single largest when you're spike since at least 1905 and possibly ever fun, has a national count has not yet been released in the national homicide rates increase again in 2021, about 2020 so the largest homicide spike on record overall index crimes navigation of the serious categories struck by the fbi put down and seemly creating a diversion between homicides specifically crime generally and however, it's important to note that overall crime measures might actually mass was more serious problem to the pandemic driven changes in routine activities because. >> and we believe this hearing to keep our 40 year commitment to the coverage of the u.s. congress, you can watch the rest of this program if you got a website, cspan.org and today the u.s. senate is expected to debate inland in sweden's to become members of nato and the senators will start about it 430 eastern to approve the request

and 67 votes will be needed for approval and alive to the floor of the u.s. senate here on "c-span2". the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o god, our shield, look with favor upon our senators today. guide them around the obstacles that hinder their progress,

uniting them for the common good of this great land. lord, free them from anxiety and fear, as they put their trust in you. enable them to go from strength to strength, fulfilling your purpose for their lives in this generation. guide them to use their abilities to accomplish your holy will. striving to please you, empower them to stand for right and leave the consequences to you. we pray in your holy name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag

of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., august 3, 2022. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable ben ray lujan, a senator from the state of new mexico, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i understand there is a bill at the desk that is due for a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title for the second time. the clerk: h.r. 5376, an act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title 2 of the s. con. res. 14. schumer under the previous order to place the bill on the

calendar, under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to proceeding. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed 0en -- placed on the calendar. mr. schumer: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i note the absence -- no, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: it is unusual that i do that. so -- okay, mr. president, two sets of numbers show the winds blowing in the democratic direction. first, the numbers revealed by the vote last night in the state of kansas and, second, new polling data that shows how overwhelmingly popular the inflation reduction act is in the minds of the american

people. these numbers show winds blowing in democrats' direction, on the issue of choice and on the issue of the inflation reduction act. today i want to talk about both. so let pee begin with last night's -- so let me begin with last night's election in kansas. last night in the american heartland, the people of kansas sent an unmistakable message to maga republican extremists -- back off women's fundamental rights. in the first vote on abortion rights sin the maga supreme court's reprehensible decision to take away constitutional rights protected by roe v. wade and which was cheered by many republicans here in the senate, voters in kansas decided by a double-digit margin to preserve the freedom of choice in their state constitution. what happened in red kansas last night is a reflection of what is happening across the country and what will continue to occur through the november elections.

voters are revolting against the extreme maga republican policies that ban abortions with no exceptions for rape or incest, send women and doctors to jail. last night's election was also a dark reminder that maga republicans are running the show within the g.o.p. their views are spreading through the party like a cancer, views that are repugnant not only to most republicans but, as we saw last night, even to many republican voters. and kansas was just the start. if it's going to happen in kansas, it's going to happen in a whole lot of states. the strong pro-choice turnout we saw last night in kansas will continue well into the fall, and republicans who side with these extremist maga policies that attack women's rights do so at their own political risk. now on nato, today the senate

will be voting on the resolution of ratification for the finnish and swedish applications to join nato. this is a very important vote. the nato vote is a very important vote for american security around the world. finland's and sweden's membership will strengthen nato even further and is all the more urgent given russian aggression, given putin's immoral and unjustified war in ukraine. putin is strengthening the nato alliance and nothing shows it better than the vote we will have this afternoon. with the vote, the senate will come together in a bipartisan manner and bolster the western alliance in the face of growing authoritarianism. when leader mcconnell and i met with the finnish president and the swedish prime minister back in may, we made a commitment to get done as quickly as possible before the august recess, and today we are keeping that commitment by

working together. despite the differences between both sides, i've always said that when the opportunity arises, democrats would be willing to work with republicans in a bipartisan way to get things done. the past -- in the past few weeks, we have seen an amazing string of bipartisan achievements, a bipartisanship that hasn't been seen with passage of so many important bipartisan bills in such a short time. together we secured an historic investment in american science and industry, we just passed the largest expansion of veterans' benefits in decades, we passed significant gun legislation, and today we will work together to bolster the nato alliance. so, again, as -- under democratic leader we want to work in a bipartisan way whenever we can, but when we can't, we will move forward on issues like climate and

prescription drugs that we feel are very important, which i'll talk about in a minute. finally, as i mentioned yesterday, i invited the ambassadors and other diplomats from finland and sweden to join us in the gallery during our debate and votes today. so let's get this done by this afternoon. now, on the inflation reduction act, this is the second place where the numbers that we read this morning show that the democrats are on the move and that republicans are in retreat. today's news provides another bevy of reminders of have the inflation reduction act is not only bold and common sense but is extremely popular with the american people. this morning five former treasury secretaries, including former secretary hank paulson who served under president george w. bush, released a statement praising the inflation

reduction act understand is urging congress to move quickly to secure its passage. the bipartisan group wrote that, quote, the inflation reduction act will help increase american competitiveness, address our climate crisis, lower costs for families, and fight inflation, and should be passed immediately by congress. the bipartisan group of treasury secretaries also affirmed what democrats have been saying for days -- the inflation reduction act will not, no matter how much our republican colleagues argue to the contrary, will not increase taxes for any family making less than $400,000 a year. again, our proposals call for closing loopholes that have long enabled the biggest companies in america to avoid paying their fair share. and even former republican treasury secretary hank paulson is now calling on congress to pass the democratic agenda. he's in very good company. this morning a poll by navigator also showed the inflation

reduction act senior senator overwhelmingly popular, overwhelmingly popular in the minds of the american people. according to this poll, 65% of americans support the proposals in the bill, compared to only 24% who oppose. more than double the people support the act than oppose it. it includes 60% of independent voters, and even 40% of republican voters. so america is on our side. they want us to pass this bill. now, contrast the democrats' agenda to what we've been hearing from the other side. while democrats want to make health care more affordable, just yesterday the junior senator from wisconsin argued that instead of strengthening medicare and social security, we should put them on the chopping block. hear that, citizens of wisconsin, citizens of america? the junior senator from

wisconsin wants to put medicare and social security on the chopping block. he has argued that the benefits which millions of americans rely on every day shouldn't be guaranteed, but should be subject to partisan infighting here in washington. he would like to revoke the guarantee of medicare and social security and make them discretionary. well, you know what happens when we make things discretionary around here? all too often they get cut, or even eliminated. we don't want to do that. but the senator from wisconsin said we should. so, senior citizens of america, listen loud and clear. senator johnson called for making these programs discretionary. for decades, they have not been. they've been programs that, when you become 65, you get it. not up to the whims of one congress or another.

so, we will fight as hard as he can can to -- as hard as we can to prevent the republicans, led by the wisconsin junior senator, from pulling out the rug from under seniors. we will fight the maga republican politicians who want to fight these critical programs programs. it's comments like these that show how out of touch the other side has become. while republicans were perfectly willing to blow a $ trillion hole in the deficit to -- $2 trillion hole in the deficit, now some are saying medicare and social security should no longer be guaranteed. of course, our democratic proposal, the inflation reduction act, is vastly different. we will protect health care. we will lower the price of prescription drugs. and make energy cheaper, while making the largest investment in clean energy ever. these are things that americans support. these are things that our country needs. and these are things that we're

going to get done when we pass the inflation reduction act in the coming days. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings on the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: tragic flooding continues to devastate eastern kentucky. in the last few days, i've spoken to state legislators and county judge executives who represent our hardest-hit counties. the governor reports that knott county has seen the largest loss of life so far. county judge dobson tells me the toll may keep rising in the coming days. state representative chris fugett represents breathett, housley and parrot counties and he tells me he's housing about 85 people in his church. the need for shelter for displaced residents will only grow. state senator johnny turner represents five counties, including knott and lecher.

he plans to use his own equipment to help clear debris from the roads. all across eastern kentucky emergency crews are making a herculean effort to restore access to power, roads, and running water. the kentucky national guard has been on the ground and in the air since the outset of this emergency, performing breathtaking rescues and rendering aid. some of their amazing work was captured on video. residents stranded on the roofs of submerged houses were pulled hundreds of feet into the air on a cable and into a helicopter, just extraordinary work. i'm deeply grateful for the brave men and women of the kentucky national guard and their service to our state. as professional first responders work around the clock, families, friends, and neighbors are

stepping up as well. one man's actions have attracted national attention. on thursday, an anonymous neighbor helped a family of three escape their flooded home. video footage showed a 98-year-old grand mother sitting on a bed fully submerged in water. this anonymous rescuer whisk that woman, her son and her grandson to safety. all three are now recovering. federal, state and local officials will continue to do everything possible and coordinate rescue and relief efforts. all these crawdges acts, from -- courageous acts from professionals and ordinary kentuckians alike will provide a glimmer of humanity in this dark, dark disaster. now, on an entirely different matter, today the senate will approve ratification protocols to welcome finland and sweden as the tu newest members -- two newest members of nato. i appreciate leader schumer

working with me to ensure the senate takes this vote before the august recess. for the reasons i've explained for months now, the vote this afternoon will be as decisive as it is bipartisan. there's just no question that admitting these robust democratic countries with modern economies and capable interoperable militaries will only strengthen the most successful military alliance in human history. both countries are already participating in nato and american-led missions. finland already meets nato's 2% spending target. and sweden is making significant investments in modernizing its military. even with the capabilities these militaries already have, they will bring meaningful interoperable military capabilities into the alliance on day one and improve burden sharing across the alliance. there's also no question that their entry is specifically in

our interests. these are long-standing defense partners of the united states. the finns have been flying f-18's and buying sophisticated american munitions since the 1990's. the swedish defense industry cooperates closely with ours and incorporates american components and modern systems, like their fighter aircraft. even closer cooperation with these partners will help us counter russia and china. their accession will make nato stronger and america more secure. if any senator is looking for a defensible excuse to vote no, i wish them good luck. this is a slam-dunk for national security that deserves unanimous bipartisan support. now, one final matter, democrats want to pass huge job-killing tax hikes in the middle of a recession that they themselves created. hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes on american jobs,

american manufacturing, american electricity, and american investment. nonpartisan experts have proven these tax hikes will break president biden's promise not to raise taxes on the middle class. the working class and the middle class will shoulder huge, huge new burdens. all these tax hikes will buy american families no relief whatsoever from inflation. nonpartisan experts say democrats' bill will make inflation even worse until 2024, and will do basically nothing, nothing to inflation thereafter. in the teeth of the inflation crisis. democrats' bill would make inflation even worse over the next two years. even the most optimistic estimate, the best figures for democrats, say it would take their legislation -- listen to this -- nine years, nine years to unwind as much inflation as the country added every week in the month of june. nine years of runaway taxing and

spending in order to subtract one week's worth of inflation. and that is an optimistic projection. obviously, the point of this bill is not to reduce inflation. clearly, this taxing-and-spending spree has a different purpose, and when you look at the legislation, the real purpose is absolutely clear. this bill is a massive goody bag of far-left environmental activists at the expense of working families. democrats want to use their own inflation as a pretext to dump hundreds of billions of dollars into green new deal nonsense. this bill declares war on american energy independence and affordability. it will push working families' bills higher in order to send cash kickbacks to rich elites if they buy fancy cars and redo their kitchens. democrats literally want to increase working families' gas bill, electricity bill, and

heating bill so they can send rebates to rich people who buy $80,000 luxury electric cars. i'm not making this up. they've come up with a huge new tax on american natural gas, which millions of americans use to heat their homes, cook their food, and dry their clothes. on top of that natural gas is the nation's largest source of electricity. so democrats want to add new taxes on top of two of the major bills that millions of american working families pay every month. that's not all. there's also a new per-barrel tax on american oil, and new royalties and fees to drive up the cost of oil and gas production on federal lands. with all the money they collect from shaking down american families, democrats want to finance new credits for people

who can afford to buy fancy new cars, stoves, and clothes dryers. why? because that's really green. subsidizing retail therapy for liberal elites to rip out working appliances, throw them away, and replace them with the latest fashions. we've got the worst inflation in 40 years right now. working families can barely afford gas and groceries right now. and democrats' answer is to offer them a mail-in rebate if they buy an $80,000 car or remodel their kitchen? a specific subsidy for electric car buyers that the senior senator from west virginia once called ludicrous is in this bill, which he's now authored.

oh, and the bill tries to skirt a supreme court victory that west virginia just won to stop democrats' illegal regulations from crushing the state's economy. the legislation intentionally, intentionally throughouts the victory -- flouts the victory the people of west virginia just won a few weeks ago at the supreme court. there's billions of dollars for environmental and climate justice block grants to directly enrich far-left nonprofits, including explicit language that would send taxpayer funding to political activism. democrats literally want to raise your electric bill in order to pay off their own protestors. i guess the people who stand in the md middle of highways during rush hour to make a protest gesture now want to receive taxpayer money for their trouble. oh, oh, and their bill would send billions of dollars to the

secretary of transportation to tear up highways instead of building more highways. if that's not enough, here's the kicker -- all of this expensive nonsense adds up to no, no meaningful impact whatsoever. all of these hundreds of billions of dollars to bankroll new appliances for rich people will not put so much as a dent, a dent in worldwide emissions or temperatures. "the washington post" admitted on monday this legislation can scarcely be expected to have an immediate measurable impact on the warming planet.

huge developing countries like china and india are dramatically increasing their emissions every year, even according to liberals' own modeling this bill, that is supposedly worth looting, looting the american people, would have basically no measurable impact on global warming whatsoever. whatsoever. liberal waste, subsidies for the rich, and according to their very own models, no meaningful impact on the climate. so i guess democrats think their 30% approval rate on the economy is actually still too high. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the

senate will be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each for debate only. the clerk: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> madam president, i wanted to come down to the floor to say a few words about the so-called inflation reduction act, which this week. but before i do i want to put this reconciliation bill into the context of where we are as a nation from a political perspective. and where we are is not a good place to be. according to the most recent gallup poll the approval rate for congress is at 16%, with massive numbers of people

disapproving of the work we are doing here. further, according to a recent university of chicago paul, a strong majority of americans believe that the government is, quote, corrupt and rigged against me, , in quote. that is how people perceive the government. further, according to a recent "usa today" poll, a very strong majority no longer believe that the democratic or republican parties are responding to the needs. we have to move away from a two-party system to a multiparty system. and most frighteningly there is a growing number of americans who actually believe that they have to take up arms, literally become violent, against their own government in order to accomplish what they think needs

to be done. and, of course, we saw an example of that on january 6 of last year with a terrible violence and death that occurred. madam president, all of this speaks to a very dangerous moment for american democracy, and in some ways resembles the conditions that existed in europe in the late 1920s and early 1930s, which eventually led to fascism and totalitarianism. and i should mention that as we speak, right now, while working families and the middle class are falling further and further behind economically, the billionaires in this country, through their super pacs, are doing everything that they can to elect members of congress who will support the wealthy and powerful against the needs of

african americans -- average americans. both parties, billionaires are coming into campaigns to elect the candidates who represent the 1%. the people of this country believe in my view correctly that we had a corrupt political system dominated by the wealthy and powerful, and we have rigged economy in which large corporations are seeing massive increases in their pockets, while the middle-class and working class families of the country continued to see a a decline in their standard of living. we don't talk about it much here in the senate or in the corporate media, but at this moment in american history we have more income and wealth inequality than at any time in the last 100 years. i know it's not fashionable, , e

might offend some wealthy campaign contributors but today obscenely you have got three people who own more wealth than the bottom half of american society. you have the top 1% owning more wealth than the bottom 92%. you have 45% of all new income going to the 1%, and your ceos of major corporations making 350 times more than average workers. in other words, the people in the middle, working people struggling, people on top doing phenomenally well. and the people on the top have enough money to elect candidates who represent their interests. and that is the overall context, in my view, in which this reconciliation bill is coming to the floor.

now, i have heard from some of my colleagues that the build back better legislation passed by the u.s. house of representatives and supported by some 48 out of 50 members of the senate democratic caucus, and by the president of the united states, is dead, not going anywhere. can't get the 50 votes that is needed. now i don't know if that is absolutely true or not but i do know that if it is true, it would be a disaster for the working families of our country who, today, are desperately trying to survive economically. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, you don't want to take money out of the economy when the economy is shrinking. you don't want to take money out of the economy when the economy is shrinking.

those aren't my words. those are the words of the current democrat leader in 2008. you don't want to take money out of the economy when the economy is shrinking. apparently it's a philosophy the democrat leader no longer subscribes to because last week he introduced legislation to take money out of the economy when the economy is shrinking. the democrats' so-called inflation reduction act, which is a misnomer if there ever was one, since the bill will do nothing to help alleviate our current inflation crisis, would take hundreds of billions of dollars out of the economy in the form of new tax hikes and comes just as our economy posted a second quarter of negative growth. notably, the bill imposes a $313 billion tax hike on american businesses with roughly half of that increase falling on american manufacturers. i guess the president's commitment to boosting american manufacturing takes a back seat to raising revenue to fund

democrats' green new deal priorities. mr. president, i don't think i need to tell anyone what happens when you raise taxes on businesses, particularly when the economy is shrinking. you get less growth, fewer jobs, and lower wages. according to an analysis from the national association of manufacturers, in 2023 alone democrats' bill would reduce real gross domestic product by more than $68 billion and result in 218,108 fewer workers in the overall economy. $68 billion reduction in gdp and more than 218,000 fewer workers. and ordinary americans would bear a substantial part of the burden of this tax increase. according to data from the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation, democrats' bill would increase the tax burden of americans across every income

bracket with more than half of the increased tax burden falling on americans making $400,000 or less. next year alone democrats' bill would increase the tax burden on americans earning less than $200,000 by $16.7 billion. mr. president, democrats are brazenly attempting to sell this new tax as somehow closing a loophole instead of hiking taxes on american businesses. but that isn't even close to being the truth. when companies pay less than the current corporate tax rate, they're often simply taking advantage of tax credits that republicans and democrats put in place to encourage investment in things like research and development or the production of new technologies. democrats aren't closing a loophole in the tax code, let's face it. they're raising taxes on

american businesses at a time when our economy posted two consecutive quarters of negative growth. raising taxes on businesses struggling with historically high inflation. mr. president, democrats claim that they will make large companies pay at least a 15% minimum tax, but that isn't true either. because democrats have created carve-outs to their own minimum tax. that's right. not all companies will have to pay the new minimum tax. for instance, green energy companies and companies that take green energy tax credits will be allowed to pay less than democrats' alternative minimum corporate tax rate. in other words, if you are a member of or invest in democrats' preferred industries, you get special tax treatment under their legislation. so much for ensuring that all

companies, all companies pay their fair share. mr. president, in addition to their $313 billion tax hike on american businesses, democrats' legislation also raises taxes on investment, another bad idea at a time when our economy is already shrinking. perhaps democrats real plan is to slow our economy and ensure that we enter a recession, what's known as stagflation. democrats' legislation also raises taxes on oil and gas production, even as americans continue to struggle with high energy prices, including a 75% increase in gas prices since president biden took office. and taxes aren't the only way that democrats raise revenue in this bill to pay for their green new deal measures. the democrats' bill also attempts to raise revenue by increasing irs audits and

enforcement. the democrats' legislation gives the irs an additional $80 billion in funding over ten years -- $80 billion, about six times their annual budget. this would allow the irs to hire an additional 87,000 employees, meaning that the irs would have nearly -- if you can believe this -- three times as many personnel as u.s. customs and border protection, the agency that is charged with overseeing security at our nation's borders. 87,000 new employees. the irs's budget would also substantially exceed customs and border protection's budget if this legislation is enacted. now, you might think that given the raging crisis at our southern border, the biden administration would be focused on the one hand beefing up

funding -- focused on beefing up funding at the u.s. customs and border protection instead of the irs. but you'd be wrong. mr. president, of the additional $80 billion the democrats' bill would hand to the irs, 57% or more than $45 billion would go to enforcement and only 4% to taxpayer services. think about that. 4% for an agency, as i said on the floor yesterday, that only succeeded in answering about one out of every 50 taxpayer phone calls during the 2021 tax season and as repeatedly, as we all know, mishandled sensitive taxpayer data. now you to name just one

instance, confidential taxpayer information is either leaked or hacked from the irs last year and shared with a left-leaning propublica in order to advance a partisan agenda. and more than a year later, the irs still hasn't provided meaningful follow-up to congress or accountability to taxpayers for that leak. and yet democrats' focus is is not on improving the irs's responsiveness and accountability but on boosting the number of audits. and speaking of those audits, no one should think the irs would be auditing -- just auditing major corporations and billionaires. nope, this bill would result in a lot of audits of small businesses and ordinary americans. in fact, it's extremely unlikely that democrats will be able to

gather the revenue they're claiming to get from increased irs enforcement unless they audit americans making less than $200,000 a year. based on data, again, from the joint committee on taxation, 78% to 90% of the revenue projected to be raised under -- or from underreported income would likely come from those making under $200,000. only 4% to 9% would come from those making more than $500,000. that, again, mr. president, from the joint committee on taxation. i just want to repeat that. 8% to 90% -- 78% to 90% of the revenue reported to be raised from underreported income would come from those making under $200,000 a year. in other words, all this talk about audits and, you know,closing the tax gap and

forcing people to pay taxes that they -- that are due, that they're not paying today, and implying that somehow that's going ply to high-income -- apply to high-income taxpayers or big corporations or businesses is just flat inconsistent with the data and the facts as compiled by the joint committee on taxation. up to 90% of the revenue projected to be raised from underreported income would come from those making less than $200,000 a year. so, mr. and mrs. american taxpayer, get ready. get ready for the irs enforcement auditor to come to your house and to start harassing you so that the democrats can pay for their massive tax-and-spending spree. mr. president, after more than a year of high inflation spurred

by democrats' reckless american rescue plan spending spree passed last year and with an economy that has shrunk for the past two quarters, it's hard to believe the democrats are trying to pass hundreds of billions of dollars in tax hikes, but that's exactly what's happening. once again, economic common sense is taking a back seat to democrats' big spending and big government ideology. democrats have already inflicted a lot of economic pain on the american people, and if this legislation passes, there's more to come. mr. president, i yield the floor. ms. ernst: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: mr. president,

today i come to the floor to urge president biden to return his attention to his disastrous withdrawal from afghanistan one year ago. i want to direct the commander in chief to reflect on a series of commitments he made to the american people before and during his reckless exit. on august 19, 2021, president biden promised u.s. troops would remain on the ground until every american who wanted to leave afghanistan was evacuated. on august 26, 2021, president biden promised to hunt down and avenge the deaths of 13 servicemembers killed in action

by isis-k in kabul. in a speech to the united nations on september 21, 2021, the president promised his administration would hold the taliban accountable to protect the rights of afghan women. mr. president, the commander in chief failed to uphold his word on all three fronts, and american security and prosperity have suffered as a result of his broken promises. today in afghanistan, americans who want to come home remain left behind. and the administration's lack of transparency concerning both the number and desire of americans trapped in taliban-controlled

afghanistan is alarming. the president and members of his cabinet repeatedly claimed the number of americans who wanted out of afghanistan was roughly 100. that number was spouted from september 2021 through the beginning of this year, the same number over and over again, even though we would hear reports on the television that 40 more americans were out, 200 americans were out. and yet the number remained the same. how many americans remain in afghanistan? the number they kept using was 100. there's no way around it. president biden broke his promise to the americans who remain. and their families anxiously

awaiting their return. americans have lived and traveled abroad with assurances that the united states would come to their aid in the event of a conflict. no matter how far away, the u.s. is expected to the have the backs of its citizens. our withdrawal from afghanistan was a cut-and-run approach that greatly damaged that guarantee. if the world's greatest superpower cannot locate and extract its own citizens from the clutches of seventh-century thugs, then far greater tests of our sovereignty, security, and prosperity will only loom larger. as we approach the anniversary of the haphazard withdrawal,

there is an open wound hurting our ability to deter the actions of our adversaries. president biden promised vengeance on the terrorists who killed 13 americans, including one from my hometown of red oak, iowa, at hamad karzai international airport. he told the american people, the united states will never rest. we will not forgive. we will not forget. we will hunt you down to the ends of the earth, and you will pay the ultimate price. again, the commander in chief's rhetoric does not match his actions. the u.s. military has not targeted or conducted any counterterrorism strikes against

isis-k in afghanistan since america's withdrawal on august 31, 2021. those who planned the cowardly act remain at large. it's not like isis-k are holed up in the mountains away from populations centers. at least 56 terrorist attacks, many of which isis-k has claimed responsibility for, have struck the people in metropolitan kabul since our withdrawal. our enemies are not hiding. but far too often, america is. we're also struck with a largely unrealized over-the-horizon counterterrorism strategy that has not deterred the resurgence of terrorists or avenged our lost warriors. our military and covert

operators' recent strike was welcome and long overdue, but the strike demonstrates a capability rarely employed and a posture toward terrorism far too inexact. it was president biden, after all, who said last august that al qaeda was gone from afghanistan. folks, that's clearly not the case. ensuring that al qaeda leader al-zawahiri will never harm another american again, the strike was raised serious questions about the security situation that we have in afghanistan p. the president's so-called and much-promised over-the-horizon counter terrorism strategy as not been a deterrent like it was promised to be.

instead we're seeing a growing threat emanating from afghanistan. this is the first u.s. military strike in afghanistan since america left on august 31 of last year. in the meantime, isis-k fighters are flowing into the country at alarming rates while al qaeda and the taliban have clearly been working together for the past year. at the very least, the taliban and haqqani network gave tsarnaev and his thugs safe haven, demonstrating -- gave zawahiri and his thugs safe haven, demonstrating ongoing collusion with terrorists. a lone strike does not present

-- not only has the u.s. capacity to protect the homeland been greatly damaged, the president's intent to champion human rights as a centerpiece of this administration's foreign policy is also in shambles. last fall, the president repeatedly claimed afghan women were a linchpin of his foreign policy priorities in the region. yet today, after 20 years of constitutional democracy and advancement of civil rights, the taliban has unraveled significant hard-won gains for the women of afghanistan. the taliban enforced a fundamentalist interpretation of islam, prohibit women from

working, from attention secondary school, and from traveling any distance without being accompanied by a male member of their family. most recently, the taliban has required all women to cover themselves from med to toe in the burka. yet it is reported that the president's team continues to bargain with the taliban concerning diplomatic recognition, potential coordination with the u.s. intelligence community, and access to $3.5 billion in held currency to the taliban, despite these actions. extending official diplomatic engagement and facilitating access to funding, without guaranteed and meaningful liberties for women and girls,

will legitimize the taliban rule and further subject women to a brutal regime. any further effort to surrender leverage to the taliban is a candid reflection of the biden administration's failure to remedy its own hypocrisy regarding human rights. the administration's abandonment of americans, inability to serve justice for our soldiers killed in action, impassive counterterrorism operations, and ignorance of the human rights disaster they precipitated in afghanistan interest substituted sound strategy for an ad hoc response of willful negligence. and they know it.

the department of state and department of defense under president biden have refused to cooperate with the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction. the president's neglect is most profoundly demonstrated through his administration's lack of controls on billions of dollars of taxpayer and frozen funds marked for humanitarian aid that have found their way into the taliban's coffers. since the taliban and hakan inet work, the two groups that are ruling afghanistan, are specially designated global terrorists, existing law compels the administration to disclose the risk of taxpayer money slipping into the hands of these two terror groups. the licenses issued by the treasury department over the last year extend far beyond

acute humanitarian aid for food and medicine. they expand the authorization of funding for activities, from endangered species research to direct payments to support governing institutions controlled by the taliban and the hakani network. i led 15 other senators in asking the biden administration to detail the total financial support provided to afghanistan in an honest assessment of the taxes, the fees, and the import duties siphoned off by the taliban. more than six months later we are still waiting for a comprehensive answer. this is completely unacceptable, in light of recent reporting

that taliban authorities are interfering with the delivery of humanitarian aid, despite a pledge to the united nations last fall that they would not. the people of afghanistan continue to suffer, from food insecurity, while the taliban are enjoying the spoils of america's generosity. numerous requests for a detailed accounting have gone unanswered by the treasury and state departments. leaving americans behind, failing to avenge the death of 13 servicemembers, and abdicating your promises to afghan women and girls do not deter threats from our shores. in testimony to the senate armed services committee on

october 26, 2021, the under secretary of defense for policy stated that isis k and al-qaeda have the intent to conduct operations against the united states, and that isis-k could generate that capability in six to 12 months, and al-qaeda within one to two years. eight months has come and passed, and we have yet to learn how team biden will protect our citizens from this threat at home or abroad. in the absence of such a framework, threats to our national security grow every day, risking the lives of

americans at home and abroad. folks, we're rapidly approaching that one-year mark. the haphazard withdraw from afghanistan, and mr. president, we cannot forget. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. ms. stabenow: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, today i rise to pay tribute to my longtime

agriculture, nutrition and forestry committee staff director and dear friend, joe schultz, who will soon be taking on a new challenge after more than 15 years of service to the united states senate. now, the first thing i have to say about joe, just to get it out of the way, he's a proud ohio native and graduate of the ohio state university, which is an immediate challenge for anyone from michigan, whether you are a university of michigan grad or, as i am, a michigan state university grad. in fact, his first job in the senate was working for my colleague and friend, senator brown, of ohio. senator brown swears that joe was 6'2 " and had hair when he worked for him. and says it's all about the farm bills that somehow changed that.

but somehow i convinced joe to come work for me on the agriculture committee. in part by assuring senator brown that joe would still be working for ohio, because senator brown's on the ag committee. and i'm so glad and lucky that i was able to do that. joe started as our chief economist. he's a great numbers guy. and nobody loves spreadsheets as much as joe. of course, he's so much more than a numbers guy, though, and we very quickly found that out. joe always knows every part of farm policy. and he's an amazing people person. someone you definitely want on your team when you go into a farm bill negotiation, which have been known to be tough. joe instinctively knows what people's reactions will be, what they will need in order to get an agreement, and he's always

had his finger on the pulse of the agriculture committee. , and the community. that's in large part because agriculture is way more than a job for joe. it's his life. he grew up on a farm, family farm in ohio. he even convinced his wife, virginia, to have their wedding on the family farm. it was beautiful, and i was so honored to be in attendance. with all their family and friends and their sheep. now, if you have ever talked with joe you probably know his family raised sheep on the farm, and boy, can he tell you some wild stories. for years, joe would have a contest on facebook during lambing season. he called it lambageddon. his friends would all guess the number of lambs that would be

born over presidents' day weekend, typically the busiest lambing weekend of the year. he always took time off to be there. whoever got closest to the correct number of lambs got bragging rights and the opportunity to name a lamb. given his dedication to the family flock, nobody on the acsg committee was at all surprised when joe and virginia welcomed two adorable babies, will and izzy, into their own family, twins, a little bit more than a year ago. after all, sheep typically have twin births, i understand. if you've ever worked with joe, one of the first things you notice is his wonderful, positive attitude. he's quick to smile, quick to laugh. he always assumes the best of people. he makes everything he's involved in so much better. that's true whether you're

talking about very contentious farm bill negotiations, and we've had more than a few since 2011, or field hearings and meetings with stakeholders. i wonder if he's kept a running total of the number of farms he's visited in michigan. nobody, and i can mean nobody, can talk about crop insurance like joe. he knows all the details. i'll never forget brandon fuens who worked for me for 20 years as my northern michigan regional manager, now the usda michigan state director, he told this story about seeing this firsthand. he remembered a farm bill hearing during which one attendee asked a very technical question about regulations. joe gave a very detailed answer, and then said hold on.

he then consulted the farm bill legislative text in front of him, found the applicable section, and repeated word for word what he had just said off the top of his head. then there were the codels. i'll never forget the trip to africa in 2014 with the women members of the senate. i led this first all-women's codel, mr. president, and members of the agriculture committee. we went to five countries on two continents in ten days, and many of our stops were in very rural areas. the codel fo focused on food security, global hunger, empowering women and girls, and agriculture trade. having joe along was such a huge help, because of his broad knowledge of agricultural issues. and i have to say, he's an

amazing travel buddy. i know every senator on the trip would agree with me, and we're so glad that he was part of the trip. one thing i'm extremely proud of, and i know joe is too, is this strong sense of collegiality he has nurtured on our amazing agriculture committee staff, and beyond. as one former colleague said, joe's the kind of leader who makes working long hours under crazy stress tolerable and survivable. even republicans have wonderful things to say about joe. that's not something you see on every senate committee. joe, i know i speak for all of us, republicans included, when i say we will miss you deeply. i'm so grateful to have had your leadership and friendship as we

have steered the agriculture committee together. we have an amazing, talented ag staff because of you. and your leadership. i wish you and virginia, your two beautiful children much success and happiness as you move forward to your new adventures. i know you'll be successful, and i look forward to celebrating all those successes. mr. president, i yield the floor.

i heard from some of my colleagues that the build that that her legislation passed by the u.s. house under said the senate democratic caucus. the 50 votes that are needed. i am not sure if that is absolutely true, but i do know

that if it is true, it would be a disaster for the working families of our country who today are desperately trying to survive. what is contrasted in the reduction at. i should mention that everyone of the provisions that i will be briefly discussing as overwhelming support from the american people according to poll after poll after poll. in other words, that is what the american people want. at a time when the united states has the highest rates of

childhood poverty of almost any major nation on earth, this reconciliation bill which will soon be coming to the floor does not accept the $300 a month child tax credit that the country had this year. that is gone. that is gone from this field. if you are parent paying for child care, 15,000 advocated childcare, this will completely yours that crisis. of course unlikely original bill back that her plan -- if you're

lurking hard right now struggling to pay for child care , it is back on you. >> i asked that the senate now proceeds to executive session for docket 117-three with all remaining provisions of the previous order in effect. >> without objection. >> mr. president. >> the senate will proceed to executive session. which the clerk will record. f 1949 on the accession of thef republic of finland and the kingdom of sweden. the presiding officer: under the previous order there will be three hours of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees on the treaties and resolution of advice and consent to ratification.

mr. menendez: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, while i know the senate and the american people's attention has been drawn in many different directions over the past couple of months, and while we are still working through numerous legislative proposals to address real challenges that families across the united states are facing from high food prices to, to gas prices, to devastating natural disasters exacerbated by climate change, i am here today to encourage my colleagues to support the united states taking an important step forward in affirming our commitment to freedom, democracy, and collective defense, to send a signal to the world that we will unite against those actors who seek to destabilize the supply of food that threatens hunger for millions of people all over the world, who seek to weaponize energy in the middle of an

unprecedented heat wave, and who think they can simply invade a neighbor with no consequences. as we grapple with the complexion geopolitics -- complex geopolitics, putin is bombing ukrainian cities, his soldiers are committing war crimes. these are not only attacks on brave ukrainians, they are attacks on the rule of international law, of which we all want to live by. they are attacks on the international order. they are attacks on one of the most deeply held american principles of a nation's right to determine its own destiny. and so, mr. president, i rise today in support of strengthening one of the greatest tools the united states has to bolster our efforts to protect those very democratic values and our citizens, the north atlantic treaty organization known as nato, one of the greatest alliances the

world has ever seen. welcoming sweden and finland into the nato alliance will signal the united states ongoing commitment to peace, stability, and democracy in europe and around the world. enlarging nato is exactly the opposite of what putin envisioned when he ordered his tanks to invade ukraine. indeed, he may have been trying to test the resolve of the alliance, and i am pleased that we have passed that test with overwhelming unity of vision and purpose. he hoped to gobble, quickly gobble up territory to correct what he has called, quote, the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century, close quote, which in essence is the dissolution of what was the soviet union. with little resistance from the countries who formally united in a values-based front against the ills of that vision for europe

and the world. instead of a quick strike, ukrainians from soldiers to schoolteachers, bravely fought back. instead of a russian coup in kyiv, president zelenskyy rallied his nation, instead of a divided west, we have been more united than ever. the united -- the united states and the free world have come together to support ukraine, to support democracies and the rule of law and to defend against brazen authoritarian aggression worldwide. however, despite the fact that putin's distorted world view has run into the reality of ra reenergized -- reenergized north atlantic treaty organization, this has not dissuaded him, this has not stopped him from using food and gas as a weapon of war, this has not curbed the threat of further russian aggression.

it is critical that we take this historic step and ratify the accession protocols for sweden and finland to join the nato alliance. it is crystal clear that nato plays a vital role for the security of the united states and is a bulwark in protecting peace and democracies throughout the world. 70 years ago democratic nations of europe and the united states came together to defend the liberty, freedom and individual rights of their citizens from the threat of a militarized soviet union. now, as then, this defensive alliance serves as a bulwark of stability and for the member states. partnering with our value based partners serves as a multiplier serves to protect our citizens and advance our interest.

indeed, the most famous of the articles of incorporations of nato, article 5, that states an attack on one member is considered an attack on all has been invoked only once, only once, when terrorists attacked the united states on september 11, and our nato allies rallied behind us, canadian air force was patrolling our sky and nato joined us in our collective efforts abroad to hunt down those who had perpetrated the attack of september 11. so we should do nothing in ratification to suggest that we are not committed to article 5. the u.s. constitution reigns supreme in all of our actions, so we should not sow doubt about our commitment, especially in this time in history. so we are duty bound to carefully consider who we admit

into this alliance. over the course of its seven-decade history, administration to nato has been guided by the alliance's open door policy as outlined in article 10 and specific benchmarks that every administration has used since the founding of nato. members must have a functioning democratic political system based on a market economy, fair treatment of minority populations, a commitment to reserve conflicts peacefully, an ability and willingness to contribute to nato military operations, and a commitment to democratic civil military relations. mr. president, sweden and finland meet and exceed these benchmarks in every respect. indeed, the qualifications of these two prosperous democratic nations are outstanding and will serve to strengthen the nato alliance. these are two steadfast nato and

u.s. allies with strong military and democratic institutions. they have every reason to participate in collective defense against potential russian aggression. and nato has every reason to embrace and welcome them into the alliance without delay. the people of sweden and finland and their governments have shown themselves to be supportive of joining nato, and in many ways finland and sweden are ideal candidates for nato membership had they have advanced militaries that are well positioned to integrate into nato. both have partnered to into the contributing to the operations in the balkans, afghanistan and iraq. they have strengthened their relations with nato even further. they have been engaging in dialogue and consultations, exchanging information and

coordinating training and exercises. in act, given geography and history, finland and sweden have long equipped their militaries an prepared their societies for the prospect of russian aggression. their participation in nato would reduce the burden on the united states and the whole military alliance. finland already spends more than 2% of its gdp on its defense budget and sweden has repeatedly, publicly committed to reaching that target as soon as possible. on top of all of this, these are two nations that are models of good governance. two nations that respect and promote human rights. now, with just a few detractors, i am pleased that there will be broad, bipartisan support admitting sweden and finland into nato. but let me speak to those few detractors. some critics say they don't want

us to subsidize these wealthy european nation security. but, of course, that's not the case. they meet or will soon meet the 2% threshold for military spending. we can count on these nations to pull their own weight. if anything, welcoming finland and sweden to nato will reduce the burden on the united states. there is tremendous urgency and a strong case for inviting these countries and we must act now. now, for those who say that expanding nato provokes russia, i would say after decades of neutrality, that finland and sweden have, they have been provoked by russia's aggression in ukraine to seek nato membership. should we let ruthless autocrats threaten the security of nato

allies or launch invasions on peaceful neighbors without consequences? no. should we let the fears of an irrational dictator guide us? no. the american people say no. and i hope the united states senate says no as well. so, today, i urge my colleagues to vote yes -- yes to providing advice and consent, yes to supporting these historic treaties, yes to welcoming finland and sweden, steadfast, loyal allies and beacons of democracy to nato, yes to a europe that is secure and prosperous. with that, mr. president. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. ms. rosen: in the month since the supreme court struck down roe v. wade, the assault on reproductive rights by antichoice maga republicans, it's been relentless. we've seen and heard the horror stories of states that have outlawed abortion. we have seen children, an even young girls, children as young as 10 who were raped and unable to get an abortion in their own states. we've seen examples of states looking to restrict -- restrict a woman's ability to travel to other states, restricting a woman's ability to travel to other states to get the medical care, the often lifesaving care they desperately need. in fact, this is an issue that republicans in this chamber objected to when democrats brought up a bill to guarantee

the fundamental right of women to travel in this country to seek care. maga republicans, wait, they want to strip women of their freedoms and they want to strip women to have the ability to choose what happens to their own bodies. if maga extremists have their way in congress, they will enact a rigid -- a rigid nationwide abortion ban which will threaten women and their doctors with jail time. and look what's already happening. antichoice states are working to stop women from going to pro-choice states to seek care and now they're even going after the doctors in those states that are simply doing their jobs taking care of their patients. this is utterly and completely outrageous. we cannot allow this to happen. that is why senators murray

padilla, lujan and i look to protect doctors in states like nevada where abortion remains legal. protect those doctors from facing prosecution by antichoice states. let me be clear. no doctor should ever be jailed for providing women with the reproductive and often lifesaving care they need wherever -- wherever those women are from. our bill, the let doctors provide reproductive health care act, would do exactly what is in the name. it would let doctors, medical professionals, provide reproductive care in states like nevada where abortion is legal without fear of prosecution or fear of jail time. our bill would empower the department of justice to protect women and their doctors in pro-choice states from

antichoice states' attempts to prosecute them. this means that if a woman from texas travels to my state of nevada, a pro-choice state, the nevada doctor she sees cannot -- cannot be prosecuted under texas' extreme abortion ban. we need to pass this now, without delay, without objections because we must protect women and we must protect their doctors. we must pass the let doctors provide reproductive health care act now. thank you. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. ms. klobuchar: i rise today in support of the let doctors

provide reproductive health care act. i'm honored to be here with the senator from nevada, senator rosen, she is one of the sponsors of this bill, along with senator murray and senator padilla, who is here and senate ben ray lujan and myself in addition to over 20 of our colleagues. we must pass this bill today, mr. president. almost six weeks ago, that's all the time it's been, it seems like it's been a lot longer, it's been only six weeks, mr. president, since the supreme court issued a rule shredding nearly five decades of precedent protecting a woman's right to make her own health care decisions. now, because of that decision, shredding 50 years of precedent, women are at the mercy of state laws or new state laws or

governors. they literally ran to the state capital, state legislators to see who could pass the most extreme bill. they are literally women are at the mercy of state laws that are a patchwork across the country that in many cases leave them with fewer rights than their mothers or their grandmothers. this is in spite of what the american people want. 70% to 80% of americans believe that it is a decision that should be made by a woman and her doctor and not politicians, not my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. they don't want them making their decisions for them. they want to make their decisions with their doctors. and if there wasn't proof enough that i've come here every single week since the dobbs decision issued to remind people where

the actual public is out there, look at what happened last night. we heard the majority loud and clear in the sunflower state of kansas. the people of kansas, in a record turnout, doubling the number of kansans that voted in the last midterm election, they voted 59% to 41% to protect reproductive freedom. that is more than 35,000 candidates that showed up in an odd election time in the middle of the summer on a hot day in august, they showed up to protect women's rights. for context, fewer than 460,000 candidates cast a ballot in the 2018 primary and now we have 530,000 who showed up to vote on one side to say a woman's right should be protected in their

state. this is a wakeup call to my colleagues who have been resisting action when it comes to allowing women to travel, when it comes to allowing women to be able to make a choice about even contraception. when it comes when to in this bill providing reproductive health care. this doesn't come down to red states or blue friends state, my friends. as i argued seriously before and now i have my proof point whether they be independents, democrats, or moderate republicans, when they show up, women's rights are protected. and guess what? they're showing up. since this decision came down, i've come down to the floor of the senate again and again with my colleagues to push for commonsense bills to protect women in this post-roe world. we've tried to preserve a woman's right to travel to other

states. that was senator cortez masto's bill. we brought a bill to the floor to give women reliable access to family planning services. that was my colleague senator tina smith's bill. we tried to pass legislation to make sure everyone should access contraception as well, as accurate information about contraception. we thank all our colleagues for their work on these bills. i want to specifically mention senator murray for her work. but we are not giving up. not when so much is on the line. many of the biggest fights for reproductive freedom are happening on the state and local level. women as well as their doctors are now in the crosshairs. republican state lawmakers are drafting legislation that would make it a crime to provide abortion care to a patient in another state where it's legal. let's get this straight. they would make it a crime, you can't get an abortion like that, a little 10-year-old girl couldn't get an abortion when she was raped in her own state. she goes to another state and

now we have legislators in certain states that are trying to make it a crime for her to do that. state legislatures in texas and arkansas indicated they are considering these kind also of laws and the governor of south dakota which shares a border with my state refused to rule out a similar law. doctors in minnesota where reproductive rights are firmly protected, could be prosecuted for providing completely legal medical procedures for people in maybe north dakota or south dakota or iowa that come to the great state of minnesota. the let doctors provide reproductive health care act is a straightforward solution. it protects doctors giving abortion care in states where it is legal and stops extreme attempts to investigate or punish them for doing their jobs. women and the providers who help them are already facing so much uncertainty because of the dobbs

decision. we should all be able to agree that at the very least, states shouldn't be able to target, punish, or arrest out of state doctors who are following their own state laws. today each and every one of my colleagues has the opportunity to make clear where they stand. they did that in kansas last night. they were able to vote. now let's have a real vote on this. not stop the vote. actually get it done. and i see my friend, senator blumenthal, who has been such a leader on this issue out of the state of connecticut is here as well as senator padilla. i yield the floor. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. blumenthal: first, thank you to my colleague and friend from the great state of minnesota for her being such a steadfast champion of this issue over so many years and such an articulate and eloquent

spokesman and i'm proud to join her and other colleagues as we have done week after week since the dobbs decision, trying to protect a woman's right to decide when and whether to have children. a woman's basic control over her own body, a woman's freedom that the dobbs decision stripped away and put in the hands of politicians. the politicians on the supreme court in effect took those rights away from the women of america. after 50 years and after everyone thought these rights were absolutely secure. when i first introduced the women's health protect act in 2013, the idea that roe v. wade would be overruled was

absolutely unimaginable. we were trying to fight the disruption of rights piece by piece through state laws that required admitting privileges or width of hallways or waiting times or other kinds of restrictions that constituted an unconstitutional burden on women's rights. and now we are in the post-roe world where the unthinkable has become real. the unimaginable is with us right now. and worse is to come. the hit list of this supreme court includes contraception, marriage equality, the basic right to privacy that is enshrined in the constitution, the right to be let alone from government interference. so my republican colleagues who think we are being alarmists,

the unthinkable is with us right now. and we need to provide assurance and certainty to the women of america that they can travel to seek abortion services that family planning options will be available to them, that the contraception rights will be secure and each time we have come to the floor to seek that recognition of basic rights, the republicans have blocked us. and so now we are here on a measure called let doctors provide reproductive health c care. let doctors provide health care, reproductive health care. there is a really cruel irony to

this effort. the doctors and nurses and health care providers who were our heroes and remain our heroes even more so now, during the pandemic and afterward can be prosecuted criminally for trying to save a woman's life. an abortion is necessary to that woman's life may be the mission of a doctor who then can be prosecuted criminally. now, in connecticut we've said, our legislature has made it absolutely clear nobody in connecticut is going to be prosecuted. no law enforcement official in connecticut is going to cooperate with texas or any other state that criminalizes abortion services. no evidence from connecticut is going to be made available to an overly zealous or aggressionive

-- or aggressive prosecutor hell-bent on going after a doctor or health care provider or a woman who seeks abortion services. but connecticut is the exception. it's safe harbor -- its safe harbor makes it unusual, not common. and so we need a national law. let doctors provide reproductive health care act that protects the health caregivers and providers of our nation to do their job. the hippocratic oath is for t them, something that goes as deep as our oath of office for us. we're sworn to uphold the constitution. they in effect take an oath to save lives.

that's their job. and their lives should not be in jeopardy nor should their livelihood simply because they are doing their job. we've seen time and time again that this supreme court has no respect for precedent. we've seen state legislators who have respect for reproductive rights and health care. we cannot rely on false reassurances made by republican colleagues here or anyone around the country because history has already shown us that this supreme court has on its hit list these fundamental rights and expanding the restrictions on them. and so i ask my colleagues to join us in unanimous consent for

this measure. that motion will be made sho shortly. and i hope that we can join in ensuring that individuals have access to quality health care regardless of their zip code, no matter where they live, the women of america deserve this basic right and the health care providers who enable them to protect themselves and who save lives deserve the assurance that they're not going to be the target of a prosecutor hell-bent on making a name for himself or a state legislature seeking to make political points at the expense of a health care provider. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from california.

a senator: thank you, mr. president. colleagues, on january 24, just five and a half weeks ago, the supreme court overturned roe v. wade. mr. padilla: just weeks after republicans in this chamber blocked our push to codify the right to an abortion into federal law. so since january 24, democrats have been fighting to ensure that abortion care remains accessible. we pushed to pass a bill that would protect the fundamental right to travel to states wrl abortion is still legal -- states where abortion is still legal. republicans blocked it. we pushed to pass a commonsense bill to expand access to family planning services. republicans blocked that one, too. we pushed to codify the right to

contraception. republicans blocked it. at every turn republicans have taken extreme and out-of-touch positions by blocking these commonsense bills. so today democrats are standing up to protect doctors, nurses, and other health care professionals who are incr increasingly under attack just for doing their jobs and providing legal abortions. colleagues, i'm proud to join senator murray and our colleagues in this effort to pass the let doctors provide reproductive health care act to ensure doctors can provide the reproductive health care that women need. abortion access, after all, is essential health care. now, i've seen firsthand

incredible work that providers in california do to provide critical reproductive care. most recently i visited a planned parenthood clinic in los angeles. we're already seeing a chilling effect among health care providers driven by the uncertainty of their legal liability. like the alarming lawsuit that was filed against a provider in indiana who legally helped a 10-year-old rape victim terminate her unwanted pregnancy. so we must be clear. for health care providers that abortion restrictions cannot be allowed to reach beyond the borders of antiabortion states. the decision of whether or not to have a child is one of the most personal decisions that someone can make.

for the students who choose to finish high school before starting a family, for the survivors of sexual assault whose abortion reaffirms the right to choose for their own bodies, for the parent who desperately wanted a child only to learn devastating news about dangerous health risks. for patients whose lives were saved by an abortion because abortion is often critical medical care. access to abortion should not be dictated by politicians and lawyers. california and many other states across the country refuse to turn the clock back to an era when abortions were outlawed and dangerous. and as we saw last night in kansas, the majority of kansas voters, in fact the majority of americans agree that women

should have access to abortion care. and so we must pass the let doctors provide reproductive health care act to protect the courageous women and men delivering essential medical care to those who need it. while republicans to block our efforts to protect reproductive rights, democrats won't back down. in the face of these unending attacks on reproductive freedom, we will not give up the fight to protect a woman's right to safe abortion access. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. mrs. murray: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. i want to start by recognizing the overwhelming victory for the right to abortion in kansas last

night. since the day the supreme court struck down the right to abortion that upended the lives of women across the country, the american people have been using their voices to speak out against republicans' extreme bans and now for the first time since the dobbs decision, they've had a chance to speak with their votes, and they sent a message loud and clear. people do not want their fundamental rights stripped away. they will not forget republicans' cruelty in dragging us back half a century. and when abortion is at stake, they're not going to stay on the sidelines. madam president, last night the people of kansas sent a message as clear as any i've ever seen in politics. now, today we're going to see if republicans are finally getting that message or if they're going to continue to ignore the american people. because democrats are here today

with legislation to protect doctors providing legal abortion care and make sure they can do their jobs, practice medicine, and save lives without the threat of legal action. i really can't believe we need this bill at all. we're talking about doctors who are following the law and simply want to provide care to their patients. it's not enough for republicans that their cruel abortion bans have meant appointments that have been canceled, prescriptions denied, doctors forced to wait until patients got sicker and their patient is at death's door before they can provide lifesaving care. no, they're going to go further than that. they're after doctors providing legal abortion care too. i really can't emphasize that enough it these doctors are following the law and still facing legal threats and harassment.

right now in indiana, a doctor is being investigated after providing an abortion for a 10-year-old who was raped. think about that. a doctor was investigated after doing their job, after simply providing health care, care that can be lifesaving, care that was entirely legal in their state, care that, up until the republicans far-right supreme court overturned roe, was legal across the country. the fact that dr. benard is being investigated after doing her job and helping her patient is chilling. i want to be clear, while dr. benard's story is being spread across the country, she is not the only doctor facing threats and won't be the last. at this moment republican lawmakers are drafting legislation that would make it a crime to provide -- for

providing an abortion. after talking to doctors back home in washington, they are following this closely and they're worried. i heard from providers across washington state who are worried they could face lawsuits that could threaten their practices and their livelihoods for just doing their jobs and providing care their patients need, care that is once again completely legal in my state. democrats are here today standing up for doctors. we've been drafting a bill of our own, the let doctors provide reproductive health care act and we're proud that dr. bernard herself supports this bill. i want to thank senator rosen, senator lujan and senator padilla. as well as my colleague, representative schrier who is

leading the legislation in the house. this is a simple bill to address a threat we know is far too real. the let doctors provide reproductive health care act will protect doctors providing legal abortion care and make sure they can practice medicine and save lives without fear of legal threats and intimidation. it will make clear the attacks we have seen on doctors are unacceptable, that politicians should not be harassing or scaring or investigating or threatening or punishing doctors for providing care that is perfectly legal, that patients want, and that in many cases is even necessary to save lives. democrats are going to try to pass this bill right now because we believe no doctor should be punished for caring for patients and providing legal abortion care. and for republicans who claim they don't want to punish

doctors actually mean it, if those words are more than an empty talking point, more than another broken promise, they'll stay out of the way and let us get this done today. if they don't, and they block us, like the legislation to block the right to travel across state lines or to expand family planning services or like they blocked legislation to block the right to contraceptives, this will speak louder than actually caring for families, patients, or women. even if they stop us from getting this bill done today, they will not stop us from continuing to put them on the record and hold them accountable. they will not stop us from doing everything we can to protect the rights and the people they are putting in grave danger, and they are going to have to answer to the people they represent, to patients, to providers, to families whose lives they are

turning upside down. so, madam president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 4723, the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. braun: reserving the right to object. many americans are not going to see eye to eye on the issue of abortion. i'm glad to see that the supreme court did what it did and returned that decision to the people, to the state legislatures. currently indiana is debating that issue. this bill denies state legislatures the right to

protect this law. the bill appears to be dealing with traveling freely across the nation to get an abortion but literally reading of the text proves the true intent of the bill. it is, i think, a backdoor into trying to upend what neighboring state legislatures, you know, should be their responsibility. it should be the people in their state that make the decision. so look at section 3a3 of the bill stating, no individual, entity or state may restrict a health care provider or any individual entity from providing or assisting a health care provider with reproductive health care services for an individual who does not reside -- who does not reside in

the state in which the services are to be provided. section 3a1, 3a2 of the bill, specifically include the phrase lawful in the state. why is that omitted from the previous clause? i think it's because this bill is an attempt to undermine state laws that protect life by allowing abortions for anyone who crosses state lines and is not a resident of that state. not to relabor. i will read it again slowly. once again, this bill reads, no individual, entity or state may prevent, restrict, impede or disadvantage any individual from providing or assisting reproductive health care services for an individual who does not reside in the state.

senator murray did not mention that it as gives the department of justice $40 million in grant funding to help people sue states that enact policies to protect life. the department of health and human services was given another $40 millioning in funding for any -- $40 million in funding for those at secretary becerra. we should not spend $80 million to undermine state laws on life or impose a legislative backdoor or abortion on demand across the nation. for this reason, mr. president, i oppose this bill and i do object to it. murray madam president. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mrs. murray: we have seen time

and again over the last few weeks when it comes to protecting rights and providing health care for women and patients and families, republicans' promises are empty and their positions are extreme. democrats just offered a bill to protect the rights of providers to be able to provide abortions in legal states. democrats recently offered a bill to protect the right to travel across state lines to get an abortion. they blocked it. we offered a bill to expand our nation's long-standing family program. they blocked that. we offered a bill to protect the right to contraceptives and they blocked that too. today again we offered a bill simply to protect doctors performing legal abortions and they blocked that too. each one of these bills was incredibly straightforward. each one of these is common sense. each time republicans have stood in the way of basic protections

of america's reproductive freedoms. democrats are not giving up, and as we saw last night, the american people are not either. we are going to fight for the right to an abortion. we are going to fight for doctors who are doing their jobs and doing what is best for their patients. we are going to fight for women making their own decisions about their own bodies, their families, and their futures. and we're going to make sure everyone knows and no one forgets exactly who's standing in the way, exactly where republicans stand in this fight. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: i have nine requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly

noted.

the presiding officer: who yields time? if no sometime yielded, time will be charged equally to both sides. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. portman: madam president, i'm on the floor today with senator shaheen to talk -- to have a colloquy about ukraine. this is the 20th time in so many weeks that i■ have talked about the unprovoked and brutal invasion of ukraine by russia. today i look forward to being

with my colleague, senator shaheen, a member of the ukraine caucus, someone with whom i traveled to ukraine and also to the border of ukraine and poland to meet with the refugees. senator shaheen is going to talk about how we got to where we are and what we do going forward. i also recent -- was recently made aware of the fact that we are going to take up the nato ratification vote today and this is to have the united states approve the addition of sweden and finland to the nato alliance. this is great for the alliance. it's great for the united states. and i believe it's also otherwise they wouldn't be interested, very good for the people of finland and sweden. they add a lot to the nato alliance. they are militarily and economically in a position to be valuable contributors. they also in the case of finland share the largest land border with russia of any country.

they have understandable concerns with what they see happening in ukraine. i just believe it's very much in our national security interest and the interest of people i represent to have in addition even further strengthening of the nato alliance through the addition of these two partners. vladimir putin thought he was going to split nato apart and today he's finding the opposite has happened. nato has come together in ways we have never seen and we now have again the addition of two very strong members of nato who are long time allies of the united states and will add significantly to the nato alliance. with regard to ukraine, let's start with a little history. ukrainians have faced adversity from russia for hundreds of years. this is not new to them. russia's impression of ukraine is not a 21st century issue. under the brutal rule of the russian czars, ukrainian was subject to -- in 1918 ukrainians

got their first taste of national freedom. ukraine declared its independence from the russian empire. unfortunately this freedom was short lived just a few years later the bolsheviks conquered ukraine. asen unwilling member of the soviet empire, ukrainians suffered horrific atrocities at the hands of their soviet overlords. in 1932 and again in 1933, the stalinist regime imposed a premeditated manmade famine against the people of ukraine. this horrific atrocity is known as the holowdamar. millions of people were starved to death. stalin even ordered the borders of the country to be sealed to prevent anyone from escaping this manmade starvation and to prevent the delivery of any international food aid. in 2018 senator durbin and i introduced a resolution to

commemorate the 85th anniversary of and to recognize the commission on the ukraine famine's finding that it was a genocide. no question. grateful to senator shaheen, senator tillis and others in the chamber today for cosponsoring that resolution. it passed in october of 2018 unanimously here in the united states senate. it failed to extieng qish the ukrainian people's identity as hard as they tried. but it was not the end of the soviet oppression. in the 1970's, the soviet leadership imposed a crackdown on ukrainian intellectuals and those with any sort of leanings toward independence or toward the west. the prisons and gulags became filled with prisoners as the soviet union tried against to assault ukrainian identity but then in 1991 after years of repression, ukraine finally broke away from its russian rulers for good. ukraine declared its independence on august 24 of that year and in december the declaration was confirmed by a

referendum in which over 90% of the ukrainian people voted in favor of independence. this chart shows the amazing response of the people of ukraine to that. 95% of the people in the kyiv area as you can see supported independence. by the way, russians often say that crimea really was not part of ukraine. well, more than half of the people in crimea were for independence as well. but russia's crimes against the people of ukraine continue to this day. last week a video was circulated online of a russian soldier torturing and mutilating a ukrainian prisoner. unfortunately not an isolated incident. after this the ukrainian soldier was shot dead and dragged with a rope into a shallow grave by his russian captors. we've all seen the pictures from bucha, people assassinated, people with their hands tied behind their back. elsewhere in ukraine a russian missile attack struck a prison

in donetsk that was housing ukrainian prisoners of war. this chart shows that prison and the fact that it was attacked by missiles. many of these soldiers were involved in the heroic defense of the steel factory in mariupol. they held out for weeks against russian assaults on the plant. at least 40 ukrainian pow's, maybe more were killed in this assault. these were soldiers who were lawful prisoners of war supposedly protected by the geneva convention. russia murder of these pow's is a war crime and must be held accountable for this and all its countless crimes in ukraine. but following its awsh playbook russia is spreading massive amounts of disinformation involving this incident and so many others. they claim the ukrainian forces killed these pris sores as a way to discourage other soldiers from surrendering. this, of course, is nonsense. among other things, ukraine needs the manpower.

why would they kill their own soldiers instead of getting them back in a prisoner swap that everybody assumed was going to happen. it makes little sense but it has never stopped russia from promulgated lies to deflect blame from its own crimes. unsurprisingly the red cross still has not been granted access to this site by russia who clearly need more time to cover up the evidence of its involvement before they allow any kind of inspection. let the red cross in. those responsible for these atrocities must be held to account. this is one reason why we cosponsored a resolution to recognize what is happening in ukraine as genocide. across the country ukrainian women and children have been subjected to indiscriminate russian missile strikes and air strikes. it has killed thousands of civilians, noncomwants, children, a few weeks ago i spoke about little liza, a 4-year-old girl with autism who was killed by a russian missile strike in vinnytsya.

when the first lady was in town a couple of weeks ago, she spoke about a 3-year-old boy who just learned ho you to use prosthetics. imagine that. an ynt 3-year-old boy who has been forced to learn how to use a prosthetic limb because of a russian air strike on civilian targets. these stories are hard to hear and hard to tell but the world must know about them. this is the reality that all ukrainians are facing. unsurprisingly, the people of ukraine are responding to these atrocities. a possible ukrainian counteroffensive may be unfolding in the south in the direction of kherson. also heard about this in the popular media. kherson is here, near the black seaport of odesa, the southern part of ukraine is incredibly important for ukraine's economy and russia knows that. remember kherson was the first major ukrainian city to fall to the russian forces after russia's full-scale invasion began in february of this year, but now ukrainian soldiers are conducting missile strikes against russian military instruct in the area to weaken

russia's defenses and conducting ground attacks and liberating parts of this territory that russia has illegally taken. you can see that in the light blue. the significance of recapturing kherson cannot be overestimated. it would undo one of russia's earliest successes in the war. it's also important that ukraine regain control of much of its black seacoast as possible. this is ukrainian's economy primary connection to the rest of the world. russia of course has sought to capture this coastline in order to economically strangle ukraine. we talked last week about what they are doing in odesa. they finally decided they were going to let ships come out of odesa and they made an agreement that they would not continue to bomb odesa and certainly not bomb any port facilities. within 12 hours they bombed port facilities. that's how much the russian commitment meant. but the ship has finally sailed from odesa and we hope many more will go. if ukraine is successful in its efforts here in the south, it

will undermine president putin and his attempts to make a russian victory in ukraine. something that the russians say is inevitable. while ukraine is making progress in the south, russia is laying the groundwork to annex occupied land, particularly in the east in this area near donetsk. occupation means that the russians themselves are distributing russian passport, paying salaries in russian rubles and ex pa dieting russian citizens for ukrainian citizens. there are reports that russia will stage a sham referendum in this area to try to legitimatize their illegal annexation. senior kremlin officials have warned russia will never leave areas of kherson in the south here where russian forces have been occupying the territory. before the invasion, these cities were home to more than 2.5 million ukrainians in this area. 2.5 million ukrainians.

one properly nantz program gandzist has said -- propagandist has said ukraine as it was cannot continue to exist. this person continued. there will not be the ukraine as we have known for many years. it won't be ukraini longer. end quote. clearly that's the russian intent. vladimir putin said his ambition is even more. it's to fully restore the borders of the old soviet union. we must make sure he knows ukraine of 2022 is not the ukraine of 1921 which russia conquered and forced interest the soviet empire. we know how to help ukraine to keep this from happening. it's to provide them what they need to defend themselves. we recently provided ukraine with what we call himars, many of us have been advin that we're glad to see there are some himars now in the theater. these have been critical to the recent ukrainian military successes. so this congress has made a difference. we provided funding. we've gotten some equipment into the area that the ukrainians

need to be able to defend themselves and to have some sort of a level playing field with russia's much bigger army. officials said with the help of these himars, ukraine has taken out russian high-value targets and destroyed them and saved countless ukrainian lives. it will yous ammunition depots and targets from long distances. himars have also conducted many strikes in southern ukraine i talked about earlier to make progress in the kherson area. russia has similar long-range artillery that allowed them to fire on ukrainian foorses -- forces with immunity. they could kill civilians and kill ukrainian military personnel but they couldn't be reached by the ukrainians. now the ukrainians have taken themselves out of that danger zone because these himars can balance the playing field. and have that longer range and the accuracy they need. i think there are about 15 in theater now. there are also a few from germany and a few from the u.k. but they need more. they say they need 40 to 50 and

the munitions to be able to make them effective. that's something that we should be focused on. we should be focused on providing them again what they need to actually win this conflict. i believe we also got to continue providing ukrainians with other weapons as well, including the army tactical missile system. this missile which can be launched from the same himars launchers we've been giving to ukraine has a longer range of 300 kilometers. in a war like this one that is increasingly becoming artillery dual, range is a disielsive factor. these missiles would allow ukraine to turn the tables on the russians. where ukraine used to be outranged by the russian artillery, with the missiles, we could be able to help ukraine to be able to strike important russian targets with impunity themselves. this is important. because ukraine is now using these weapons in this counteroffensive in kherson. the institute of study of war in washington, d.c. has said recently this defensive to take out russia is in the works and

ukrainians are using himars to strike targets effectively. 50 miles away. it's helping. we made a difference. former security adviser to the ukrainian government told "newsweek" the state of russian morale in the south means a counteroffensive has an excellent chance of success. the russians suffer from poor morale, logistical troubles and the horrors of himars. end quote. so the evidence is clear as to why we should continue to send them weapons they need to be able to not just survive but to win this conflict. by the way, we have hundreds of himars in our stocks that are currently not with active units. so we have the ability to help more. this war has now crossed over the five-month mark. since before the invasion began, i've come to this floor a number of times to talk about what needs to be done as has senator shaheen and others. i have mentioned the fact that we sent billions in military aid and humanitarian assistance to ukraine and that it is working,

particularly as we see with some of these new weapons, it's making a difference. it will help these brave warriors in their most vulnerable noncomwants, the kids, the children to be able to survive and to be able in the case of the military to be able to start making progress. to push out the russian inv invaders. democrats and republicans alike have sounded the alarm with bipartisan pushes and legislation to help ukraine. the u.s. cut off our own oil and gas. we're usuallying the europeans to do the same. we have talked about the need for more weapons, for more sanctions to remove all of russia's banks to the global financial system, to explore options to remove other tax benefits, and to remove access to the u.s. market. all of this is necessary. both on the military side, the humanitarian side, the economic side, and the sanction, side. in order to have a victory. i fear sometimes with regard to the military assistance that

we've been doing too little too late. we can't continue too do too little too late. this is a struggle. it's a struggle between freedom and democracy and the right of self-determination on the one hand and, on the other hand, russian aggression unprovoked, a brutal conquest, authoritarianism and tyranny. president putin's ambitions lie well beyond ukraine. we must show him that the west continues to stand unite. we need to show ukraine that the world stands with them. this is why it is so important that sweden and finland have chosen to join nato and we must support them in this. senator shaheen and i have shown that in our work to aid ukraine, it is no the a republican or democrat issue. we are stepping up in support of our democratic ally together. as the fight rages on, the

perseverance and self-determination of ukrainians seems to grow stronger. we've seen the resilience in the face of russia's broken promises. when russia has attacked ports and humanitarian corridors, the ukrainian people are fighting for their homeland, for their families, for their freedom. and it is impressive and inspiring to see what they are doing. the senate is going to break for an august recess in the next few days and even though we won't be on the floor every week to continue to fight for the ukrainian people, we will do so with our work back home, with getting more people engaged and involved in america to help on the humanitarian side, and we will continue to promote the fact that the united states national security interest is served bid helping freedom and democracy. i want to note something president zelenskyy said recently in an address to the people of ukraine. he said strategically russia has no chance of winning this war.

it is necessary to hold on so that even at the tactical levels, the terrorist state feels its defeat. we must do our job, protect our state, and take care of each other. end quote. let's hope ukraine finish this mission, protect their state, their democracy, and take care of each other. let's give ukraine the tools it needs to be able to do that. after these months of fighting and giving acres the west must not falter during ukraine's dire time of need. we must be there through victory for the european people. victory for self-determination, victory for freedom. with that, i'd like to yield to my colleague from new hampshire, senator shaheen and my partner in this effort. mrs. shaheen: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: madam president, i am really pleased to come to the floor to join my colleague from ohio, senator port man. we've twice traveled to ukraine

together. i have appreciated hit leadership as cochair of the ukraine caucus and his advocacy for not only legislation to help ukraine but also for these reports which weekly have kept the war in ukraine in front of the american people, which is so important as we think about how do we continue support in our public for what's happening in ukraine and des -- and this fight that the ukrainians are so publicly ways and meaning. i am also pleased to be here with my colleague, senator tillis, who because we're going to be voting this afternoon on ratification of the access of finland and sweden to nato. together we led a bipartisan delegation to madrid last month which included both three democrats and four republicans and we were able to visit

helsinki and stock hole on our way into stockholm. i wanted to talk about both of these topics this afternoon because they are connected, as senator portman has said. there is a reason why finland and sweden after decades of maintaining neutrality are looking at joining nato. it's because of this unprovoked, brutal war by russia against ukraine. and they're successful in ukraine, we don't know where that will end. and so we need to make the connection for people. a year ago no one would have thought that sweden and finland would have wanted nato membership, but of course a lot has happened in that year. vladimir putin made one of the

most consequential miscalculations in modern history. i think it's the biggest miscalculation in foreign policy since hitler went into russia in world war ii. he went into ukraine to wage this unprovoked, premeditated war upon the people of ukraine. and part of his ration al was to talk -- and part of his rationale was to talk about nato and his opposition to ukraine's joining nato but also because he thought he would be able to stall enlargement of nato. he thought he would be able to split the nato allies and, in fact, just the opposite has happened. the global response to punish putin for this war in ukraine is unprecedented. his -- putin's barbaric campaign in ukraine and threats to democracy around the world has

resulted in the strongest iteration of nato to date. and now here we are, the united states is about to welcome two very capable, very qualified and deserving members into the alliance, which will further strengthen our global coordination to preserve our rural space order. i've spoken before in this chamber about the strong bipartisan support for finland and sweden's nato membership. when sweden and finland announced their intent to apply for nato membership, senator tillis and i led a letter to president biden that within about 24 hours was cosigned by 80 of our colleagues, all pledging to support swift ratification of the accession protocols. and just last month senator tillis and i led that delegation to madrid to the nato summit, and we did it at the request of both the majority leader schumer

and the minority leader,. mr. mcconnell. when meeting with our allies and partners, we talked about our commitment to return to the senate and to work hard to swiftly ratify the accession protocols, an we've done just that. we had hoped to be the first body to do that ratification. we're going to be the 22nd, which i think is very good news for nato and for the effort to ensure that finland and sweden become members of nato. on july 19, the senate foreign relations committee on which senator portman and i sit unanimously voted in support of nato's accession protocols. and today's vote is not just important for sweden and finland and for nato, but it's also important for ukraine, as senator portman laid out. the ukrainian people are on the front lines of a war for

democracy and for our collective , shared values, values that underpin the heart of the nato alliance. and sweden and finland's membership will bolster our efforts to hold putin to account, as he wages this war to eradicate ukrainian culture. putin's decision to invade ukraine affirmed what we have long known -- that vladimir putin does not respect the distinct history, culture, and identity of the ukrainian people. his view of history, of course, is falls. it's distorted and it's deadly. his unprovoked war in ukraine is a manifestation of his delusional ideas and his blatant attempt to wipe ukraine off the map of europe. but despite the challenges to their sovereignty, for generations, the ukrainian people have maintained their own traditions, their own language and their own dream of

independence. and putin is waging propaganda campaigns that seek to justify his goals to the russian people. he is deploying deliberate, harmful rhetoric of denazifying ukraine. he is pursuing a broader maniacal agenda to eradicate everything ukraine -- the land, the people, the language, the culture. we know russia has established camps in both russian and ukrainian even before the february 24 ination. now properties are that there are over one million ukrainians who have been forcibly relocated to russia, including about 250,000 children, children who have been taken from their ukrainian parents and sent to russia. so we need to call putin's actions what they are. they are acts of genocide.

and after the rwandan genocide, the international community had vowed to never again let such immense huge tragedy happen on our watch. well, we must not let putin accomplish his mission of destroying the ukrainian people and dismantling the international rules-based order which has been in place for more than 70 years. and we must hold them accountable -- and we must hold him accountbling because we know if he is successful, putin's campaign is is not going to end with ukraine. who will be next? the baltic states? eastern european countries? romania, poland? as americans, we have a moral obligation to work with our allies to hold putin to account. and i am proud that this body is doing just that.

last week the senate foreign relations committee, of which senator portman and i are both members, introduced a resolution recognizing russia's actions in ukraine as genocide. but of course we must do more, and today's ratification vote is going to be another step in sending a message to both vladimir putin and the ukrainian people that nato is unified and that we are going to continue to support their efforts to push back against this brutal dictator. so i hope that our colleagues will join us in celebrating today's important moment of nato's enlargement from 30 to 32 members. this historic accession is a testament to the global commitment to not be bystanders amid a war that violates all international norms and seeks to destabilize our rules-based order. i hope that our remaining neigh

lice will move swiftly -- i hope that our remaining nato allies will move swiftly against the ethnic cleansing of the ukrainian people, we must push back on putin's blood-thirsty war on ukraine. so again, i'm pleased that we are here to support both ukraine and the ratification of sweden and finland into nato. i'm sure we will have a very strong, bipartisan vote this afternoon. and i look forward to continuing to work with nato and with our colleagues as we do everything we can to support the success of ukraine against vladimir putin. thank you, madam president. i yield to my cochair of the senate nato observer group, senator tillis. mr. tillis: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. mr. tillis: thank you, madam president. i want to thank my friend and colleague, senator portman, for

his work and his focus on ukraine, and i want to thank my friend and colleague, senator shaheen. it's been a real pleasure. once we started up the senate nato group, after it had been ambassadorment -- dormant. i grew up in a family of six kids. and we even to this day have our differences and disagreements. i got one sister i'm pretty sure wouldn't vote for me if she lived in north carolina. i know when her family gets threatened, there's no difference between us. that's what vladimir putin saw on february 24. he saw the family of nations in nato come together like he couldn't possibly have imagined. and he saw two nations, finland and sweden, after decades of being nonaligned saying enough is enough. now it's time to pick between

good and evil. and evil is vladimir putin. and good is western democracies, western democracies like finland and sweden ho -- who respect the rule of law, who respect the rights of their citizens, who invest in their military, and who will be a net exporter of security the date they enter nato. as a matter of fact, they're already a very valuable asset to nato. i've spoken with many of my colleagues in the department of defense, many people in uniform. they laud the relationship they have with the military of sweden and finland. they work together on exercises. they know that sweden has a formidable navy that's going to give us added presence in the baltics and added puerto ricans in the arctic -- and added presence in the arctic. the worst possible scenario that putin never anticipated was a

completely unified nato and the addition of 8930 miles, -- 830 miles of nato border right up against russia. that's what he has gotten for his illegal invasion of ukraine, and blood of thousands are on vladimir putin's hands. i want to talk a little about finland and sweden. by i have to start with that letter. i it remember vividly, senator shaheen, when meeting with finish diplomats and defensive ministers, we said what can we do to send the signal to the people of finland and sweden that the united states is absolutely supportive of their accession in nato? they said communications also be good. we said we'll do a letter. in 24 hours, we got 80 signatures of the question will be why not the other 20? honestly, we didn't take the time. everybody signed onto the letter, but we thought it was important to get that

communication out quickly. today, we're going to see more than 95 senators, i think more than that, vote for ratification, because they understand that finland and sweden are ininvesting in their military. finland is at 2%, continuing to invest. they've put out orders for 64 f-35 joint strike fighters. why is that extraordinary? finland is about half the population of my state, north carolina. about 5.5 million people. they have 64 joint strike fighters on order. we have 200 in full operation in the tuns. if we, on a per capita basis, had as much joint strike fighters as finland intends, we would need more than 4,000. let's talk about sweden. their industrial base is extraordinary. they have advanced fighter technology. they have advanced submarine technology. they have an industrial base that can be mobilized and one

already developing platforms that are nato interoperable. they're not going to have to do nato 101. they're going to get to work. they're going to continue the work they're already doing, and in sweden's case, if some members are concerned about burden sharing, hitting the 2% mark, in stock home we talked about this, -- in stockholm we talked about this, they're on their way, they're committed. their government officials are committed to getting to 2% funding, and thank goodness. maybe that sends a message to other nato countries that they need to get up there. ukraine taught us we have to be ready and at that level of burden sharing. i'm not the least bit concerned with freand p finland -- with finland and sweden meeting their order. finland will be there by 2027, early 2028. now we have to move forward. i am also being a little competitive, i'm disappointed that we weren't the first

nation, but i also am very optimistic. i'm thrilled so many nations have already recognized how valuable they will be as full-flected nato allies -- full-negligented nato allies. we'll be 22nd, but in record time. everybody knows here, i described this place as a crock pot, it takes a long time to cook something in the u.s. senate. for us to do this, in less than a month, is absolutely extraordinary, and i hope that the people of sweden and finland recognize that that is because the united states senate has full confidence in them. we welcome them readily, and we look forward to their accession, and this step in ratifying the treaty is a great step. madam president, i encourage all of my members to consider voting for finland and sweden. the last thing i'll leave you with, is that there are some here who say we can't really worry about russia. we have to worry about china. we have to worry about both. and nato is worried about both.

if you look at the strategic concept out of madrid, you should also recognize there were four countries from indo pacom at a nato sum. they recognize we have to look at china and recognize the threat, but also that we have an immediate threat in europe and have to stand together. with nato, i'm very proud of how the partner came together. with sweden and finland i'm going to be more proud of our alliance when they are full-negligented members. we'll -- full-fledged members. we'll work to make sure the remaining countries follow suit quickly so that we can welcome both of these great nations into the greatest alliance that's ever existed. thank you, madam president.

mr. portman: madam president prk i yie -- madam president, i yie. i yield back my time.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. hawley: madam president, i rise today to discuss american national security and the decisions that we must make to keep this nation safe. the senate will vote today on whether to expand nato by admitting sweden and finland. i intend to vote no, and i encourage my colleagues to do the same, and i want to say a word or two as to why. finland and sweden want to expand nato because it is in their national security interests to do so, and fair enough. the question that should properly be before us, however, is is it in the united states' interests to do so? because that's what american foreign policy is supposed to be about, i thought. it's about american security,

protecting american workers, defending american jobs, securing american prosperity. and i fear that some in this town have lost sight of that. they think american foreign policy is about creating a liberal world order or nation-building overseas. with all due respect, they're wrong. our foreign policy should be about protecting the united states, our freedoms, our people, our way of life, and expanding nato, i believe, would not do that. listen, we should tell the truth about the consequences of the decision that we're going to take today. expanding nato will require more united states forces in europe, more manpower, more firepower, more resources, more spending. and not just now, but over the long haul. but our greatest foreign adversary is not in europe. our greatest foreign adversary

is in asia. and when it comes to countering that adversary, we are behind the game. i'm talking, of course, about china, the communist government of beijing has adopted a policy of imperialism. it wants to dominate its neighbors, dictate to free nations, it's trying to expand its power at every opportunities, and that includes power over the united states. beijing wants power over our trade, over our jobs, over our economy. they want us to come to them and beg for market access. they ultimately want to reign supreme as the world's hedga mon, the sole super power. chinese leaders have said it themselves, this is no mystery, beijing wants a world in which the united states and all other nations are forced to bow before china's might. it's their stated ambition. this would be a world in which the chinese government and its proxies would touch every aspect of our lives, from chinese dpoodz dominating our -- goods

dominating our markets to chinese propaganda flooding airwaves and money and influence corrupting american politics. this would be a world in which china would be free to expand its use of slave labor and to double down it's global campaigns of repression. that's the world that beijing wants, and the truth is we are not now in a position to stop them. let me say that again. the truth is, we are not now in a position to stop them. that is a hard truth, but it is the truth nonetheless, and the american people deserve to hear it. our military forces in asia are not postured as they should be. the commander of our forces in the indo-pacific has testified to this on multiple occasions. we do not have the weapons and equipment we need in the region. we don't have enough advanced

munitions, sealift and airlift are far short of where they need to be. attack submarines are some of the most important aspects we have in asia and europe, but they're already in short supply and the fleet is sinking. on top of all that, we do not yet have a coherent strategy for stopping china's dominance in the pacific, beginning with the possible invasion of taiwan. and we are not committing the attention and resources we need to develop and implement that strategy. why aren't we prepared to do what we need to do in asia? well, because we have been distracted for too long, for decades, by nation-building activities in the middle east and by legacy commitments in europe. so now the choice is this, we can do more in europe, devote more resources, more manpower, more firepower there, or, or we can do what with we need to do in asia to deter asia. we cannot do both. we cannot do both.

the chief of naval operations recently testified that the joint force is simply not sized to handle two simultaneous conflicts. that's the reality. both the 2018 and the 2022 national defense strategies, which were developed by different administrations of different political parties, reached the same conclusion. we have to choose. it's not enough to simply say that china is the pacing threat or to say that the risk to taiwan is real. we must do something about it. we have to prioritize of we have to focus. and that means we have to do less in europe in order to prioritize america's most pressing national security interests, which is in asia with regard to china. now, this isn't to say that the united states should abandon nato, but it is to say that you're european allies really must do more. they must take primary

responsibility for the conventional defense of europe and rely on u.s. forces for our nuclear deterrent and select conventional assets. this is not just so that america can focus on china, though that is of overriding importance to us. no, this is also about nato's future. european allies have to step up now or risk leaving nato exposed if the united states and our forces are pulled from europe into a conflict in the pacific. every european allies must make necessary investments now for today's threat environment or risk the worst. but nato isn't doing that. our european allies are far from where they should be. nato states agreed years ago, back in 2006, to spend at least 2% of gdp on defense, but many nato members still haven't met that pledge. meanwhile, nato supreme allied commander in europe testified a

few weeks ago that our allies need to spend more than 2% just to meet existing ground force requirements, which brings us back to sweden and finland. both countries are longtime nato defense partners and strong opponents of russian imperialism. both occupy important geography. they are also advanced economies with capable military, and i respect all of that. but their admission would also bring distinct challenges. sweden still isn't spending 2% of gdp on defense and doesn't plan to until 2028. finland announced a one-time defense spending boost, but it's not clear whether it will sustain the higher investment, the minimal needed for nato. now, some say we shouldn't worry about any of this some say finland and sweden can defend themselves ant won't require -- won't require

anything from the united states or nato allies. if true, why join nato? the truth is both countries wants nato's help defending themselves. that's why they're applying for membership. fair enough. because so many nato allies spent years funding their militaries, it will be the united states that will be asked to send forces to help defend sweden and finland in a time of crisis. even absent a crisis, nato expansion will mean more united states forces and u.s. firepower in europe for the long term. if we want to make nato stronger, the right course is to increase the amount that member states spend on their own defense, say, to 2.5%, and press our european allies to take primary responsibility for europe's conventional defense. but this administration, it's going in exactly the opposite direction. they had the chance to push for greater european miment spending and investment at the recent

madrid summit. they didn't do it. instead, the biden administration has committed the united states to massive spending in ukraine, far outpacing our european allies, even as they surged tens of thousands of troops into that region, apparently for good. some say expanding nato will allow the united states to do less in europe. i wish that were true. but how can it be when nato is overdependent on american support right now? how would increasing nato security needs somehow magically enable partisan united states to do -- enable the united states to do less? the fact is nato expansion will generate new requirements. sweden has already asked the united states to increase its naval presence in the p baltic area, for example. make no mistake, expanding nato means expanded obligations for the united states and europe. that's the nature of a security commitment. some say we need to expand nato

in europe to deter china in asia, but china isn't going to be deterred by the number of our commitments in europe. china is going to be deterred by our power to deny their imperial ambitions in asia. that's it. that's the whole ball game. we cannot strengthen our deterrent posture in the pacific if we're sending more forces and resources to europe to defend new allies. that's the bottom line. finally, some say we can't beat china by retreating from the rest of the world, but i'm not arguing for retreat and i'm not arguing for isolation. what i am arguing for is an end to the globalist foreign policy that has led our nation from one disaster to another for decades now. what i am arguing for is the return to a classic nationalist approach to american foreign policy, the one that made this country great, a foreign policy that is grounded in our nation's

interests and in the reality of the world as it is, not as we wish it was or not as we once hoped it would be. in years past, nato was a bulwark against an imperial soviet union. today the world's greatest imperial threat is in asia and the hour to address that threat is growing very late. we owe the american people this truth. we owe them a clear accounting of the facts, and we owe them the courage to make tough choices. today i submit that means voting against expanding nato and focusing where we must, to do what we must to deter an imperial china. this isn't an easy vote, to be sure, but it is the right one for our security, for our prosperity, for our people, for our nation. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from minnesota.

ms. klobuchar: madam president, i rise today in support of finland and sweden's application to join nato. i give my strong support to this application. i disagree heartily with our colleague from missouri. i know you know, madam president, having worked on this issue as i have, having visited these countries, we know how important they are to minnesota and wisconsin. minnesota has a special bond with the kingdom of sweden and the republic of finland, and at the core of this bond, at the core of the bond between our country and these countries is shared values, values of democracy, values of freedom. and, yes, we have challenges. of course we do in asia. but i happen to believe when you are a great power like the united states of america, you can do two things at once. and let's look at what these countries add to our security by joining nato. first of all, finland is over

2% of their budget on military. sweden is increasing their budget on military. both nations have professional militaries. they have strong and transparent economies, and mostly they believe in human rights, in freedom, in liberty, and equality. they believe in democracy. and i will note specifically finland has added an extra $2.2 billion in defense spending this year. and greece and poland and lithuania and latvia and estonia and united kingdom above 2%. let's get the facts straight here and talk about what these countries will add to our security. we are at an unparled moment in history.

since vladimir putin's cruel, unjustified invasion of ukraine, people all over the world have been waking up out of a two-year playing, out of a slumber to realize just how from fragile our democracy is. we realized it here in this building when not so long ago insurrectionists invaded this chamber. we didn't just sit back and say, well, there goes our democracy. we stood up. we stood up, democrats and republicans, in this very chamber. and when president zelenskyy of ukraine took to the streets, the minute that this invasion started and looked at a video camera and said we are here, he was saying that to his own people to give them the courage to stand up against the inhuman barbarism of a dictator. but he was also saying it to the rest of the world. we see it on ukraine's front lines where everyday people took up arms and are taking up arms

to protect their country. it sent a warning shot to tyrants around the world who believe that free democracies are just up for grabs. ukrainians have shown their true colors in bright blue and yellow, which happens to be the colors of sweden. they have shown their true colors, and they are showing the world what courage is all about. having been in the last group of senators from this chamber who met with leaders in ukraine just a few weeks before the war started, i can tell you this, the people of ukraine want to choose their own destiny and the moral flame they have lit across the world will not be doused. russia's unprovoked aggression in ukraine has changed how we think about the world security. that's why i strongly support the decision of these two great democracies -- sweden and finland -- to join the most important and defensive alliance in the world, nato.

when president biden met in may with finnish and swedish leaders about their application to join nato, he said the people of finland and sweden, he said to them that we have and they have the total and complete backing of the united states of america. we supported that. the the senate committee on foreign relations echoed its support with an overwhelming bipartisan support just last month. our leaders support this pact. by joining nato, allies made a sacred commitment to one another that an attack on one is an attack on all. the only time in history this has been a vote was after 9/11, when the united states was attacked, and all our allies rallied to our side. as americans, we have never and will never forget that. in june we celebrated the anniversary of the end of world war ii in europe. nato was formed in the wreckage of world war ii when president truman signed the north atlantic

treaty. he is expressed the goal of its founders to protect the peace. for decades it has been crucial to upholding that peace. now 73 years later, nato is as important as ever, and the recent decisions made by our great friends, the great countries of sweden and finland, are a testament to the continued promise of this alliance. as swedish prime minister anderson said in may, with sweden and finland as members, nato will also be stronger. we are security providers with sophisticated defense capabilities, and that is correct. we are champions of freedom, democracy, and human rights. that is correct. as finland's leaders, president ninisto and president marin also said, nato membership with strengthen finland security. as a member of nato, finland would strengthen the entire

defense alliance. i had the honor of being on a panel at the munich security conference with president ninnisto, and i saw firsthand his commitment to the democracy in finland and to the democracy all over the world. finland and sweden are already among our closest partners on a range of issues. they are already important contributors to the international community, including in the united nations, the organization for security and cooperation in europe, and other international organizations. finnish and swedish troops have already served shoulder to shoulder with u.s. and nato forces in kosovo, in bosnia. in 1994 sweden and finland joined nato's partnership for peace program, strengthening our official relationship and coming one step closer to being a full-fledged nato member. nato, finland and sweden partnered together in security in the baltic region, a practice that will be more

important now. in 2018 finland, sweden and the u.s. signed a trilateral agreement to promote security in northern europe. both finland and sweden are already working in coordination with the u.s. and other allies and partners to support brave ukrainians standing up to vladimir putin. sweden has responded to russian bombing in maternity hospitals with millions of dollars of support and helmets and body shields as well as billions for the refugees flowing from ukraine. finland has sent military aid, including thousands of assault rifles and 70,000 ration packages and offered millions of dollars in humanitarian aid. both nations also have the potential, as i noted, to bring huge assets to this alliance, not as my colleague from missouri implied to somehow make things harder. are you kidding? maybe he hasn't seen these countries. i have. finland, after fighting its own

territorial wars with the soviet union, has a reserve force of 900,000 strong. sweden has built its own fighter jets, and both countries recently announced upcoming expansion and reform of their militaries. as the arctic region which holds increasing importance for the u.s. and european security sees encroachment from russia and china, may i add to my colleague from missouri, sweden and finland are poised to help nato confront these challenges. i am here to give my full support for sweden and finland entering nato. as we make clear, we stand with sweden, we stand with finland, and we stand with democracy. russia's war in ukraine, a full-scale, unprovoked, and premeditated war against a sovereign and democratic country, has changed europe and the world, but it has also demonstrated the importance and

resilience of our trans-atlantic alliance. we have all witnessed the bravery of the ukrainian people as they fight for their lives, and we are proud to stand with them. this is about the future of political freedom, economic freedom, technology freedom, and, yes, democratic freedom. finland and sweden taking the step of nato membership will not only strengthen their own security, but the cause of freedom in europe and around the world. and i would say when things are tough, we keep our friends closer. and i believe that the strong nato and the inclusion of sweden and finland will actually help us with the rest of the world, not just with this conflict in ukraine. and so i ask my colleague from missouri, who is not here right now, to consider that as we look at our alliances and how we deal with china, we must strengthen our trade alliances. we must strengthen our military alliances. and certainly including finland and sweden as a member of nato

is one big positive step. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the junior senator from arkansas. mr. cotton: today the senate exercises one of our unique and most important constitutional responsibilities, the debate and ratification of a treaty. and the nato accession treaty for sweden and finland is the most consequential kind of treaty because it commits america to the mutual defense of another country. we commit along with our nato partners to come to sweden and finland's defense if they're attacked. just as finland and sweden will come to our defense if we're attacked. it's a weighty matter indeed. i want to explain why if one

honestly considers all the circumstances and weighs all the evidence, i don't believe this is a close debate at all. if finland and sweden join nato, the alliance will unquestionably be stronger. the risk of war and of america being dragged into war will decrease in europe and vladimir putin's unprovoked war of aggression against ukraine will backfire in another significant lasting way. i noted at the outset how unusual this moment is. finland and sweden are historically neutral countries. sweden has refrained from joining military alliances since the days of napoleon. finland also charted a course of neutrality even after the soviet union invaded finland during world war ii. now these historically neutral

countries have petitioned to join nato. why? sweden, and especially finland, have always lived closer to the bear's den and thus had a different relationship with moscow than we do. but now the russian bear is rampaging, mauling a sovereign country on its borders that's not in the ranks of nato. finland and sweden want to naturally avoid ukraine's fate. they concluded reasonably enough that there is strength in numbers, and they're right about that. if i were sitting in stockholm or helsinki, i would want to join nato too, but we're here in the united states senate. what matters to us, what should matter to us is what's in it for us. much as we may esteem the fins and the swedes, and we should,

they're good people, we need allies that enhance our common defense, allies who can pull their own weight and then some. military alliances are not charities. but finland and sweden aren't charity cases. they bring into nato their well-trained, well-equipped technology and vital geography. finland is a country of warriors with a long and proud tradition and to put it bluntly of fighting an killing russian invaders. in 1939, russia launched an unprovoked war of aggression against finland. what has become known as the winter war. few observers gave small finland a chance. but the outnumbered and outgunned fins shocked the world.

not least stalin and the russian communists by matching the red army blow for blow. ever wonder where the term molotov cocktail comes from? the fins gave it to us. what they lacked in antitank weapons, they made up in grit an courage. finnish soldiers rushed soviet tanks and dropped the mom inside them -- the bombs inside them. then there's the legendary sniper who killed an estimated 500 russian soldiers, among the highest number of confirmed sniper kills ever reported in combat. he entered into the history books better known by his well-earned nickname, white death, which also happens to be what every russian general fears

from another tangle with the fins. the fins haven't forgotten the lessons of the winter war. still today every adult finnish men must fulfill a period of national service, almost all choose the military. finland has a 900,000 man reserve it can draw on in a time of crisis and can fill an army of 280,000 when fully mobilized. finland's reserves are larger than the reserves of france, germany and italy combined. finland has firepower in addition to manpower. according to scholars, the foundation for the defense of democracies, finland has one of the strongest militaries in europe with more rocket launchers than france, germany or the united kingdom.

it has a strong fleet of fighter jets and plans to buy 11 american-made f-35's. sweden is an industrial powerhouse that will add muscle to the alliance. the swedish navy is an advanced force with advanced warships and submarines. they have produced some of the finest radar aircraft and weapons. in conjunction with the british, the swedes manufacture the in-law antitank. i would add that the swedish firm erickson along with nokia, are among the few alternatives to w huawei for telecommunicati. they are putting their money

where their mouths are when it comes to their defense many following russia's invasion of ukraine, finland boosted defense spending by # 0% and will spend more than 2% of its total economy on the military this year. sweden is in the middle of doubling its defense spending and plans to reach that 2% goal no later than 2028. for these reasons alone, finland and sweden are not only worthy additions to the alliance but will become two of the strongest members of the alliance from the moment they join. but that's not all. they also add key geographic advantages to our alliance. first, the swedish island of gotland is in the middle of the baltic sea, fewer than 200 miles from the military base in kaliningrad.

he who goals gotland goals -- control gotland controls the baltic. in the event of a conflict with russia, nato could keep enemies from resupplying by sea. they would make it easier to relieve the baltic states by sea and air in the event of a russian invasion. second, finland controls the northern shores of the gull of finland through which russian ships must pass to reach petersburg. our nato ally estonia already has the coastline of this narrow waterway, that is not even 30 miles wide at its smallest point. by adding finland to the

alliance, russian aggression would become even more difficult. third, the danish straits would also being in effect nato waters. russia's baltic fleet must pass through this stra extra tij -- a strategic choke point. sweden controls the northern and eastern shores. by adding sweden to the alliance, we further complicate russia's naval operations. fourth, the 800-mile border of russia and finland -- this border would more than double the amount of border that russia must defend. it will threaten russia's military installations where russia's largest naval forces are positioned to break out into

the atlantic and threaten the united states. so aside from their military strength and economic power, finland and sweden allow us to turn the baltic into a nato lake, bottle up russia's fleet, cut off its isolated military base and expose russia to greater risk in the event of conflict. all things considered then one might contend that finland and sweden are the strongest candidates to join nato since its origin in 1949. we will soon see that most senators agree when we vote later today and really how could one disagree. after all, the last countries to join nato, montenegro and north macedonia were each proved -- approved by the senate with only two no votes. those countries brought their own case to nato.

let's be honest, who can deny finland and sweden? countries far larger, capable, and far more strategically situated. it would be strange, indeed, for any senator who voted to allow montenegro or north macedonia into nato to turn around and deny membership to finland and sweden. i would love to hear the defense of such a curious vote. but since some observers have criticized their bid for membership, let me address those arguments now. the most basic argument is -- isn't really directed at finland or sweden but at nato itself. some critics say america shouldn't defend countries halfway around the world. these critics are seven decades too late. we are treaty bound to defend more than two dozen nations in europe. whether we support this treaty

today or not, we will still be treaty bound to defend those nations. so the real question today is whether adding two capable and strong nations to our mutual defense pact will make us stronger or weaker. the evidence i've shared demonstrates that adding finland and sweden will indeed make us stronger, more likely to deter russian aggression and to defeat russian aggression should it come. next, some opponents contend that admitting finland in particular is a liability because the united states would be committing to the defense of its 800-mile border with russia. this argument is both alarmist and backwards. it's alarmist because russia hasn't attacked a nato member in its more than 70-year history even as it has attacked many nonnato countries. given the russian army's pitiful

performance in ukraine, they will be in no position to wreak break with that -- to break with that record any time soon and finland is the least likely to be attacked by russia after the trauma of the winter war. white death is a strong deterrent. moreover, these critics are thinking about this issue backwards. as i said earlier, it's russia that has to worry about its long border should it attack our allies. nato is a defensive alliance, always has been, always will be. neither finland nor any other nato country has any plan or desire to invade russia. but should russia ever be tempted to attack nato, the finnish border creates nearly insurmountable war-planning dilemmas for the russian general staff. to borrow what u.s. grant told his commanders about robert e.

lee, rather than worry about what russia would do at finland's border, russia should be worried about us. putin noticed and acquiesced. others say our main strategic focus should be on china, not russia. i agree. china is the greatest long-term threat to the united states, but admitting finland and sweden to nato enhances our common defense, especially our defenses in europe, a nato that is stronger militarily, economically and geographically in europe is a nato that needs to lean less on american power. we ought to welcome strong capable allies in europe who can free up the american military to focus more on the pacific

theater. that's dubbably true -- doubly true when there is erickson and nokia that can help us beat china in the global technology race. others have objected that the majority of nato members are currently failing to pay their fair share toward our common defense. i agree here too. i'm tired of freeloading, grandstanding friends. how is that a criticism of sweden or finland. as i said, finland pays its fair share and sweden has chartered a clearer path their than many nato members. and both nations are doing so for a reason more durable than diplomatic sweet talk, perceived danger. some claim that expanding nato will provoke russian aggression, but the fact is nato expansion is the result, not the cause, of russian aggression. countries are banking on nato --

banking on nato's door because of russia's behavior. as i mentioned earlier sweden and finland have long histories of neutrality. vladimir putin's balance towards his neighbors has made that neutrality untenable in their minds. a few critics of nato expansion love to quote the words of george washington's farewell address. our first president warned against permanent alliances and he recommended as little political connection as possible with other nations. that advice was well suited for a young republican in 1796 but washington didn't stop writing where these critics stopped reading. the great statesman saw a future where america would gain strength, stand up and assert itself. washington continued. with me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to

our country, to settle immature its yet recent institutions and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it humanly speaking the command of its own fortunes. we have gained since washington's time the command of our own fortunes. one of the pillars of our strength in modern times is our network of allies and partners in the old world. these beachheads and lodgements of freedom help us keep the awful power of modern war at a distance. finland and sweden are two such nations. they have asked to join our mutual defense alliance and they are worthy partners. i urge my colleagues to grant their request, ratify this treaty, and welcome two more strong beachheads and lodgements into the north atlantic treaty organization.

i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from delaware. mr. carper: madam president, the speaker just finished speaking before he leaves the floor, he and i same -- share the same initials, trchlts c. and in -- t.c. and in this case we share the same views on an important issue. it's important to have the t.c.'s speaking from the same hymn book. madam president, on a lighter note, some of the conversation here is pretty serious. this is a serious matter, but i want to tell -- take it just a little bit lighter. i'm reminded of the words of harry truman, former president, used to say the only thing in the world is the hiss we -- the only thing new in the world is the history we forgot or never learned. and i want to take, if you will, as the presiding officer knows, every tuesday we have our caucus lunch. republicans have theirs. unfortunately we don't dine together enough. but our caucus lunch, we have a

history moment or history minute, maybe a minute or two, one of the highlights of frankly the time we spend together. i want to look back a little bit in time as we take up today an issue that's right before us. as it earn its out, the first swedes and fins, madam president, came to america about 384 years ago from a place kalamar, sweden. as we heard from others who have spoken, sweden and finland were the same country. there was no finland. all the fins leaved in sweden. and they continued to live in sweden for a good long time. i think swedish -- 1809, swedish rule over finland officially came to an end and finland separated from sweden. but when the two ships, the kalamar nickel and fogle grip

set sail from what was in sweden, across the atlantic ocean toward the western hemisphere, they got close to land and ended up sailing north of would later would become the delaware bay, sailed further north of what would become a more narrow channel, the delaware river and continued to sail -- didn't go up as far as what is now philadelphia, but they came across an unchartered river that went to the west off of -- a left turn off the dwir river to the west -- delaware river to the west. at the sailed for about a mile, maybe a mile and a half. and they decided they would put down their anchors. a bunch of rocks, big rocks along the sides of that river. put down their anchors and declared that spot the colony of new sweden of what is now wilmington, delaware, the colony of new sweden. and they raised their flag and said this is where we're going to make -- that was i think maybe the first european, at

least in my state, the first european colony that was created and was created later and taken over by i think the dutch and then by maybe the british. but initially it was the swedes and the fins who cool niced that -- colonized that spot. delaware has -- has one of the newest national parks in america. it's a different kind of national park that tells the story of delaware's involvement in the early -- earlier history of the settlement of our country leading up to the ratification of the constitution on december 7, 1787 which took place in our state capital. delaware became the first state for one whole week, madam president, we were the entire united states of america. and we opened it up and let in maryland and pennsylvania and 47 or so more, including wisconsin and i think for the most part it's turned out pretty well.

we had some bumps in the road, as the presiding officer knows. but colony of new sweden was in place for probably about 25 years and then the dutch took over and then the british sort of took over the region in 1664. when the dutch created the colony of sweden in what is now wilmington, delaware, they also built a church. and they built what is now known as old swedes church. we have a lot of churches in this country and the old swedes church is believed to be maybe the longest, continuously serving church in america. how is that for history? and it was part of our national park that we created, somebody worked on for years. we created in a decade or two ago. old swedes church. it's still there. still doing the lord's work.

the -- this is a beautiful, beautiful picture. this is the kalamar nickel, full sail. this is one of the two ships that brought the swedes and fins to america, all 384 years ago. we -- this is the swedish flag over here. and this is the delaware flag over here. the kalamar nickel is literally has a permanent place to be, maintained and anchored along the christina river and about -- when i went to the biden station this morning to catch the train to come down here, as i do most mornings, madam president, if i had just not gotten on the train and headed down river about a mile, i would come to this ship right on the christina river. it set sail many places around

the world, really the ship that represents our state which used to be the colony of new sweden. we all get to meet people from different places around the world. and i've been privileged to meet a lot of swedish americans. it turns out there are more swedish americans than there are swedes in sweden. let me say that again. there are now more swedish americans than there are swedes in sweden. there's a bunch of them. and they contribute to our country, certainly to our state in many, many different ways. i work a lot on economic development, always have as government and even now. some of the finest business people i have ever met are swedes or swedish extraction. funny story, if i could, madam president, everybody -- 25, the king and queen of sweden, come to revisit the colony of new sweden. we have a big celebration for a couple of days right along the banks of this river, the

christina river. by the way, the christina river, all those years ago when the swedes first came to shore, they made the river after their child queen who at the time was 12 years old. imagine peaking at the age of 12 and becoming a queen or a king. christina, the -- that river is named after her. i like -- women who are named christina, i tell them their heritage, their name goes all those years back to when the swedes first came here and helped to settle our country. anyway, once every 25 years the king and queen of sweden come to visit us. and in 2013 king carl, the 16th and queen sylvia of sweden came to delaware for several days. we had a huge celebration on the banks of the christina river. i had the privilege of sitting next to the queen during dinner, this big banquet, hundreds of

people, black tie, great music, wonderful speeches. and she and i had just a delightful time talking over dinner. i said to her, we talked about the arts, and i like films and i believe the presiding officer is a film buff. one of my early favorite directors, emar -- ingmarbergland, we talked about his films and the films that actually touched our lives and helped shape our lives. we talked about music. we talked about music. i said to the queen of sweden, i said i've always heard -- i don't know where i've gotten this, your highness, i don't know where i got this, but for some reason i make a connection between you and the singing group abba. now, inga mar, one of the greatest of all time, abba, maybe one of the top singing

groups in the history of the world, they actually still record from time to time. but anyway, i said to the queen -- queen sylvia, is there a connection between abba and you and your husband? she said, well, there is. i said what is it. she said the night before we were married in sweden, she said there's a huge celebration and a concert, outdoor concert with tens of thousands of people. they said the ed lines group for the concert was abba. i said no kidding. i said did they sing? she said that was the night they debuted the song dancing queen. maybe one of the best pop songs i've ever heard. i won't say we sat there and hummed a few bars but maybe we between. -- but maybe we did. we had a lot in common with the swedes and the fins. we share a lot of likes and

really very much a appreciation, if you will, of the arts, including film, including music. they are a country that prides ourselves on free enterprise system. so do the swedes. you look up the term no-brainer and you won't find it in the dictionary. but if you look up the term no-brainer, madam president, it would say this vote today. and the issue that's before us. why in god's name why wouldn't we want the swedes and fins to join us together. a congresswoman from delaware, she talks about sticks tied together can't be broken. sticks tied together can't be broken. one stick, you're going to break it. pile a bunch of them together, you can't break them. the same is true here. the same is true here. the admission of finland, admission of sweden into nato

makes that band of sticks even stronger and that much harder to break. i'm just delighted that we have an issue when there's been a fair amount of dissension in these halls, i'm delighted that we have something i think we can all -- pretty much -- almost all can agree on. this will be a good thing. it's going to be good for our country, good for sweden, good for finland. i think it's going to be good for our planet. and those of us who are privileged to live in what used to be the colony of new sweden couldn't be happier. and we're delighted to celebrate. i would just say to anybody listening, you know, i've never been to a national park in delaware. we want you to know we have one and it's a great one, from one end of the state to the other. start up north. get off the train, walk about a mile, you'll be at what used to be the hope place, the starting place of the new colony of

sweden. with that, madam president, i think i've done enough damage. thank you for the time to speak and i'm going to dwreeld to -- to yield to a fellow from alaska who is a man -- i don't know if he spent a lot of time on ships and boat. i spent a few years as a navy guy. but the marines, they spend a lot of time at sea. they take rides in our boat, as it were. i would say different uniforms but same team. on this one we're on the same page and it's great to be there. i yield the floor. mr. sullivan: madam president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: madam president, it's always good to follow my friend from delaware, captain -- navy captain carper, vietnam vet, naval aviator, the whole works. it's an honor to serve with him on epw and other committees. thank you, my good friend from delaware. madam president, i call up my amendment number 5192 and ask that it be reported by number.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from alaska, mr. sullivan, proposes an amendment numbered 5192. mr. sullivan: madam president, after world war ii, european leaders looked to the united states to help heal a fractured world and to help provide safety against increasing communist russian aggression. as winston churchill said, quote, there i sat with the great russian bear on one side of me with paws outstretched and on the other side the great american buffalo. well, the buffalo prevailed, nato prevailed and the world's most successful and enduring military alliance was born. in 1949, the senate ratified the

nato treaty by a vote of 82-13. president truman was quoted at the signing ceremony of the nato treaty by saying, quote, in this pact, we hope to create a shield against aggression and the fear of aggression. for us, war is not inevitable, he continued. men with courage and vision can still determine their own destiny. they can choose slavery or freedom, war or peace. the treaty we are signing here today is evidence of the path they will follow. that was when president truman signed the first nato treaty. and indeed, madam president,

since the formation of nato, no world wars have broken out, no country that is a signatory of nato has been invaded by another country's military forces. in fact, the only time nato's article 5, which is the pillar of the alliance which states that an attack on one is an attack on all, was invoked was actually after the terrorist attacks on america on 9/11. our allies came to our help to ensure afghanistan wouldn't harbor terrorists. we appreciate that help. we appreciate it deeply from our nato allies. madam president, nato, however, senior senator more than just a military alliance. it is a group of countries with

shared values and beliefs and a commitment to the principles of democracy. all of this, in addition to the military alliance, is the heritage of nato. president ronald reagan summed it up in a speech to our nato allies in 1993. quote, what do the soviets mean by words like democracy, freedom, and peace? not, i'm sorry to say what we mean. place the word soviet with russia and the sentiment unfortunately holds true today. we see the antithesis of these democratic values and shared beliefs of nato being played out in real time before us in the streets of ukraine where vladimir putin is leading a

brutal assault on ukraine, russia's democratic neighbor, and committing atrocities, horrible atrocities against the brave people of that country. as both president truman and reagan remarked, members of the nato alliance are like members of the same house and the same family. the house and the family of democracy. so today the u.s. senate will welcome the nations of sweden and finland into the nato family. like any family, we may not agree on everything, but when it's most important, we will have each other's back. that is the essence of nato. and the core reason for its success. neither russia nor any other

country will be able to invade sweden or finland now that they've become members of nato without its nato allies coming to their support. of course, fund has subpoenaed the russian invasion. in 1939 where without the help from other nations its greatly outnumbered finnish army fought off over one million russian forces for three months. but that won't happen again to fingerprinted and it won't happen to sweden. they won't be alone now. we welcome these countries' commitment to freedom and their advanced professional militaries, which will make nato stronger.

and, too, finland and sweden, no longer will you be working with nato, you will be in part of the greatest defense alliance in history. so welcome to these great countries. as churchill once said, there's only one thing worse than fighting with allies and that is fighting without them. so, madam president, i strongly support the inclusion of these two great nations, sweden and finland, into the nato alliance. important owe cautions like this -- important occasions like this are also an opportunity to reflect on the obligations of membership, not just for these new nato members but for all nato members. and on the heels of the russian invasion and annexation of

crimea in 2014, the heads of state and representatives of the then 28 member countries who made up nato, attended a very important summit, a nato summit in wales. there they agreed upon a common goal for all nato members that they would spend a minimum of 2% of their gross domestic product on defense by 2024. this 2% of gdp nato defense spending goal has been strongly supported for decades by american administrations, both

republican and democrat. presidents bush, obama, trump, and now president biden. at the time, in 2014, of the nato summit in wales, ten of the 28 members of nato met that 2% guideline. now, eight years later in 2022, the 30 nato country members, we only have eight of those 30 meeting that 2% threshold. i have a chart here. it lays out the 2% goal, who's above it, who's below it. there's many other countries besides the ones that are listed there, madam president. but the bottom line is, since wales and that important commitment, there's not been

much progress in nato on this shared goal and commitment. now, i am a very strong supporter of nato and a very strong supporter of the u.s. military. and i want nato toendure for decades to come. but alliances can't endure if shared commitments and shared burdens are not met. this is particularly true for democratic alliances like nato. there must be a sense among the citizens of such countries that all are pulling their weight for the collective defense of the alliance, for the collective defense of each other. so as i mentioned at the outset, madam president, i am calling up an amendment to the resolution. my amendment is to make this

commitment clear. it is to announce the u.s. senate's expectation for all nato members -- the united states, existing members, and now new members -- expectations on what has already been agreed to by each nato country and its citizens. the amendment is simple. it states the following -- the senate declares that all nato members should spend a minimum of 2% of their gross domestic product on defense and 20% of their defense budget on major equipment, including research and development, by 2024, as outlined in the 2014 wales summit declaration. that's it. it's a simple amendment, madam president, and i hope it can pass in the next hour by a voice

vote. let me conclude with this. a robust expanded nato with finland and sweden as new members is needed now more than ever, especially given the brutal invasion of ukraine by russia. we need to fully understand the broader implications of this invasion. we have entered a new era of authoritarian aggression, led by russia and china's dictators who are increasingly isolated and dangerous, driven by historical grievances, paranoid about their democratic neighbors, and willing to use military force and other aggressive actions to crush the citizens of such countries. these dangerous dictators --

vladimir putin and xi -- are increasingly working together to achieve their aggressive goals. we must wake up to the fact that this new era of authoritarian aggression will likely be with us for decades. we need to face it with strategic resolve and confidence. the united states has extraordinary advantages relative to the dictatorships of russia and china. if we are wise enough to utilize and strengthen them. our global network allies, our lethal military, our world-class network of natural resources, our dynamic economy, and, most important, our democratic values and commitment to liberty. xi's and putin's vulnerability

is that they fear their own people. we should remember this and exploit this in the years and months ahead. nato, as an alliance, encompasses so many of these powerful comparative advantages -- a lethal military, a global network of allies, dynamic economies, and the power off democratic values and the commitment to liberty. we should all welcome and celebrate the addition of finland and sweden to the nato alliance, but we should also use this moment to recognize the seriousness of the authoritarian threats on the rise all over the world and recommit ourselves, all nato members, to our obligations of collective defense moving forward.

madam president, i ask that in another section of today's record, i ask unanimous consent that senator cornyn's statement be included in full. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senior senator from maryland. mr. cardin: thank you, madam president. first i want to applaud the senator from alaska for his comments. i agree completely with his statements, and i think his amendment making it clear that we expect the 2% to be honored by all member states is something that we all should welcome and agree to. so i thank you for your leadership. i also thank you for how you have articulated the importance of nato to our national security. nato is the trans-atlantic security partnership that has served our national security interests so well for so many years, since the end of world bar