the chair: on this vote the yeas are 16, the ncaas are 249. the amendment is not adopted -- the nays are 249. he amendment is not adopted. he house will come to order. the house will come to order. please, members, take seats and take all conversations off the house floor and please clear ll aisles.

the house will come to order. please, members along the back row and the aisle, please take your conversations off the loor or find a seat. the house will come to order, lease. he house will come to order. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas, mr. crawford, rise? mr. crawford: i request unanimous consent to speak outside of order. the chair: without objection. mr. crawford: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm honored to be joined here by my colleagues from arkansas, mississippi, oklahoma, alabama and the states that have been impacted by the devastating

storms that occurrle earlier this week. while we had hoped that the entire mississippi and arkansas delegations could join us, representatives greg harper and alan nunnelee from mississippi and representative tim griffin from arkansas are back home today coordinating with the federal, state and local officials who are organizing disaster assistant efforts. tomorrow representative griffin will be touring the devastation in arkansas' second district with secretary johnson from the department of homeland security. all these delegations have spent hours keeping close contact with one another and with officials in arkansas, in particular regarding tornado that ripped through mayflower, el paso and others, leading a path of destruction in central arkansas and the same is true for the other affected states. the destruction is heartbreaking and our prayers go out to all those affected by these devastating storms, especially knows who lost loved ones. our delegation would like to thank the first responders, volunteers and neighboring communities for all their assistance, donations, prayers and tireless efforts during this difficult time. their hard work and dedication

has saved lives. we also urge those who can to continue to help in any way they can to assist in the recovery and rebuilding of neighborhoods and communities that were impacted by these storms. we also honor and remember those we lost and representative grifferen asked that i share a story of one of his constituents, u.s. air force master sergeant daniel wassam, who served -- the chair: the gentleman will suspend. the house is not in order. the gentleman can condition. mr. crawford: u.s. air force master sergeant daniel wassam who served with the 138th airlift wing. the master sergeant lived in arkansas with his wife, suzanne, and his two young daughters. according to reports, he sacrificed his own life to shield his 5-year-old daughter from falling debris. his example of selflessness and bravery during this disaster is one all americans and arkansans can admire. i now ask for a moment of silent prayer to honor all the victims of those recent tragic

events. mr. crawford: thank you. i yield back. the chair: without objection, two-minute votes will continue. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, on which further proceedings were postponed and the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. blumenauer of oregon. the chair: a recorded vote having been requested, those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a vorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. -- a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning

institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the .s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 195, the nays are 222, amendment is not adopted. the clerk will read the remainder of the bill. the clerk: pages 53, line 3, this act may be cited as the military construction and veterans affairs and related agencies appropriation act, 2015. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. culberson: mr. chairman, i move the committee do now rise and report the bill back to the house with the recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and that the bill is -- bill as amended do pass.

the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee do rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house of the union directs me to report the same back to the house with sundry amendments and recommendations that amendments be agreed to and that the bill do pass. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration the bill h.r. 4486 and reports the bill back to the house with sundry amendments adopted in the committee of the whole. with the recommendation that the amendments be adopted and that the bill as amended do pass. under house resolution 557, the previous question is ordered. a separate vote demanded on

the, -- is a separate vote demanded on any amendment? if not, the chair will put them engross. the question is on the adoption of the amendments. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendments are adopted. the question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for military construction, the department of veterans and affairs and other related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2015, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. under clause 10 of rule 20, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute involvement -- vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is

expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 416, the nays are one. the bill is passed. without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent that when the house house adjourn today it adjourn to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: so ordered. he house will come to order.

the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from montana seek recognition? mr. daines: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my rashes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. daines: our colleagues in the senate are playing games with the american people. senator harry reid has allowed senators to vote on a nonbinding resolution for the keystone x.l. pipeline. a nonbinding resolution. grand gestures don't create jobs. the american people deserve real action. senate democrats who claim to support the keystone x.l. pipeline need to stand up and demand that harry reid allow a

vote on the keystone x.l. pipeline. the american people have waited long enough. montanans are tired of the political game the endless delays and politicians who refuse to put job creation ahead of partisanship. the house has acted. it's time for the senate to step up and do the same. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? without objection. mr. thompson: tomorrow marks the 63rd annual national day of prayer. on this day we praise god for he many blessings bestowed upon us. during types of great adversity and in times of great prosperity, americans of all walks of life seek god's guidance. today we face many great channels including brave men and women serbing in harm's way and an economy that must grow faster and lift more americans,

especially those in need, to greater security. we pray that the families of this nation may find renewed strength and belief in god's word and grace. we also seek the lord as we pray for those who serve in our military. we ask for god to protect them and to watch over them. plbling, let us seek god's guidance and pray he'll grant us the wisdom to overcome the many trials and tasks before our nation and its people. on the national day of prayer, may god bless this great nation and all its citizens. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, $12. in nigeria, $12 is the cost of bride slave. recently around 200 girls went to school and never came home. they were kidnapped and for $12

apiece sold to islamic militant terrorist group. they were forced into marriage and they were raped. modern sex slavery. this inhue -- inhuman human trafficking crime needs action. today the united states took a huge step forward in the battle against this scourge. the judiciary committee passed three bills fighting this growing problem here in america. the justice for victims of trafficking act that i sponsor aid long with carolyn maloney of new york was passed and supports and protects victims of the horrible crime. it pun ush -- punishes the sex trafficker and punishes the buyer, the child rapist. it helps rescue child victims and treats them as victims rather than child prostitutes. no life deserves to be stolen and served for $12. children should not be for sell anywhere, at any time, for any reason. that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. griffin of arkansas for the balance of the week, mr. harper of mississippi for today, mr. nunnelee of mississippi for today, and mr. richmond of louisiana on april 0 through may 1. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the requests are granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr.

speaker. a lot going on in the world right now. and america seems to continue to lose credibility around the world. when we travel abroad and we have leaders from other countries, especially moderate muslim allies and friends who wonder why we're not helping in the war against terrorism, the war against radical islam, i mean moderate muslims realize what it is. it's radical islam. it's exactly what the wonderful people of egypt rose up and rebeled against. by the millions. in fact, there were more millions of egyptians that signed a petition in support of removing morrissey than even he ever -- removing morsi than even

he ever claimed voted for him. but the muslim brotherhood sponded and they have burned churches, they have persecuted christians and jews, and the cop tick christian pope has told us of -- and the coptic christian pope has told us of his concern for our support for radical islam because the united states and even a couple of republican senators down the hall seemed to support, they said let's release morsi, they seem to want the muslim brotherhood back in charge. so it was shocking for this administration to say we're not going to supply the military equipment to those who are against radical islam that we had agreed to provide to those who represent radical islam. the muslim brotherhood.

and yes, their party, their political party in egypt is called the freedom and justice party because under their definition, freedom means the freedom to worship only allah and justice means only justice that comes from sharia law. so they have a little different definition of freedom and justice. and in their less than 100-year history, as an entity, the muslim brotherhood has killed so many innocent children, who had no grievance or gripe with islam. but it should also be noted that one of the reasons that moderate muslims are so supportive of our effort to

stop radical islam is because whenever a moderate muslim stands up to radical islam, they immediately go to the front of the line to be killed or persecuted by radical islamists. so we share that. that's why the enemy of our enemy can be somebody with whom we just may be able to cooperate. that's what happened in president bush committed to go after the october, november, december of 2001. we put in less than 500 americans, special operations, special forces, intelligence, we gave them air support, we gave them some weapons and we

had to negotiate, the bush administration did a phenomenal job of negotiating with northern alliance tribal leaders because they knew to be successful against the taliban they were going to have to work together. so we were able to pull that off, there may have been some cash that actually was utilized to get them to work together, and it worked. and within a matter of four months or so, the taliban was defeated. the legendary general that this administration wants to classify as a war criminal defeated the taliban for us as the leader of the northern alliance tribes. in a meeting with him, along with dana rohrabacher, steve king, a few of us were meeting with some of the northern alliance leaders, and since we knew about that last final

battle where the northern liance went after the last stronghold of the taliban, elevated high up in a hill or mountain, and the general through an interrupter -- interpreter explained, he knew that if they sent people on foot, they'd never get there. there'd be too many bullets and rocket-propelled grenades. they'd never make it to the taliban stronghold. and they knew if they could get there and route them there, that that would be the end of the organized taliban, at least for quite some time. so the general realized the only way to have a shot at getting there was for around 1,000 horsemen to go charging up that hill, up toward the strong hold -- stronghold, with

bullets, rocket-propelled grenades, all kinds of things coming at them, but he knew that if they would move quickly enough, they might get past those and be able to destroy the last stronghold of the taliban. they did lose many of the northern alliance tribal soldiers, but they made it and totally routed the taliban. what an incredible victory. the general offered to take me next time i came to afghanistan , he asked if i rode horses, i i grew up riding horses. and he said, then you need to come with me, i'll take you up that famous ride that's so legendary all over asia. but after that, the interpreter advised me something i wasn't aware, that they don't have

leather saddles in afghanistan. i inquired, what kind of saddles do you have? he said, they're made of wood. that changed greatly my desire to go riding uphill on a wooden saddle. but it still is amazing what they did and they did it with our encouragement, our support, our logistical support, our aerial support. there are other occasions when, with someone imbedded with the northern alliance, the northern alliance leaders could say, you see over there on that ridge, that little hump? that's a bunker that contains many, many taliban. they getted coordinates, call it in -- they get the coordinates, call it in, the bomb would be released, it would go to the target and take it out and then the northern alliance soldiers would finish off those who made it through

the bombing. some in this administration think that means they're war criminals, whereas the fact is they fought the taliban in their own country, the way they've always fought, and the way the taliban fights, and they defeated them. then we did an unfortunate thing. we helped them with a constitution that centralized the government. in a very regional, federalist area, tribal area, we should have helped them have a more federalist country, where the states, the regions have the power. but apparently our leaders at that time thought it would be easier to deal with one centralized government than potentially many hard-headed leaders of small countries or

small states. but we should have let them have their small states and their tribal areas because as some of the northern leaders, very intelligent, had pointed out, if you would help us get an amendment to the constitution that you helped push on us, that allowed us to elect our own governors, our mayors, pick our own police hiefs, then we could control afghanistan better and then the taliban, when you leave, can't just knock off our president and take over the whole country. then it would be harder for them to take over the whole country. they might get one region and then the rest of the regions could rise up and take them out of that one. we can defeat them but not with the structure that you gave us. there was no reason for us to lose the hundreds and hundreds

and hundreds of american military members under the command of commander barack obama, but he said it was the important war, the war was won by early 2002. and then we became occupiers. that was unnecessary. let them run their own country. they defeated the taliban with now than 500 americans and we've lost a number of times that original number that went in and were imbedded. but that has helped create an image of the united states around the world, as this administration has continued to allow the slaughter of american soldiers in afghanistan, for what point we don't know.

and at the same time we were allowing our soldiers to be handcuffed with rules of engagement that restricted them or threatened them with court marshall if they were to defend themselves and it turned out somebody got hurt who was not a soldier. so the world saw the united to sit eg the taliban down and negotiate with us. this administration was sending out word, look, look, you don't even have to agree to anything, if you'll just agree to sit down with us, heck, we'll buy you a luxurious office, complex, in qatar. we may even release some of your murdering thugs that we have confined. heck, we'll do that, we'll release some of them anyway. just to show our good faith.

heck, we'll do whatever, if you'll just sit down and talk with us. there is no radical islamist in e world that respects that kind of talk from an american leader. from any leader. oh, please, we beg you, please sit down and talk with us. they don't respect that. that projects weakness to them. there's one thing they respect and that is power, when used appropriately. they may hate it, they may despise the way it's used but they respect power when it's used effectively. and this administration has not done that at all. go back to iraq, the bush administration basically had

set up a status of forces agreement by the end of 2008. most of the terms were agreed to. the bush administration, many of us believe, could have gone ahead and finished, had that signed before president obama took office. but as i understand it, it was considered a generous outreach by george w. bush, his administration, to the incoming president. why? because not only is he not stupid and he's not crazy and he is witty, but he's a gracious man. so i had ted kennedy to the -- that's why he had ted kennedy to the white house so many times, even though ted kennedy would go out and bash him every time he'd been over. he's a gracious man. and he thought it would be a gracious act, from what i understand, to allow the obama administration to get the

credit for finalizing the status of forces agreement with iraq. ut then the brazen attitude by the new administration not only didn't sign the status of forces agreement that the bush administration had teed up, they didn't get any status of forces agreement. mitt romney was not very eloquent in the way he pointed it out, not very effective in the way he pointed it out. but he did bring it up in one. debates. you can even -- in one of the debates. you can't even get a status of forces agreement done with iraqment and it is something that this administration -- iraq. and it is something that this administration should have been embarrassed about. after all we had done for iraq, under this president, this administration, we just crept ut of iraq with nothing even

in the way of a thank you agreement, a thank you note. fact, rather left hard -- in fact, rather left hard feeltings when we left, after -- feelings when we left, after we left them with the ability to elect their own leaders, their own government. this administration bungled the status of forces agreement to the point there was none. we lost further respect there. we've lost respect around afghanistan. when talking with the general, some of the other northern alliance leaders they had talked about how the united states had lost respect among radical islam. and these are moderate muslim friendses of mine and, yeah, they do -- friends of mine, and, yeah, they do fight ruthlessly, but that's their area. they talked about how the united states had lost respect among radical islamists, among

the world. they see us as a toothless tiger, a paper tiger. someone to be laughed at, not to be concerned about nor respected and certainly not feared. people from t with pakistan who are constantly terrorized by the pakistani army, by their military, brutalized, terrorized, kept in fear for their lives so many time, and they happen to be in the area where pakistan's best minerals were located. you would have thought the pakistani leader would have treated them better, since they comprise such a big part of the

country that's some of the best -- most valuable land because of the minerals in the area. same in iran, there are people that are indigenous to south, southeast iran. they're mistreated terribly by the iranians. t a thought came to my mind, having met with these people previously, knowing the geography of the area, having heard american commanders and northern alliance individuals as well all indicating, you know, most of the supplying of the taliban in afghanistan is coming through that area of pakistan, not because of the baleuch, they don't want the taliban helped they certainly don't appreciate radical islam, so i asked our

northern alliance leader friends , former allies, before this administration, what if we started suggesting that because of the mistreatment of the baleuch in pakistan, it's time to give these people their own independent country. let them be independent. have their own area to which they're indigenous. because if we did that the people in charge of southern pakistan would indeed stop any supplying to the taliban coming from pakistan or anyone else that went through that area where so much of the sflifing taliban has been going through. and who would benefit?

the world would benefit. our american soldiers would have benefited. we could have done that years ago. and instead, last time i looked, there were about twice as many people, american military individuals, who had died in afghanistan compared to the number that died when bush went to war in afghanistan. so under bush, it was about seven years in afghanistan, compared to the years of president obama, president obama has had fewer years yet more americans have been killed. why? because under this commander in chief, the rules of engagement handicapped our own military. many of them have been killed by the very people they were supposed to train.

because there was just simply not enough respect for the united states under this administration, because we saw what this administration would do. up adical islamists rared and killed americans, we saw did. his administration they apologized. that korans were burned. now how does apologizing to adical islamists for burning korans that their own people had desecrated, passed messages through, prisoners that have been provided these free korans had sent messages, used them, and so they had to be destroyed. and when they were found burning

, the radical islamists used the occasion to kill innocent americans and this administration apologized to the country responsible for the killing. you know, in civilized countries like the united states has been, nd still is most places, the continues to be , unless they're under sharia law that provoking words are never a defense to a physical assault or murder. no matter what anyone says to you, does to you, no matter what it is, no matter how vile, it does not justify a physical response. no matter what is said. under sharia, it's different.

but our constitution is supposed to be the law of the land in his country, not sharia law. , a man our fellow texan who was given the f.b.i.'s highest civilian award, a man who is described by the muslim brotherhood periodical in egypt as being one of the six top muslim brother leaders in this administration a man who spoke as a featured speaker at the uge tribute to the ayatollah khomeini, man of vision, a man who was given a secret security clearance by janet napolitano as secretary of homeland security without proper vetting, without proper investigation, even after

he was found and known to have downloaded inappropriate material and tried to shop them, homeland security said, we never found any theaveed he tried to shop those classified documents, or the dock yulets from classified source he is downloaded, they didn't bostonner to talk to the reporter that stated in print -- they didn't bother to talk to the reporter that stated in print that he talked to a well-known national publication to which mr. elibiary had shopped the documents. janet napolitano lied about that. it was not properly investigated. they would have checked to find out with whom he was supposed to have shopped these documents. but he sure has kept his secret security clearance. he's still proud of that f.b.i. award. he's still -- he still has a foundation tchailed freedom and justice foundation, just like --

called the freedom and justice foundation, same name as the muzz lick brotherhood political party. and yet this administration continues to count on him as one of their top advisors. that's why muslim leaders around the world, especially in the mideast have told some of us, talked to some other congressmen that have been on a trip recently to the mideast, they encountered the same thing. why are you guys helping radical islam now instead of helping us fight it? and we're wondering which one of your allies you're going to throw away next. and it's not hard to understand why world leaders would wonder such a thing who have been our our best you see ally in the mideast the one who

respects the rights of women, who doesn't kill homosexual, gay individuals in their country, ,ne that allows muslims to vote to work, and to provide them protection. the one country that allows all those things, that's our ally israel and we have the secretary of the state out there previously some months back talking about, gee, it may look ke they want a new intifada, another murdering spree. accusing israel of wanting more murdering, when they've done everything they could to try to protect themselves? and nobody in the media, not in this country, talks about the

rockets that have never stopped radical to israel from islamist controlled areas. and instead, you have liberals in this country, friends of this administration that are out there saying, you know what? we need to cut off anything we do with israel, and that kind of talk is supported by our own secretary of state when he says, gee, they're risking being guilty of apartheid. he tried to walk it back but he has illustrated so much anti-semitism that it's time for him to go. and it's time for this administration to take a stand. and even though our mainstream media here in america doesn't like to hold him accountable and

heaven help somebody at one of the mainstream media sources if they want to get to the truth of something like benghazi, their job is going to be gone. first they're going to be told to back off and then they're probably going to lose their job. we can't expose the truth about he present administration. because if they were interested in exposing the truth, then after the highest ranking attorney general in this country said to me, you don't want to go there, buddy, i said, are you alking about contempt? and he made it clear that he was. to look at exactly

at the highest ranking -- here's what he said to me in our hearing. on april 8, 2014, you don't want to go there, buddy. you should not -- and then i said are you talking about contempt? should be three dots at the end of there. you should not assume that this is not a big deal to me. i think it was inappropriate, he's talking about congress holding him in contempt because he refused and continues to refuse to provide documents that he has, that he should have produced and he continues to

refuse to produce. he said, i think it was unjust but never think that was not a big deal to me, don't ever think that. that's hour highest -- that's our highest ranking law enforcement officer in the country talking like that. this is what g, he said february 13 of 2013. amazing, abc news, they'll call my office and say, where's your basis for that? will they ever call the attorney general and say, how do you reconcile what you said under penalty of perjury before congress to what you told us in our interview? oh, gosh, no, abc news could never do that. because they might hurt the guy that -- that's in the white house that they helped put there. abc the interview with

news, february of 2013, not hard to find, i can find it, surely abc news, somebody -- you know, he said to gohmert never think it wasn't a big deal to him. obviously he's saying now it's a big deal. but this is what he said back over a year before. but i have to tell you that for me to really be affected by what happened, he's talking about contempt of court or con tevert of congress, he said i'd have to respect the people who voted in that way, and i didn't so it didn't have that huge of an impact on me. that was attorney general eric holder to abc news, february, 2013. now i had in the back of my mind that it had not been a big deal o him.

why didn't abc news remember nobody at abc news would remember, you know, he told gohmert, don't you ever think it wasn't a big deal. nobody remembered this from a year before at abc news? now, i wouldn't use this line, court, my old practice professors in law school used to say, matt dawson, effective trial lawyer, if you were caught saying two different things, like our attorney general has been, two different things about dawson usedic, matt to say, well were you lying then

or are you lying now? like i say, i'm not saying that, i'm just reflecting on what matt dawson would say if confronted with those two different quotes. what i, as a member of congress say is, this is really outrageous. it is time to have people in this administration that the world will respect, that the country will respect, that will be fair and even-handed, will not come into congress and mislead congress, will not hold up, stonewall, prevent the american people from knowing the facts about how innocent people came to be killed with guns that this justice department forced to be sold to people who should never have been allowed to have them. they're entitled and we are entitled as a nation to have a

secretary of state that is respected and does not say outrageous things and accuse allies of outrageous offenses when those allegations are so far from true. and yes, i know secretary kerry says he wishes he hadn't chosen the word apartheid. about ut intifada, how khan.ng fellow vets about it's time for us to regain some respect in the world. d it's time for us to stop radical islam before there's another holocaust.

i read a fantastic book written au oel rosen berg, "the schwitz escape." . is a novel. people escaped, because they wanted to get the news out to the world about what was happening that this wasn't just a prison work camp, that they were rounding up jews by the hundreds of thousands and bringing them in and at the prison camp, putting them in showers and instead of water coming out, poisonous gas did and their bodies were taken right across and burned in a

giant crematorium. and the people that were there always saw the smoke. always smelled the vile smell of burning. es and then you found out that once people escaped, they got information out. it still took far too long for america or the allies to do anything to stop it. could have bombed the railroads that were taking jews in to these prison camps, where they were being killed in masses. even after people escaped and got word out, we didn't. allies didn't. and the railroads continued

running and the cattle cars cramped with jews being taken. initially, they were taken to the prison camps and a decision was made as they walked up to an individual, you go here, which means you are going to work and then we'll gas you and then burn you or you're not worth keeping, so you are going to get killed immediately. and in the end, the attempted six million or so jews, because they were war criminals? no because they committed a crime of any kind? no because they were jews. that is a crime against humanity. the leaders of iran have said they want to to destroy the

great satan, which is the united states. and they want to wipe the little satan, israel, off the map. they want the jewish vermon as they have sometimes called them, eradicated. there are some like the j street group, no, no, we can work with these people. and i have to point out to any work with iran and its current leadership of these people can't be trusted. and when the history was written , turned out there were some jews that helped the nazis by pointing out where other jews

lived where they were being hidden. there is a special place for them in eternity. eople need to understand the odern-day gas chambers are being constructed. hey are too near completion in iran, called nuclear weapons. the number of years now we have been hearing projections, iran is this close to having nukes. this close to having nukes. joel rosenberg raised a good point in one of his prior novels, he does great research constructing

material, they waited until they had enough material so they could construct several nuclear weapons. and i'm sure that's their thoughts, just as with the 9/11 hijackers, yeah, they were crazy, but they weren't stupid. they were very methodical, as they plotted to kill what they hoped would be tens of thousands of americans, innocent people, believed they thought about all the horror with glee. some of those that helped plan, but were not actually part of the 19, joyful as they saw americans deciding between being burned to death in world trade centers or jumping 1,000 feet to their death. and they rejoiced. and these same people in iran who were so thrilled to see

americans burning, being crushed in the world trade centers as they fell or even jumping to their deaths, they were so ecstatic about that. and these people are working on nuclear weapons. hey cannot be trusted. mr. speaker, there is something this administration can do that ill regain america's respect around the world that should cold in his putin tracks, that will stop china from ever more aggressive overtaking and reach beyond their borders, to stop thugs

around the world who seek to , something ntries hat would fear and respect america would be the very thing that will protect america, will protect israel, will protect saudi arabia, will protect the and ., will protect jordan protect egypt, and that is for the unions -- united states of america to have the commander chief issue the order take out anything that iran has that may proliferating nuclear weapons. take it out. and if they scramble to save something, then let's go back and hit him again and again, not the people of iran, unless these

cruel leaders have buried nuclear facilities in civilian areas. they've done that. then it would be the iranian leaders that would be responsible for criminally harming civilians and putting them as cowards, putting them between the criminals and judgment day. we need to do that. israel doesn't have our f-35's, don't have all of our stealths and don't have the capability to carry out our best bunker-busters in iran and eliminate their nuclear weapons. we do. maybe it takes more than one sorty, one group of planes going in, maybe it takes one, two,

three. take them out, whatever it takes , and that stops iran in their development of the modern-day gas chambers, the modern-day holocaust that will occur in israel and in america if we don't act. i read about survivor from one f the death camps when the american soldiers arrived and were so thri thrilled, they went running up and the jewish inmate who was free, spit in his face and skt basically, where have you been? six million people killed for nothing more than being of a

particular race. and we could have stopped it far sooner. who knows how many millions we could have saved if we acted sooner. but now we know. we know without a doubt, iran wants to develop nuclear weapons . is trying to develop nuclear weapons. have said they want to wipe us out. have said they want to wipe out israel. it's time to take them seriously . and by doing so, you gain respect from the thug taliban, because they realize as gaddafi did, wow, he did it to iran, he'll do it to us. and they would fear us and respect us enough, respect our power, not us individually, they

would respect the power and the world could see more years of peace and could see an end in sight, maybe for 100 years or so of radical islam, moderate muslims could live in peace. jews could live more in peace. christians could live more in peace. there are christians being persecuted around the world probably in greater numbers than ever before. not in percentages, but in numbers. in countries like iraq where we gave them their freedom, they're persecuting christians and jews. in afghanistan, we gave them their freedom, they are per cuting christians and jews. they were persecuting christians

and jews in egypt until the people rose up in demonstrations literally went arm and arm, a beautiful, incredible scene for world peace as muslims, jews, christians, secularists, took to the streets to rebel and demand theyust of a leader and if waited another year, they probably would not have been ble to do it. for those with believe in the power of pray we need to continue to pray for israel and ey -- egypt and the egyptian leader. i applaud the obama administration, i was thrilled and am so pleased that this

administration has announced they're going to go ahead and furnish apache helicopters to the new government in egypt. it's going to be tough for the egyptians. they've got a tough economy. they have too many on welfare. they've got a lot of adjustments to make. but they want freedom. the masses of egypt want free do they don't want radical islam. they don't want radical islam like rebelled and killed kaddu fee, like took over due knee sa. -- and killed gaddafi, like took over tunisia. they don't want that. we need to encourage them, we need to help them. we need to help them eliminate all the weaponization that morsi encouraged and allowed, it turns out, in the sinai, as egypt

stands up against radical islam. so i really want to thank the obama administration for supplying hrough and the apay -- apache helicopters that were supposed to be supplied. the general who stepped down as general of the military and who will likely be elected president , as he said previously do, you not understand, we use the apaches to keep the suez canal open. we're using the apaches to clear out the radical islamists in the sinai. why wouldn't you want to help us do that? why would you rather help radical islam? i know that in in body a

majority would stand with our president and we would be proud of him if he would protect us and protect israel. stop the nuclear proliferation in its tracks. not by promising to release murderers, not by talking israel into releasing more murderers, not into giving iran billions and billions of more money, not to eliminating any more of the buttions against iran iran, just take -- against iran, but just take out the nuclear capability that's developed so if we letse otherwise them get nukes, they will be glad to supply them to terrorists. and you don't have to have

intercontinental ballistic missiles to get a nuke to america. you can put them on a boat and float them right up the potomac, the hudson, right up to the shores of chicago, up in houston, new orleans, take out 70% of our refining capacity. or they could put a nuclear weapon on even a sorry scud missile that is so inexact and unch it from a boat or barge into the interior air space and it doesn't need to hit the ground but there's a huge range that even a scud missile could make and explode a nuclear weapon, creating an electromagnetic pulse, an e.m.p., that would fry most of the computer chips in the

country, shut down most of our electrical capacity, shut down grocery stores, shut down stores relying on computers, shut down cars that have reliance on computer chips, they can do all that with a nuke, one nuke. and a lousy missile that's not very exact. they could do that. it's time we acted before they destroy america as we have known it, as it has come to be, the greatest country in the history of the world. more individual freedom, but we see that waning. greatest economy in history, but we've seen that wane. now we're told in a very short time china will be the biggest economy unless something happens. how about if the united states stops the modern day gas

chambers from being completed, stops the radical islamist enemies of america, israel, and of moderate muslims. how about if we do moderate islam a favor and take out the radicals for them as well? and yout peace on track don't do it with a secretary of state that condemns our closest allies, accuse -- accuses our allies of being criminals, you don't do it by release murderous thugs of country this is a hate us and are planning to kill us at some point whenever they get the capability. you do it by self-preservation. in texas we're pretty proud of our self-defense laws.

and when somebody has told you they're going to kill you and they are close to having the ability to do that, it is self-defense to stop them. it's time. mr. speaker, with that, i yield ack. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. does the gentleman have a motion? mr. gohmert: i move that we do now hereby adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the molt is adopted. -- the motion is adopted. accordingly the house

>> earlier today, the house passed the first spending bill for 2015. the measure provides $158 billion for veterans programs at $6.6 billion for military construction. tomorrow work on another spending bill for the legislative branch. follow the house live on c-span when members return on thursday at 9:00 a.m. eastern. is getting worked on the 12 annual appropriations bill to fund the federal government for fiscal year 2015, beginning with the military construction and veterans affairs bill. guest: it funds military bases. it is funded at 71.5 billion dollars in discretionary funding

which is a slight increase about current levels. and is considered generally one of the more noncontroversial bills. under an open rule, what does that mean for the debate that we are likely to see? guest: it could mean anything. we do not know going into debate what we are going to see. any member can walk up to the desk, and submit an amendment. looking back at the history, we have a general idea of the provisions we might see, but we still do not know yet. host: anything in the queue for this debate this year that might attract attention? guest: in particular there have been media reports about the v.a. hospital system in phoenix and how 40 veterans died waiting for care there, and how there was a secret waitlist that was kept hidden from the public. we are expecting perhaps an amendment having to do with that. there is also a perennial policy

writer to the bill having to do with, regarding the renovation in prisons in the u.s. we should see the democrats try to strike out the provision. host: on thursday, the house is set to take up the legislative branch spending bill. he tweeted about that, an amendment we will not see. missing from the list of amendments, the house will consider this representative moran's housing stipend for lawmakers. why is it not being taken up? guest: the house typically takes up the red legislative branch bill under a structured rules. . all of the amendments we will see on the floor have been approved by the rules committee. ssmaness and mora -- congre moran said he wanted to propose an amendment adding a $25 a day stipend for lawmakers who live more than 50 miles away from the

capital. he says that houck current lawmaker strategies are not high enough to maintain to houses. it'd not make the final cut. branchhis legislative spending bill is set to extend that pay freeze that congress enacted the couple years ago. is there any pushback on that this year? guest: not really. we're not seeing anything. there is a feeling congress right now that if they are going to be stringent spending capital on the rest of the federal government, the same cap should apply to the u.s. capitol complex and all of the lawmakers who serve their. host: you talk broadly about the debate on the 2015 bills. your article said that would be even more temptation to -- t han usual to attach riders on spending bills. give us an example. guest: this is a contentious midterm election year in which control of the senate is at

stake. on top of that, because this is an election year, there are few bills that are likely to be enacted. 12 appropriations measures are likely to be the only bills we see in congress. because of the temptation to message ahead of the elections, we are likely to see lawmakers try and bring forth controversial amendments and policy rdiers. host: so the work gets underway in the house on the 12 spending bills. what about the senate? guest: yesterday they first hit -- they had their first full committee meeting. barbara mikulski mentioned she plans on holding her first full committee markup on may 22. and that is also going to be the military constructions veterans affairs bill. soon thereafter, she situate like to focus on agriculture. host: you can follow her reporting on twitter.t thanks for joining us. >> at an event marking nato's

65th anniversary, vice president biden talked about the importance of the military alliance and how nato members should react to russia's violation of ukrainian sovereignty. his remarks of the atlantic council in washington are 20 minutes. [applause] >> see the respect this group has, mr. vice president? theehalf of fred kemp and atlantic council, welcome to our family. we have members of the board of directors. we have members of our international advisory council and most important, we have got some serious leaders from europe who are trying to determine their destiny around europe full

and free. so over the last day, we have had the pleasure of hearing from many of these leaders. and it really is a distinct letter to conclude this extraordinary and timely conference with remarks by the vice president of the united states joe biden. that vicetting president biden would conclude our conference because few have done more than you, mr. vice andident, to promote advance vision of a united europe. during his tenure in the senate as chair of the foreign relations committee, then senator biden provided critical bipartisan leadership to the cause of stopping genocide in the balkans and bringing former warsaw pact countries into nato. after his election as vice president, he has continued his role as a leading architect and voice on european policy. and most recently, vice president biden has again been in the lead on providing reassurance to u.s. allies and

supporting the new government in kiev in light of the recent crisis in ukraine. last month he visited poland and lithuania. and just last week he returned from meetings in kiev to offer u.s. support for the interim government. i am delighted the vice president can be here with us today to offer the obama administration's perspective on the challenges facing a europe whole and free and how it intends to respond. so please join me in welcoming the vice president of the united states, joe biden. [applause] >> thank you. >> well, governor, thank you very, very much. and what a distinguished crew that i'm about to speak to. and i tell you, i've been trying to follow, as much as i can, the -- all that's been going on the last couple days, and i'm delighted to be able to be here to give -- and i'll try to make it as brief as possible, brent -- the -- our perspectives, so

-- because you've been going a long time. to the current and foreign -- the current and former foreign ministers of albania, bulgaria, the czech republic, lithuania, macedonia, montenegro, poland, romania -- all places that i've spent a lot of time -- i'm delighted you're here. and to the defense ministers from estonia, georgia, czech republic and montenegro as well, and to the many ambassadors and our close friends, i want to -- i want to tell you what an honor it is to be before you. and also, steve hadley and brent scowcroft and secretary albright, it's an honor to be able to speak before you as well, and to nato's future leaders, who we're relying on a great deal. we're here today -- we're here today to celebrate the fruits of two actually very audacious and consequential notions -- maybe

two of the most consequential and audacious notions of the last hundred years -- the idea that after centuries of conflict, culminating in two world wars, europe could reinvent itself in a single community defined by peace, anchored in political and economic integration, collective self-defense, and a free flow of commerce and people, and no less important, the idea that the door to this transatlantic community would remain fundamentally open to free nations who share the values and commitments we have, and to those who dream from inside the captive nations of the day they too might join a europe whole and free. and from those improbable, remarkable roots, from the principle of integration, collective defense and an open door grew the post-cold war enlargement of nato and eu that we now commemorate.

and today i want to talk about the road traveled to get there and the word ahead to complete this project, because it is not complete, in my view. all in all, the growth of the euro-atlantic community has turned out to be one of the greatest forces in human history for advancing peace, prosperity, security and democracy. and i don't think that's hyperbole. i think that is literally the case. and this year we celebrate 15 years since poland and the czech republic have joined -- and hungary have joined nato, 10 years since seven more nations from the baltics to the black sea expanded nato's ranks, and the big bang that grew the eu, and five years since albania and croatia became part of nato. in hindsight, it's tempting to suggest that this was inevitable, but those of us who lived through it know it was anything but inevitable. i remain in awe of the

determination and moral courage the people and the leaders who willed their country forward through political, economic and social upheaval. and the glory is all theirs -- all theirs. like so many of you, i was proud to play a very small supporting role. i had the opportunity, ironically with my colleague bill roth who was chairman of the finance committee at the time, to help bring the baltics and central europe into nato. it's easy to forget that this was a hard-fought battle on the floor at the time. there wasn't unanimity in the united states senate. some of the brightest and most articulate members of the senate thought that -- thought that expansion was happening too soon. others said it went too far, it would generate a reaction in russia that was inappropriate. but i was strongly in favor, joined by my fellow delawarean senator bill roth. we were so passionate about it,

madeleine may remember, that president clinton joked that nato must be offering to move the headquarters to wilmington, delaware -- because -- no, i'm serious. it was -- do you remember that's what he said at the time of the official vote. but you know, all these years later, there are some who look at russia's aggression in ukraine and say -- maybe we should not have extended security guarantees to poland, romania, bulgaria and the baltic states. but i think it shows we had to extend that guarantee, because we reject and continue to reject, have rejected the notion of a sphere of influence built on the backs of the people who deserve freedom -- freedom that we always supported and that we believe is as vital today as it was then. and let's be clear -- the current crisis born in the enlargment of nato and the eu 15

yeras ago has nothing to do with -- 15 years ago has nothing to do with the enlargement of nato. it was born in the kremlin. it was born in putin's mind. it has nothing to do with the fact that we expanded nato. and here's another debate we don't hear much about anymore -- and i don't know how many conferences over 40 years i've attended about nato. so no longer is there a debate about is nato still relevant? i stand before you as a proud atlanticist like most of you, if not all of you, my entire career, and a firm believer that nato and the trans-atlantic relationship have never been more relevant than they are today. in the last three months i've had the honor -- and i see some of my friends here -- to visit or talk with over 28 separate meetings with presidents and

prime ministers from the region. and i'm pleased to announce that in june president obama will be returning to europe. he will visit poland for the 25th anniversary of the democratic elections that took place there for the first time in a long time; brussels to consult with the g-7 on ukraine and other issues, and france, where he will celebrate the 70th anniversary of detail -- excuse me, of d-day with our oldest -- america's oldest ally. as president obama told the people of strasbourg, quote, "our shared history gives us hope, but it cannot give us rest. this generation cannot stand still." he means it, we mean it. i suspect you all share that view. we have a lot of work cut out for us in the very near term, and it starts with focusing on the upcoming summit of nato in wales. as you know, in response to

russian aggression, america's taking steps to make clear that our allies will honor the solemn commitments under article 5 of the nato treaty. there are no ifs, ands or buts about that, that is an absolute ironclad guarantee. and it's amazing to me how welcome the reassurance of that guarantee is in our newly admitted members of nato in central and eastern europe. we've been urgently stepping up our military presence in air and land of the balkans -- excuse me -- of the baltics and poland and in the waters of the black sea, and we've asked our nato allies to make similar contributions, and many have. and we hope by wales all nato members will have increased their commitments to nato, to nato's reassurance efforts and to their own defense budgets. it puts this back in sharp relief once again, because shared security has to be a

shared responsibility, and as the -- excuse me -- as isaf and the mission in afghanistan comes to an end, we need to invest in training and maintaining the expertise that we've collectively built. we need to continue to build on the security capacity of our partners outside of nato. and we have to tackle threats together. economically, people on both sides of the atlantic are hungering for greater economic opportunity. that's why i'm such a strong supporter of the president's initiative of trans-atlantic trade and investment partnership. it will be tough, but it is necessary. it is necessary. it will create growth in jobs. it will strengthen the global trading system and make us both stronger at home so we can be strong around the world together. and when it comes to energy, russia should not be able to use its resource as a political weapon against its neighbors. i believe, and some of us in

this room have believed this for some time, that it's time to make energy security the next chapter in the european project of integration and market expansion that began with the european coal and steel community. it's long past time. and it can be done. it's time to replace country-by-country strategies with a coherent collective effort focused on diversifying supply, improving efficiency, which badly needs to be done, making investments in market reforms, including greater flexibility for infrastructure to transport natural gas and a good deal more. i applaud and encourage europe's efforts to take a more reasonable approach because a more stable european supply of energy means a more secure world. this would be a game-changer for europe, in my view, and we're ready to do everything in our power to help it happen. and through it all, we need to be finishing the business of

building a europe whole, free and at peace. when i visited ukraine last week, i saw and heard and felt the people's aspirations for a better and more dignified future. i know that senator kerry spoke at length with you about ukraine, and so i will be brief on the subject. ukraine's struggle starts with an acute challenge of russian violation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity, and all the rules of the 21st century taught us that must be upheld, they have been flat violated. what russia has done violates not just ukrainian sovereignty but the fundamental principle that european borders cannot, will not be changed through political intimidation or military force. and we have to be resolute in imposing costs.

and i'll note parenthetically that costs are going to be shared in some cases disproportionately. that's the reality. but the community's work in ukraine can't end there, by imposing costs on russia. it is -- it is -- quite frankly, it's equally mission critical that we focus on what ukrainians are for. for 25 years, it's been free. for 25 years, it has not met its goals. for 25 years, even including the orange revolution, it has not been realized, in significant part because of corruption and as a consequence of institutions that need significant modernization. this needs to be a government that exists to serve the people, not enrich the powerful. i found when i met with the prime -- oh, excuse me, was the prime minister -- with the

president, with civil society, with three of the leading candidates for president and with the members of all parties in the rada, there is a common view, east and west, that the government has to begin to deliver, that corruption is incredibly corrosive. it may not be politik to say, but it is a reality. the -- they need an economy where there are jobs and what you know matters most to them, where, in fact, ukrainian -- there's respect for the diversity of people, and there remains a united ukraine. i think that is all within their grasp. we're working to provide u.s. civilian experts on the ground who can help realize each of these aspirations and provide specialized knowledge in holding elections that are monitored so no one can question the

legitimacy, in building institutions that are transparent, more modern, more effective than ththose the -- than those ukrainians have had over the last 25 years; in fighting corruption so that time democracy -- in time democracy can be delivered to the ukrainian people. in my view, it's the most significant bulwark against russian aggression, because ukraine will need all these things to succeed. and finally, there's the matter of our relationship with russia. since the end of the cold war, america and nato allies have reached out to russia in a hand of partnership and a place in the partnership for peace, the g-8, the wto, the council of europe. we did this because russia's integration into the international order remains in everyone's interest. but russia -- it cannot -- and i believe they do know -- have it both ways. if russia wants to benefit from the international order, it has to respect that order and abide by the rules.

otherwise, it's going to face growing costs and growing isolation. ladies and gentlemen, the challenges we face, i need not tell anyone in this audience, are real, but they're able to be faced and we're able to succeed if we face them together. america has stood with europe and always will, just as europe has stood with us. and the progress we have made has been remarkable. when i think of how far we've come, it calls to mind the words of the poet seamus heaney in his poem "the cure at troy." he wrote, history teaches us not to hope on this side of the grave. when the wall fell, hope and history began to rhyme. let's not rest until they rhyme once again in a europe that is finally, finally whole, free and at peace. it's a big order, but it is possible to get it done if we remain joined at the hip, if we

remain united and steadfast. thank you all very much for listening, and i appreciate the opportunity to speak to you. [applause] , the lead bob corker republican on the foreign relations committee, announced that he and other senators will introduce a bill to respond to the ukrainian crisis. he went to the senate floor to discuss what will be in that bill. a senator: stphr-pt. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. corker: thank you, mr. president. i rise today out of a genuine concern that the foreign policy that our administration is conducting is creating danger for the united states citizenry and kraepgt danger throughout the world. let me just speak a little bit about that. i think all of us have seen what happened in syria when the

administration had an opportunity on the front end of a conflict to put its thumb on the scale to change the dynamic of what was happening inside the country, and stated that it would do so. it did not. this weekend i was at a security conference, and people on both sides of the aisle expressed dismay at the way the administration had conducted its operations, or actually hadn't conducted its operations in syria, and yet had stated so many times what it was going to do. and today we find ourselves in a situation where i'm absolutely certain that one of the policies that we will end up carrying out in syria will be a counterterrorism policy because of our concern about the fact that because we didn't act when we could, not with american boots on the ground -- that's not what anybody has proposed -- but when the administration could have done something to prevent the disaster that has occurred there, to prevent

60,000 more syrians from being killed indiscriminately in many cases by helicopters from the administration dropping barrel bombs on innocent civilians there, when the administration could have acted to keep those types of atrocities from occurring, to keep al qaeda and other extremists from coming in to the country, when it said it was going to act and didn't, when it could have done that, now we're going to find ourselves very quickly in a situation, in my opinion, where we realize that this is a threat to our homeland, and we're going to be engaged in counterterrorism activities. i say that as a predicate to the issue that i'm going to discuss, which is ukraine. mr. president, so many members of our body have recently been to ukraine. as a matter of fact, i count 12 members, members on both sides of the aisle that have spent time visiting ukraine and going to madon and seeing, seeing what the people there did.

they rose up to hope for a free world, to hope for human rights, to hope for democracy, and to rid the country of corruption. today we have a, we have a prime minister that is young, who's taking on the issues of the day and doing everything he can to usher this country into a new era, a country that is destined to join the west on its current path. at the same time we see a country whose greatest threat to that occurring is russia, a country that as we know, illegally went into crimea and annexed it, a country that today has 40,000 troops on the border, a country that has black ops operators inside eastern ukraine, the industrial part of ukraine, that it hopes over time to in essence become a part of what they're doing in russia. we see every day the destabilization occurring and we know the most important next

step in ukraine is for them to go to this may 25 election and have an election the world community believes was a valid election. and yet we know daily putin and russia does everything it can to destabilize ukraine and to delegitimize this process of elections and moving forward. so, mr. president, a number of us, out of grave concern for what is happening, out of concern about where this is going to lead america, where this is going to lead europe, have come together to write a piece of legislation because what we've seen from the administration is a lot of rhetoric. unfortunately, mr. president, what we see is an administration that can't help itself but to try to to be on every 24-hour ns circle talking about what it's going to do. but then when it comes to the time of actually doing it,

that's not what has occurred. this week i was very disappointed when the administration unveiled its next round of sanctions. we had all hoped that the administration would put in place sectoral sanctions, sanctions that would have an impact on the resolution economy so putin and those around him who are carrying out these activities would understand that they will pay a price for what they're doing illegal in this part of the world which, by the way, goes against the agreements that we all came to around the budapest memorandum where we said we would honor the sovereignty of this country. mr. president, for that reason, a number of us have come together to write a piece of legislation. it's a legislation that is intended to try to drive an outcome. it's a piece of legislation that moves away from the way the administration has been dealing with this, where they are always a day late and a dollar short. they're always responding to what russia does.

they're always doing something that in essence deals with the situation after something bad has already occurred. this legislation is designed to, again, drive an outcome to show the administration that there is a strategic way to deal with this issue. mr. president, let me tell you what this doesn't do. and i was very disappointed to pick up the "wall street journal" this morning and read on the front page that those of us who are concerned, which, by the way, is strongly bipartisan, strongly bipartisan in this senate, concerned about what's happening in ukraine and concerned about the fact that the administration has not done those things with economic sanctions in a more strong way to cause russia to pay a price for what it's doing. but i was very disappointed to pick up the paper and read where the president said those people who want to see military action by the united states in ukraine -- that's not what this bill does. as a matter of fact,

mr. president, what this bill does is it lays out a strategy to try to keep that from happening. because i think numbers of us on both sides of the aisle are concerned that under the current policy of saying what we're going to do and not doing it, but basically continuing to allow russia to do what it's doing inside eastern ukraine is actually the very policy that could lead to significant problems down the road. we all understand these are how major conflicts unfold. and we all understand we're talking about two countries that are armed with nuclear weapons. so, mr. president, today at noon a number of us will gather around and introduce a piece of legislation that does three things. number one, it strengthens nato. i think everyone would agree that the commitment of nato to its allies, our commitment to nato, our partners' commitment to nato has waned over the last

period of time. by the way, mr. president, this is not just something that's occurred under this administration. it's been going on for some time. we have only three countries, as a matter of fact, three countries within the nato alliance that are actually honoring their commitments relative to its support of nato. so the first piece of this is to strengthen nato. it is to expedite, by the way, this administration's own plan relative to missile defense, a plan that they've laid out. it does not change that technology. the second piece of this legislation is intended to deter russia from what it's doing. mr. president, if you remember the geneva accord said that putin would move the russia troops away from the border that are intimidating people inside eastern ukraine. but i think what we've seen now is that -- quote -- "red line" has changed and now what the administration is focused on is them not actually going inside

the country. but all of us understand that russia is actually accomplishing what it wishes to accomplish inside ukraine without even sending troops in, because they're able to do it, again, with black ops. so what this piece of legislation that i'm -- that my friend from wyoming and so many others were involved in developing what this legislation does is lay down clear sanctions, first beginning today -- or after passage, beginning with sanctions, sanctions that hit several important entities in the banking sector and the energy sector so that we actually do something that affects the russian economy until such a time as they pull those troopsway from the border and they remove -- those troops away from the body and they remove the black ops from inside the country that are fomenting the problems. in the event that russia does

actually cross the border with those troops, this bill imposes much deeper sanctions on russia and significant iand signifies e they would pay. earlier this week when the administration put forth its sanctions, it was a marvel to see that the stock market in russia several days in a row continued to go up, had no effect on russia -- none. mr. president, editorial writers and people on beige sides of the aisle -- on both sides of the aisle understand this was nothing, nothing, more than a slap on the wrist. putin understands this. russia understands this. they understand that we as a nation have not signified that we're really willing to use these economic sanctions in a way through the president's own economic order, i might add, to change behavior. and so we're very concerned about the direction that this is taking. the third thing that this bill

would do is it would harden our non-nato allies. mr. president, i think you know that in the country of moldova, where i recently just returned -- senator barrasso on another trip just recently returned -- there and in georgia and in ukraine, would you know there are a number of things that we need to do to help them harden their country. this bill lays those things out. let me give you one example. in the russian speaking of -- in the russian-speaking area of eastern ukraine, the only information that the people who are russian-speaking in that part of the world are receiving is coming from russia. it's propaganda. it's talking about things that the united states is doing, which we aren't, and the great lives that they will have if russia is able to annex that part of the world. so at a minimum, we need to make sure that the information that these people are receiving is very different. but there's so many things that we as a nation can be doing to ensure that ukraine is not

destablized, that moldova is not destieblesdestablized, that geot destablized. mr. president, this bill that we'll be introducing today is a serious piece of information. as a matter of fact, i'm gratified by the type of work that so many members have put in to making this legislation as it is. it's strategic, it is serious, it tries to accomplish a good outcome. and what i hope the introduction of this legislation will do is it will cause the administration to step away from the microphones and the cameras, to step away from the empty rhetoric that has been shared all across this world, to cause them to step back and say, hey ... wouldn't it be good if we laid out a strategic approach to europe?

isn't it time we realized that russia is destabilizing europe and that affects our citizens? our citizenwe benefit from 22% e world's gross domestic product. so the fact of the world being secure is not only important to us because of human rights and democracy and freedom, but a it is important to the very livelihoods of the people of our country. so, mr. president, i thank those involved. i look forward to discussing this more fully at noon today when we unveil this. what i hope will happen, again, is that the white house and those involved in setting foreign policy will step back, they will sit down, they will begin to do those things that strengthen nato more fully, they will do those things that certainly cause russia to understand exactly what will happen if they continue on the path that they're on, and, thirdly, strengthen our non-nato

allies, which because of the policies that we have not put in place are continually being destablized. with that, >> the bill would have raised the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. senator bob corker was the only republican to vote in a for of the bill. as reported in usa today, democrats anticipated egypt each of the minimum wage bill -- the defeat of the minimum wage bill. in terms to use this of other issues. coverage resumes tomorrow on c-span2. f