden and his transition team almost immediately began tell graphing -- telegraphing weakness to russia. members of joe biden's foreign policy advisory team in the german newspapers expressed openness to nord stream 2 being built, expressed a willingness to try to circumvent the sanctions that had been working and had worked for over a year. within days of joe biden and his team expressing weakness to putin, russia and putin heard and they began the process of getting ready to return to building the pipeline. russia did return to building the pipeline. you know what day, madam president?

january 24. 2021. four days after joe biden was sworn into office, putin said we're safe, we're free, our man joe is in the white house, and we know that the administration is not going to follow u.s. law anymore. and so on january 24, the russians returned to building a pipeline. now, for two years, this body had been united, republicans and democrats, that we were going to stop this pipeline, but joe biden and his administration decided instead to waive the sanctions, decided instead to give vladimir putin what amounts to a multibillion-dollar gift. and not just a gift one time. if this pipeline is allowed to go online, it will put billions

of dollars in putin's pockets every year, year after year after year. what are the consequences of nord stream 2? number one, russia gets richer, russia gets stronger, russia gets billions of dollars that it can use to build its military to threaten its neighbors, to threaten our allies, to endanger the lives of americans and our friends. number two, europe is hurt. our friends and allies in europe are made even more dependent on russian energy. madam president, our former colleague in this body, senator john mccain -- may he rest in peace -- he had a phrase for russia that was memorable that i've used many times. he referred to russia as a gas station with a country attached.

that is putin's plan. it is very simple. putin is a petrotyrant. he's a tyrant. he's a bully. he is a he a k.g.b. thug, and all of his aggression is funded by selling oil and gas. together, republicans and democrats in congress had taken billions out of putin's pockets. and sadly, joe biden and kamala harris decided the world would be a better place if instead putin had billions more -- not just this year or next year but for decades to come. when putin is dead and buried and the next dictator is ruling over russia, that next dictator will be reaping the benefits of this pipeline. indeed, as a result of joe

biden's decision, many are referring to this pipeline as the biden-putin pipeline. for a very simple reason -- it is putin that is building it. it is putining that profiting by it t and the only reason putin is allowed to do so is because president joe biden has given him a multibillion-dollar gift that strengthens russia and it weakens europe. it makes europe subject to energy blackmail. putin has demonstrated a willingness and indeed a history of using energy blackmail, of using those who are dependent on natural gas to coerce them to do what he wants. in the dead of winter, when people are at risk of freezing to death, putin has threatened to and has in fact cut off gas

to endanger the lives of innocent civilians in order to coerce governments to bending to his will. as a result of joe biden's surrender to vladimir putin, putin will have the continued ability to exercise economic blackmail against europe. but not only that, europe has energy needs. those energy needs could be readily satisfied by american energy. europe has expressed a willingness and in some instances an eagerness to import american energy. but joe biden has decided that american jobs are unimportant. his first day in office, biden shut down the keystone pipeline,

killing 11,000 jobs in the united states, including 8,000 union jobs, 8,000 high-paying union jobs that with the stroke of a pen, joe biden eliminated. and at the exact same time that biden is shutting down jobs at a pipeline in america, he is green-lighting and giving a gift to the vladimir putin of a pipeline between russia and germany, producing jobs in russia, producing billions of dollars in russia, and taking away jobs in america. this pipeline is a disaster. as the afternoon goes on, i will elaborate on different aspects in which it is harmful and on the steps we can and should be taking to stop it. but at this point, senator barrasso is here and has some thoughts he wishes to express, and so i will yield the floor to senator barrasso for his

remarks. mr. barrasso: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming is is recognized. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. i come up to join and add my voice to senator cruz, the senator from texas, about joe biden's surrender to vladimir putin. utah know, energy is called the master resource for a reason. it powers our military, powers this nation, powers the economy. and yet joe biden on his first day in office seemed to take us from a nation of energy dominance to energy dependence. canceling the keystone x.l. pipeline and now approving this pipeline, nord stream 2. i come to add my voice to all of those -- and there are many who have spoken out against the president -- in expressing our deep concerns about this administration's unwillingness to fully sanction the nord stream 2 pipeline and to allow it to move ahead. i'm sure -- so is i'm sure senator cruz, as part of his

discussion this afternoon, will talk about the confirmation hearing of tony blinken to be secretary of state. and we asked him specifically about the pipeline and he said he would stop it no matter, even though it was down to the last -- i think he may have said 100 yards. they would stop it. that's not what happened. we saw joe biden surrender. for years we've been sounding the alarm about this russian trap. this pipeline, who built it? gazprom. who are they? they are the russian-owned state monopoly. we heard about russia acting as a gas station with a country. at one time he went on to say that russia was a mafia-run gas company disguised as a country. the dangerous pipeline is going to double the amount of russian

natural gas going to germany via the baltic sea. completion of the nord stream 2 pipeline is going to further tighten its grip on european gas supplies and extend the threatening influence because, as i said before, energy is the master resource. we know russia uses energy to coerce, to manipulate. they use it as a geopolitical weapon. they coerce and manipulate our allies and our partners in europe. many of our nato allies, germany in particular, are becoming dependent upon and addicted to russian gas. europe already gets 40% to 45% of its gas imports from russia. the new export pipeline helps russia undermine europe's efforts to diversify energy sources, suppliers, as well as the routes. nord stream 2 make europe more energy dependent on russia and

of course more prone to russian influence. at the same time it's going to further fuel russian aggression aggression, russian intimidation and russian instability across europe. putin is a powerful foe who aims to divide europe and to destroy the nato alliance. he's been broadcasting those plans. this is not a surprise. the nord stream 2 pipeline would mean a massive money transfer for our nato allies straight into the kremlin's coffers. this means more resources to put towards russia's destabilizing activities. and we continue to see an increase in these destabilizing activities be. russia occupies territory in ukraine, georgia, and moldova. russia launched a military build-up on ukraine's border. russia poisoned a political

opposition leader. russian hackers are creating economic chaos by disrupting america's supply chains. russia's could use these cash reserves? what way? a way to fund aggression in europe and around the world. it's interesting, putin even funds environmental activists in europe to shut down energy where they would be exploring for natural gas and oil. he wants environmental activists to protest any efforts for european countries to develop their own gas resources so he can hold them hostage in this way as well. well, president biden's weakness on putin's pipeline is going to have serious consequences, not just the financial ones for russia, not just those in europe, but worldwide. and for our security and for the security of our allies, i believe we must stop this nord

stream 2 pipeline. that's why congress has overwhelmingly, this body passed several pieces of bipartisan legislation. people say to me can't you do anything in a bipartisan way in congress anymore? i say well, we certainly did when it came to the nord stream 2 pipeline. we passed bipartisan legislation imposing sanctions on this very project. yet this administration, the biden administration, the surrendering biden administration is unwilling to implement the laws that are on the books. president biden waived congressionally mandated sanctions on nord stream 2a.g. which is the company overseeing the pipeline construction. by using a national interest waiver, this administration gave russia the green light to speed ahead to completion of this pipeline. there is strong opposition to president biden's deliberate

failure to follow the law when it comes to this pipeline and the supply of energy from russia to europe. on march 3 of this year, madam president, i led a group of 40 senators in sending a letter outlining our concerns, and i ask unanimous consent that this letter be part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. on this letter signed by 40 senators, we called out the biden administration for refusing to impose sanctions on entities involved in the construction of this very pipeline. it's a lengthy letter, and i'm not going to read the whole thing, but let me point out the letter says this -- the failure of this administration to identify and impose new sanctions signals its willingness to allow president putin to gain a stranglehold over europe's gas supply and increase its geopolitical

leverage. we called on the administration to correct its misguided actions by quickly and fully implementing the sanctions mandated by u.s. law. it's been over six months, and president biden still refuses to follow the law. through his inaction, president biden is gifting russia a new geopolitical weapon. and one of the things i found most astonishing, madam president, in terms of this administration taking us from energy dependence -- from energy dominance to energy dependence is what happened just last month. the biden administration seeing the impact of rising energy costs, rising gasoline costs, people in wyoming paying more than $25 extra every time they fill their tank compared to the day that president biden came into office, he said we need to do something. his national security advisor actually went to say we need to ask opec-plus to produce more

oil, more energy. who is opec-plus? it is saudi arabia and it is russia. on our energy committee of which i'm the ranking member senator murkowski, the senator from alaska, came to the committee and told members of the committee that currently the united states is using more energy produced from russia than it is from her home state of alaska. what does that tell you about this administration and the commitment of this administration to energy needs in this country, in our own country? it is very disturbing, madam president, to see the president act in such a reckless way regarding our nation, our economy, our energy security, and continuing to give gifts like this to our enemies. it is much better to sell energy to our friends than have to buy energy from our enemies. but that's what appeared on the white house website put there by the national security advisor to

the president just last month, saying, asking saudi arabia and opec-plus to produce more energy to help lower the cost at the pump for people in the united states, here at home. why do you think we have -- haven't, mr. president? we killed the keystone x.l. pipeline. it's been a long-standing moratorium on federal oil and lands which there still has not been a lease sale since the day you signed that executive order and the day you came into office. we need to force the president to act on this critical issue of the nord stream 2 pipeline. yesterday, just yesterday the u.s. house of representatives, the body down the hall, with nancy pelosi as the speaker of the house, the house of representatives passed an amendment to the national defense authorization act imposing new mandatory sanctions

on nord stream 2. it would repeal the national interest waiver for sanctions under existing law. this is an incredibly important step, and i would look forward to it quickly becoming law. protecting this russian trap that they have laid for the germans and for europe, the noose around the neck, the nord stream 2 pipeline, it is in our national security interest to block that, but yet this administration is not doing it, and i believe it's a grave mistake on the part of this administration. while president biden has failed to do the right thing, there is still time. the administration can reverse course and fully sanction the nord stream 2 pipeline, and if president biden refuses, congress is prepared to take strong action to protect the energy security of our nation and our allies.

and with that, madam president, i thank senator cruz for allowing me to join in support of the comments that he's making. we have been wonderful partners, and other members on the floor in a bipartisan way, with a specific focus on what is happening with russia and its efforts to undermine the united states, to undermine nato, and to try to go back to, as they said, put the band back together, reestablish the former soviet union, which putin mutant has stated is his -- which vladimir putin has stated is his goal all along. thank you, madam president. i yield. mr. cruz: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas is recognized. mr. cruz: i thank the senator from wyoming for his powerful remarks, and i thank each of

the senators who have worked with me, both republicans and democrats, in our successful effort for over a year to stop the nord stream 2 pipeline. successful right until joe biden became president. i want to talk now about the precise dangers that are posed by the completion of nord stream 2. many agree it would be a catastrophe for the security of the united states and for our european allies. nord stream 2, if it goes online, would double the gas flowing from russia to germany while circumventing american allies that putin targets militarily, diplomatically, and commercially. as a result, if nord stream 2 goes online, it will expose ukraine and poland to deep,

long-term daiks, and it will -- dangers and leave them vulnerable the next time russia targets them for aggression. now one-third of that goes to ukraine. that provides ukraine a curious kind of protection because putin knows that he can't endanger that energy infrastructure without endangering his economic line to the world. with nord stream 2, putin and russia are given by joe biden, by kamala harris effectively open season on ukraine. and when a year from now we see russian tanks in ukraine, we will remember this moment that it was joe biden's surrender to putin on nord stream 2 that enabled russia to carry out that

aggression. if nord stream 2 goes online, it will enrich putin with billions of dollars to direct towards his maligned activities. by the way, if you don't want to take my word for it, here's what the polish prime minister said about nord stream 2, that nord stream 2, quote, strengthens russia's power, helps president putin to build a military power, and helps to intimidate other nations. in addition, if nord stream 2 goes online, it will solidify russian energy dominance at the expense of european energy diversification. if nord stream 2 goes online, it will deepen the corruption that tragically is endemic across russia's energy sector and export more of that corruption to europe.

i want to talk a bit more about the crushing overarching danger of russia using nord stream 2 for blackmail and for coerce. putin uses energy as a weapon. we've seen that pattern over and over again. he uses weapon for blackmail and coercion. he turns it off or on to punish resistance to his expansionism. this is a real, acute, and proven threat. russia turned off the gas to europe in the winter months of 2006 and again in 2009 because of political disputes. the kremlin company that owns and would run nord stream 2, gazprom, has repeatedly cut off gas to ukraine during political crises. it's open blackmail.

and because of joe biden and kamala harris, putin will have more power to blackmail our friends in europe. and it is not only me, it's not only republicans. indeed, it's not only republicans and democrats in congress who understand the magnitude of this threat. our european allies understand fully just how disastrous nord stream 2 would be. ukrainian president zelensky has said that it is, quote, flat-out wrong not to notice that nord stream 2 is a dangerous weapon not only for europe -- not only for ukraine, but for the whole of europe. i want you to pause and reflect. president zelensky of ukraine said this pipeline is a

dangerous weapon directed at ukraine and the whole of europe. why is it being built? because joe biden decided to give it as a gift to putin. in a meeting with the biden administration, the polish deputy foreign minister said, and i quote, poland considers this project to be detrimental to the security of not only ukraine, not only central europe, but also to the security of the whole of europe, making the e.u. dependent on russian gas. if we give a damn about our friends in poland, if we give a damn about our friends in ukraine, if we give a damn about our friends in europe, don't allow joe biden to allow vladimir putin to point this weapon at the heart of europe.

in a joint statement signed by representatives of the foreign affairs committees of the parliaments of estonia, la -- ireland, poland, ukraine and the united kingdom, here's what the foreign affairs committee stated. quote, countering maligned russian aggression is in the vital national security interest of the whole of nato, the e.u., and our partners in central and eastern europe. and that quote, nord stream 2 is a geopolitical project geared toward expanding russia's influence on europe through energy dominance. madam president, a question for every member of this senate to decide, do we care about

endangering the national security, about threatening, about making our european friends subject to blackmail? do we care about what estonia, about what lithuania has told us, do we care about the czech republic, do we care about ireland, do we care about ukraine, do we care about the united kingdom? our actions can decide that. unfortunately joe biden and kamala harris have decided our european allies, their security is not of sufficient concern to them. and, instead, they have actively given this pipeline to vladimir putin. my democratic colleagues, and indeed the vast majority of american lawmakers, also understand the precise danger of blackmail and coercion posed by

nord stream 2. in 2018, senator coons, my democratic colleague from delaware said quite plainly, that, quote, we have to work with europe to reduce its dependence on russian energy exports, and in particular to convince it to discontinue the nord stream 2 pipeline from russia to germany. senator coons continued. quote, as long as russia dominates the provision of energy to europe, it will continue to hold a veto over many european policies and it will be in a position to weaken and marginalize countries like poland and ukraine. madam president, senator coons was right in 2018 and what he said is right today. joe biden is committing a generational political blunder, a catastrophic mistake that hurts american national security

and that hurts european security. congress has repeatedly passed sanctions targeting nord stream 2, targeting russia's corrupt energy market more broadly. those sanctions, especially caatsa and piza, and i will discuss the specific sanctions legislation that are on the u.s. books that joe biden is ignoring, that is -- he is flouting, disregarding and refusing to enforce. those sanctions impose mandatory sanctions. this body, congress as a whole, democrats and republicans, past administrations, everyone has worked together not just to counter russia but specifically to prevent putin from being able to leverage energy as a geopolitical weapon. the biden administration, however, tells us they have a

better solution, a better solution than both houses of congress, a better solution than following u.s. law. instead of imposing sanctions to stop the pipeline, they tell us, they worked out a deal with germany that they promise will prevent putin from being able to use energy as a weapon. it's the best of both worlds, they say. they don't have to use sanctions and they still solve the problem of russian energy blackmail. president biden said, quote, chancellor merkel and i are absolutely united in our conviction that russia must not be able to use energy as a weapon to coerce or threaten its neighbors. those are nice sentiments if they weren't accompanied by joe biden giving a multibillion-dollar generational gift to putin to do exactly what president biden said he didn't want putin to do. here is how an official from the

biden state department described the deal. there is a commitment on the part of the united states and germany, in this statement, that should russia attempt to use energy as a weapon, and have done so over and over and over again in the past, should russia attempt to use energy as a weapon, germany will take action at the national level and press for effective measures at the european level, including sanctions to limit russian export capabilities to europe in the energy sector and that includes gas and or other economically relevant sectors. so, madam president, understand what they are saying. if and when russia does what they've done in the past over and over again, if they do one of the reasons they want nord stream 2 is to exercise economic blackmail, if and when they do that, germany is going to send a really stern letter to the

european union. one of my favorite movies that heidi and i have watched many times is a movie called team america. it's a comedy, done by the creators of south park. it's a movie that involves puppets. i will give a warning, it is a movie with an enormous amount of profanity in it and it is also one of the funniest movies every made. in team america, they talks about -- talk about hans blitz and the tool of sending a message to the united nations and they ridicule that as being uneffective. in the case of that movie it was north korea, but in the case of putin, i rettig you, -- i a --

vladimir putin has not lost one minute sleep worrying about germany letter to the european union. once nord stream 2 goes online, it will become a dominant source of energy for europe. putin knows this, merkel knows this, biden knows this. turning off nord stream 2, which germany has suggested, oh, once we're addicted to the crack, we'll just turn it off and we don't want it anymore. that would be suicidal, which putin knows, and he's counting on. it is as empty and hollow a threat as ever been uttered on the international stage. and even worse, we already know that it's a hollow threat because putin has already in just the last few days crossed the line into using energy as a

weapon. so we don't have to go back to 2006, we don't have to go back to 2009. let's go back to last week. in just the last week it has become clear that putin has been turning down gas exports to europe to coerce our allies into dropping opposition to nord stream 2. the blackmail is open and it is brazen, russia and officials have said if germany and the e.u. approve nord stream 2 coming online, then they will turn this back up. on friday more than 40 members of the european parliament called for an investigation of the coercion, saying that gas pumps were driving up prices to question the european union and into streaming nord stream 2 activation. i want you to pause and reflect, the biden administration's claim

to prevent nord stream 2 being used as a weapon for energy blackmail is if russia ever does it, germany will stand up to them. russia's doing it right now. not in 2006 -- well, yes, they did in 2006. not in 2009. well, yes, they did in 2009. today, last week, and they are not hiding it. they are saying we'll cut off your energy until you approve nord stream 2. how exactly is the biden administration claiming they are going to prevent the maligned use of this pipeline? they are literally surrendering to blackmail right now. for no reason. and, you know, sadly, the reason over the past nine months i have had conversations with just about every senior biden state department nominee in my office

over and over again about nord stream 2. almost to a person the nominees agree, nord stream 2 would be terrible, it would be disastrous, it would be bad for europe, it would be good for russia. by the way, tony blinken said so in his confirmation meeting and he said so even more vociferously on any couch in my office. they all said this. so why then would biden have committed this disastrous mistake? sadly i think there are two reasons. one, the biden team entered office with an almost pathological revulsion at anything the previous administration did. if the trump administration did it, it must be wrong and must be reversed. now, listen, madam president. none of us in this chamber are

naif. we under -- naive, we understand politics. we understand when one party takes over from another party, they often take over the previous administration's decisions, obama reversed decisions of the bush administration and there are a lot of decisions in the trump administration that sadly from my perspective biden is reversing, as a general matter that's why we have elections and there are differences between the policy decisions between the two parties. but the biden team is further than that. it is almost a pathological, if trump did it, it must be bad. never mind if the trump administration did this only after the congress came together in an extraordinary moment of bipartisan unity and passed this as mandatory legislation. in my office over and over again with just about every senior biden state department nominee,

i asked them, please, don't turn one of the biggest foreign policy victories of the last several years into one of the biggest foreign policy defeats of the last several years. the reports came out actually that state tried to honor its commitment, the department of state in the interrer agency process argued for, let's follow the law, let's impose the sanctions. and what the public reports have suggested is that the biden white house, the political operatives in the biden white house overruled state. even though state knew the right policy was shut down the putin pipeline and the wrong policy was turn it into the biden-putin pipeline, the biden white house desperately wanted to put their stamp on this. because if it was done under president trump, they were going to reverse it. the second reason is the biden

foreign policy team, for whatever reason, has a deep and abiding interest in giving to germany whatever it is they want. now, look, germany is an important friend and ally. we work together closely with germany on economic matters, on diplomatic matters many we have long and positive relationships with our friend and ally germany. that doesn't mean we agree with everything the germans do, anymore than we agree with everything any other ally of ours does. in the last week, the biden administration precipitated the french withdrawing their ambassador from america, extraordinary moment, which i will point out at least illustrates that we have a history of having disagreements and sometimes serious disagreements with our friends and allies. but oned friend of -- one friend

of mine has a phrase he puts it that the biden foreign policy establishment, they sleep with votive candles of angela merkel under their beds, that they view chancellor merkel as someone who must be surrendered to, acquiesced to no matter what. nev never mind that chancellor merkel has an extremely limited tenure in office. she is on her way out. never mind that the next successor government in germany may well decide that they don't even want nord stream 2. this biden foreign policy team, perhaps as a farewell gift to angela merkel have decided that president biden should surrender to putin. that makes no sense.

that is dangerous. it's harmful to europe. it's harmful to germany. it's harmful to america. and it helps russia. we are going to have an extended period of time to continue to discuss these matters but at this point i see that senator shaheen is preparing to speak. so i yield the floor to senator shaheen. the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire is recognized. mrs. shaheen: thank you. i appreciate my colleague from texas being willing to turn over the floor so that i can give my remarks. mr. president, i'm here today to discuss my concerns about the ongoing partisan obstruction in the senate. first as everyone here knows,

september 30 is the end of the current fiscal year, and without action by this senate on a continuing resolution so the mechanism to continue to fund the government, our government is going to shut down at midnight on the 1st. so what happens if we don't pass that continuing resolution and government shuts down? well, critical operations will shutter. we've seen this picture before. our national parks will close. we can tell our government researchers including nobel prize-winning scientists to leave their labs and we would be doing this in the middle of the greatest health crisis of our lifetime. a government shutdown also means that we ask essential federal workers to work without pay. f.b.i. agents, border patrol agents, t.s.a. workers, weather forecasters. others would be forced to

continue their essential work and they would be doing it for i.o.u.'s. we would promise them we would pay them. but there's no guarantee. now, it's puzzling to me because other countries don't do this to themselves. government shutdowns put america behind. look at the government shutdown that we had that went from december 2018 to january 2019, the longest government shutdown in our history. and while our space scientists were at home, china landed the first rover on the dark side of the moon, something that we had not done. the continuing resolution before us also includes resources that will help americans whose homes were flooded, homes were destroyed by raging wildfires or by hurricanes, including

hurricane irma. they deserve our help, not more political infighting or partisan bickering. we also owe it to our afghan allies who put their lives on the line to assist u.s. soldiers to pass this bill. it contains critical assistance to help them resettle after phasing -- facing imminent danger from the taliban. so from emergency housing assistance to resources for health screenings, job training, and other essential services, we can't let our allies down. we've already let some of them down because we weren't able to get everyone out of afghanistan. and we're still working on that. but to then say you're on your own despite years of helping the united states, that's just patently unfair.

and secondly, as we're discussing the continuing resolution keeping the government open, one of the things that our colleagues, our republican colleagues have said is that they're not growing to increase the debt limit. i think we in congress have a solemn obligation to protect the full faith and credit of the united states government. treasury secretary yellen has told congress that the treasury will exhaust extraordinary measures that they have been using to pay our nation's bills sometime next month. and let's be clear. the prospect of the first ever default on our nation's debt obligations would be disastrous for our economy at a time when we can least afford it. raising the debt ceiling is not about whether or not we should spend more money or incur more debt. raising the debt ceiling is about paying the bills we already owe, the bills that come

due from the previous administration. minority leader mcconnell himself has voted to increase or suspend the debt limit 32 times. and when president trump was in office, democrats in this chamber -- and i was one of them -- supported raising the debt ceiling three times because we understand that it is grossly irresponsible for us to renege on obligations that our government has already incurred. you know, as a former governor, one of the worst fears i had as new hampshire went through challenging times during a recession, during a court-ordered change in how we funded our schools was that the state would have its bond rating lowered. and that would mean we would have to pay more on money owed. it would have an impact on

everyone in new hampshire. and this is sort of the equivalent of having the bond rating lowered from new hampshire. only a hundred times, a thousand times over. now, this is that on steroids. and now because we have a democratic president, republicans are saying they won't lift a finger to prevent this catastrophic outcome for our economy, for our currency, for the full faith and credit of the united states of america. this is not a game. the stability of our economy and the financial security of working americans are at stake, and we have an obligation to pass legislation that's been sent to us by the house, to keep our government open, and to raise the debt limit. this isn't just about the united states. this has implications for our

entire global financial system. sadly, mr. president, the partisan brinkmanship and obstruction doesn't end with domestic and economic matters. i'm also very concerned about the dangerously slow confirmation process of our state department nominees and ambassadors. what we've seen is a few members of this body who are threatening our national security by slowing the process to schedule nomination hearings for qualified nominees, preventing votes on those state department nominees who have been improved by -- approved by the senate foreign relations committee. today only two ambassadors have been confirmed by the senate. this administration has had to wait over 200 days for its first ambassador to be confirmed compared to only 62 days for the previous administration.

for the first 300 days of the previous administration, 55 state department nominees were confirmed by the senate. and now as we approach the first 300 days of the biden pres presidency, this senate has only confirmed 14 appointees. now i agree with my colleague from texas about the nord stream 2 pipeline. i think we need to sanction it, but i'm not willing to shut down the government to allow the actions of this government to grind to a halt because i'm concerned about that issue. in senators are concerned about our national security, they would match deeds with words and confirm career state department nominees who have been waiting for months.

and when we look at the increasing global threats to the united states, operating with a depleted diplomatic core jeopardizes our national security, u.s. interests, the safety of americans at home and abroad. these political games are really risking serious consequences. it must stop. i know we can work together in a rational bipartisan way to address the country's needs. i've seen it. i believe my colleagues who are holding things up, love this country, but i'm concerned that their actions don't show that they love the country. there's no excuse for delaying or hindering the basic functions this legislative body is constituted to perform. and i urge all of our colleagues to join us to get to work. let's get this done.

maybe if we do that, we can address some of the other concerns that we have that we ought to be able to work together and compromise to get done. that's what i'm going to continue to try and do, mr. president. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. lee: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah is recognized. mr. lee: i ask unanimous consent to suspend the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lee: mr. president, george washington in his farewell address to the nation warned us against foreign entanglements and costly wars.

he and other founders knew firsthand the danger an enduring danger abroad proposed to the cause of freedom. despite those warnings, we, the united states, have been embroiled in a directionless frill dollar war in afghanistan for the last 20 years. and after all that investment, the american blood and treasure poured into that cause, americans watched in horror as any semblance of so-called progress in a democratic afghanistan crumbled in a matter of weeks. haunting images demonstrating this failure tragically played out before us. americans hadn't seen tragedy of this type since the fall of saigon. the cost of war project at brown university estimates that the total monetary cost of our war in afghanistan amounts to $2.3

trillion, counting u.s. military spending both on and off-budget. u.s. manpower, resorrieses, and expertise were -- resources, and expertise were dedicated for decades to the with aer in afghanistan. so we -- to the with aer in afghanistan. so -- to the war in afghanistan. so we must ask ourselves, what went wrong? how did the erosion of congress' war making a role permitted these failures. in the very early years of the war, congress shrugged as the president transformed mission in afghanistan. president bush addressed the nation and the service members going to war in 2001 promising, quote, to all the men and women in our military, every sailor, every soldier, every airmen, every coast guardsman, every marine, i say this. your objectives are clear. your goal is just, close quote e

at the time, the mission was clear. the goals were to capture the terrorists responsible for the september 11 attacks, neutralize the threat posed by al qaeda in afghanistan and ensure that the taliban was not strong enough to provide a safe harbor to al qaeda. in 2003, we had substantively accomplished each of those goals, though killing osama bin laden would take until may of 2011 is the taliban had fallen and the leaders of al qaeda. the bush administration shifted the administration reshaping the country's government and culture as if to mirror our own. even as the mission in afghanistan was change add dramatically and

unrealistically, congress did not repeal or replace or amend the 2001 reauthorization for the use of military force in afghanistan. the constitution charges the legislative branch to not only fund but also declare and oversee wars. and yet congress seemed unaffected by the rather dramatic change in mission and strategy. as a result, the war continued for longer than it should have, much longer, as the united states continued to lose tax dollars, lives, and any attachment to the original goals all at the same time. as building a democratic afghanistan became the new mission, presidents of both parties and the interagency apparatus ignored explicit evidence of failure and in fact

doubled down on american investment and involvement. the special investigator general for afghanistan reconstruction created by congress to oversee and audit funds used for nation building in afghanistan has delivered 427 audits and more than 250 reports to congress since 2008, detail ago the risks, the waste, and the mismanagement in the u.s. mission. many of these reports pointed out contradictions of our aims and explained the waste, fraud, and abuse plaguing the funds congress appropriated for the reconstruction projects of all sorts. now, thanks to the investigative journalism of craig whitlock of "the washington post," the afghanistan papers added another layer to the inspector general's reports, revealing evidence that high-ranking officials in the department of defense, in the state department and the white

house knew that the u.s. mission had no focus, no metrics, no clear coordination, and no defined enemy. douglas lute, a three-star army general who served as the afghanistan war czar under president bush and president obama, is quoted in the published interviews saying, quote, we were devoid of a fundamental understanding of afghanistan. we didn't know what we were doing, close quote. well, i share the view with the majority of americans that withdrawing forces from afghanistan was the right choice and was by all accounts inevitable at some point. the biden administration's disastrous withdrawal was the culmination of american failure in afghanistan. kabul fell to lawlessness and mass panic. afghan security forces laid down

arms to the taliban. afghan president fled the nation. potential terrorists, men with child brides secured seats on u.s. evacuation flights while american citizens were left behind enemy lines. our nation lost 13 service members with many more seriously wounded to a terrorist attack, and the administration ineptly responded by killing ten innocent civilians, including seven children. president biden's close's closing of the war in afghanistan has been riddled with avoidable mistakes resulting in both tragedy and embarrassment of historic magnitude. the president, and other high officials must be held accountable for this failure. anyone else engaging in such

mismanagement of our actions in a theater of war would surely be held accountable. they must, too. throughout 20 years of engagement, congress itself has shamefully failed to respond to an executive branch plundering of powers that constitutionally belong to congress. it's time for congress to do its job. it's time to ensure that such a grave mistake that cost us so much in american taxpayer resources but, most importantly, in american blood will never, ever happen again. some of my colleagues and i may disagree on when and exactly how to use military force, but we should debate those matters in the light of day for the american people to view and, even more importantly, for the american people to influence.

u.s. engagement in afghanistan over the last decade and the recent blundered withdrawal demands that we prioritize such a debate. it is long, long overdue. that's why i along with my colleagues across the aisle, senator chris murphy and senator sanders, introduced the national security powers act, which would restore congress' role in national security decision-making. this is an opportunity to protect our constitutional order. american citizens and especially those who serve in our military deserve nothing less. despite our political differences, as members of the branch of government most accountable to the people, we feel the weight of american blood and treasure, sacrificed in our nation's wars. we may not have all the answers. i certainly don't claim to have

them. but we've put forth a really thorough, well-reasoned, much-needed set of reforms to ensure that america is not thrown into another endless war without continual congressional input, congressional input that's not just helpful, i.t. not just a good -- it's not just a good idea but congressional input that's actually required by the constitution itself. it's that kind of input that's been neglected and, sadly, it's been neglected not just by the executive branch but it's been neglected by the congress, by the very people who are supposed to wield it. see, there is a big difference when it comes to war-making power between our system of government and the one we left behind, the one that was based in london. as alexander hamilton explained

in federalist 69, this was one of the key design features of the constitution, one of the things that differentiates it from our former london-based system of government. there the chief of executive -- that the monarch, in those days, king george iii -- would take the country to war unilaterally. it was up to parliament then to figure out how to fund it. our founding fathers decided to make a break from that practice. they did not give this power to declare war to the chief executive. no, they gave that power only to the branch of government that would stand accountable to the people at the most regular intervals, the legislative branch. when we denigrate this role, when we minimize this responsibility, when we shirk this duty, we do so to our own everlasting shame and in violation of the oath that each and every one of us has taken to support the constitution of the

united states. in this republic, mr. president, congress can no longer sit idle while the executive alone decides the fate of our nation's wars and those who fight in them. while we can't change history, we can live up to the ideals of our constitution. i pray, mr. president, that we will. and i no -- and i know that together we can, we must, and we will. thank you, mr. president. mr. sullivan: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska is recognized are. mr. sullivan: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, there's been a lot of discussions on the floor today, and i fully support them, about an important, important role of the united states senate that we need to take on with

regard to our oversight responsibility of what the entire country has recently observed as a fiasco, debacle with regard to foreign policy in afghanistan that's going to have consequences for years. like all of us, i was home over august when all of these images on tv were unfolding, and i will tell you, mr. president, i don't think i've ever seen my constituents matter about a single issue than -- madder about a single issue than this. it wasn't just republicans. it was across the board alaskans. why? because they saw our great country humiliated. they witnessed time and time again the president of the united states, the commander in chief, telling them blatant

falsehoods, that they knew were falsehoods, and there is yet to be any accountability on this. now, the hearings have begun. we've had two hearings on the armed services committee, but they continue to insist on keeping them classified. no reason to do that. we need to have these hearings out in the open. the american people want to see them. we had hearings on the foreign relations committee this past week and we started to see the beginnings of the biden administration's strategy as it relates to explaining this fiasco, this debacle. what is it? remarkably, it's to blame donald trump, if you watched the secretary of state testify in front of the foreign relations committee, then blame the generals, and then continue to

quote the president of the united states that this withdrawal in afghanistan was, quote, an extraordinary success. let me repeat that. an extraordinary success. that's what the president of the united states has called this, and, unfortunately, his secretary of state, his under secretary of defense who testified in front of the armed services committee just a couple days ago in a hearing that was the height of deniability, on any responsibility, all of them continue to cling to this blatant falsehood that every american knows is not the case. this wasn't an extraordinary success. what we witnessed in afghanistan, the whole country knows that.

in fact, the whole world knows that. this is the cover from a few weeks ago of "the economist" magazine. pretty honest, well-respected magazine. much of the world reads it. and that's what "the economist" called it -- "biden's debacle." if you look in the magazine, it goes into several articles about the implications of biden's debacle. here's some of the names, titles of the articles in this magazine. the fiasco in afghanistan is a huge and unnecessary blow to america's standing in the world. that's not an extraordinary success. how about this one, another article in "the economist."

joe biden blames everybody else. that's not accountability. and then perhaps, mr. president, most importantly, the big win for china in afghanistan in seeing america humbled. these are articles in an international magazine, a well-respected international magazine that the whole world is reading, and this is what happened in afghanistan. it wasn't an extraordinary success. to the contrary, mr. president, it was a debacle it was a debacle. now some things are becoming increasingly clear as the administration tries to defend this, tries to explain it.

as "the economist" magazine mentions, this is president biden's fiasco. despite attempts by the civilian leadership in the biden administration to explain this away with regard to blame on donald trump or the generals, this was 100% president biden's decision and debacle. mr. president, it is becoming increasingly clear even in the classified hearings that we had on the armed services committee that the president's senior military advisors said to the president do not do this, sir. do not go to zero with our troops. instead you should keep a small

force there. furthermore, it is becoming increasingly clear that the president's military advisors then said to the president, and if you do go to zero, if you do get rid of all our troops, especially if they're pulled out before others leave, you are going to see many bad things happen tactically, operationally, strategically for our country. in essence, what americans witnessed and saw on tv in august, this was predicted. the president was told this. he ignored this advice, so he owns this debacle. and what he needs to do now, mr. president, is tell the truth about it. he and his administration need to tell the truth about it.

l there are many things that are disturbing about what's happened over the last several weeks in afghanistan, but what has been so disturbing is not only how the president has been blaming everyone but himself, is that when he talks to the american people about this issue, he has clearly not been telling the truth, and the american people know it. let's start with the issue i just mentioned, mr. president -- the advice that the president received from his military advisors. president biden was on a media interview show on august 18 as this whole fiasco was unfolding. he was asked, your top military advisors warn against withdrawing on this timeline. they wanted you to keep 2,500

troops. that was the question from george stepanoulous. later he pressed your military advisors told you you should keep 2,500 troops in the united states. the president of the united states -- no one said that to me. i can't recall mr. president, that's not true. that's not true. during that same interview, george stephanopoulos said we have like 10,000 to 15,000 americans in the country. are you committed, mr. president, to making sure that american troops stay until every american who wants to leave gets out. that was the question. the president said yes. i'm quoting him.

if there is american citizens left, we're going to stay. the military is going to stay until we get them all out. that's a quote from the president of the united states. that wasn't true. in a later interview, president's mentioned that -- the president mentioned that, quote, al qaeda is all gone from afghanistan. that isn't true. we know that. the president also said that our nato allies, quote, every one of them knew and agreed with the decision i made to end, jointly end our involvement in afghanistan, unquote. that is not true. that is not true. and the president and his advisors, the under secretary of defense for policy most recently have been highlighting this incredible over-the- horizon capability to go after

terrorists that we still have in afghanistan. that we know has been greatly diminished. we have heard that from the military leaders who know these issues. so even on that issue, they are not leveling with the american people. now, mr. president, these are not small, marginal misstatements i'm talking about. these are dramatic, obvious falsehoods that go to the very heart of the foreign policy fiasco we've all witnessed. these are life-and-death deceptions that the president of the united states told the american people and he told the world. and here's the thing. the american people, the people in britain, the people in our

nato ally companies, the leaders in our countries that are adversaries, everybody knows that these statements were false. and one of the many things that is so harmful to come out of this because of these kind of statements, when they come from the commander in chief, this undermines the credibility and honor of the united states of america in front of the rest of the world. and that is one of the major reasons why so many of my fellow alaskans and our fellow americans are so upset by this biden debacle. so, mr. president, there's going to be more hearings next week on the armed services committee.

we're finally going to have open hearings. and what we will need are straight, truthful answers from the witnesses, particularly those in uniform who are not obligated to cover for the command in chief's unwise decisions or blatant falsehoods. to the contrary, these witnesses will need to tell the truth, will need to tell the truth. speaking of the truth, mr. president, here's one truth that to me has been clear for months, and i've been talking about it for months, and is even more relevant and urgent

today in light of this foreign policy fiasco in afghanistan. the biden administration's budget is dangerous to america. take a look at it, america. this is a $6 trillion budget, $6 trillion budget, where almost every federal agency in the u.s. government gets a big increase in its budget, some in the 40%, 20%, all this green. double digits for most. two agencies, two agencies in this biden budget blowout actually get cuts, cuts adjusted for inflation they're cuts. what are they? the department of defense and the department of homeland security.

if you're looking at the border right now, you know that homeland security doesn't need a budget cut, and we certainly in this time of increasing danger globally don't need a department of defense cut. but that's what this administration is doing right now. like the president's actions and statements on afghanistan, this budget is divorced from reality because here's the reality. here's the reality. we have a growing threat from international terrorism, once again is afghanistan, once again has become a safe haven for some of the most dangerous, violent, extremist organizations on the planet. we know it, we see it. the taliban, the haqqani network, isis-k, al qaeda.

they're all celebrating and they are coming back to afghanistan. and guess what they're doing? they're plotting against this great country. it didn't have to be this way, mr. president, but that's the reality. here's another reality. after watching this administration's chaotic withdrawal from afghanistan, our adversaries are going to test joe biden's will in other areas of the world. it's going to happen. russia with regard to ukraine or the baltics or poland; iran with regard to israel, the terrorist leaders in that country continue to say they want to wipe off the face of the earth; and of course communist china with taiwan. some of you may have seen during the biden afghanistan debacle, china started rattling its saber as it relates to taiwan for this

very reason. so, mr. president, let me underscore this again. the weakness and lack of resolve demonstrated by the biden administration in afghanistan and this very weak military budget is likely, i think very likely, unfortunately to invite aggression by our adversaries in other parts of the world. here's my message to the president and his team -- you've got to be ready for this. you better be strong. and being strong starts with supporting the department of defense budget that is not cutting our readiness as this one clearly does, and actually matches the realities of the more dangerous world we now find ourselves in because of this president's foreign policy

incompetence. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from texas is recognized. mr. cornyn: thank you, mr. president. eight months into the humanitarian crisis at the southern border, our democratic colleagues are finally, finally paying attention. this is after 1.2 million migrants have arrived since president biden took office, which apparently did not raise any particular alarms. neither did the countless numbers of migrants who endured

abuse at the hands of criminal organizations and human smugglers. our colleagues didn't spring into action either when the processing center in donna, texas, reached 1,600% capacity earlier this year. and they didn't show much concern about the fact that the surge left security gaps along our border, making it easier for the drug cartels to move heaven knows what into our country. actually we do know what they moved into the country because more than 90,000 americans died of drug overdoses last year from drugs coming over the u.s.-mexico border. but finally our colleagues seem to be paying attention. over the last several days 15,000 migrants, primarily

haitians have arrived in del rio, texas, 15,000 migrants in a town of 35,000. you can imagine what sort of reaction they had. these migrants have set up camp under the international bridge and border patrol and state and local officials have been working around the clock to ease the humanitarian crisis. of course the first concern in 100-degree temperature is to try help protect these migrants, make sure that they have food and water and that people don't die of heat stroke. i want to thank the border patrol, who does a lot of good work and a lot of the good work they do is actually save lives of migrants who are suffering from exposure or injure and then

dr injury and then left behind by the coyotes but then so are the law enforcement. so the border patrol, local and state law enforcement and everyone seemed to come together to meet this surge of migrants in del rio. but like the front lines of the covid-19 pandemic these men and women have been operating in crisis mode for months and are expected to carry the weight of a crisis that everybody knew was coming. as the biden administration races to respond to the crisis now, finally, i'm left wondering, why didn't they see this coming? after all, 1.2 million migrants have crossed our border just since joe biden put his hand on the bible and took the oath of

office on january 20. the president campaigned actually on the promises of policies that were certain to lead to a surgance of migrants at the border and that's just what we've seen. when the president and director mayorkas and vice president harris say, don't come, the migrants see people pouring across the border in the hundreds of thousands and successfully making their way into the interior of the united states. the human smugglers, the criminal organizations that move migrants from their homes across the border, they are getting rich. they are whispering in the ear of the migrants that these people made it, you can make it too, just give me my money. earlier this year a woman had crossed a rio grande on a

smuggler's ranch said that the biden administration was the reason that she and her 1-year-old son attempted the dangerous journey at all. she said, quote, that gave us the opportunity to come. some of the closest followers of the president's words and the administration's actions are the cartels and criminal organizations that get rich off of the backs of these migrants. actually it's pretty good money. let's say on average these migrants and their families pay $5,000 and it varies depending on where you want to come from. if you want to come from a little farther away, it's a little more expensive, if you are closer to the border, it's a little cheaper. let's say on average it's $5,000, and you multiply 1.2 million migrants times $5,000, that's a huge windfall

to these criminal organizations. it's good business. it's a great business model. but migrants suffer at the hands of these cartels and human smugglers, they often arrive malnourished and suffering from exposure, many young women and girls have been sexually assaulted. some of these young girls even arrive pregnant. there are hundreds of young women who are at del rio under the bridge who are now pregnant. and some of them don't make it at all. in brooks county, texas, which is where there's an interior checkpoint by the border patrol, the practice of the smugglers, the coyotes, is to get people across the river, put them in a stash house, that you've

probably seen some pictures of, and when the coast is clear, put them in a vehicle and drive them up the road past the checkpoint. before they get to the checkpoint, they say to the migrants, get out of the car, here's a gallon milk jug, here's some protein bars, we'll meet you on the other side of the checkpoint. now some of the land around the checkpoints are some of the most difficult territory you can possibly imagine, especially during the summer. and actually, the vice president when she was in the senate, kamala harris and i sponsored a bill to reimburse brooks county, texas for burying the bodies of unidentified migrants who died trying to make that trip around the checkpoint in falfurious.

they couldn't afford it. they have a modest tax base. but the cartels are always looking for a business opportunity and an opportunity to make a sales pitch to very receptive ears. when they see the biden administration releasing migrants into the interior, they use that information to convince others to spend the money it takes to make the dangerous journey north. and certainly when the biden administration releases people and tells them, come back later for a court hearing or here's a notice to report, when you get to where you're going, turn yourself into i.c.e., immigration and customs enforcement, and, of course, it should be no surprise that many, many, many do not show up. they do not report and they are never heard from again unless they commit a serious crime and then it's discovered that they have illegally entered the united states and have failed to

show up for their court hearing. but the point is once these people make it into the united states, you better believe they are on the phone, text messages, e-mails, talking to their relatives back in their home country. and what do they tell them? they said, i made it. i made it, and you can too. and so they keep coming. well, as i said, this is big business for the cartels. they get rich off of the migrants, of course, and, second, when they flood the border with all of these migrants, these huge numbers, it overwhelms the border patrol just with unaccompanied children alone. and the rio grande valley

sector, the border patrol chief said that he has had to take 40% of the patrol off of the border to take care of and process these unaccompanied children. and what do the cartels do? well, they are not stupid. they are actually pretty smart. and they know when border patrol is not guarding the border, that this is a tremendous opportunity to move their illegal drugs across the border into the united states. this isn't just some conspiracy theory, this is a tried and true tactic of the narcos. earlier this week the administration admitted to congressional staff that this was a coordinated effort by the cartels to direct haitian migrants to a single location and overwhelm customs and border protection. in other words, this entire

surge was orchestrated by a bunch of criminals. they intentionally flooded one section of the border so that personnel from others would be moved. in fact, there were 400, i believe, the chief said he moved from other sectors to the border patrol to come to del rio to deal with this humanitarian crisis. and you better believe that the cartels took advantage of the fact that they left holes in our security along the border in order to apply their poison and to move their migrants across the border. even though we're familiar with the tactic and we've seen it time and time again, the administration still removed agents from the checkpoints in the del rio sector to respond to the migrant surge, playing right into the hands of the cartels when they took agents off the front line. the cartels are simply playing a

game -- well, actually, they are playing three dimensional chess while the biden administration is playing checkers. and the cartels are get -- continuing to get rich off of this trafficking and human, and drugs. no surprise, this shifting of resources is simply not sustainable. the administration continues to play whacka mole on the southern border. every time progress is made on one crisis, another one pops up. the administration says they are trying to control the crisis in del rio, and there were early statements that they would make use of title 42, a public health title that gave the border patrol authority guidance based on spreading covid-19 because these migrants are not tested, they are not vaccinated, yet

they are put on buses and sent off into the interior of the united states to contribute to the ongoing pandemic. but the administration does have tools, title 42 would have given them the authority to turn back the migrants, at least the adults. but now with reports that the administration continues to release migrants into the united states, this backsliding will cause this situation to repeat itself. maybe the next surge won't be in del rio. maybe it will be in the rio grande valley or el paso or any other sector in the u.s.-mexico border. my state has 1,200 of common border with mexico. there's 2,000 miles of common border with the united states and mexico. so my state is feeling the

disproportionate negative impact on our border communities and they need help. without a clear consistent and effective approach across the entire border, del rio will become the new normal. there are a lot of questions we need to ask about the administration and i'm glad that chairman durbin announced we will have an oversight hearing of the department of homeland security in the coming weeks. but in particular i want to know what the administration's doing with these 15,000 individuals once they are processed by border patrol. when mr. mayorkas says the process is working, does that mean he's taking these migrants and placing them into the interior of the united states, contrary to the earlier statements that they were going to transport these migrants by airplane back to haiti? i would like to know how many of these migrants are being

returned under title 42. how many of them are family units? how many have been released with a notice to report, just turn yourself into i.c.e. idea? how many individuals never report to i.c.e. to commence their immigration court proceedings? and most importantly is the d.h.s. following through on their stated intent to expel or remove these individuals? that would be real deterrence. that would discourage more people from coming. if we find out the administration and the secretary have been lying to us, that instead of expelling these individuals, they've been placing them into the interior of the united states using this flawed catch and release approach, that's a serious problem. transparency is key, and i hope we will have an opportunity to

ask these questions under oath in the coming week. i'd also like to know if the administration plans to appeal judge sullivan's ruling on the use of title 42. there's only about another week left before judge sullivan's order saying that title 42 is no longer available. kicks in. it's important that especially while the pandemic is still upon us that public health officials have this authority under title 428 because if -- title 42 because if title 42 isn't available, the border patrol tells me they fear they will lose control entirely. title 42 has been important during the pandemic and as we know, the pandemic is not over. unless judge sullivan's order is appealed and reversed, the u.s. government will not be able to use this